Fortification Levels

[Q-Ball]

Clearly the way AE works is that building up to size-3 forts is quick and easy; I assume these are Field forts, basically foxholes, sandbags, a few log bunkers, nothing too elaborate.

After level 3, construction is much slower. My question is this:

How much slower does it get?

What does it take to get Iwo Jima, for example, to size-9? Are we talking 100 engineering squads working for a year, or what?

Are size-9 forts in AE more effective than in WITP, or is that part unchanged?

I like the change actually, size-9 forts were MUCH too routine in WITP. I would just expect a size-9 fort to be REALLY nasty in AE, like Iwo Jima was (if that was "size-9", but I assume it just about was).

[Nikademus]

Forts were toned down in AE.

And yes, they do get harder to build the higher you go.

[khyberbill]

And dont forget you need a certain level of supply to build a fort beyond lvl 6.

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

And dont forget you need a certain level of supply to build a fort beyond lvl 6.

really? Is that in the manual? I missed it ... [X(]

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: khyberbill

And dont forget you need a certain level of supply to build a fort beyond lvl 6.

really? Is that in the manual? I missed it ... [X(]

it is, that´s when your fort level turns into red, you don´t have 20.000 supplies in the hex and can´t build it any further.

[xj900uk]

Japanese strong points, composed of reinforced coconut-tree logs, were notoriously difficult to destroy yet surprisingly easy to construct/build.  Witness the struggles around Buna and Salamua to try and dig them out...

[John Lansford]

I'd say Okinawa, Iwo Jima and Peleliu were all level 8-9 fortifications.  Basically every position was fortified, all guns dug in, everything protected, and the entire defending force underground.

[Andy Mac]

Forts and what they mean in game are bloody hard to define.
 
1- 3 in general are easier to construct than stock
4 - 6 are harder cumulatively I think its about twoce as hard.
 
So to get from 1 to 6 is about twice as hard as in stock or to put it another way to get to 6 now takes about as long as it took to get to 9 in stock but with an accelerated 1 - 3.
 
This reflects that even minimal/hasty defences created by soldiers are substantially better than no defences.
 
7 - 9 reflect far more integrated maginot prepared type fortifications with a lot of depth and are therefore difficult to build

[EUBanana]

The infamous 20k supply limit is such a huge drag on things. [:(] Just about everything vital seems to need 20k supply!

I suppose that means it's doing its job though. [;)]

[Puhis]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

What does it take to get Iwo Jima, for example, to size-9? Are we talking 100 engineering squads working for a year, or what?

Is it even possible to get level 9 fort to Iwo Jima? I thought the max is only 6 (because it's an island base)...[&:]

[Andy Mac]

Its only 6 because there is a limit to the defensive depth on an island of that size

[loricas]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Clearly the way AE works is that building up to size-3 forts is quick and easy; I assume these are Field forts, basically foxholes, sandbags, a few log bunkers, nothing too elaborate.

After level 3, construction is much slower. My question is this:

How much slower does it get?

What does it take to get Iwo Jima, for example, to size-9? Are we talking 100 engineering squads working for a year, or what?

i'm making a test on fort construction time:

base for test Naha (okinawa 95,66) no work on airport or port

day 1 53 eng fort from level 0 to 1
day 2 53 eng fort level 1 + 43%
day 5 53 eng fort level 2 attained
day 6 53 eng fort level 2 + 12%
day 8 106 eng fort 2+39%
day 10 106 eng fort 2+63%
day 14 106 eng fort 3 attained + 2%

so: around 50 eng point lev 1. 150 level 2. 1000 level 3.

progress in later post

[HansBolter]

My real concern is how quickly the fort I worked for weeks or months to complete is reduced.

Just how effective are forts when it only takes only ONE day of combat for engineers to reduce them by a level?

Is there a sliding scale of difficulty in reducing them just the same as the slidning scale in creating them? It sure doesn't look that way to me. Engineers seem to be able to reduce a fort level from 3 to 2 just as quickly and easily as they reduce it from 1 to 0. They can even do so while participating in attacks at abysmal odds.

I have seen the AI perform suicide 1-99 odds attacks just so the engineers can reduce the fort by a level. Something about this just screams out that it is poorly modeled. Engineers shouldn't be able to automatically generate a fort reduction merely by participating in an attack, no matter how poor the odds.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but in my mind the amount of time needed to reduce a fort plays into the equation regarding how much time and resouces I should spend creating them.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

My real concern is how quickly the fort I worked for weeks or months to complete is reduced.

Just how effective are forts when it only takes only ONE day of combat for engineers to reduce them by a level?

Is there a sliding scale of difficulty in reducing them just the same as the slidning scale in creating them? It sure doesn't look that way to me. Engineers seem to be able to reduce a fort level from 3 to 2 just as quickly and easily as they reduce it from 1 to 0. They can even do so while participating in attacks at abysmal odds.

I have seen the AI perform suicide 1-99 odds attacks just so the engineers can reduce the fort by a level. Something about this just screams out that it is poorly modeled. Engineers shouldn't be able to automatically generate a fort reduction merely by participating in an attack, no matter how poor the odds.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but in my mind the amount of time needed to reduce a fort plays into the equation regarding how much time and resouces I should spend creating them.

