Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
plund
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 10:29 am

Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by plund »

Assuming that there are two identical units (no individual unit fortification level). One is located in non-base 3x defensive terrain (i.e. Wood Rough) while the other is located in a base hex on Clear terrain with Fortifications. Which unit will have the best defensive advantage during combat?

At what level of fortification will the base hex be somewhat equivalent to the unit in the non-base 3x defensive terrain?

Thanks in advance for any help rendered.
GetAssista
Posts: 2818
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by GetAssista »

x3 terrain for sure is better.
~ level 8-9 of forts is needed for x3 AV defensive bonus in clear terrain AFAIR (can't find exact bonus table ATM but it does exist and was mentioned on the forum earlier)
Main benefit of non-base hex is that individual forts cannot be destroyed when already built by LCUs sitting there.
Main benefit of base is that fort level is shared, hence they can be built by specialized engineers, above level 6, and quicker than on non-base hexes. Also supplies can be stored in base, while not in the non-base hex

User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by obvert »

Here is the difference:

Fort 1: 1,10 x AV
Fort 2: 1,25 x AV
Fort 3: 1,50 x AV
Fort 4: 1,75 x AV
Fort 5: 2,00 x AV
Fort 6: 2,25 x AV
Fort 7: 2,50 x AV
Fort 8: 2,75 x AV
Fort 9: 3,00 x AV

So x3 terrain is very good defensive territory, well worth trying to maintain positions there. Additional forts built in the field can make these hexes incredibly tough to crack.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: obvert

Here is the difference:

Fort 1: 1,10 x AV
Fort 2: 1,25 x AV
Fort 3: 1,50 x AV
Fort 4: 1,75 x AV
Fort 5: 2,00 x AV
Fort 6: 2,25 x AV
Fort 7: 2,50 x AV
Fort 8: 2,75 x AV
Fort 9: 3,00 x AV

So x3 terrain is very good defensive territory, well worth trying to maintain positions there. Additional forts built in the field can make these hexes incredibly tough to crack.


In the end the 3X terrain because built up forts can be degraded by assault engineers whereas terrain cannot. There are other factors as well. DL is harder to maintain in terrain thus bombing attack by air can have reduced or no effect. I do not think that built up fortification in the open have any effect on spotting. Basically for Japan is is very difficult to hold any position in open terrain later in the game-even a city.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by HansBolter »

Just build level 9 forts in the 3x terrain and you will be fine.[:)]
Hans

User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by rustysi »

Also keep in mind that in a base hex it is 2X plus the fort level to capture the base. So a level three fort in a base hex requires a combat result of 5-1 to capture. Not so easily done if the base has significant ground numbers in it. This could mean several attacks before the base is captured, with the resultant numbers of destroyed/disabled devices for the attacker.

All that being said I'd still prefer the 3x defensive terrain.[:D]
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
GetAssista
Posts: 2818
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by GetAssista »

ORIGINAL: rustysi
All that being said I'd still prefer the 3x defensive terrain.[:D]
There is no "still" here. Triggers for defending units to retreat from bases and non-bases are the same - attack should reach 2+forts odds. But base forts can be reduced and non-base cannot, hence base hex is easier to capture WRT this
User avatar
rustysi
Posts: 7472
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:23 am
Location: LI, NY

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by rustysi »

ORIGINAL: GetAssista
ORIGINAL: rustysi
All that being said I'd still prefer the 3x defensive terrain.[:D]
There is no "still" here. Triggers for defending units to retreat from bases and non-bases are the same - attack should reach 2+forts odds. But base forts can be reduced and non-base cannot, hence base hex is easier to capture WRT this

And as I said I'll still take the 3x defensive terrain because to get to that multiplier in a base I'd have to build to a level 9 fort. Ever do that? I haven't. Its much more difficult in my experience to get an opponent out of difficult terrain than a base. Now a base with difficult terrain is a defend to the last man position.[;)]
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
User avatar
SheperdN7
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 4:11 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by SheperdN7 »

Terrain over forts anyday.

What happens when you put them together though?

Angry opponents, that's what.
Current Games:

WitP:AE PBEM against Greg (Late '44)
AE PBEM against Mogami (Early'44)
WITE PBEM against Boomer Sooner
proflui
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 1:38 am
Location: Hong Kong, now in Toronto

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by proflui »

But the best terrain usually is not a base and units do not share support. Given that is terrain still better than fort?
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Defensive terrain vs. Fortifications

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: proflui

But the best terrain usually is not a base and units do not share support. Given that is terrain still better than fort?

As can be gleaned from the table provided by Obvert level 9 forts in clear terrain become the equivalent of level 0 forts in 3X terrain.
Hans

Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”