I just posted a similar message in the "sand" thread, but here is even more appropos.
Beach assaults can be hella fun, at least as the attacker, if the scenario is decently designed and the battlefield is scaled properly. I am now tweaking a scenario based loosely (or as closely as it can be done given CM's present unit, terrain and vehicle options) on the 1st Marines' assault on Beach White 1, Peleliu, 1944. The U.S. assaults into a fortified ridge against point blank flanking fire. The objective is to break through and seize an objective line along a road 300 yards in from the beach. I've play tested it from both sides.
I have never had more fun as the attacker playing against the AI.
Yes, casualties on both sides can be very high. Historically, they were horrific. That's war. But I've found few game experiences more immersive than locking your view at ground level to an infantry unit advancing across a beach (or, in CM, a slightly undulating meadow) under intensive heavy artillery, mortar and MG fire, and finally reaching cover without breaking on second 54. (Or, for that matter, sitting atop a crater-pocked ridge under heavy 8" gun fire trying to repel an assault.)
As for the "no strategy or tactics" bunk, it's just B.S. Fire and movement has never been more important. Keeping your arty spotters alive and functional for the 2-3 minutes it takes to bring suppressive naval gunfire on enemy fortifications takes very imaginative and painstakingly careful positioning. Exploiting the breakthrough once it occurs takes no less savvy than penetrating any other defense in depth.
I'll upload my scenario somewhere in a couple days, and you guys can decide for yourselves. Some will like it, some won't. That doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.
Sledgehammer