Do forts build too fast (particularly for Soviets)?

[Altaris]

No, right now you can get 50 net points max per turn on one hex. This is enough to go up 1 level at any fort level. What I'm proposing is that this net value be divided by the next for level up (so going from 0 to 1 is still the same as now, going from 1 to 2 has a hard cap of 25 (50/2) instead of 50, going from 2 to 3 has a hard cap of 17.66 (50/3) instead of 50, etc). This basically means having the hard cap on the number of points that can be accumulated in one hex go down as the fort level goes up.

As it stands now, with enough construction points, it's feasibly possible to go from lvl 4 to lvl 5 fort in 1 turn (though I doubt the construction points would be available for that). With my proposed system, it would take a minimum of 10 turns to go from lvl 4 to lvl 5. More importantly, it would take a bare minimum of 6 turns to go from 0 to 3 forts, whereas now it seems quite possible to do that in 3 turns.

Above all, I think this hard cap needs to be seriously nerfed in mud and blizzard. Having that huge span of time to build up loads of forts is what I think is killing games in 1942 (well that and the uber-blizzard).

[timmyab]

Ah, I see what you mean.
Yes I agree, it's more or less exactly what I was advocating earlier in this thread in terms of time taken to build the next fort level.
There are other things that could be done as well to improve the current situation.For instance leadership ratings (possibly the infantry rating?) could modify the maximum rate of fort building.This would also satisfy some concerns about Axis fort building later in the game.You could also put a limit on building level 3 and 4 forts.A fair few 3 levels allowed, but 4 levels strictly limited.

[pat.casey]

Another possible "fix" might be to cap the level of fortification that units can "self build" to at level 2.
To get to level 3 or 4 you'd have to use a specialized fortification engineer unit (sort of like the railroad repair units) to raise fort levels.
You could then add more of these units to the armies as the war progressed to simulate the generally higher entrenchment rates as time progressed.

[randallw]

Are some people in this thread unaware that support units ( sappers/engineers and construction ) assist with fort levels?

[2ndACR]

Nope, I know about it, but don't think I have ever seen them help, or is it behind the scenes? As in do they deploy like the rail repair guys on map or invisible.

[Panama]

From Soviet Order of Battle World War II, Volume IV, "Red Guards" Soviet Guards Rifle and Airborne Units 1941-1945:

"The Germans considered the Russian infantry to be masters at digging in, 'disappearing into the earth', as one writer put it. This was not due to any 'natural affinity' of the Russian for his dirt, but to a combination of training and equipment. Every Soviet rifle unit down to the battalion had it's own sapper or combat engineer unit, and even the smallest of these, a small platoon in the rifle battalion, had a wagon full of tools with it. While trained sappers worked at special tasks like setting up wire entanglements, clearing or emplacing mines, and building or digging major barriers, the regular riflemen could supplement their own entrenching tools with larger shovels, picks, axes and saws to dig and build all types of protective positions."

One example. In 68 manhours a 76mm Cannon position with 100 degree field of fire, crew and ammunition pits, all covered overhead.

"...within an hour a rifle company would be firmly dug in and in less than 12 hours an entire regiment and all of it's supporting weapons could be dug in, camouflaged, with overhead cover and cleared fields of fire."

Generalmajor Friedrich Von Mellenthin: "No artillery fire, no matter how violent and well concentrated, will wipe out a Russian posittion which has grown overnight"

[Razz1]

How about flipping the coin and looking at the other side?

Decrease the benefits of forts. Level 1 gets decreased by 50%, level 2 by 25% and level 3 by 10 %.

Just another perspective to look at.

[LiquidSky]

A turn is a week. How long does it take to build/lay wire minefields etc. Build trenches? Bunkers? I fear we may find out that the game is actually too slow at building them.

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: LiquidSky

A turn is a week. How long does it take to build/lay wire minefields etc. Build trenches? Bunkers? I fear we may find out that the game is actually too slow at building them.

To lay down a serious defensive belt like those around Kursk, about 4 months and lots of dedicated engineering resources.

The germans spent about 4 months on the panther line (August -> January) before falling back on it and it was far from done.

[randallw]

The engineer/construction units helping with forting do it behind the scenes; they don't appear on map, so the only you know if they probably helped with a fort is to compare the fort level from one turn to the next.

I am not well read up on the Kursk preparations; I know there were lots of civs helping out, which is probably required if you want to build the world's longest AT ditch.

