Thoughts on Fortifications

[GrumpyMel]

Getting into this game and learning to play it better as well as enjoying it. However, I thought I'd share a few observations about fortifications. Does anyone else feel that fortifications are too quick/easy to build up and maintain? Some thoughts....

- Units enjoy the full benefits of fortifications even though they've just been fully switched into the line. This seems a bit unrealistic and I think makes for an unsatisfying game play mechanic. It seems to me that part of the benefit of fortifying is not just the physical apparatus (fox holes, barbed wire, entrenchments, etc), but the units familiarity with the battlefield... that isn't something that would be fully transferable to a new unit taking it's place in the line. From a gameplay perspective it creates a sort of shell game where a defender can simply switch in their most powerful unit(s) to a portion of the line where their forts have been depleted, making the hex practicaly unassailable until the forts have been fully rebuilt. This wouldn't be so bad against a human opponent that at least has to maintain proper reserves in good combat shape across the entire line to protect it.... but the AI seems able to "cheat" moving units to spots in the line where they really don't seem like they should be able to get to if they followed regular movement rules.

- Concentrated bombing (and concentrated artillery) seems to do nothing to fort levels. I've put entire air forces worth of air power ground striking a single hex on multiple occasions and the fortification level doesn't budge an inch. That's highly unrealistic... in reality concentrated air power and artillery was one of the solutions to built up fortifications. They should be ripping through the fort levels in a hex, instead of doing nothing.

- From a gameplay perspective, I've got myself bottled up in the toe of Italy and unable to break out due to Axis fort levels. Partialy this may be my own fault (it's my first game) due to choice of invasion spots (near Crotone) and not maintaining the momentum (though horrible weather made that difficult). However, I've still got something like an 8 hex front that the Axis seems to be able to hold with just a few weak units in high forts... and whenever I break a Fort down a level in one spot the HG Panzer Division and another strong unit seem to instantly warp into that location (8 hex's over mountains and rough terrain in light mud, through enemy ZOC's without taking a readiness hit) and if the fort isn't fully rebuilt by my next turn, the hex is still pretty unassailable due to the strength of the units occupying it). It makes for a pretty unsatisfying gameplay situation. I wouldn't mind it so much, if the AI really needed to have significant forces committed there to keep me bottled up.... but thanks to warping Panzer divisions and fortifications that seem completely impervious to concentrated air power and artillery...it doesn't.

- I really feel there needs to be a solution available to the player to knock out fort levels if they are willing to concentrate the resources to do so. By all means make manuver and keeping momentum important and penalize the player for failing to do so.... but the player should have a solution for bulling their way through a well fortified line if they run up against it... if they are willing to concentrate the resources and if their enemy really hasn't concentrated alot of reserves to give the defense some depth.

[Baelfiin]

Heavy artillery and engineers will reduce them, are they being committed in your ground battles?

[GrumpyMel]

ORIGINAL: Baelfiin

Heavy artillery and engineers will reduce them, are they being committed in your ground battles?

Yes, on every single attack. I've got the entire Tactical Air Force on Ground Support (and the entire 15th Air Force is assigned to Ground Strike the same hex in the Air Phase) most divisions have a combat engineer attached ... the symbol shows in the attack box.... and Corps and Army HQ's have artillery units attached and are near the Front Line.... I generaly massively outnumber the amount of tubes the enemy has committed to a fight.

I do tend to budge the Fort Levels a little but with such full scale assault...but it's like .02 or .04 on each attack....maybe if I get really lucky I'll move it .4 or something like that but the enemy rebuilds it something like .5 on each turn....and if it does get weakened, they instantly warp in the HG and another heavy unit (I think an SS PzGr division) from 1 spot in the line to another... no matter how far away they are... so the weakened spot becomes kinda unassailable...I face something like a 200+ defensive
CV in that hex the next turn. That's completely unrealistic.... (and unsatisfying gameplay) no way a defender should be able to maintain fort levels in a hex that is subject to repeated heavy bombing and artillery strikes..... Heck, you should be able to knock out Fort levels just from repeated bombing alone....without even committing a ground attack.... and certainly as a prelude to a ground attack.

[Baelfiin]

There was some discussion about air bombing reducing fort level, maybe you can post screenshot of some of your attacks so we could see what you are seeing.

[Smirfy]

I think it has been mentioned that Allied artillery and airpower are pretty redundant

[NotOneStepBack]

...go around them

You'll never win assaulting head first into a fort line, it's best to flank them with another invasion.

Art of war 101, don't attack where your opponent is strong.

[KenchiSulla]

ORIGINAL: Smirfy

I think it has been mentioned that Allied artillery and airpower are pretty redundant

Its not.. The disruption alone caused by massed air tips the balance in many critical battles... You just need to learn how to look deeper..

[RedLancer]

It took the Allies two years to get north through Italy with good reason.

[Belphegor]

I'm not going to say whether I agree with the current situation or not. In the current game against Pelton I was beating my head against his fort wall for some time. It occasionally took 2 weeks to recover troops and fatigue from failed assaults. Eventually, with massed air assault, engineers and arty I managed to start knocking down forts 2 levels in one attack. Then I got him shifted again. 1 or two hexes per turn... and ran out of steam.

I felt the key was to not really let him recover and attack at more than one location to stop the reinforcing. Although I welcomed the opportunity to cause more attrition.

