France game - why are Germans siting on hands?

[Aeon221]

Then if they are higher than level 2 they can be added at game start or by event.

BTW if you want to get all historical tell me where super forts in WWII actually made much of a difference. Most of them were maneuvered around, bombed into rubble or penetrated at a weak point. The only super fort I can think of that actually put up a decent fight was the Russians at Brest. The Germans opted to siege it send the bulk of thier forces around it. And if memory serves me correct German special forces took out both the Neatherlands and Belgium super forts within 48 hours.

The entire purpose of forts is to enable economy of force actions. Meaning you can dump third rate under equipped divisions without prime movers on those sectors and they will hold while your better equipped troops fought elsewhere. Forts did exactly that throughout the war.

France spent 5b francs on the Maginot line, peanuts compared to what they spent on defense elsewhere and half what Germany spent on the Westwall. It was not penetrated until after the Battle of France was lost, and then only in a weak point in the Saar where the field elements had been pulled off to deal with the existential crisis going on to the rear.

The extension was penetrated at Sedan, but it was not completed, and was staffed with poorly trained soldiers led by officers who frankly did a poor job of handling what should have been a straightforward action. The French army had expected a German attack on the Maginot extension (albeit not quite so strong of one) and supplied their garrison formation with a strong mobile corps to beat any penetration back. It was not used as it should have been, to crush the bridgehead. This is a book length topic though.

Forts are not and were not seen as war winners. Their purpose was to enable concentration elsewhere and they were very good at it. Thanks to the Westwall Germany was able to safely concentrate all of their best forces on the attack while leaving a skeleton force to defend their weak flank.

As far as your question regarding where forts were successful, people didn't generally attack fortified lines unless they thought they had a serious advantage.

 

[Aeon221]

The entire problem is that the Maginot Line was costly as hell. Not only that: the construction of comparable forts along the entire Belgian border, even assuming economical feasibility, would have given Belgium the (correct) feeling that they would be thrown under a bus in the case of war against Germany. Moreover, a Switzerland-to-Channel line would remove the one strategic advantage the Maginot Line gave: knowing where the enemy offensive will strike through. In short, the game fails to model why France didn't just bunker down within its borders - because, according to its rules, it is a sound decision with sound results.

The Maginot line was not costly as hell. This is yet another British myth. Here's Forczyk's Case Red:

As to cost, the Maginot Line was built between 1928 and 1936 for about F5 billion (about $195 million), equivalent to 7.5 per cent of the French Army budget in this period.23 Few historians mention that the Germans invested nearly RM 1 billion ($400 million) in the West Wall fortifications during 1934–39, plus twice as much concrete and four times as much steel as the French put into the Maginot Line project – yet that effort is not described as wasteful or impairing the Wehrmacht’s offensive spirit.24 How can one side’s fortification programme be harmful to morale, but not the other side’s similar programme? Furthermore, the Maginot Line not only inflicted significant casualties upon the Germans, but managed to resist longer than the mobile parts of the French Army. It is true that during the period that the Maginot Line was being built, the French Army spent less than F100 million ($3.9 million) on tank programmes, or just 2 per cent of what it was putting into fortifications.25 However, this imbalance reversed in 1934 when France began a major programme to expand its armoured forces while only minor work on fortifications continued after 1936.

 

[WeissRaben]

The Maginot line was not costly as hell. This is yet another British myth. Here's Forczyk's Case Red:

I never said it was a bad expense, which is what that paragraph counters. Just that is was very costly, and more than doubling its length, mostly on less defensible terrain to boot, would have drained resources for literally no gain - and even destroying the historical Maginot line strategic significance of offering one single possible avenue of advance, simplifying war plans. It would have alienated Belgium, and removed a strategic advantage, at a great cost. And the game fails to represent this. The Maginot line was possibly a tiny bit too short, as history proved in hindsight (covering the Ardennes, rather than waving them off as "unpassable", would have prevented a lot of problems), but it did the job in a way that a more costly fully fortified border wouldn't have.

 

[--Yigito123--]

The problem really isn't the strength of forts or the German AI's avoidance of them (Which is reasonable). The problem is that those forts can be built in the first place. Now, I'm not saying "make forts impossible to build", but rather that it's weird that they can be built so fast. You can make Maginot-line tier forts across the border of Belgium, Switzerland and Italy, and have enough time to get some forts up against Spain as well, in one third of the time that the Maginot line was built in real life.

 

[ArmChairAttila]

but it (Maginot Line) did the job in a way that a more costly fully fortified border wouldn't have.

Even after France was defeated after 6 weeks? I really don't think it did the job. If anything it was a factor, if not large one for such a fast defeat.

 

[Oahkoah]

There used to be a way to trick the AI into an offensive. If you attack them with your units, and then immediately cancel the attack, the Germans may try and hit you with a costly counterattack

 

[Adam Wilson]

The only thing I can think of is lots of PP or resources to build forts, but that seems quite soft compared to the huge cost of Maginot and the Westwall historically. Currently, if you're playing as a European major, building forts along every border is a legitimate tactic if you have enough factories. I suppose that's the inherent weakness with a game that doesn't simulate currency.

 

[yerm]

Even after France was defeated after 6 weeks? I really don't think it did the job. If anything it was a factor, if not large one for such a fast defeat.

The job of the maginot was to force Germany to invade somewhere else and shrink the defensive line, which is what it did. France failing to deal with that concentrated attack elsewhere is not the maginot's fault. Were the Czech forts a failure too since they were circumvented via diplomacy?