[mmarquo]

"To lay down a serious defensive belt like those around Kursk, about 4 months and lots of dedicated engineering resources."
 
Yes - but it was 7 successive concentric belts of fortifications hundreds of kilometers long - and probably represents level a level 4 - 5 effort. And as you know, there were complex preplanned impassable anti-tank ditches funneling inot interlocking fields of AT fire, etc.; including a communcation network and centers. Some opine that the most important lend lease asset was rolls of telephone wire more than anything else.
 
Marquo

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: Marquo

"To lay down a serious defensive belt like those around Kursk, about 4 months and lots of dedicated engineering resources."

Yes - but it was 7 successive concentric belts of fortifications hundreds of kilometers long - and probably represents level a level 4 - 5 effort. And as you know, there were complex preplanned impassable anti-tank ditches funneling inot interlocking fields of AT fire, etc.; including a communcation network and centers. Some opine that the most important lend lease asset was rolls of telephone wire more than anything else.

Marquo

Sure, it was a massive defensive zone.
What's it equate to in game terms? Linear level 4 fortifications with level 5 strongpoints at towns.
How long did it take in real life? 4 months.
How long does it take in the game? About 4 weeks, give or take.

Unless we want to postulate that Kursk was something so special as to not be modelled in-game?

[Altaris]

I've decided to take up a test game of HtH versus myself, with forts setting at 35% (roughly 1/3 of default settings). Going to see how this pans out. Since each fort level seems to increase by about a x3 multiplier, my theory is this should make forts roughly 1 level lower in most cases from what I'm seeing now. I think that would be about right. I keep thinking if these dang lvl 3 forts were only lvl 2, I'd probably be seeing more realistic results.

I doubt this is going to have any impact at all on lvl 1 forts, since from what I'm seeing I think the net 50 points at lvl 1 is being far exceeded, but I think should make it take a couple of turns to get to lvl 2, and probably around 4-5 turns of solid building to get to lvl 3.

Right now I'm running with both sides at 35%, maybe this is a mistake to modify on the German side, we'll see. However, I don't like the idea of Germans being able to do insta-fort building either. Fort building should require some effort, not be an after thought with beat up and retreated units that magically pops up lvl 2-3 forts in just a few short weeks.

[Panama]

Kursk
In the beginning of June, on the south side of the salient, in front of the 4th Pz Army, the Soviets moved their main line of defenses back about five or six miles to take advantage of terrain. They were no less fortified there than other places. As mentioned by others, these were rather 'super field fortifications' given the amount of time and people available. Not something anyone should consider 'normal'.

[bednarre]

ORIGINAL: Panama

From Soviet Order of Battle World War II, Volume IV, "Red Guards" Soviet Guards Rifle and Airborne Units 1941-1945:

"The Germans considered the Russian infantry to be masters at digging in, 'disappearing into the earth', as one writer put it. This was not due to any 'natural affinity' of the Russian for his dirt, but to a combination of training and equipment. Every Soviet rifle unit down to the battalion had it's own sapper or combat engineer unit, and even the smallest of these, a small platoon in the rifle battalion, had a wagon full of tools with it. While trained sappers worked at special tasks like setting up wire entanglements, clearing or emplacing mines, and building or digging major barriers, the regular riflemen could supplement their own entrenching tools with larger shovels, picks, axes and saws to dig and build all types of protective positions."

One example. In 68 manhours a 76mm Cannon position with 100 degree field of fire, crew and ammunition pits, all covered overhead.

"...within an hour a rifle company would be firmly dug in and in less than 12 hours an entire regiment and all of it's supporting weapons could be dug in, camouflaged, with overhead cover and cleared fields of fire."

Generalmajor Friedrich Von Mellenthin: "No artillery fire, no matter how violent and well concentrated, will wipe out a Russian posittion which has grown overnight"

It seems like there are questions about both the quality and quantity of fortifications construction required to reach a certain level. The level of the fortification applies to all of the units in the hex, 10 miles! Why not keep track of fortification numbers (quantity) and fortification levels (quality) . Fortifications can be partially destroyed with this approach. Also, it should take a substantially amount of time to build a solid row of level 3 fortifications in the hex (high number). Also, what is the relationship between historical fortification type and the game level ---
Level 1 : Trenches and foxholes?
Level 2 : Wooden bunkers and overhead cover?
Level 3 : Concrete bunkers?
Level 4 : Maginot Line?

