Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Trenches?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Originally posted by StephenT
In other words, I don't think we need to mess about with the "dug-in" rating or anything else - simply lower the attack rating of most units. Exactly how low will be a subject for playtesting, I imagine.

As a final word: the elaborate trench networks like the German Hindenburg Line or the British positions around Arras, with concrete bunkers and dug-outs, multiple trench lines with firing bays and communication trenches, light railways bringing up ammunition to the gun positions, etc - these should certainly be represented by province fortifications. Such trench networks took months to build.
Click to expand...

I do think attack and defense ratings need to modified to represent trench warfare. I think the West front trenches should be represented by fortifications, lower levels than say Verdun. The reason is that trench warfare was not the norm on the East front. In fact the East was somewhat mobile. Warfare in Russia, Rumania, Austria, and Turkey were not characterized by the high level of trench warfare there was on the West front. It was actually a lot more mobile front.
 
Originally posted by tristam509
I do think attack and defense ratings need to modified to represent trench warfare. I think the West front trenches should be represented by fortifications, lower levels than say Verdun. The reason is that trench warfare was not the norm on the East front. In fact the East was somewhat mobile. Warfare in Russia, Rumania, Austria, and Turkey were not characterized by the high level of trench warfare there was on the West front. It was actually a lot more mobile front.
Click to expand...

Partly due to the lesser value of the Russian, Ottoman and Rumanian troops, that is, lower defence value, which means more mobile front.

/Johan
 
Mostly due to the much lower troop density. The armies in the east lacked the strength to form a solid trench line all the way from the Baltic to the Carpathians - there were usually gaps and thinly-held places where the attacker could break through and exploit. Around key positions where troops from both sides converged, like Riga, Western Front- style trench warfare was the norm.

On the other hand, I believe that propensity to build fortifications is one of the settings in each country's AI, so could be tweaked. (A lower setting for Russia and A-H)
 
that popup idea is good, but i wish luck to whoever has to mod it.:D
 
I think a nice balance for simulating trenches would be a mix of high defense/low attack AND an enhanced "dug-in" bonus. The digging-in would simulate the slow trench improvement, since the bonus increases over time. That way, units caught on the move will get no benefit, since they have not been in one place long enough to have constructed trench networks.
 
Originally posted by shell
I think a nice balance for simulating trenches would be a mix of high defense/low attack AND an enhanced "dug-in" bonus. The digging-in would simulate the slow trench improvement, since the bonus increases over time. That way, units caught on the move will get no benefit, since they have not been in one place long enough to have constructed trench networks.
Click to expand...

Sounds sensible - we did get roughly the correct balance with the high defence ratings anyway. When techs are distributed, things may change slightly, if it causes any imbalances. :)
 
While compiling the files last night I had a bit of a brainstorm and added a few pre-war fortifications to certain provinces (in the country.inc files). To give everyone else the chance to disagree with my ideas :) here's the complete list of what I added:

province = { id = 555 landfort = 2 } # Metz
province = { id = 650 landfort = 1 } # Konigsberg

province = { id = 554 landfort = 2 } # Verdun
province = { id = 543 landfort = 2 } # Toul-Epinal
province = { id = 527 landfort = 1 } # Paris

province = { id = 548 landfort = 2 } # Antwerpen
province = { id = 552 landfort = 1 } # Liege

province = { id = 643 landfort = 1 } # Warszawa
province = { id = 715 landfort = 1 } # Kovno
province = { id = 722 landfort = 1 } # Brest-Litovsk
province = { id = 788 coastalfort = 2 } # Petrograd

province = { id = 873 landfort = 1 coastalfort = 1 } # Constantinople/Gallipoli

I deliberately didn't assign any values higher than 2, because forts were really not all that important in the 1914 campaigns - and later on in the war, players can easily build their own forts.
 
Sounds good, I would add a coastal fort to Wilhemshaven (I think that is the one German coastal province with a beach), to simulate the sea mines, and coastal defenses Germany had in the area.
 
