Amphibious Operations in SC 2

[JerseyJohn]

There have been many complaints about the practice in this game of transporting a unit and just sailing around aimlessly looking for an opportune landing place. This has been a particularly abusive practice in the Mediteranean.

In reality amphibious operations are complex affairs requiring much planning and naval support. Units are not simply put to sea and moved about.

I'd suggest the following:

That there be two categories of sea transport. Normal port to port transport and port to friendly coastal hex as it now exists, and Amphibious Operation Transport, allowing for seaborne invasions such as D-Day, Sicily, Salerno, Anzio etc.

1) There would be no change in normal port to port transport, that remains exactly as it is.

2) Units taking part in Ambhibieous operations start out from a friendly port. The Transport MPP cost is twice that of normal transport. An enemy controled hex is selected as the target; if it requires more than one turn to reach that square the full cost is applied for each turn the unit is at sea.

--Upon arriving at it's destination, the unit is landed immediately, it does not wait at sea for a turn as is presently the case.

-- If the target hex is occupied by an enemy unit but adjacent squares are not the invading player can choose to land at the unopposed location.

-- If forced to fight a defending unit, a conventional battle takes place in which the attacker can incorporate shore bombardment, carrier based attacks and airfleet attacks, after which the seaborne unit also attacks without penalty. If the defender is not destroyed the seaborne unit is returned to the nearest friendly coastal hex at it's current stregnth.

Once a beachead is secured , reinforcing units, including HQs, could be landed at Friendly controled Coastal Hexes.

Amphibious landings should also take place in good weather, which means summer except for the southernmost coastlines. But that issue ought to be tackled after the basic method is resolved.

I know this will be argued against as making the game more complicated, but the alternative is putting up with brainless invasions by floating corps and armies that stay at sea indefinately.

If this solution is not practicable, I think we should find one that is.

[ March 02, 2003, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Minotaur]

We can also do like in Third Reich...

Some coastal hexes has a special 'Beach' draw that means that amphibious landing may happen there and only there...

Of course you shouldn't be able to make an amphibious landing on your own soil... Only on enemy land... Meaning you can only transport your units from port to port...

And yes... Amphibious landings should cost more MPPs than a simple port-to-port transport, simulating the need of special assault ships to carry them, the transport of the needed supply, etc...

I could see that on the right-click menu on a unit... You have 'Transport' and we should add 'Amphibious' in the list...

I don't know how much an Amphibious assault should cost, but I'll put it at 3 times a standard sea transport...

[JerseyJohn]

Minotaur

Yes, I'd go for triple instead of double and also for the beaches, which I didn't want to bring up as I'm constantly being told I over complicate things. But I'm very, very glad you mentioned them.

With a beach provision and good weather conditions, places like Norway, Denmark and the Low Countries become less inviting. If the North African coastal hex area were deeper, say three hexes so it would be possible to maneuver, invasions there wouldn't be very inviting either.

[jon_j_rambo]

Is Hubert going to make changes?

Transport landings come down to ports, not beaches. We've already talked about supply counters or "3R beach-head counters".

What matters now?

1) Who controls the air wins (see Terif carriers)

2) Destroying a unit per turn is more important than controlling land.

3) The Med. Front & Spain is a joke for the Allies, no supply.

4) Submarines can't swim farther than 2-hexes from a friendly port because their supply sucks. (See aircraft rules)

5) Experienced HQ's w/ experienced carrier/air are unstoppable.

How do the Allies win? Control the Air with the British.

How do the Axis win? Control the Air with the British.

[JerseyJohn]

Good points. You're right, a lot of these things have already been stated and restated. I started a weather forum then found out JP Wagner covered almost the identical ground six months before I did, and one of the posters in his August Forum mentioned casually that he'd said the same things months before that!

Wagner makes a good point that we're really just "...spinning our wheels" till Hubert provides some real feedback.

I'm very disgusted with the current Mediteranean situation. It isn't a game, it's just a narrow and useless strip of hexes and, as you say, the Allie are so poorly supplied there they can't do anything. Which is ridiculous. The Allies had plenty of supplies in North Africa and it was nearly always the Axis that was struggling.

I'm also disgusted with the current airfleet situation, that also needs to be changed. Air Power was extremely important in WW II, but in SC it's almost the only weapon anyone needs to use! I've seen games where the Axis has eight or nine air fleets in every theatre, controling the North Sea, the Mediteranean, the Eastern Front -- everything! Too much, something needs to be done about that. Possibly my range suggestion is part of the answer.

The Atlantic is a problem.

The Subs are a problem.

There are a lot of things that need correcting, but every time anything is mentioned there's a chorus of opposition. Don't ruin it, don't make it more complicated, etc. & etc..

Games. All Games, need to be improved with the passage of time and experience gained from their being played. SC is not an exception. Yes, it's a good game, currently on the highest Beer and Pretzel tier. All that's being asked is that it's short comings be corrected so it leaves the Beer and Pretzel category altogether. It's better than that.

[Minotaur]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

We've already talked about supply counters or "3R beach-head counters".

I think HQs should do the trick... The only way to supply your units after an amphibious assault should be a HQ... So you'll HAVE to use an HQ... Protect it or you're unsupplied... And since they're not cheap, you'll have to prepare yourself before doing it!...

