Blockades

[DanishPosh]

Hi everyone

I am new to the forum but have been playing STW for a long time and just recently started on MTW VI.
I do not have RTW simply because my old timer PC cannot handle it. Alas, one day

I will prop. have a few questions for stuff I cant find on the forums (no search function yet).

So here's the first one:
I am playing the Danes and have all of Britain/Ireland in my possesion. I keep these territories with a minimum of forces whilst I keep a strong fleet in the Channel. I'm thinking that it's impossible for an enemy to move a force through the Channel waters while I have my fleet in it.
I thought so because that is how it works for me when someone puts a boat there I cant move back and forth.

But to my suprise the Spanish were able to invade Wessex by putting a single boat in the Channel while my fleet was still in it.
Why does the blockade only work one way?
Does it have anything to do with how fast the ships are?
My fleet consists of Caravels and Longboats.

Please

[Silver Rusher]

Welcome to the org.

I'm not sure, but if you were not already enemies with the Spanish they would probably have been able to do it anyway. Can't really remember, haven't played MTW in ages.

[mfberg]

They were either able to get around your fleet by having their ships in the other seas that border your lands (both the Irish Sea and English Channel border Wessex), or they walked in, but you would have seen that.

mfberg

[yesdachi]

Did they invade via the sea or the fictional bridge that connects Wessex to mainland Europe? If it was the bridge then they don’t need a ship in the water.

[DanishPosh]

They were either able to get around your fleet by having their ships in the other seas that border your lands (both the Irish Sea and English Channel border Wessex), or they walked in, but you would have seen that.

mfberg

Hi mfberg

They did not have any ships in the Irish sea.

What do you mean walked in? Is it possible to move from Flanders to Wessex without a fleet?

[DanishPosh]

Did they invade via the sea or the fictional bridge that connects Wessex to mainland Europe? If it was the bridge then they don’t need a ship in the water.

Hi yesdachi

Is this possible or are you pulling my leg?

And if possible, from which territories can you "walk" in?

Cheers

[dgfred]

Did they invade via the sea or the fictional bridge that connects Wessex to mainland Europe? If it was the bridge then they don’t need a ship in the water.

What fictional bridge??? Or are you kidding? Maybe that is
how England keeps trying to attack Flanders in my HRE game although I
have 4+ ships in the English Channel .

[drone]

What do you mean walked in? Is it possible to move from Flanders to Wessex without a fleet?

Yes, you can cross the channel there without needing boats. Sort of like the "bridge" between Denmark and Sweden.

Welcome to the .Org

Edit-> Can't check now, but I think there is a dotted line on the strategic map between provinces with these paths.

[DanishPosh]

Yes, you can cross the channel there without needing boats. Sort of like the "bridge" between Denmark and Sweden.

Welcome to the .Org

Thanx mate

Funny thing is that both connections exists in our time (the tunnel and the bridge) but in 1100?

Are there any others of these crossing? The Strait of Gibraltar?

[yesdachi]

Hi yesdachi

Is this possible or are you pulling my leg?

And if possible, from which territories can you "walk" in?

Cheers

I would never pull your leg. Sarcastic and argumentative but never leg pulling.

I believe this has been a topic of some discussion in the past prompting some to create mods that don’t allow these “bridges”. I think they make the game a little simpler but one could argue that it is not realistic to think a bunch of knights and their horses could swim or rowboat the English Channel or the straits of Gibraltar.

[drone]

Thanx mate

Funny thing is that both connections exists in our time (the tunnel and the bridge) but in 1100?

Are there any others of these crossing? The Strait of Gibraltar?

I think both Granada and Cordoba connect with Morrocco, and Naples connects with Sicily. Can somebody else verify this, I'm at work....

[DanishPosh]

I would never pull your leg. Sarcastic and argumentative but never leg pulling.

I believe this has been a topic of some discussion in the past prompting some to create mods that don’t allow these “bridges”. I think they make the game a little simpler but one could argue that it is not realistic to think a bunch of knights and their horses could swim or rowboat the English Channel or the straits of Gibraltar.

I thought so

Is this incorporated into the XL mod?
Been hearing good things about it so far.

[EatYerGreens]

There is a sort of logic to the 'land bridges'. Bear with me while I explain.