Well, Fort Drum (the "Concrete Battleship") took several years to complete---but it only took American Combat Engineers one afternoon to blow it to he11 and gone (level 8? to level "worthless").

On the other hand, that was a very well planned and executed "special op"..., so maybe the problem isn't how quickly it happens when it does, but how often it happens per chance...

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

My real concern is how quickly the fort I worked for weeks or months to complete is reduced.

Just how effective are forts when it only takes only ONE day of combat for engineers to reduce them by a level?

Is there a sliding scale of difficulty in reducing them just the same as the slidning scale in creating them? It sure doesn't look that way to me. Engineers seem to be able to reduce a fort level from 3 to 2 just as quickly and easily as they reduce it from 1 to 0. They can even do so while participating in attacks at abysmal odds.

I have seen the AI perform suicide 1-99 odds attacks just so the engineers can reduce the fort by a level. Something about this just screams out that it is poorly modeled. Engineers shouldn't be able to automatically generate a fort reduction merely by participating in an attack, no matter how poor the odds.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but in my mind the amount of time needed to reduce a fort plays into the equation regarding how much time and resouces I should spend creating them.

Well, Fort Drum (the "Concrete Battleship") took several years to complete---but it only took American Combat Engineers one afternoon to blow it to he11 and gone (level 8? to level "worthless").

On the other hand, that was a very well planned and executed "special op"..., so maybe the problem isn't how quickly it happens when it does, but how often it happens per chance...

My thoughts exactly. As currently structured, does engineer participation in an attack, no matter how poor the odds, AUTOMATICALLY result in fort level reduction, OR is there only a CHANCE of fort reduction? Does the chance of fort reduction, if structured this way, vary with the combat odds?

These are questions I would really like to see answered by some one in the know.

[erstad]

My thoughts exactly. As currently structured, does engineer participation in an attack, no matter how poor the odds, AUTOMATICALLY result in fort level reduction, OR is there only a CHANCE of fort reduction? Does the chance of fort reduction, if structured this way, vary with the combat odds?

These are questions I would really like to see answered by some one in the know.

I know one thing:
- Not automatic reduction, it is a chance of reduction. Many times a fort is not reduced in an attack.

It should be relatively easy to find out if it's odds based - watch the sequence closely and see if the engineer reduction occurs before the odds are calculated. I think it does, but wouldn't want to say that for sure.

I speculate another thing:
- Chance of reduction is a function of the number of combat engineers present

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: erstad

My thoughts exactly. As currently structured, does engineer participation in an attack, no matter how poor the odds, AUTOMATICALLY result in fort level reduction, OR is there only a CHANCE of fort reduction? Does the chance of fort reduction, if structured this way, vary with the combat odds?

These are questions I would really like to see answered by some one in the know.

I know one thing:
- Not automatic reduction, it is a chance of reduction. Many times a fort is not reduced in an attack.

It should be relatively easy to find out if it's odds based - watch the sequence closely and see if the engineer reduction occurs before the odds are calculated. I think it does, but wouldn't want to say that for sure.

I speculate another thing:
- Chance of reduction is a function of the number of combat engineers present

While I can't tell where in the sequence the fort reduction occurs, it is ahead of the odds in the combat reports. Which, to me, seems completely bass ackwards.

The combat odds should have a direct impact in determining the chances for success of the engineering effort. If the odds are so abysmal that the firepower of the troops in the fort is soo overwhelming that the engineers cannot even get near the fortifications to place the charges then thier chances of success would be greatly reduced.

Allowing the engineers to reduce the fort before the odds are calculated looks a lot like a free pass for the engineers.

[John Lansford]

Fort Drum was also disarmed when the US blew it up; the 14" and 6" guns were all destroyed when the US surrendered in 1942, so the only weapons the Japanese had were the MG's at the sally ports and whatever else they had brought with them.  It was basically a big concrete bomb shelter by 1945.

[Blackhorse]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


While I can't tell where in the sequence the fort reduction occurs, it is ahead of the odds in the combat reports. Which, to me, seems completely bass ackwards.

The combat odds should have a direct impact in determining the chances for success of the engineering effort. If the odds are so abysmal that the firepower of the troops in the fort is soo overwhelming that the engineers cannot even get near the fortifications to place the charges then thier chances of success would be greatly reduced.

Allowing the engineers to reduce the fort before the odds are calculated looks a lot like a free pass for the engineers.

It is less bass ackwards than you might think. The odds are calculated *after* all of the combat (artillery bombardment, then devices firing at each other) occurs. The odds only determine if the defender retreats. The combat engineers are in the front line and have to survive all the shooting. If, when the dust settles, you still have enough combat engineers alive and undisrupted, you have a chance to reduce the forts, even if your final odds are (substantially) less than 1:1. Obviously, if your finals odds were, say, 4:1, there is a much better chance, all things being equal, that enough of your engineers survived to take the fort down a level.

[John Lansford]

The AI had two SNLF's and some engineers dug in on Lunga at fortification level 3 when my invasion force of two Army regiments landed.  Even with heavy bombardments from ships, carrier planes and LBA, lots of supply for the Army men, and shock attacks, the defenders were defeated only after I landed the 1st Marine Division in a followup wave a few days later.  The two infantry regiments never could reduce the fort level, although they were slowly wearing down the defenders' overall strength by the time the 1st Marines landed.