I'm still way behind historical but attribute that to my opponent's gameplay not the engine. I'm still learning.

He has been annoyed with the apparent ease that I take hexes once I focused the entire tactical air force on one hex.

[Smirfy]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

It took the Allies two years to get north through Italy with good reason.

Yes they never left artillery range because German infantry weapons were so superior especially in Italy so it took them time to limber, unlumber move stockpiles and set up again.Add to that everything was booby trapped and your on a narrow front it was going to be methodical. And then you had the Allied troop withdrawals for DDAY and Dragoon. Both the Gothic and Gustav lines were both broken I remember correctly, despite this.

[Davekhps]

Italy is a tough nut to crack. The way the Allies have around it is to launch a phib invasion every time the Axis form a line, the AI will then dislocate (teleport?) to the rear, abandoning those forts. The phib has to be large enough to trigger this, a couple of divisions gets "walled off," while a robust invasion always seems to dislocate the line.

Eventually, you'll get to good tank country on both coasts that will allow for less fortification and thus easier breakthroughs. In the meantime, pound railyards and railways (I find both seem to be more effective than interdiction, but that's just a hunch).

[HMSWarspite]

People need to read up about Italy. From Wiki:

"Repeated pinpoint artillery attacks on Allied assault troops caused their leaders to conclude the abbey was at the least being used as an observation post. Fears escalated along with casualties, and in spite of lacking clear evidence, it was marked for destruction. On 15 February American bombers dropped 1,400 tons of high explosives, creating widespread damage .[6] The raid failed to achieve its objective, as German paratroopers occupied the rubble and established excellent defensive positions amid the ruins. Between 17 January and 18 May, Monte Cassino and the Gustav defences were assaulted four times by Allied troops, the last involving twenty divisions attacking along a twenty-mile front."

4 months - 17 weeks of continued assaults, including air raids and much artillery.

BTW, no army left artillery range (except in totally exceptional breakthroughs). The reason 1918 in the west ran like it did was because the Allies had at last learned this. The skill is having mobile and flexible artillery which means it moves faster/sets up quicker. Totally superior infantry weapons = bog standard machine guns. Everything else is just a counter to the counter to machine guns!

[HMSWarspite]

ORIGINAL: Davekhps

In the meantime, pound railyards and railways (I find both seem to be more effective than interdiction, but that's just a hunch).

Interdiction is for Christmas, railyard damage lasts all year (well, almost[;)])

[marion61]

ORIGINAL: Davekhps

Eventually, you'll get to good tank country on both coasts that will allow for less fortification and thus easier breakthroughs.

Why not invade into good tank country to start with?[8D]

[Joel Billings]

Check out the starting situation in Italy in the May 44 campaign. The German units are bled white. Although the 1st FJ Division has 7000 men, its combat ready TOE percentage is 26%. German units in Italy are between 30-70% combat ready TOE. This, along with clear weather allows for a breaking of the Gustav Line. In good weather, the Allies can focus their interdiction over a few hexes of the front preventing the German units from fully utilizing what strength they have to reinforce critical spots in the line (in game terms, heavily disrupting units when they are attacked). Attacks will take ground and things can snowball just as they do in Breakout & Pursuit (or at least the Germans can be forced back).

I can't guarantee that the Germans won't send more forces to Italy in Campaign 43 than they did historically, but then the Allies have other options as well. But what did happen can happen in the game.

[Kumppi]

So is it better to make interdiction attacks against front line units than directly bombing the units? I thought that against units that don't move its better to bomb and interdict rear areas where units and freight move.

Is there any difference except targeting when you select UNIT or INTERDICT in the target selection when creating ground attack missions?

[Smirfy]

Like I said I dont doubt in th May 44 campiagns you guys have got the OOB and the various strengths and weaknesses right its actually getting them to that stage form the 43 scenario

70% of Allied casualties in Normandy were due to mortars which aint bad for a "bog standard" weapon, To get to the Mortars one had to go through the superior infantry weapon to do that one needed artillery. As for Cassino the vetrans 36th infantry division demanded a congressional inquiry into Clarks handling of the 1st battle after the war. Dont think he had much artillery support The next two battles were fought on unfavourable terms because the Allies got themselves in a fix at Anzio. Finally Alexander got a plan, and a lot of artillery and attacked in May when the weather was nicer. Believe he broke through.

[Joel Billings]

Yes, interdiction is better than directly bombing the unit. Bombing may cause a few immediate losses, but will only put a small amount of interdiction in the hex. Interdiction may not put any immediate losses on the unit (it will only cause losses at very high interdiction levels), but in conjunction with an attack, it will pin the defending forces (by disrupting them at the start of the ground fighting). It is also good in the rear areas for intercepting supplies coming to units, reducing reserve commitments of units in the rear, and causing losses to units moving in from the rear (especially if on trains, don't rail into high interdiction). So in Normandy in 44 the Allies can both isolate the battlefield and pin the front line forces. In Italy, you probably don't have the forces to do both, but you can pin the front line units in the tough hexes you plan on attacking.

[Baelfiin]

Ground attack unit can inflict a lot of disruptions which seems to have an effect on a ground attack later

[Joel Billings]

Yes, you're right in one way about ground attack. It also causes disruption, which is converted into fatigue at the end of the bombing run. This will also reduce the CV of the defending unit. There are many ways to skin a cat. Gary's strategy of choice for the AI is heavy interdiction, but you can find other ways to the same end.