I think the game manual itself explains how the ships which actually carry trade goods overseas are, in effect, invisible in the game. The ships you build for yourself in the game are actually military only. They enable you to control a sea region and blockade passage of an enemy faction's (again invisible) trade vessels, whilst meantime defending the safety of your own traders.

I see the land bridges as representative of your armies 'renting' the use of trade vessels to make a short sea crossing.

The significance of the 'bridges' is that they are in places where the opposite coast can be sighted from land, so they are long established travel routes. Hardly a navigational challenge, when never out of sight of land, eh?

Longer distances, more challenging navigational requirements and beach landing invasions require a proper navy.

EDIT: Extending this logic would seem to demand a land bridge between the Mull of Kintyre, in Scotland and the NE tip of Ireland as it's possible to sight one coast from the other, with decent weather. However, some may say that it makes things a little too easy for the English to unite the Isles and spam Gallowglasses for the rest of the campaign...

[PittBull260]

download BKB's super mod, or the XL mod, the land bridges there are disabled

[EatYerGreens]

download BKB's super mod, or the XL mod, the land bridges there are disabled

I've yet to really master the default game and I gather these mods are even more demanding, so I think it's too soon for me to make any changes just now.

In fact, I've only recently moved up to the VI version (2.01) and had to restart a campaign from scratch again, so that's another reason not to switch to mods for a good few months yet (I'm a self-confessed plodder, several weeks in and only up as far as 1170-odd).

If I knew the trick to disabling the land bridges, that is the one mod I would be willing to DIY the changes. New unit types, new factions and new provinces do not interest me. At least not yet...

The trouble is, I know it can't be a simple text file change alone. The bitmap for the campaign map needs to be tampered with, surely? If someone was willing to let on the details of what to backup, what to edit and in what ways, I'd be all ears.

[Del Arroyo]

The land bridges to me seem a little bit silly. I mean, in some cases you could argue that it was close enough for an easy, short voyage, but this is actually not the case with the English Channel. And in all cases an enemy naval force would be able to prevent any such crossing, which is not possible with the "land bridges". Is it really that much trouble to place a single ship in the sea region?

DA

[Grey_Fox]

I think it may be due to the fact that the French would launch raids into England throughout the Hundred Years War, occasionally with over a thousand men.

England is visible from the French coastline after all.

[ichi]

The way I always looked at the land bridges is that one or two ships wouldn't prevent an army from crossing over the course of an entire year. And they make the game a little more interesting, IMHO

ichi

[DanishPosh]

The way I always looked at the land bridges is that one or two ships wouldn't prevent an army from crossing over the course of an entire year. And they make the game a little more interesting, IMHO

ichi

I think you could argue the two points equally well and it comes down to your personal taste.

But imagine my surprise as I was sitting in fat Wessex with nothing but the governer and two trebuchets when the Spanish suddenly walked up my backyward with two full armies
I was able to throw them out though by the help of some reinforcements from Denmark and Saxony

That just sparked me to a new question, but I'd better make a new thread for that...

[dgfred]

I think you could argue the two points equally well and it comes down to your personal taste.

But imagine my surprise as I was sitting in fat Wessex with nothing but the governer and two trebuchets when the Spanish suddenly walked up my backyward with two full armies
I was able to throw them out though by the help of some reinforcements from Denmark and Saxony

That just sparked me to a new question, but I'd better make a new thread for that...

I was surprised too , but it was the English (with very weak army)
trying to visit my Flanders. Although they lost the battle, it did throw a little
wrench into my perfect work so far . I had to divert some valuable
troops from my Italian . A couple of turns later I did return the favor
to Wessex . Next I think I will either conquer all of England or give
the Spainish a little spanking. My Emperor Friedrich is in his 60's, and
is my namesake so I have made sure his reign has been a very prosperous one for Germany.

[EatYerGreens]

One thing I wanted to add, about land bridges.

The one place I can think of which would actually justify a land bridge being added to the game, because there is an actual land connection in reality, is between yummy Sweden and Finland.

For no better reason, that I can see, apart from the map cutting off too far to the south, they didn't put this in by default. Perhaps the reasoning is that north of that line the lands are too inhospitable for farming, long-distance route-marching or battling.

