On the interaction with the land-based assets

[akosjaccik]

Although once again this is something I do not feel too strongly about (meaning I am not entirely convinced that the potential work this suggestion might require to implement into the game worth the time and effort if it takes resources away from more pressing or interesting matters), I thought it might spark a discussion or other, perhaps more interesting or viable ideas might stem from the topic, so decided to share it.

As Japan, I've lead in my latest playthrough a surprise attack against Vladivostok, in which scenario I leveled it's naval air base as well. This resulted in the loss of the base's a/c in one way or another, but this is something that gets "refilled" quickly and without much pain. Other notorious examples are the coastal batteries who are "pointless" targets, I don't think they come even with increased maintenance for a bit once destroyed, similarly to say, damaged ships. Finally, we have the generic "bombardment targets". This got me thinking about potentially more dire repercussions:

Let's say the player entirely destroys a something, which results in...

Coastal battery or airship base: The player or the AI loses the facility, it gets deleted from the "Coastal fortifications" list and of course, won't show up in battles again until rebuilt from scratch to simulate the costs.

Land bases: The base loses two "levels" (in their current iteration), or if =< lvl2 it gets deleted.

Ports: I am simplifying this issue and say "every port can be shelled from the sea" without for example the interference from land features. Ports in this case would be legitimate targets. I'd not penalize either the player or the AI too much for this, but some "fun" (? ) potential is there, so in my example, a ""destroyed"" (emptying the HP pool in this sense would translate to "serious enough damage") Port would mean damaged ships (5-10%?) needing 1-3 months of repair randomly selected from the "Ships in service" list, a month of delay in some constructions and a prestige hit. This could potentially also mean that the "opposing side has no ships left" would not automatically be a battle-ending occurence, but a [Y/N] decision, and if the player stays to shell the port (within the scenario time limit of course), further losses may be inflicted; though I am not certain I'd complicate it this much, as interesting as this might sound (how would the AI handle if the player brings his ships home etc). Additionally, to simulate the destruction of research facilities and material, randomly and optionally a slight setback in research points. All in all, a mix of lovely things.

Important however, that the ships would not fire at ports per default, but it could be selected under the list of the targeting crosshair icon.

Additional possible candidates: (Either "randomly" appearing on the map, or - as I don't know how one could program that "populate the coastline" - more reasonably replacing 'land targets', see down further*)

Army depot: Direct result could be simply VP with the fitting flavor text, but also increase the chance for the player's army side's "brilliant success -> 1200 VP". Most importantly, in case of active fighting in the region (sword icon above the flag), this could visibly influence the outcome. This could also work against rebellions ("Insurgent stash" or something), helping the player to retain control over the area.

Naval munition storage: In the next month the side suffered the destruction of this facility would go into battle with a %-based magazine penalty.

Material storage: The majority of construction and repairing processes would suffer +1-2 month of time required.

Fuel storage: Applies the already existing "Fuel shortage" condition for two months/turns, which to my knowledge automatically applies to oil-firing ships. This type of facility would not "spawn" before 1920.

Railways / railway junctions / whatever important infrastructural element: To mix things up, this could be a wildcard and result randomly in any or up to any two of the above four, but with a rather decent chance of nothing happening as well ("rail connection was restored in two days").

Civilian targets: Now this a very controversial idea, and I do not see the need for this, but in a brainstorming-sense I'll add it to the list still. Shelling settlements could raise unrest by 1-3 points, helping to collapse the state, but causing a massive international uproar similar to or even worse than liner sinkings, and (in case of the player) gaining a serious prestige hit.

*Now, the catch is, all of the above can replace the standard "bombardment target". I know many players won't like me for this, but yes, this could mean that you still can decline an enemy raid on your shores, but you won't only lose VP, but there is a high (still random) chance that your actual infrastructure would get hit (the player, in case of declining the battle, should get a report about this) as described on the list above, the target selected randomly perhaps based on different percentage chances (in a very, very complicated example, the AI would opt much more likely to attack coastal towns in case the player is in a massive VP lead). "Raiding force succeeded without any interference, a [caliber] coastal battery of yours / ammunition storage / whatever in [region] got destroyed, here are the repercussions".

If the battle generator rolls a coastal raid, the nature of the target could be seen on the pre-battle screen. Hell, the player could in rare cases be prompted with a dialog pop-up to suggest strike target: on the list 2 - 3 pre-selected option could generate a raid accordingly then, and an option esentially saying 'no', which would go down on the standard battle generating route.

Admittedly, there are a whole, whole lot of issues with the idea:

- Likely a massive amount of work, depending on the level of implementation.

- The options, and mostly the results are rather "gamey".

- In case of some ideas (like shelling ports), it's a big question mark how the AI could or should behave.

Still, even a low-level implementation would perhaps spice up the "deplete the random bombardment target HP" missions a bit, and potentially be a segment that could involve the player in some decisions which would help to somewhat bridge the rift between the tactical and the strategic level.

Or, if nothing else, hopefully this was a fun food for thought.