Liam Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 We need some sort defense against the Blasted Corp Fleets that all nations tend to assemble. They run way out of supply and way out of the way to irritate rather than do something realistic. Conquor land... I would like to see some sort of base naval unit that defends coasts only... Or more penalties for it. The Russians can send as many as 10-20 corps in a game to Northern Germany and never take a single city but hold their own there until the end of the War... In reality the Kriegsmarine would've nailed them all! As in the case of the invasion of the US or Canada with Italian/Germany corps... I purpose Destroyers as a multi-Raid coastal defense update with little or no power beyond those two rolls. Though gunboats and coastal survellianc and the logistics of launching such an attack being very expensive! So hike the price up for those corps that sit at sea for months on end! Make them pay bitterly for not actually using them for a true purpose of Invasion<just harassment> Corp Transports were NEVER used in WW2 as harassment units as far as I know... They sunk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 11, 2003 Author Share Posted March 11, 2003 We need some sort defense against the Blasted Corp Fleets that all nations tend to assemble. They run way out of supply and way out of the way to irritate rather than do something realistic. Conquor land... I would like to see some sort of base naval unit that defends coasts only... Or more penalties for it. The Russians can send as many as 10-20 corps in a game to Northern Germany and never take a single city but hold their own there until the end of the War... In reality the Kriegsmarine would've nailed them all! As in the case of the invasion of the US or Canada with Italian/Germany corps... I purpose Destroyers as a multi-Raid coastal defense update with little or no power beyond those two rolls. Though gunboats and coastal survellianc and the logistics of launching such an attack being very expensive! So hike the price up for those corps that sit at sea for months on end! Make them pay bitterly for not actually using them for a true purpose of Invasion<just harassment> Corp Transports were NEVER used in WW2 as harassment units as far as I know... They sunk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 11, 2003 Author Share Posted March 11, 2003 Oh, and it's two different things to leave a city undefended<then gets hit by enemy amphibious landings> and to allow a corps 3 thousand miles away to sit at sea for 6 months then land on a US oilfeild to pee them off and cut supply their in half..etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 11, 2003 Author Share Posted March 11, 2003 Oh, and it's two different things to leave a city undefended<then gets hit by enemy amphibious landings> and to allow a corps 3 thousand miles away to sit at sea for 6 months then land on a US oilfeild to pee them off and cut supply their in half..etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaWolf_48 Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Limit the time and limit how many can become transported. 4 turns max, Italy, Germany, and Russia are the only one to abuse the limits of transports. Italy should have no more than four (4). Same with Russia, Germany maybe six (6). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaWolf_48 Posted March 11, 2003 Share Posted March 11, 2003 Limit the time and limit how many can become transported. 4 turns max, Italy, Germany, and Russia are the only one to abuse the limits of transports. Italy should have no more than four (4). Same with Russia, Germany maybe six (6). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Liam We just had three Amphibious Landing Forums and that was the reason for them. link to Amphibious Operations Forum link to Amphibious Landing Unit Forum link to the Amphibious Operations Research Field [ March 11, 2003, 06:15 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Liam We just had three Amphibious Landing Forums and that was the reason for them. link to Amphibious Operations Forum link to Amphibious Landing Unit Forum link to the Amphibious Operations Research Field [ March 11, 2003, 06:15 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 Sorry John though next to Fighters this is the biggest problem in the game... Jet Fighters would be too slow to hit land targets and I don't think Russia ever had enough transports to move that many men in WW2! So a limit would be good...or a High Price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 Sorry John though next to Fighters this is the biggest problem in the game... Jet Fighters would be too slow to hit land targets and I don't think Russia ever had enough transports to move that many men in WW2! So a limit would be good...or a High Price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 jet fighters would be too fast. You can tell I'm working doubleshifts lately ;( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 jet fighters would be too fast. You can tell I'm working doubleshifts lately ;( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Liam You're right, they are two of the worst problems. Glad you started this forum as it revives the topic. As you can see I'm pasting the three links as a reference. The other forums ran their course. Perhaps yours will bring the problem