Fortress & Military Installation

[TechWins]

I think the modern day fortress should be something like a military installation(x) (I'm not the person who came up w/ the modern day fortress idea, the specifics of the idea are mine though). The MI would help repair your units at the rate of 50%and do the same thing as a fortress unless the MI can do it better(*). If you wanted a MI inplace of a fortress a worker would have to upgrade it the same way roads are upgraded to railroads. I also think to help prevent so many fortresses being built the fotress & MI should cost money to maintain. The fortress should cost 1 gold per turn. Therefore, the MI should cost 2 gold per turn.

(*)- The fortress & MI would give a 200% defense advantage. Having a unit in a fortress any where in your borders will not cause any unhappiness at all (this is obvious if when a unit is in your national borders you are never caused unhappiness). Having a unit(1) in a fortress outside of your borders will not cause any unhappiness at all but as soon as the second unit(2) from that city leaves the borders, regardless if in a fortress or not, that unit(2) will become unhappy. So the city will inquire one unhappy citizen (variables such as gov., city improvements, luxuries, etc... could manipulate this system). [An example of this is that if you were to be a Republic (Civ2 rules apply here Republic). In London if you had a trireme out sailing the waters, therefore you wouldn't have any unhappiness in London until one more unit left the city. Your Civ has a fortress out of your national borders. In that fortress you have a unit inside it from London. You will still not be seeing unhappiness in London, even though you have two units out of London. But if a third unit were to leave London and go into that same fortress you would be experiencing one unhappiness.] MIs will support up to two units in the unhappiness realm, instead of one like the regular fortress. Fortresses & MIs will be able to be placed on any tile excluding ocean, mountain (to comply with city rule), and city tiles. Side Notes - MI's will be able to be produced at 100% slower rate than a fortress. Also, injured units in a fortress will be able to recover at the rate of 25% per turn.

I think having this new fortress/military installation system they would become much more strategical and valuable. Please comment and add anything to help enhance this system. [Some of the ideas given in the thread have been used.]

[SerapisIV]

I believe that fortresses have been outdated since WWI, just look at the Maginot Line and Dien Bien Phu. The only reason why Khe Sahn wasn't overrun was because of intensive airpower and resupply (my father was there). I think fortresses should actually be eventually outdated around the armor technology with a replacement being an attack or smaller defensive bonus in nearby territories, sort of like the sensors in SMAC. This would be due to being closer to your supply lines and command leadership.

Another idea is that fortresses they give a sight bonus or a ZOC to a unit without one. I especially believe in the ZOC addition. It makes fortifying your borders a much more important and usable feature.

[JMarks]

Originally posted by SerapisIV
I believe that fortresses have been outdated since WWI, just look at the Maginot Line and Dien Bien Phu.

I don't know about the latter, but didn't the Germans just go around the Maginot Line? I recall that it was state of the art defence and would have been very costly to destroy, and or go over. The Netherlands on the otherhand could be bulldozed (relativly speaking) with little resistance and give an open hiway to the inside of France. Big military instalations are useless if you go around them.

Ioanes

[Grumbold]

Big military emplacements have certainly fallen out of favour since WWII. I expect it is because these days shells and missiles can be launched from over the horizon with sufficient accuracy and power to destroy them. Having fortresses go obsolete with the discovery of rocketry would be an idea. I certainly don't agree with modern forts becoming more effective.

Military bases that just repair troops would be no bad thing, but perhaps Firaxis think there are enough cities around that it is not necessary.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by JMarks
I don't know about the latter, but didn't the Germans just go around the Maginot Line?

That was my point, following WWI, large scale fortresses were next to useless, fortresses in Civ2 should eventually become obsolete as well.

[Mech Assassin]

I think, Military Base should work as an Airbase and repair units also. ABM (Anti-Ballistic Missile) Systems could be built to Military Bases to defend it from missile attacks, SAM Batteries to help against Air attacks and bunkers to help against land attacks. I think, you should be able to choose, what things to build to your Military Bases (each thing takes some time and maintainance cost).

As for upkeep, ½ gold for fortress would be insufficient. Maybe 1 gold for fortress and 1 gold for 1 type of defense in MI would be good.

Then, I think, you should be able to build some defensive installations such as trenches or bunkers. They could double the defensive power of units and half the damage, done to the units in trenches (infantry in trenches is much harder to over-run than infantry on normal terrain. It's very hard to fire to trench with tank or rifle. Missiles can't be targeted that accurately either, so they would pose little threat to units in trenches). I also think, you should be able to build coastal defense lines (like Atlantic Wall. It fell only because of concentration of the defenses to a wrong place).