Finally, its seems like significantly extra supplies should have to be stockpiled for level 2+ fortifications. Most of European Russia is not heavily forested.

[Mynok]

Tracking fortification by unit would be the ideal IMO. Might not be doable though.

[hfarrish]

It seems to me the ideal solution is still building off Zort's earlier comments, which would be to limit the construction of level 4 forts to areas around cities, to limit construction by brigades and perhaps to limit construction by depleted units and modify it by a leader's administrative skill (not sure if this has been suggested before, but it would seem to make sense). As a dedicated Soviet PBEM player I think its fair to limit the high end of construction - no way would there be a line of concrete bunkers from the Black Sea to Leningrad, but by the same token, as others have pointed out, the Soviets were quite good at digging fast - so 1-3 forts should be relatively attainable. Not like these can't be broken by a well planned German offensive.

[Adnan Meshuggi]

Russian army was quite good in digging in
But the defence wasn´t the way that nobody could break through. How should the germany otherwise had managed to break through the Stalin-Line, a well prepared bunker line?

I think, fortification should help the defender, but with a certain break-through-possibility.

One problem with fortification is, that you can build 30 or 40miles DEEP Fortification in fast time. I can´t remember any frontline in ww2 that had a wider defence belt. Only at kursk at two single points (knowing that the germans would attack here) were 30km deep. And - the germans broke through, not easily, but they broke through with lower losses as the russians.

So, maybe fortifications need more "numbers"?
Say, from 1 - 10?
10 is Maginot-Line-Style, 5 is deep trenches with concrete small bunkers?
Each number larger as 5 improve mine belts, barb wire, protection against artillery
on the other side, if you attack with enough engineers, this reduce the "above5"-bunkers by 3?, but only to 4 or larger?

[Panama]

Stalin Line had been mostly abandoned after advance into Poland in 1939. Much of the artillery had been taken and was still in storage waiting to be put into new fortifications along new border to the west. The bunkers were still at the Stalin Line but much was in bad shape. Some parts were manned when the Axis attacked but it was not a very good defense because of neglect. Also, Stalin Line was made to channel attacks rather than stop them when it was built.

I think Adnan has a good idea but there is no need for a Maginot Line level. No one has resources or time for that kind of fortification. The best you could get is several lines of field fortifications as at Kursk.

[Adnan Meshuggi]

Hi,
 
the readings about the "breakthrough" of the stalin line tells a different story. In the cases it was manned, it was a hard but not impossible fighting
 
But i agree - you need no maginotline, just for sevastopol
 
I still like the idea that you can establish a defence line in a certain deep, but no "40m deep"-Fortress. Not with the limited resources (has anybody asked how these guys build all the trenches with barb wire? Where comes the concrete?
 
At kursk the russians could lay a lot mines. Normally, no division has 100.000 mines for the 40miles deep defence layer...
So not the level is the biggest problem, but the depth.
 
One idea (can it be done?) is, that the army can give priority for certain hexes or for an area... in this area you can build a deeper defence line (as one row) with a higher fortification as 2. All other hexes can only be level 1 or 2 or zero (maybe zero or 1 to make it even harder?)
This could help to avoid "Verdun at the eastern front". The player need to define the defence line, with priority. no line can be deeper as 2 hexes (similar to the biggest fortification layer at kursk), if you use troops behind, they can do some light dig-in (say, some artillery is better prepared, but honestly, if your gun can shoot 10 miles, nobody would dig in each gun so deep with 40 miles distance to the frontline. I bet, these guns would be in cover against air attacks, but nothing else. In no army existing

You also should define what kind of defence you want. a linked static line with one,two or three reservelines as backup (better, but take longer... it starts with the first line and the last line will be finished last. Also if you want 360 Degree Defence... you give the order and the computer do the rest.
 
So if you plan the Eastwall, but you have only limited engineer capability, you have a big problem - cause only 20% of the hexes has more as level1-defence. But if your heroes pay you the time (or both sides do not attack), you can dig and dig, you revice barb wire, mines, concrete, building material, and and and. If these defence systems are finished, they are really ugly (level 5-7)

So you can force the enemy to fight at another place and time (like the northern sector)

Oh - in winter (frozen surface) you should only reach level 1, only heavy engineering equipment should help to avoid it. So no russian "kursk is everywere defence-line" (or german).