Fortifications are overpowered

[Shepard-Commander]

I am playing as Brazil and I am invading Paraguay. I recently invaded Argentina relatively easily. My divisions have support artillery, engineers, armor, infantry, and I have air superiority and hundreds of close air support missions. My troops have modern equipment and doctrine. With all of this, one would think that you could attack an encircled fortified area with a 30 to 1 advantage in divisions and win, unfortunately this is not the case. fortifications need to take longer to build and be less powerful.

[equinox1911]

I would agree that forts are really strong, and bc they apply a percentage mod on attack they scale really well. i think the key would be to negate more of the modifier whith encirclement.

I saw a lonely french guy holdning a maginot fort (lvl 10) for months :)

[Shepard-Commander]

I've noticed that Poland holds out for a ridiculous amount of time in many games as well. I am attacking Paraguay and they have 1 division holding off 30. Tempted to use a nuke cheat to just end it.

[equinox1911]

Nukes are not even that good, honestly right now i couldn't tell you what they do besides like 1/4 org dmg and maybe 10-15% strenght dmg ...
And i think only the first nuke impacts national unity.

[equinox1911]

Btw you can just starve em out if they are not in a city.

[Shepard-Commander]

They are in a city

[Laiders72]

Forts are strong but they are nowhere near that strong. Are your divisions at full or mostly full strength? Are you certain they have actually been upgraded/reinforced such that they really do have all the bells and whistles? What missions have you set your bombers too? Do you even have bombers in the area? Is the fort in bad terrain such as mountains or behind a river or a built up urban area or the hellish combination of both? Probably even more factors to consider than that really...

As for Poland, in both of my games (set to historical focus without me ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ around too much with history either) fell in a few weeks to months. It varies. Of course, if Germany is distracted by other concerns then they will only contain Poland and not invade it and the Allies are more active than they were historically in providing support for an invaded Poland so those can play a role too.


Aside: looking at you Chongqing... a Chinese city on a mountain behind a river which it took me 2 or 3 years to take and truly hold and claimed the lion's share of my losses in the creation of the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere

[Laiders72]

Originally posted by equinox1911:

Nukes are not even that good, honestly right now i couldn't tell you what they do besides like 1/4 org dmg and maybe 10-15% strenght dmg ...
And i think only the first nuke impacts national unity.

Nukes of WWII were strategic not tactical weapons. What does it do to the region hit?

[Shepard-Commander]

All of my divisions are full strength and have the most modern weapons available. I have bombers doing both close air support and strategic bombing. I have overwhelming air superiority. One side of the city has a river, all other sides do not. It is in a forest, but the ground is flat. All units are fully supplied. It is simply ridiculous. Now I have a 60 to 1 advantage and it is still holding. I am very confident that it is a flaw in the game and not in my strategy or units.

[xScaramouchx]

I believe that strategic bombing will wear down fortifications, happened to me on the German side of the Maginot line as Poland, defending against the Italians. Had solidly entrenched in the forts but as Poland I had zero air power. Gradually my forts got damaged and destroyed from the Italian air campaign.

[equinox1911]

Originally posted by Laiders72:

Nukes of WWII were strategic not tactical weapons. What does it do to the region hit?

I didn't check what it did to the buildings, didn't matter anyway USA can't resist the red army.

I was very underwhelmed by the nukes tbh. From a gamemechanics pow that is, they look really pretty :)

[Mansen]

The simple answer - Bomb them. If you have cut them off from supplies, it is purely a matter of time before they run out and you can practically walk right in. With no fort bonuses either, because of the bombing.

[Kidserge(Yong)]

I recommend tank, at least build 2-5 light tank divisions in every 24 division for one commander. If you find forts, best action is to leave it alone, DO NOT attack it and your commander will order other division to encircle it.

Use your tank to help encircle and leave it until out of supply, If it have 1-2 divisions (I think 4 is the optimal for city), using 4-5 tank divisions and attack them from 2+ direction and it will break quite easy.

In my game as Japan, I have 6 light divisions, 6 medium divisions and 12 infantry with support artillery and able to kill USA quite easy.

If you have air superiority, use bomber to bomb the town and the supply will be gone.

[Mansen]

What size division are we talking here? Because I'm having a very hard time keeping even a single column of tanks per divison stocked late into the war, in spite of a full line.

[Bridger]

Do you have a screenshot of the combat window? It's hard to comment without that info.

[Rumpeltroll]

Originally posted by Shepard-Commander:

I've noticed that Poland holds out for a ridiculous amount of time in many games as well. I am attacking Paraguay and they have 1 division holding off 30. Tempted to use a nuke cheat to just end it.

Didn't Poland in the WW2 had like 250 soldiers in a bunker complex that held against 3-40 000 germans. Bomb planes tanks artillary for 2 weeks. After 2 weeks they were down to 150 soldiers and out of ammo so they surrendered. So if this game is suppose to be a real simulation, then forts need to be really good. Since they infact was in many cases. :)