Gun Emplacement Facility
Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22107
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
Thanks for the feedback! Anyone else?
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
I also think gun emplacements should be more powerfull. In many cases they used decomissioned battleship guns. And since one shore gun is worth up to 10 ship guns, maybe gun emplacements are too weak...
Please teach AI everything!
-
- Colonel
- Posts: 430
- Joined: Aug 21 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
One thing I would like to note is that I think gun emplacements should be added into Cold War and all other scenarios as well. i know they aren't as common nowadays but I think they're fun to use.
-
- Major
- Posts: 161
- Joined: Aug 27 2008
- Location: Liverpool
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
Totally agree with other comments about gun emplacements being weak.
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 619
- Joined: May 05 2006
- Location: Norway
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
I like them a lot but I agree they could be more powerfull. I can think of a few locations where they should be added on the map in Norway.
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 734
- Joined: Sep 19 2007
- Location: south of the banna rebublic
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
Game still installing so I don't know if they there or not but Simmons town has a number of batteries defending it (big ass Battle ship guns) and a few other places had them to. Never fired a shot in anger but they there. Though now they use 76mm not 16" shells.
You plastic soldiers i will turn you in to real soldiers
CPO Mzinyati
CPO Mzinyati
-
- Warrant Officer
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Aug 13 2011
- Human: Yes
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
Further thoughts on gun emplacement facilities: One of the problems I'm seeing with them, in particular with France's in 1936's start, is that since they do not count as units, they don't block enemy units simply capturing the hex they are in, barely taking a single shot in the process.
Edit:
In a different note: Having a future tech equivalent of the gun emplacement could be nice. A "laser emplacement" facility maybe?
Edit:
In a different note: Having a future tech equivalent of the gun emplacement could be nice. A "laser emplacement" facility maybe?
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 646
- Joined: May 20 2013
- Human: Yes
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
This kinda makes sense. I mean, what use is a gun emplacement without a garrison?Felius wrote:Further thoughts on gun emplacement facilities: One of the problems I'm seeing with them, in particular with France's in 1936's start, is that since they do not count as units, they don't block enemy units simply capturing the hex they are in, barely taking a single shot in the process.
Edit:
In a different note: Having a future tech equivalent of the gun emplacement could be nice. A "laser emplacement" facility maybe?
-
- Warrant Officer
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Aug 13 2011
- Human: Yes
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
If I'm interpreting what happened with France in my game correctly, because it's just a single Gun Emplacement instead of a bunch of facilities and/i] gun emplacements, it can't take garrisons, at least not in sufficient numbers. I'll need to recheck it later, but it does seem rather weird, specially with how Germany can simply move through the Maginot line without even pausing, instead of having to bypass it or the like.GreenGoblin wrote:This kinda makes sense. I mean, what use is a gun emplacement without a garrison?Felius wrote:Further thoughts on gun emplacement facilities: One of the problems I'm seeing with them, in particular with France's in 1936's start, is that since they do not count as units, they don't block enemy units simply capturing the hex they are in, barely taking a single shot in the process.
Edit:
In a different note: Having a future tech equivalent of the gun emplacement could be nice. A "laser emplacement" facility maybe?
-
- Major
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Mar 11 2014
- Human: Yes
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
I've made good use of the gun emplacements, specially in choke points.
I had a war between Italy and Germany at the Austrian (Germany) and Italian border, I placed a couple of these at the mountain pass that most units funnel through and that emplacement with some additional Ranger & Artillery support held off the initial attack extremely effectively.
I had a war between Italy and Germany at the Austrian (Germany) and Italian border, I placed a couple of these at the mountain pass that most units funnel through and that emplacement with some additional Ranger & Artillery support held off the initial attack extremely effectively.
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 646
- Joined: May 20 2013
- Human: Yes
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
I would like to bump the fact that the Maginot line is effectively meaningless in-game. It should really have great strategic value and force the German play to flank through Belgium or Italy.
-
- General
- Posts: 1286
- Joined: Jun 08 2005
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
A bit more specific approach should be given to SR-1936, for those installations pre-set in the game.SGTscuba wrote:2 or 3 hexes depending on the range setting in difficulty.
