Jump to content

What locations start with fortifications


Canuck_para
 Share

Recommended Posts

German West Wall fortifications should also be included, since these were available in 39-40 and then improved in 44. A3R changed Leningrad from a fortification hex to swamp, which could be considered in SC.

I assume fortifications are fixed and cannot be constructed during play, and that only entrenchments account for units improving their position. Are entrenchments unit specific or for the occupied hex? This is usually a unit specific attribute which increases over time if the unit doesn't move, but it may be useful to consider rear units being able to improve a hex attribute for other units to use when they withdraw - like the defensive rings around Moscow. Hex entrenchment values should be lost when vacated, so would have to be continuously occupied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess that the problem with the current fortifications maybe is that they are too effective to have them in more places than they already are.

Furthermore, the Westwall only makes sense in games with a finer hex grid. Together with the Maginot line, we would end up with two rows of fortifications more or less directly bordering each other.

Keeping the Maginot line after occupying it makes not really sense either as the forts face in the wrong direction. I'd say the "vanishing" of them is a good abstraction with respect to this. smile.gif

Straha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A3R changed Leningrad from a fortification hex to swamp, which could be considered in SC.
Not really sure what you mean by this.

I assume fortifications are fixed and cannot be constructed during play, and that only entrenchments account for units improving their position. Are entrenchments unit specific or for the occupied hex? This is usually a unit specific attribute which increases over time if the unit doesn't move, but it may be useful to consider rear units being able to improve a hex attribute for other units to use when they withdraw - like the defensive rings around Moscow. Hex entrenchment values should be lost when vacated, so would have to be continuously occupied.

Entrenchment values are terrain specific. Each type of terrain will allow for a maximum entrenchment value, which increases +1 point per turn every time you do not move the unit or engage in combat with that unit. Leave that hex and it drops to 0 as you've guessed.

Max entrenchment values are as follows:

City = 4

Capital = 6

Fortification = 8

Mountain = 4

Open areas, Mines, Forests = 2

[ May 17, 2002, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: Hubert Cater ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doh! I keep thinking of unit stacking, but there isn't any in SC. So terrain-based entrenchments for the hex are fine. tongue.gif

Btw, 3R had Leningrad a fortress on clear terrain (4x on defense), but A3R dropped the fortress and changed terrain to swamp (3x on defense). Subtle difference.

For Maginot Line and West Wall, fortifications should be for appropriate hexsides but probably not a big deal in SC. Either way, fortifications should be removed from play when overrun by enemy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like the on map forts can be re-improved by the new tenant. I guess that means that the entrenchment value goes blooey when you move out of it. Do you lose entrenchment value instantly, or can another friendly unit move in to the hex during your turn and keep the value the "old" unit had built up in the hex?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, 3R had Leningrad a fortress on clear terrain (4x on defense), but A3R dropped the fortress and changed terrain to swamp (3x on defense). Subtle difference.

I went with the idea that Leningrad was just a regular city that sort of became a 'Fortress' due to the war and the subsequent prepared defences. So keeping this in mind, I found that the entrenchment system works well since as the Axis player it takes you a little while (usually) before you drive your forces up to Leningrad and it gives the defenders a chance to sit there and entrench their unit each turn. Now I know that this is in itself not much different from other cities, but the fact that Leningrad is surrounded by water on 5 of it's six sides (Baltic, Lake Lagoda, and the Neva River) plus the fact that attacks across a river hex are reduced, it really worked out well and can make taking Leningrad a bit of a chore smile.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like the on map forts can be re-improved by the new tenant. I guess that means that the entrenchment value goes blooey when you move out of it. Do you lose entrenchment value instantly, or can another friendly unit move in to the hex during your turn and keep the value the "old" unit had built up in the hex?
Exactly, you not only get the bonuses of being on a specific type of terrain like a fortification, but each one also gives you an additional entrenchment value that can really make it tough for opponents to knock you out. So with this in mind it is a per unit entrenchment value, leave that position and your unit will be at ent = 0, with nothing left over for subsequent units that decide to occupy that position.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a differentiation between large and small capitals? If not, shouldn't there be an extra difficulty in taking a larger city over a smaller one? Paris is, according to Lonely Planet 105 sq km while Moscow is 1035 sq km (present day stats). Obviously there will be a much more substantial army protecting Moscow which will make it inherently more difficult to seize the Soviet capital in the first place, but shouldn't Moscow and London and other very large cities get an extra bonus simply because of its size and the effort required to take the whole city? Just a thought.

Looking forward to playing the demo! smile.gif

- Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone needs to keep in mind another little aspect of fortifications. They produce 5 MPPs no matter wether they have a direct land connection to the capital or not. This probably played a role in the decision of wether or not to include the Siegfried Line. As the adition of that fortification would have added 30-35 MPPs to Germany's starting production depending on wether it was 6 or 7 hexes long. Cya, bye!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Just bumped this oldie topic up again in case any else was interested in why there are no other fortifications like the Siegfried line or the Atlantic Wall in SC.

Although primarily a game design issue, I still think SC should give the Germans the Siegfried Line in 1939. It'll at least to stop an aggresive Allied play into the Rhine in 1939.

Also when SC calculates casualties from units landing on enemy coasts, are the casualties the same regardless of geography (i.e. casualties from landing in North Africa same as landing in pas de Calais?)

If so then I'd change the parameters and increase casualties on any landings on the Coasts of France. This should simulate the effects of the Atlantic Wall.

[ January 06, 2003, 01:45 AM: Message edited by: Genghis ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Achiles:

Everyone needs to keep in mind another little aspect of fortifications. They produce 5 MPPs no matter wether they have a direct land connection to the capital or not. This probably played a role in the decision of wether or not to include the Siegfried Line. As the adition of that fortification would have added 30-35 MPPs to Germany's starting production depending on wether it was 6 or 7 hexes long. Cya, bye!

This isn't the case. Add up France's start MMP's and you'll get 115 - it would be 130 if the Maginot Line generated 5 MMPs per hex. The number is solely a measure of the strength of the fortification.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...