The only thing I can think of is lots of PP or resources to build forts, but that seems quite soft compared to the huge cost of Maginot and the Westwall historically. Currently, if you're playing as a European major, building forts along every border is a legitimate tactic if you have enough factories. I suppose that's the inherent weakness with a game that doesn't simulate currency.

France going all Donald Trump along the Belgian border should enrage Belgium. This was a big reason France hesitated up there in real life. In fact I would argue Belgium should just concede to Germany anschluss style if France does this, as they were NOT ok with the idea of being Germany's parking lot while their "allies" defend only after their borders.

 

[Adam Wilson]

That would make sense, but only if the forts were added by decision. It would be a lot harder to add to game mechanics if players/ai were building forts themselves.

 

[Secret Master]

You know what I love about this community? Posts like these.

I thought playing as France would be pretty challenging given how quickly the AI-France has collapsed in all my other games. So far however, the Germans are just sitting on the border and the Italians just bashing into my alpine forts. Is this normal or am I doing something unusual? This is set at regular difficulty and I buffed Germany and Italy with the custom sliders to give them 12% bonus.

Hey all,

If i remember correctly, Japan send volunteers to daniel in the last WWW stream. Well most of the time i was not even thinking about them when suddenly i noticed what they were actually doing.

Bashing into the maginot line. Over the river. As single infanterie divisions. You know, the thing every AI nation previously loved -> bashing into your line until they have no manpower or equipment with no regards to sucess chances.

It's a true case of "You can't please everyone." If you let the AI attack forts, they bash themselves against them. If you tell the AI not to do it, players complain that the AI doesn't attack.

 

[WeissRaben]

The job of the maginot was to force Germany to invade somewhere else and shrink the defensive line, which is what it did. France failing to deal with that concentrated attack elsewhere is not the maginot's fault.

Exactly. In fact, things went exactly like France expected - but then they failed to contain that very expected attack.

 

[Skjuld]

France going all Donald Trump along the Belgian border should enrage Belgium. This was a big reason France hesitated up there in real life. In fact I would argue Belgium should just concede to Germany anschluss style if France does this, as they were NOT ok with the idea of being Germany's parking lot while their "allies" defend only after their borders.

That's not exactly how it went, though. Belgium didn't like having the Maginot line stopping before their border, because they understood that it meant a Franco-German war would happen in Belgium. So they decided to reinforce their army and forts and go neutral. Which is when the French did a limited extension of the forts.

Belgium was faced with unpleasant choices. Either stay allied with France and UK and become a battlefield, or go neutral with guarantees and hope that would deter Germany. Which in turn put constraints on France. Extending the Maginot would be logical but politically difficult, since France and UK were guaranteeing Belgium. And if they planned to go to Belgium's help in case of a war, what would be the point of costly fortifications behind them on the border ?

Everyone in Europe was still thinking in WW1 terms., except for the Germans (and Soviets, before the Purges). They were "preparing for the last war", indeed. While Germany was thinking about how to avoid fighting WW1 again. Which resulted in every European army they faced being rolled over.

 

[Chanbara]

It's a true case of "You can't please everyone." If you let the AI attack forts, they bash themselves against them. If you tell the AI not to do it, players complain that the AI doesn't attack.

I actually felt weirdly pleased when I was playing as France and Germany was battering my half-arsed 2nd level fort line with concentrated tank assaults from multiple directions that were slowly draining my ORG even though I was winning the individual engagements. I even needed to actually use my MOT as a mobile reserve, as they should be used on the defensive. And then my level 5 forts finished, and they stopped dead, and all I could do was feel remorse that I'd killed that save.

 

[yerm]

You know what I love about this community? Posts like these.

It's a true case of "You can't please everyone." If you let the AI attack forts, they bash themselves against them. If you tell the AI not to do it, players complain that the AI doesn't attack.

I have a high level of respect for Paradox developers, and therefore have no issue with expectations that the AI can find a way to not suicide into high level forts AND not sit paralyzed when there are only forts. Somewhere in between these extremes of ramming the maginot or digging in is the option that Germany's AI will pick the least fortified area and make a calculated assault there.

 

[Gort11]

I'm hopeful that a future AI Germany faced with a fort-happy France would make its TAC planes do strategic bombing on the province in question, with the focus on the forts.

When the new patch hits I'll be interested to see if Germany can use strategic bombers to flatten the Maginot Line and take France without going through the Low Countries.

 

[WeissRaben]

I'm hopeful that a future AI Germany faced with a fort-happy France would make its TAC planes do strategic bombing on the province in question, with the focus on the forts.

When the new patch hits I'll be interested to see if Germany can use strategic bombers to flatten the Maginot Line and take France without going through the Low Countries.

You would need heavier stuff to flatten level 10 forts, though - not quite tallboys, but close enough.

 

[Secret Master]

You would need heavier stuff to flatten level 10 forts, though - not quite tallboys, but close enough.

First thing I thought of:

 

[WeissRaben]

First thing I thought of:

Pretty much! That's the thing - 1944 tech would be able to flatten the Maginot Line, but 1939 Germany doesn't have that.

 

[Secret Master]

Pretty much! That's the thing - 1944 tech would be able to flatten the Maginot Line, but 1939 Germany doesn't have that.

Yeah. I'm good, but even I can't get 1944 STR in production as Germany by the historical date of Danzig.

 

[Micky Luv]

A little experimentation today with the Czechs. Made sure to complete the NF tree that gives level 7 forts along the border but didn't spam divisions much; concentrated on making quality 7/2 divisions with lots of support companies (Eng, Recce, Art, AA). Refused to hand over Sudetenland. AI Germany aggressively attacks those forts.

Going to repeat exactly tomorrow when I get time, it but this time just spam lower quality infantry divisions. See if that makes a difference.