I am alluding to the fact that several of the sites suggested above did not have the same quality and range of artillery emplacements.
For example:
* U.S. sties mentioned used surplus 16"/50 guns ordered and built for the never completed "South Dakota" class battleships and their performance outclassed the older guns installed at several of the fortifications listed above (as most of those used gun from scrapped
ships or medium caliber guns removed from older BB/BC types (9.4", etc.), partly because these sites were built during WW One and did not have benefit of the latest heavy guns.
The exception was the limited number of German 15" guns used, surplus guns for the "Bismarck" BB class.
I think, whether the game is played as Moderate or Hard, the one, two or three hex criteria for each "pre-sited" location at the beginning of the game should be "fixed", based on the actual gun ranges of guns installed.
-
- General
- Posts: 1286
- Joined: Jun 08 2005
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility - drop Singapore
Singapore should not be included, as it was not built - all of which was on the north coast to protect the naval base and dockyardsAragos wrote:Recommendation: Once you guys get the Guns working, I suggest replacing all of the Maginot Line hexes with them. The ML had large, emplaced gun batteries, as well as extensive field fortifications.
Other locations:
--Singapore
there - in 1936.
More details and hex suggestions will follow on Aragos's suggested locations and maybe another or two (Sveaborg; Sweden; Holy Loch, Scotland; Kronstadt Naval Base (that of naval base "Tallinn" was not completed until 1939. Kronstadt and Sveaborg were the strongest fortification in the Baltic, 1936. In the Black Sea, Odessa and Sevastopol should not be omitted from any '36 listing.
Add to this should also include Narvik and Oslo, Norway (not the prominent German losses during the invasion efforts, including
heavy cruiser BLUCHER).
A useful guide for European sites:
Fortress Europe: European Fortifications Of World War II
By J. E. Kaufmann, Robert M. Jurga
-
- General
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: Jan 13 2005
- Location: Washington, DC
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
Substantial numbers of guns were specifically-designed coastal artillery. Good examples include the US 'pop-up' guns and mortars at Manila Bay, the Panama Canal, San Francisco and New York City--IIRC, those were actual coastal guns (in general) vice naval guns adapted to shore batteries.geminif4ucorsair wrote:A bit more specific approach should be given to SR-1936, for those installations pre-set in the game.SGTscuba wrote:2 or 3 hexes depending on the range setting in difficulty.
I am alluding to the fact that several of the sites suggested above did not have the same quality and range of artillery emplacements.
For example:
* U.S. sties mentioned used surplus 16"/50 guns ordered and built for the never completed "South Dakota" class battleships and their performance outclassed the older guns installed at several of the fortifications listed above (as most of those used gun from scrapped
ships or medium caliber guns removed from older BB/BC types (9.4", etc.), partly because these sites were built during WW One and did not have benefit of the latest heavy guns.
The exception was the limited number of German 15" guns used, surplus guns for the "Bismarck" BB class.
I think, whether the game is played as Moderate or Hard, the one, two or three hex criteria for each "pre-sited" location at the beginning of the game should be "fixed", based on the actual gun ranges of guns installed.
-
- General
- Posts: 1286
- Joined: Jun 08 2005
Re: Gun Emplacement Facility
Agree about really old guns being specially built, as with 'pop-up' guns - but most remained removed guns from ships designated surplus during WW One.
Beyond that, the newer guns - more relevant to SR-1936 - were guns built as "replacements" for more modern, post-WW One
completed battleships and a lot of formerly-stored 5"/40 cal guns off destroyers, etc. Those should be considered as part of the capabilities of Fortification - Coastal Defense Sites in SR-36.
References to their locations are easily found on internet, indicating BG did not research this in advance of release.
Unfortunate.
Beyond that, the newer guns - more relevant to SR-1936 - were guns built as "replacements" for more modern, post-WW One
completed battleships and a lot of formerly-stored 5"/40 cal guns off destroyers, etc. Those should be considered as part of the capabilities of Fortification - Coastal Defense Sites in SR-36.
References to their locations are easily found on internet, indicating BG did not research this in advance of release.
Unfortunate.