Coastal forts UN discussion

[Niklas]

As a compromise, how about we say that coastal forts may not cover the entire coast? Like denyd says, I doubt anyone is planning that anyway.

 

[General_W]

One other thing to consider and that is naval bombardment. Even with forts a couple of battleships would be able to red-line the defenders and then using carrier based bombers, the defenders could be eliminated. At that point I'd rather be able to capture a city and unload tanks and continue the offensive as opposed to landing them on the shore and be subject to counterattack.

I'm thinking that the map maker might have desired to see some modern era warfare with combined arms being used as opposed to the usual AA unit steamrollers that usually occur.

There should be some interesting decisions on whether to go for marines or enter the modern era with mech infantry, modern armor and nukes.

As to my opinion, if it keeps Babe from bailing out, then sure. I don't think any team is planning on building a lot of forts anyway.

very well put.

As a compromise, how about we say that coastal forts may not cover the entire coast?

That works for me.

 

[donsig]

As a compromise, how about we say that coastal forts may not cover the entire coast? Like denyd says, I doubt anyone is planning that anyway.

That might be difficult to write into a rule. Are you suggesting we put in a specific percentage or number of tiles that can or can't be fortified?

 

[Niklas]

Yes, if the compromise is deemed like the best way, I am suggesting that we decide upon a fraction of the coast that may not be fortified. What that fraction should be is a different discussion. But of course we can't just say "not the entire coast", since that would be little restriction if you could leave only one tile open.

 

[General_W]

New Rule: Max of 50% of costal tiles may be covered with Forts.

Hard to imagine anyone doing that in the first place…

But no problem for me personally to agree to that.

 

[cubsfan6506]

Okay I can agree to that.

 

[Niklas]

Aye, fine by me. What does the other side of the argument have to say on the issue?

 

[Whomp]

It's obvious this will never pass so drop the whole proposal and let's get it on.

 

[Chamnix]

New Rule: Max of 50% of costal tiles may be covered with Forts.

I think the amendment is pretty much irrelevant, but if we're going to pass one, I think it needs to be a little clearer - 50% of all coastal tiles owned by a civ, or 50% of coastal tiles on each landmass? What happens when a landmass is shared by 2 or more civs? What about the tiles on such a landmass not owned by either civ?

I'm not trying to be anal, but when teams have different understandings of what the rules are, obviously we get in trouble.

Marines with a 8 attack against infantry at 10, fortified behind a city or town (with walls) is about 13% success rate. Barricaded that success rate is ~7.5% and a fort is 12.8%. All on grass...
Without a fort or barricade on grass it's at least 23.8%. Quite a difference by transports imo.

Just as an aside, marines attack with 12, but your point about there being a huge difference between fort/barricade/town and open grassland is obviously still valid.

EDIT - crossposted that one with Whomp. Feel free to ignore...

 

[Whomp]

Thanks for the clarification Chamnix. Since I don't recall ever using marines I looked at the main page which likely had PTW numbers.

It's a moot point though and we officially drop this proposal.

 

[CommandoBob]

New Rule: Max of 50% of costal tiles may be covered with Forts.

Coastal would equal tiles that can be invaded, no?



So the Pink Dots would be coastal. True?

Imagine that one of the Pink Dots is a city. Is that tile still coastal?

Imagaine that one of the Yellow Dots is a city. Is that tile still coastal?


Some Nitpicking on a Good Idea
To me it seems that once a city is built in a tile that can be invaded, it should no longer be considered a coastal tile for this rule. That seems a bit backward, but consider a landmass with 100 coastal tiles and 50 cities on those tiles. I can't imagine a landmass just like that with 50 legal cities but let's pretend it could happen. If those cities are still counted as coastal tiles, then 50 other tiles could be made into forts. Fifty forts and fifty cities; I don't think this is what you had in mind.

If city tiles are not considered coastal, then only 50 coastal tiles are left, and of these 50 only 25 could become forts.

Further Nitpicking
Would this apply to all the tiles of nation or to each land mass the nation has in its possession? One tile islands would be excluded from the count but what about two tiles and larger?

 

[CommandoBob]

It's a moot point though and we officially drop this proposal.

Nevermind.

 

[Nobody]

Get a fleet of carriers and bomb the coast line till its only red units and then send in the marines.

 

[cubsfan6506]

In conquests you can just kill it.