It's simple logic. Game mechanics allows fortresses to be destroyed. If fortresses are trenches it just doesn't make any sense.
What is a trench? It's basically a hole in the ground that allows to cover from enemy fire. How on earth would ACs destroy a hole in the ground? Do they hold hand brake at same time as they gas and thus making wheels spin and throwing back mud in the trench, filling it up and thus "disabling" it of usage? Or how do tanks destroy trenches? I thought they just rolled over them.
And what about BSs, RGs and arties? The shells they fire create holes in which soldiers can hide (depending on the shell size, but I'd say this definately applies to BSs). So, they should create trenches rather than destroy them in an enemy province.
Now to the breaking argument:
Why would soldiers literally drop their guns, pick up shovels and start to fill up trenches in the middle of a battlefield? Because that is what "destroying" a trench really is.
On top of all that, what does the lvl of the trench implies, the depth?
What is a trench? It's basically a hole in the ground that allows to cover from enemy fire. How on earth would ACs destroy a hole in the ground? Do they hold hand brake at same time as they gas and thus making wheels spin and throwing back mud in the trench, filling it up and thus "disabling" it of usage? Or how do tanks destroy trenches? I thought they just rolled over them.
And what about BSs, RGs and arties? The shells they fire create holes in which soldiers can hide (depending on the shell size, but I'd say this definately applies to BSs). So, they should create trenches rather than destroy them in an enemy province.
Now to the breaking argument:
Why would soldiers literally drop their guns, pick up shovels and start to fill up trenches in the middle of a battlefield? Because that is what "destroying" a trench really is.
On top of all that, what does the lvl of the trench implies, the depth?
