The OP of this thread demonstrates the point better than I can:
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ort-mechanics-make-no-sense-sometimes.866431/
Summary:
The enemy marched from Wismar to Lübeck to Holstein. OP didn't want this to happen. In fact they thought it couldn't happen, because Wismar was listed as being in the ZOC of Lüneburg. But the game secretly decided that Wismar was in Lübeck's ZOC after all, so the enemy could move there.
What's gone wrong here?
1. The fort in Lübeck is actually harming its owner - it's allowing the enemy to move on a path that the fort owner doesn't want, when this path would otherwise be prevented by the fort in Lüneburg.
2. (if I'm reading things right) the UI is lying to the player, leading to a nasty surprise.
2. is clearly a bug, but 1. is a more complex problem. If two forts of the same country both exert ZOC over province X, and an invading army is in province X, who decides which fort the army moves on?
The invader? No, this would lead to lots of silly situations where forts increase the invader's freedom of movement.
The game, through some algorithm that is made clear to the player? Not as bad, and probably OK as a default occurrence, but could still lead to some awkward and non-intuitive situations (e.g. if it's to do with age of forts, a player may have to demolish and then immediately rebuild a fort in order to get the ZOCs to line up properly).
No, for forts to make any sense as a defensive tool, it has to be the owner of the forts who decides.
Suggestion: Add a button somewhere to allow players to click on a province that is protected by multiple forts, and manually assign ZOC priority to a particular fort (chosen from a drop-down menu). That way, the player controls how their own forts' ZOC work and can choose whichever arrangement is most favourable for them.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ort-mechanics-make-no-sense-sometimes.866431/
Summary:
The enemy marched from Wismar to Lübeck to Holstein. OP didn't want this to happen. In fact they thought it couldn't happen, because Wismar was listed as being in the ZOC of Lüneburg. But the game secretly decided that Wismar was in Lübeck's ZOC after all, so the enemy could move there.
What's gone wrong here?
1. The fort in Lübeck is actually harming its owner - it's allowing the enemy to move on a path that the fort owner doesn't want, when this path would otherwise be prevented by the fort in Lüneburg.
2. (if I'm reading things right) the UI is lying to the player, leading to a nasty surprise.
2. is clearly a bug, but 1. is a more complex problem. If two forts of the same country both exert ZOC over province X, and an invading army is in province X, who decides which fort the army moves on?
The invader? No, this would lead to lots of silly situations where forts increase the invader's freedom of movement.
The game, through some algorithm that is made clear to the player? Not as bad, and probably OK as a default occurrence, but could still lead to some awkward and non-intuitive situations (e.g. if it's to do with age of forts, a player may have to demolish and then immediately rebuild a fort in order to get the ZOCs to line up properly).
No, for forts to make any sense as a defensive tool, it has to be the owner of the forts who decides.
Suggestion: Add a button somewhere to allow players to click on a province that is protected by multiple forts, and manually assign ZOC priority to a particular fort (chosen from a drop-down menu). That way, the player controls how their own forts' ZOC work and can choose whichever arrangement is most favourable for them.
Upvote
0
