Airborne: Don't need it at this scale

[Hueristic]

Originally posted by Funker Vertinox:

In "War In Europe" the AA Divisions were usually used as modifiers to increase the CRT of the attacking force or to take a poorly defended port.

But on their own they were quite usuless except as your standard division.

Perhaps SC could take into this account so you could drop AA with an attack as a +1-2 modifier in favor of the attackers.

An exellent idea. A Asset pool.

[Konstantin V. Kotelnikov]

Here is information on a soviet operational drop in 1943 from a History of Parachute Drops Site:

1943, 24-25 September: Last Soviet operational-level airborne assault of the war. After the successful strategic defensive operation at Kursk in July 1943, the Soviet military quickly launched two counterattacks on German forces, which began a retreat westward toward the Dnepr River. In an effort to expedite Soviet crossings and develop bridgeheads, approximately 10,000 paratroops were to be brought in from the 1st, 3d, and 5th Guards Airborne Brigades (many troopers of which were veterans of the assault missions near Vyaz’ma in early 1942). Aircraft used included 50 PS-84s and 150 IL-4s (B-25s supplied by the U.S.), plus a handful of gliders and nearly three dozen sailplane-type gliders. Parachutists were to drop at night in the area near the pocket on the west side of the bend in the Dnepr River just below Pereyaslav, where partisans had maintained strongpoints. Jumpers, who included a number of nurses trained as parachutists, were delayed a day because of weather. Units encountered problems with aircraft unsuited for parachute delivery and in preparations and aircraft fueling. Finally, rather than attempting to form up, aircraft simply departed as they were ready, shuttling in troopers in widely dispersed columns. The 5th Brigade dropped in easy range of the German 19th Panzer Division that was moving east on the road through Dudari toward the river to provide assistance to German forces trapped there. Most parachutists were slaughtered in the air or as they reached the ground. Similar losses for related reasons occurred with 3d Brigade. The 1st Brigade landed in better position and went into action with infantry units, as planned. However, during October and November the forces in this area at the bend of the Dnepr River were driven out or eliminated. Ironically, the Germans poured in so many reserves to this contested area south of Pereyaslav that Soviet forces probably crossed the Dnepr more readily at points north and south than they would have otherwise. Losses were so heavy and results so meager, however, that the Soviet military confined its elite airborne units to infantry fighting for the balance of the war. Most of the difficulties in this operation arose from a combination of factors including expediency in planning, poor coordination, the use of transport aircrews rather than troop carrier aircrews, no joint training between airborne and air crews, ineffective intelligence, and improper equipment.

[GumbyDude]

I've been playing Third Reich for over 25 years now and airborne corps work great in that game, even with abstract seasonal turns. So, do you need airborne to play and win? No, but having it is a plus and a simulation of historical fact.

Mmmm, actually paras are necessary to win in 3R or A3R (although moreso in 3R). Maybe you meant to say: not necessary in SC. In 3R, a player cannot crack a double or triple line defense without them and all defenses are set up to defend against them specifically. The main criticism of 3R was that they were TOO powerful (dropping behind the enemy and destroying an entire corp is pretty darn powerful), but it's an abstraction that I understood and accepted over the years.

3R was my lifeblood. I lived and breathed that game for over 20 years and launched the A3R website (I can no longer find it online) with Bruce Harper and maintained the site for a couple years while he developed Global War 2000. He mainly used the website as a vehicle for the development of that game and I ran the forums. I had to give it up in '99 to move and focus on my career and totally lost touch (I did not like the changes being developed in GW2K). Later, everyone accused me of "abandoning" them or something? But that's a story for another time....

Anyways, back to SC: With no stacking in SC, I can understand Hubert not designing a system for paras. As a fellow software developer I can understand that his design might not lend itself to a unit dropping on another unit. Such a mechanic could totally require a revamp of his code (depending on how it's written). Also, as a game mechanic, I can't imagine how it would work unless either the attacker or defender is completely destroyed (as in 3R). Also, there is no restriction on OB based on years or limit on # that can be built, such as in 3R. I can see it now: Germany has 20 airborne attacking everywhere on the map. You would need to limit the number of paras to 1 or maybe 2 for the US. Again, his code probably wasn't designed for force pool limitations like these.

[GroupNorth]

I am thumbs up for special Airborne and Mountain divisions. Why? Because I'd like to use German Airborne everywhere, especially Crete and the UK; and use Mountaineers in the Caucacus, Spain, and Yugoslavia.

Another very important function is create a GARRISON unit. The Garrison would be considered a regiment or brigade whose prime function is to secure a city/port.

- A Garrison is made by right click on a Corps or Army, and selecting the LEAVE GARRISON option.

- A Corps is reduced by 3 or an Army by 2 when they leave a Garrison. Later, the Corps or Army can be reinforced.

- A Garrison cannot move; it cannot be reinforced.

- It's function is to hold out ideally until help arrives.

- Garrisons would ideally exist in nearly every game city that is not occupied by a real unit.

[IrishGuards]

Was that the airborne assault at Kanev or another battle...?? :confused:

[GumbyDude]

Another very important function is create a GARRISON unit. The Garrison would be considered a regiment or brigade whose prime function is to secure a city/port.

- A Garrison is made by right click on a Corps or Army, and selecting the LEAVE GARRISON option.

- A Corps is reduced by 3 or an Army by 2 when they leave a Garrison. Later, the Corps or Army can be reinforced.

- A Garrison cannot move; it cannot be reinforced.

- It's function is to hold out ideally until help arrives.

- Garrisons would ideally exist in nearly every game city that is not occupied by a real unit.

Holy crap! That's a pretty good idea. Could this be abused though? Makes Russia a lot easier for Germany almost too easy. Maybe if the unit leaving a garrison loses 5 points, but the garrison has strength of only 2 or 3 and can't move or attack or some other kind of restriction. Otherwise, play balance might be skewed a bit much in favor of the Axis. Also need to be able to kill the garrison at any time so you can march an army into the city to defend it when you need to defend it for real.

[Genghis]

On a side note on garrison units, I always liked the idea of static defense units like the Germans had on the Atlantic Wall.

Units would have great defense but no mobility nor can they really attack.

They would be different from fortress hexes since you can at least place them anywhere on the map.

they would be cheaper to build than regular infantry units but there should be a limited number of static units you could build.

Also you can move static units at a cost. once a static unit moves, it loses it's good defensive value while only providing minimal offense and defense capabilities.

[ January 08, 2003, 09:38 PM: Message edited by: Genghis ]