StephenT said:
While compiling the files last night I had a bit of a brainstorm and added a few pre-war fortifications to certain provinces (in the country.inc files). To give everyone else the chance to disagree with my ideas :) here's the complete list of what I added:

province = { id = 555 landfort = 2 } # Metz
province = { id = 650 landfort = 1 } # Konigsberg

province = { id = 554 landfort = 2 } # Verdun
province = { id = 543 landfort = 2 } # Toul-Epinal
province = { id = 527 landfort = 1 } # Paris

province = { id = 548 landfort = 2 } # Antwerpen
province = { id = 552 landfort = 1 } # Liege

province = { id = 643 landfort = 1 } # Warszawa
province = { id = 715 landfort = 1 } # Kovno
province = { id = 722 landfort = 1 } # Brest-Litovsk
province = { id = 788 coastalfort = 2 } # Petrograd

province = { id = 873 landfort = 1 coastalfort = 1 } # Constantinople/Gallipoli

I deliberately didn't assign any values higher than 2, because forts were really not all that important in the 1914 campaigns - and later on in the war, players can easily build their own forts.
Click to expand...
At last!!! I've been asking this to be included since some half a year or so. I doubt Warsaw should be fortified, 'though The small province northwards (Ostroleka) should have a level 2/3 fort. Brzesc should have a level 2 as well and perhaps Silesia should have a level 1.
Cheers
 
Halibutt said:
At last!!! I've been asking this to be included since some half a year or so. I doubt Warsaw should be fortified, 'though The small province northwards (Ostroleka) should have a level 2/3 fort. Brzesc should have a level 2 as well and perhaps Silesia should have a level 1.
Cheers
Click to expand...
Acutally, I think Liege should rate a much higher fortification level and we should reduce it with en event. Call the event "The Guns of August" or something similar. If Germany is at war with France, trigger the event and make Germany at war with Belgium and reduce the Liege fort to 0.

On the east front, premysl should rate a 2 or 3. It was the main Austrian HQ and their largest fortress. No higher tho, the Russians were still able to storm the place.
 
valen said:
Acutally, I think Liege should rate a much higher fortification level and we should reduce it with en event. Call the event "The Guns of August" or something similar. If Germany is at war with France, trigger the event and make Germany at war with Belgium and reduce the Liege fort to 0.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't this assume that the Belgian fortresses wouldn't put up any fight at all, when historically, they actually gave stiff resistance?

I think it would be going too far to simulate battles by event. :)
 
Please, everybody, bear in mind that in 1914 most fortresses were out-of-date, filled with obsolete guns, and generally considered useless by most armies. In fact, the French and Russians took all of the guns out of theirs (and issued them out to the infantry divisions instead - yes, this is in the game). In other words, they didn't have much effect on the actual fighting, except in cases where the fort blocked a natural bottleneck like the bridge over the Meuse.

So I'd hesitate long and hard before handing out fortification levels of 2 (or even 3) to many different provinces, especially since the game will likely run for 6 months or so before war begins (allowing even more fortresses to be built).

Ostroleka would be province 642 instead of 643, which is Warsaw.
Brzesc is 622 and already has a fort: should it really be level 2, which is equal to the strongest forts currently on the map?
Silesia - Oppeln is 636
Przemysl is 724
Wilhelmshafen is 589.
We should also add Gibraltar, presumably? 989
 
I guess it depends on your deffination of "put up a fight", the most powerful fortress in Europe last about a week, but I can see you point. Maybe a big birtha tech that just ruins fortress values is a better way to go
 
I would leave Liege as one of the few modern fortresses anywhere. At least level 2, probably level 3.

Another thing we should do is increase the defensive bonuses for all terrain types. This would represent trench systems better than forts and better than high defense values.

Steele
 
I didn't know that the strongest in TGW are level 2 and not level 10 (as in HoI). If so, then perhaps Only Gibraltar deserves a fort since all the others could be seized.

There indeed is a fortress in Warsaw (quite an impressive pile of bricks), but it didn't put much fight and was definitely more of a prison back then. Other forts in the area were mostly outdated as well (Janowiec), some of them built even before napoleonic times and never refurbished. On the contrary, the Modlin fortress was one of the biggest back then and even in 1939 put up a good fight (almost a month). It should be big. The same for Przemysl, which actually fought quite well and was big. However, if you make only 3-points fortification scale...
Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back