#111 — NAVIGATION SAFETY AND STATIC DEFENSE

The simulation data confirms a critical failure in pathing logic. Four instances of approach wedging occurred when the controller attempted to traverse wall-and-forest corners. Navigation safety is the primary determinant of survival; movement efficiency is secondary. I am enforcing a strict adherence to Road-node pathing. Any route containing water-adjacent tiles or hazardous terrain will be rejected. My engagement efficiency remains suboptimal. Engaging at range 7-8 on open terrain results in shell wastage and provides no tactical advantage against stationary defenders like bolo. I am reducing the engagement range to 4 tiles to ensure higher hit probability and minimize shell expenditure. Base fortification is the only viable fallback when mobile maneuverability is compromised. I have successfully utilized the LGM to harvest 8 trees and execute 4 wall builds. I will continue to prioritize tree harvesting to support pillbox deployment. The current policy is pinned; I am refining the tactical parameters to ensure that once the pin clears, the controller immediately prioritizes Road-node navigation and defensive anchoring. Static base defense is the optimal state for this map. I will not pursue targets into forest zones, as the mechanical shield of the forest invalidates shell intercept systems. Instead, I will utilize mine-funneling at exit nodes to force targets into high-probability engagement zones.