nearer to a solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Liam You're right, they are two of the worst problems. Glad you started this forum as it revives the topic. As you can see I'm pasting the three links as a reference. The other forums ran their course. Perhaps yours will bring the problem nearer to a solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza_35 Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Well if someone drops an Italian corps on a USA oilfeild whose fault is that!! I always leave token defence of at least 1 ship and sometimes a bomber. You can see an invasion coming a mile away. How can a player recon the map before sending important ships in. Its not like we got patrol boats to do the job for us. Anyone who does not send a corps to do the recon buissness might as well play another game. I agree that there shoule be a transport limit and a amphib capability for all sides and they should be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazza_35 Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Well if someone drops an Italian corps on a USA oilfeild whose fault is that!! I always leave token defence of at least 1 ship and sometimes a bomber. You can see an invasion coming a mile away. How can a player recon the map before sending important ships in. Its not like we got patrol boats to do the job for us. Anyone who does not send a corps to do the recon buissness might as well play another game. I agree that there shoule be a transport limit and a amphib capability for all sides and they should be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John DiFool Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Originally posted by JerseyJohn: Liam You're right, they are two of the worst problems. Glad you started this forum as it revives the topic. As you can see I'm pasting the three links as a reference. The other forums ran their course. Perhaps yours will bring the problem nearer to a solution. Okay-people keep using "forum" when they should be using "topic" or "thread". This ENTIRE collection of "threads" is called the "Strategic Command Forum"-kapish? John DiFool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John DiFool Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 Originally posted by JerseyJohn: Liam You're right, they are two of the worst problems. Glad you started this forum as it revives the topic. As you can see I'm pasting the three links as a reference. The other forums ran their course. Perhaps yours will bring the problem nearer to a solution. Okay-people keep using "forum" when they should be using "topic" or "thread". This ENTIRE collection of "threads" is called the "Strategic Command Forum"-kapish? John DiFool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 Yes Gazza! Though the navies of these nations are ill representated in SC... If at all Here is a a bigger picture from this website http://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsAtlanticBattles.htm I think we have a few ships missing!<even strategic scale> Do you honestly think that an Italian amphibious landing of Texas was possible in WW2? Even if it was I think Bush's GrandPappy would've got his shotgun and shot a hole in bottom of the wooden transport Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 Yes Gazza! Though the navies of these nations are ill representated in SC... If at all Here is a a bigger picture from this website http://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsAtlanticBattles.htm I think we have a few ships missing!<even strategic scale> Do you honestly think that an Italian amphibious landing of Texas was possible in WW2? Even if it was I think Bush's GrandPappy would've got his shotgun and shot a hole in bottom of the wooden transport Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 John Di-Fool Bit of a sore point heh? Well, Forum-Thread-Topic-Fertility Ritual it might have been better if you'd offered an opinion on the game issue being discussed instead of going so far off-topic with your semantics tirade-Kapish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted March 12, 2003 Share Posted March 12, 2003 John Di-Fool Bit of a sore point heh? Well, Forum-Thread-Topic-Fertility Ritual it might have been better if you'd offered an opinion on the game issue being discussed instead of going so far off-topic with your semantics tirade-Kapish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 Off topic, bahh? Is there such a thing in SC? These are all the Amphibious OPs of WW2... I don't think you'll find many Italian landings off Texas? Why...cause landings off Texas weren't friggin Italians Business In fact besides Germany/US/Japan/UK I don't that you'll find a single incident of anyone else achieving such technology... http://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsAmphibious.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted March 12, 2003 Author Share Posted March 12, 2003 Off topic, bahh? Is there such a thing in SC? These are all the Amphibious OPs of WW2... I don't think you'll find many Italian landings off Texas? Why...cause landings off Texas weren't friggin Italians Business In fact besides Germany/US/Japan/UK I don't that you'll find a single incident of anyone else achieving such technology... http://www.naval-history.net/WW2CampaignsAmphibious.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts