v1.04b (comments): The mechanics and cost of entrenching

[MarkShot]

It seems that entrenching has no combat penalties and no associated costs (since there doesn't seem any modeling for fatigue or resource consumption related to entrenching).

Thus, as far as I can tell, one should always entrench when stationary. Even if you are in an offensive posture due to leader activation, you can end up implicitly with a defensive posture.

That brings me to the point of this ... if it always better to entrench and there are no penalties, then why not make it automatic?

Other games have implemented this automatic behavior for stationary units. Examples:

Panther Games: RDOA/HTTR/COTA - the deployment cycle begin as soon as units stop moving.

Firaxis: SMG/SMA - stationary units not engaged begin to improve their positions.

Paradox: HOI 1/2 and Victoria - again when not on the move they dig-in.

Comments?

[jhdeerslayer]

I had been thinking the same thing. There seems to be no downside to doing it and just tedious thing to have to remember to do.

I find resetting Ambush every turn somewhat along the same lines for my Indians anyway. But this is not always the stance I choose so auto this is probably not good.

You da man Markshot as usual!

[Pocus]

yup, no adverse side effect. We wanted to recycle this icon slot for something else, and have entranchment automatic, but never found the time to do so.

[PhilThib]

In fact, we do have a design for fatigue that is currently being evaluated (part of the huge - and growing - to do list). In that design, the cost in days (and exhaustion) of building an entrenchment is deducted from the recuperation process... in other words, units building entrenchments will be a bit more tired if and when engaged in battle the same month of the works...

But curently its not in leure:

[Korrigan]

On the other hand, what about historical armies behaviour?

Were armies staying idle in the open? or were they building campaign camps as soon as they stopped in a province just like roman legions used to do?

[rasnell]

Is there any advantage to entrenching when inside a fort or city? Would seem to be unnecessary, but the option is there. Does it really matter?

[MarkShot]

I think it was stated somewhere that entrenching in structures does make historical sense as explained by the developer and does actually impact the combat mechanics.

Wish I had more info for you, but I am just learning this myself.

[Pocus]

entrenching in a city or a fort gives the same advantages as entrenching outside. Think of earthworks and any preparations possible to sustains an assault. Don't forget also that you can be besieged in a non walled structure, the game enable that, but unless entrenched you won't have a big defending bonus.