I think it would add considerably to the game dynamic if Novgorod had an additional direction in which to expand in. They seem to be able to recruit Viking units too, so it's a logical place for them to go.

Now, if only the AI could get Denmark to attack northward, instead of foolishly mixing it with the HRE...

The most annoying thing I find about the Wessex-Flanders bridge is that the immediate thought is that it's been put there to allow the English faction to shuffle forces between their island and continental landholdings but no. The start position has Flanders in French hands and the English are somewhat hamstrung by the need to build a keep, two ports, a shipbuilder and a ship (19 years) to make this fundamental connection, short of going to war with France more or less right from turn one.

It would be kind of entertaining to play out something like the 100 years' war but, by taking their richest province off them so soon, they're crippled at the outset and can't put up what could be described as stiff resistance after that point.

[Del Arroyo]

Yeah, the French get annihilated in every game I play.

[dgfred]

Yeah, the French get annihilated in every game I play.

You should give them a break and play as the French yourself .

I got to get Flanders whether I'm the HRE, Spanish, Danes or anyone for
that matter , surely a habit I need to break .

[Don Corleone]

I think the general idea is that the 'bridges' aren't so much intended to be bridges, as you don't need a fleet to cross the water. Think about it... the British evacuated out of Dunkirk mostly on fishing vessels (of course, that was in what in game terms would be Friesland).

But I think the idea there is how tough would it be to commandeer local vessels to make the crossing.

And I don't know if it makes sense to put a land bridge between Finland & Sweden. It would be pretty tough to lead an army through Kemi down to Stockholm in the middle of the winter.

[Shottie]

Well for the RL prespective. A fishing vessel or more trasnporting men (hidden in the boat of course) could get by a whole armada of ships also at night you could get a few boats across. From another point a huge D-day style invasion would be noticed and dealt with. After all a hunderd + boats filled with yelling men with sharp objects isn't the normal fishing boat look.

[Don Corleone]

You have a point. Maybe next time one of the CA guys logs in, we can ask them what was the rationale behind the land bridges.

[Mr White]

[QUOTE=Don Corleone]Think about it... the British evacuated out of Dunkirk mostly on fishing vessels (of course, that was in what in game terms would be Friesland). QUOTE]

Sorry to correct you like this but Dunkirk is French but in medieval times Dunkirk was a part of Flandres. Friesland on the other hand is the north of the Netherlands

Dunkirk ( or Dunkerque in French) comes from Duinkerke wich is Dutch ( the language spoken in Flandres) for dunechurch.

[EatYerGreens]

I suppose part of the logic of it is that, assuming hostilities have broken out between the English and French in the continental lands then, with only one sea zone to bridge, a French ship in the Channel will be useless for an invasion of Wessex because an English ship there will blockade them and prevent the troop move. Perpetual naval combat in the Channel would seem realistic and entertaining to some but plenty would find it tedious, in equal measure. Also expensive to both factions and the resource drain could handicap both in terms of tech/building development. One or both of them will have to fight off the HRE at the same time, so likely gives up shipbuilding to save money and shifting the game balance.

Perhaps game testing proved that the French faction personality, set to something other than CATHOLIC_CRUSADER_TRADER would make it fail to build ships and, even with greater continental army strength, fail to pull off an invasion of Wessex thanks to the lack of transport, or due to the blockading effects if they did happen to have a ship. So they bung in the land bridge to make those moves possible.

Personally, I see Britain's island security as being central to its success in those times, so I'd take that particular one out, if I knew how.

Oh, one other thing, which is that the bridge forces the holder of Flanders to keep it well garrisoned against whatever hostiles are lurking in Wessex, at times when Flanders is no longer on the continental front line. I hope you see what I mean by that.

I don't know how sensitive the AI is to threat of Naval invasion, in terms of garrison levels in coastal provinces where only an enemy faction has a ship in the adjacent sea zone.

There lies another logic-hole, by the way. You can invade into a province with no port, which implies the boats are shallow draught and can be beached. Once you've conquered, you are mysteriously unable to re-board the invasion ships on the beach and you have to build a port now (eg after taking Ireland). On the other hand, without that factor, where is the motivation to build ports in provinces without trade goods? Lack of port building denies trader factions places to trade with... hmmm.