Oh, and trenches were used during WW2 in Finland... My grand-father fought at some of those Finnish lines (as a defender) and trenches certainly help to keep your positions, so I really think, they wouldn't become obsolete very soon.

[SerapisIV]

I'm not arguing against trenches, every infantryman still builds trenches, the US did in the Gulf War, they're represented by the 'f' fortify command. But large-scale set fortifications which is what fortresses represent, those don't work. Look at Saddam's Line of Death in the Gulf.

[Mech Assassin]

In Gulf, Saddam was greatly outmatched in technology, so it really ain't a very good place to take examples from.

Oh, and fortify command could rather present fox-holes than trenches with minefields, tank-obstacles, bunkers, AA-stations (read, defensive lines) and such... They're quite expensive and need to manned (what good is a defensive line without men), but still they're useful. Iraq didn't stand a chance with their technology during the Gulf War...

[SerapisIV]

Full trenches don't stand a chance against modern armies, whether they be British, French, German, American, or even Chinese. By taking away your mobility, you take away any chance of winning. The ability to move around fortified positions and just hammer you with artillery make them useless. Smaller fortified positions are okay as they are not permanent structures, but full fortresses of the Civ model are currently obsolete.

[Mech Assassin]

Fortresses, that aren't in any choke point are useless, as you can just go around them. But, when one is in a choke point, it can effectively stop the movement of an army. Oh, and most fortificated positions can stand even the heavies artillery attacks (if they've digged deep enough, the rock will do the job for them). Also, who defender would be stupid enough not to bring some of his own artillery to counter enemy artillery threats.

Oh, and you only sacrafice the mobility for the period of time, when you don't need it. You can still attack and if the attack fails, you still have a place, where to retreat to defend at.

[One More Turn!]

Reading the posts in this topic made me think about unhappiness in cities caused by military units. In CivII units were tied to specific cities and caused unhappiness only in that city. If I am remembering correctly (and I am way to lazy to check) in Civ3 units will be supported by the entire civilization. Will the unit still cause unhappiness only in the city in which it was built?

[TechWins]

Reading the posts in this topic made me think about unhappiness in cities caused by military units. In CivII units were tied to specific cities and caused unhappiness only in that city. If I am remembering correctly (and I am way to lazy to check) in Civ3 units will be supported by the entire civilization. Will the unit still cause unhappiness only in the city in which it was built?

It hasn't been confirmed on how unhappiness wil used. The unhappiness system I used in post is that units will be produced by a city and then supported by the nation. The city will get unhappiness of a unit that it has built if the unit becomes unhappy. I also figured that your units would only become unhappy if they were out of your borders. I'm not sure if this will be the way that Civ3 will work but I was just assuming it to be this way.

Another idea is that fortresses they give a sight bonus or a ZOC to a unit without one. I especially believe in the ZOC addition. It makes fortifying your borders a much more important and usable feature.

Yeah, that's a good idea. Maybe a fortress could see 2 tiles away and a mi could see 3 tiles away.

As for upkeep, ½ gold for fortress would be insufficient. Maybe 1 gold for fortress and 1 gold for 1 type of defense in MI would be good.

That wasn't an exact number that has to be put inplace. The fortress could be 1 gold and the mi 2 gold. I don't know what numbers would work best for the game. I could tell you some more accurate numbers if I knew a lot more about Civ3. This isn't going to be implemented but it's worth mentioning.

I think fortresses should actually be eventually outdated around the armor technology

Another good idea from you. The fortress would become obsolete at the discovery of mobile warfare (or whatever they are going to call it in Civ3). Also with that discovery you will now be able to build in mis.

[Inverse Icarus]

cities with barracks repair units there for a full turn to 100% hp.

so if a mech inf was on it, every turn it would have 100% hp again.

sounds whore-ish to me. just stack 10 mech infs on it.

[H Tower]

Serapis: what about Hitler's atlantic wall? the allies spent a couple years preparing to assault it. but your right, fortresses are out of date now.

if fortresses did eventually become obsolete and disappear after a certain amount of turns, wouldn't this fix the AI's fascination with them?

and of course you shouldn't be able to build fortresses after reaching a certain level of technology. robotics maybe?

[Inverse Icarus]

i always found that funny, the AI built fortresses on grasslands one spot away from a mountain-bottleneck.

and more times than a few they build a bunch of fortresses in their own land, and they DONT EVEN USE THEM. SO I DO.