No Normandy in SC?

[SeaWolf_48]

How can you have the Normandy invasion in SC? Doesn't that shock anyone about SC! Without support of a port you will not be able to supply your Corps. To overcome this TR had Beach Head Counters that supplied like a port. The British designed Mulberries so that they would be supported until a major port could be opened. It took months to get a major port opened up (Cherbourg) to ship traffic. It took longer for Brest to open.

How about having a Beach Supply Unit in SC2, I'm sure it's to late for SC?

[Spookster]

Originally posted by SeaWolf_48:

The British designed Mulberries so that they would be supported until a major port could be opened. It took months to get a major port opened up (Cherbourg) to ship traffic. It took longer for Brest to open. How about having a Beach Supply Unit in SC2, I'm sure it's to late for SC?

You're thinking of "Clash of Steel", which IMHO is the best strategic WWII game ever. If COS had updated graphics, head-to-head mode and played on Windows XP, there would be no need for SC, none at all.

If you want to play COS and you are DOS-capable, then do a google search and find a free down-load. Cheers.

[JerseyJohn]

SeajWolf

It's a great point.

If you're good at going through the back pages you'll find a good forum on this back around page seven or page ten, somewhere around there.

I think the consensus last time was landing an HQ was like having a mulberry.

Immer Etwas had an interesting forum very recently which I believe was called The Shores of Iwo SC in which he described an interesting situation; all the shore hexes being occupied and the invasion having no way to establish itself.

There was a more recent one as well, but I don't recall who started it or what it was called. That isn't much help, I just wanted you to know there is a lot of info on this topic in the not too far back Forum pages.

[ January 25, 2003, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[kurt88]

Landing and/or would be A great addition to SC,especially for the Allies.

Also I think it be great to see one or two 'special units'-historically correct ofcourse,like the nebelwerfer-for both sides.

Maybe some diplomatic options?

Or am i overdoing it?

[kurt88]

uhhhh, that would be landing and/or beach-head units.

[ January 24, 2003, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: kurt88 ]

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

Some details are just not possible in a game at this scale.

In A3R there was no provision for commando raids at all. But you can bet the Commandos and Rangers at Normandy were as needed as the Airborne that was dropped.

A3R had airborne, but it was a single unit counter. There was no methodolgy in place for commando operations.

The landing of an HQ with invasion forces might be a good way to reflect the Mulberry necessity.

But my big interest is going to be how to do Marine operations in a Pacific setting where you have a single island barely worthy of a full land hex.

I think any development here, will greatly enhance retroactively I hope, any design considerations for European operations.

[Night]

The lack of support for amphip. invasions is a little troubling, but can be overcome if you are good enough. HQ's seem to do the trick for resupply not to mention the obvious fighting bonus they present, but in a situation where there is limited space and your force stands the chance of being pushed back, your HQ could easily fall leaving the the rest of the invasion force in serious trouble.

On the flip side, I would like to see the addition of engineers or some way to build defences that aren't really to strong but enough to slow down or hamper an enemy, like the atlantic wall or numerous other german defensive lines did in WW2.

[Spookster]

Originally posted by Night:

On the flip side, I would like to see the addition of engineers or some way to build defences that aren't really to strong but enough to slow down or hamper an enemy, like the atlantic wall or numerous other german defensive lines did in WW2.

You're thinking of "Clash of Steel", which IMHO is the best strategic WWII game ever. If COS had updated graphics, head-to-head mode and played on Windows XP, there would be no need for SC, none at all.

BF should buy the rights to COS and run with it.

[Liam]

Actually what is it that Rommel said about a fixed Gun, a waste, go around it?? Paraphrazing

refering to the maginot

[JerseyJohn]

On the other hand, how many fixed guns did Rommel want along the Atlantic in 1944? Fortifications combined with an active defense are a great asset. There main purpose, historically, is to channel the direction an enemy has to move through.

For hundreds of years France has been building strong fortresses along the Rhine facing strong German fortresses on the opposite bank. During those same hundreds of years Belgium has served as a French/German stepping stone; wonder if there's a connection? :eek:

[Desert Dave]

Trouble is, if you allow some engineer unit to construct more fortifications, then it will be even more difficult to get ashore than it already is. :eek:

I have advocated the use of a "marine" unit which could attack from off-shore (... solving the stacking issue, assuming this will not be changed in SC2) with some kind of first attack bonus. It would then move ashore if successful (... along with Air and shore bombardment), but would remain in the shallows at reduced strength if not successful.

Well, you would have the opportunity to attack from several sea hexes at once, which would increase the chances of success. However, if all the units are reduced too much, you would have the delicate problem of choosing which one to land, and which to leave vulnerable to air or naval attack.

Presumably you wouldn't undertake a major invasion (... and this would have the great effect of reducing small "nuisance" invasions) UNLESS you first insured Air supremacy and adequate naval support.

Naturally the marine unit would cost more and would be a major effort only undertaken by those countries that had good and sufficient reasons for invading in the first place. Perhaps there might even be some research category so that you would better model the improved training and the Higgins type landing craft. :cool:

Germany and Russia would likely not invest so heavily in "marine" capable units, unless they wished to conduct a small side show in the Baltic or Black seas.

The amphib problem is not so severe that it cannot be easily solved in a future game.

[Shaka of Carthage]

SeaWolf_48

Third Reich had a beachead counter.

Mulberries were designed as one solution. The US took a different approach, deciding that amphibious shipping was better for them. While mulberries acted as artifical ports, and amphib ships eliminated the need for a port, both provided the means to keep supplies flowing to support infantry units, not armored units.

Problem in SC with using HQ as an artificial port, is that you cannot pick it back up. A better fix would be to allow the HQ to be offshore, in a sea hex, but next to a land hex. Then it would perform the purpose of the mulberry and amphib shipping. And while that would require some programming changes (ability for the HQ to unload in a "coastal" hex), everything else would be in place (line of supply to a "port").

Spookster

While I agree that COS was the best computerized grand strategy WWII, even if was able to run under Windows, it would not eliminate SC. The AI in COS cannot compare to the AI in SC. Even the earlier version in COS before it was "future" fixed. And COS still has some major problems that need to be fixed.

Kurt88

As someone mentioned, if the game system is properly designed, then the need for the "gimmick" units is unnecessary.

A comphrensive diplomatic model would have to be SCII. Simple model could exist in SC if you allowed MPP's to be spent to change the readiness of a minor neutral in declaring for the Allies or Axis. You would have to add some sort of modifier to reduce or enhance to natural tendency of the minor. Example, Iraq (Persia?) would lean towards the Axis, not because they were pro-Axis, more because they were anti-British (wanted thier independence).

Sarge

Commandos and Rangers would be nice, but you are right, at this scale, cannot represent with units. In an abstract way, along with Partisans, would work. As long as the target nation would have to spend MPP's on "security forces" (not represented as a unit), to negate the effect.

For someone to represent the island hopping in the Pacific Theater, you would have to have a operational level game system. Thats a totally different beast than SC.

JerseyJohn

While correct in that fortifications channled an attack, they did so at an operational or lower level.

Immer Etwas

There were no amphibious operations of the size you are suggesting (ie attacks from multiple hexes) at the scale SC is. And based on the current combat system that SC uses (no retreat after combat), offshore attacks by "marine" units does not address the fundamental problem. Within the context of SC, clearing the beach is a function of air and sea units, establishing the beachead and capturing the port is the function of the amphib unit.

Thanks,

Barry