Blockades

[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.

[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.