Maginot lines

[joncnunn]

There were two reasons the historical Maginot line didn't suffer a substantal internal break:

1. In real life there is a limit to how many units can be stacked in a single tile. (And consequently the size of your attack) That does not apply in Civ IV.

2. The Germans went around it. This will also happen in Civ IV if you build an incomplete wall or underdefend the edges.

I also note that even if the French had "completed" the line by continiuning the wall between France and the low countries to the sea, the Germans could still have gone around it by invading France thru Italy. It would have taken longer to get the troops in position via rails east of Swizerland but those were already in the Axis hands pre war.

[Starfarer]

Honestly, if the French had had the resources to "complete" the line, they would have had the resources to have a large enough military to repel the Germans without it. The Line was never intended to be the best shield, as far as I can determine. It was intended to be a delaying tactic, to force the Germans to take an inopportune route and give France enough time to mobilize and defend actively.

Had they had substantial support from outside forces (ie, in this case, perhaps the US), Germany's invasion would've faltered and slowed down, possibly even failed, by having to go around the line.

Say what you want about WW2 Germany. They were good at what they did.

[johnmcd]

The other feature of Civ that makes a defensive line (whether Chinese, Roman or French in inspiration) weaker than in real life is the lack of supply as a feature.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Starfarer
Honestly, if the French had had the resources to "complete" the line, they would have had the resources to have a large enough military to repel the Germans without it. The Line was never intended to be the best shield, as far as I can determine. It was intended to be a delaying tactic, to force the Germans to take an inopportune route and give France enough time to mobilize and defend actively.

Had they had substantial support from outside forces (ie, in this case, perhaps the US), Germany's invasion would've faltered and slowed down, possibly even failed, by having to go around the line.

Say what you want about WW2 Germany. They were good at what they did.

If the French and to a lesser extent the Brtish had an idea about moblie tank forces then the Maginot line would have been a good idea. if the line went all the way along the border then the line would have served it's purpose of delay and it would have bought time for a massed armoured response. Unfortuantely the French did not understand the concept of armoured warfare like the Germans.

The french and and British in 1940 had more and on the whole better tanks than the Germans, but no idea how to use them effectivley

[yaroslav]

Originally posted by TheStinger
The french and and British in 1940 had more and on the whole better tanks than the Germans, but no idea how to use them effectivley

A little OT, but I agree wholeheartedly. In my humble opinion, France and UK had better equipment (I mean, the British had even Radar!) in many aspects of the war. Sometimes, it looks to me that the only advantages that the Germans had were tactics (Guderian comes to mind) and some kind of "will to win" that at first the British and French governments appears to have not had at the beginning of the war.

Later on, when the British started to defend as their life was at the stake, and helped by logistical problems of the Germans, they defeated Germany, mostly singlehandedly, in both the attempt to invade UK and in North Africa.

[couerdelion]

It seems odd that you are talking about massive fortifications at a time when any expansive military campaign is likely to be more successful if troops are sent to the front by sea. So there is every chance that a choke-point at this time will be ignored simply because it can be. In fact, all you are doing by protecting a square is keeping that particular tile available for your use (ie containing roads, resources). It denies the attacker little.

The advent of galleons and frigates means that all coastal cities need a reasonably decent defence – that’s if you don’t want to lose them – but more importantly requires a significant mobile army to move to the invasion point and wipe out anything that lands.

Choke points work in the pre-Astronomy world, and particularly in the pre-Catapult era. After that, you want to be moving to the open plan death-trap.

[Chemical Ollie]

I haven't seen the AI use amphibic assaults en masse. Landing a Galleon or two behind my lines is just suicide for the troops it carries. But human vs human games is of course another story.

I also see Maginot lines as an economic way to keep my nose above the water if I'm pressed by massive enemy onslaught. When fortified inside forts or in forests, the AI will waste at least 3 units for every of my units it kills. And if I stay in my cities, he will walk around my land to rape and plunder, so the Maginot line will keep him out. I can also leave gaps in the line to trap him into the killing fileds where I want him.

But I only use those lines on small maps or when there is a narrow piece of land I can cut off. It's not economically feasible on large maps with long borders.

[Quillan]

Ollie, are you playing BtS? In vanilla and Warlords, the AI would normally only bring 1-2 boats loaded with troops on an invasion, but it's a lot more in BtS. The most I've personally witnessed is 7 galleons loaded with troops, but I've seen 17 empty galleons in one city before.

[Chemical Ollie]

I have BtS, and indeed the AI is smarter. I have a hard time mastering large maps on noble and above. In vanilla I easily won at Prince and quite often at Monarch as well. But I have yet to see the AI doing a large naval invasion on the same continent.

[Quillan]

Same continent? Neither have I, now that you mention it. The big ones I've seen have all been trans-oceanic invasions. They tend to march if you share a landmass with them. It's faster, as they use roads and railroads.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Quillan
Same continent? Neither have I, now that you mention it. The big ones I've seen have all been trans-oceanic invasions. They tend to march if you share a landmass with them. It's faster, as they use roads and railroads.

And that's when the Maginot line might come handy, to let them bang their forehead bloody against it. At least if there is a narrow piece of land you can cut off.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
And that's when the Maginot line might come handy, to let them bang their forehead bloody against it. At least if there is a narrow piece of land you can cut off.

Nah. If you can afford to keep enough units immobile for the Maginot line to be useful, you should be able to overrun the AI (or hold them off without the line,) which means the game is pretty much won anyway. As a "just for kicks" thing, this could be fun, but it doesn't sound feasible if you're in for a real fight.

[wodan11]

Originally posted by Modo44

Nah. If you can afford to keep enough units immobile for the Maginot line to be useful, you should be able to overrun the AI (or hold them off without the line,) which means the game is pretty much won anyway. As a "just for kicks" thing, this could be fun, but it doesn't sound feasible if you're in for a real fight.

Man, I totally disagree with all that...

The way Civ is designed, the defender gets the benefit of mixed unit stacks. If you fortify a two spearmen and two axes in a forest or whatever, and the AI comes up with 4 HAs and 4 swords, his HAs will face your spears and his swords will face your axes. You'll have the odds in your favor to defeat him, with half the units.

If you instead allow him to send his stack in, there's no way you can hold him off, not without catapults. Your spears will face his swords and your axes will face his HAs. Plus, you are giving up the fortify 25% as well as the terrain 25-75%. That's huge.

Where it can get to be "not worth it" IMO is if your maginot line is more than 2 spaces.

Wodan

[One_more_turn]

If you instead allow him to send his stack in, there's no way you can hold him off, not without catapults.

By the time he can build his Maginot Line, siege weapons will be available for a long time. Chances are, Bombers wouldn't even be far away.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by wodan11

Man, I totally disagree with all that...

The way Civ is designed, the defender gets the benefit of mixed unit stacks. If you fortify a two spearmen and two axes in a forest or whatever, and the AI comes up with 4 HAs and 4 swords, his HAs will face your spears and his swords will face your axes. You'll have the odds in your favor to defeat him, with half the units.

If you instead allow him to send his stack in, there's no way you can hold him off, not without catapults. Your spears will face his swords and your axes will face his HAs. Plus, you are giving up the fortify 25% as well as the terrain 25-75%. That's huge.

Where it can get to be "not worth it" IMO is if your maginot line is more than 2 spaces.

Dude, a Maginot line implies multiple squares (i.e. a long border), and that's what I was referring to. Those require a lot of units to hold effectively, and are nowhere near feasible.

If you can get it down to two squares, that's a choke point in my book. Those can be defended with cities (on hills, with walls).