This is not part of amphibious, but I think it's important!...

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

1) Who controls the air wins (see Terif carriers)

Some solutions:

- Add a Jet-Air Fleet unit that is only good against Air Units...

- Anti-Air Defense should be a thing you can buy with MPPs instead of researched... You choose to pay 'x' MPP to buy 1 point of air defense into that city or that port...

- Jet Fighter technology should not boost attack... only defense...

- Change Air Fleet so that they're not so good against land or sea units...

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

2) Destroying a unit per turn is more important than controlling land.

True... but if we give a small MPP value to each Hex you control, that would be less of a problem...

Plain = 1 MPP

Forest = 2 MPPs

Mountain/Swamp = 1/2 MPP

Cities/Ports are still the most important target with 5 to 10 MPP... And add to that Mines & Oil fields...

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

3) The Med. Front & Spain is a joke for the Allies, no supply.

Alexandria/Madrid should be a supply point...

And HQs should do the rest...

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

4) Submarines can't swim farther than 2-hexes from a friendly port because their supply sucks. (See aircraft rules)

They should have unlimited supply... And move faster... Especially when you research Advanced Subs...

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

5) Experienced HQ's w/ experienced carrier/air are unstoppable.

See your point #1...

Let's just hope we are not preaching in the desert...

[ March 02, 2003, 02:45 AM: Message edited by: Minotaur ]

[Liam]

In real war you need amphibious Craft to land on enemy beaches. Transports are completely different and shouldn't even be considered the same device. Transport Craft would just get you to a friendly port. Though you need a craft that is has a flat bed, you need ground that's fairly good for landings, usually that costs extra and should be represented as a seperate unit. As the Germans didn't have much amphibious capabilities and would take them a bit extra as well as the Allies to dip into Britian/France... Which is just too easy...

The Russians as far as I know had Nill in that department but in this game they can be used as the Corp O Death at Sea... Really unrealistic

Airpower, how to balance it.. Simple, change the aircraft types. Fighters didn't have the explosive capabilities that bombers/divebombers/medium bombers/fighterbombers had... and a certian amount of fighters can destroy any unit in the game. That's unrealistic. Usually to strafe and bomb a target<aside from an airfield> fighters went low and slow where they weren't as effective for accuracy. Fighters were mainly used for fighter superiority missions, escort missions, and airfield attack with bombers in tow. Expand the capability of the bomber and fighter as a duel role to fix the problem. I'll admit fighters especially American ones wreaked havoc on Trains, tanks and other units but mostly towards the end of the War. They were specially fitted and designed for one purpose. As there wasn't much German Air to dedicate to specailized roles anymore they'd lost air superiority.

[JerseyJohn]

Liam

Good points. It would be difficult to assess the damage done by long range fighters in game terms on this scale. As the end came closer they had reduced resistance from German interceptors -- though the German aircraft types improved, pilot quality went down with the replacing of seasoned veterans by green recruits (all the less able to fly the newer aircraft with their reduced training standards). So, it's valid to say the American aircraft flying at their extreme range flew it at a greatly reduced efficiency rate that was not a factor in the actual air war.

Interesting air factor entry, but if you could make further Air Fleet entries in the other Forum set up specifically for that topic ( Solution for Bullying Air Fleets )I think it could be delt with more effectively and would add specific ideas to the area they're needed at.

[ March 02, 2003, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[jfstup]

these ideas have merit,but making landings tougher and more expensive would make the game more unbalanced in favor of the axis. so to implement these ideas, that factor would need to be considered.

[JerseyJohn]

jfstup

Interesting way of seeing things. I suggested the idea to stop the Italians from floating aimlessly around the Mediteranean. Also, I think it would make SeaLion more difficult to mount. Both of which would work against the Axis!

[Piumarcobaleno]

Do you want to make axis boulder even heavier? Combination of "Iolo defence" and "Dutch Gambit" are already capable of stopping the axis early in the game, with a combination of air power and good defence line..

In the second turn allies can muster 3 air fleets, one bomber and 2 carriers in range of bruxelles; more, usually players bid at least 100 mpps for axis, so england and france get 115 each at start, +100 or more for the bid for england, plus both nation can scrap say 2 battleships and a cruiser each in 2 turns (you need to scrap battleships right in ports), gaining additional 170 mpps each, that makes about 500 mpps for each nation by the end of the second turn. Consider that usually, if axis has not redeployed his air force near belgium to counter the dutch gambit, allied troops should make it into bruxelles on turn 2, so when you hit that "done" button, 300 points of plunder will go to the nation you have chosen.

In 2 turns, france and england have collected 1300 mpps ca.

The Fatherland, on the other side, can: A)have taken poland, gaining 300 plunder, but leaving time to allied to take belgium, so the plunder bonus is the same, or B)have operated troops to belgium (while allied troops can redeploy by foot), leaving poland alive for other 2 or 3 turns at least.

In every case, allied player can buy stuff for 1000 mpps MORE than axis one, making room for one or two additional air fleets and a HQ.

Let's see how much air power is in play now..

Brits 3 air fleets, 2 carriers and a bomber (+ a HQ if bruxelles goes to london), French 2 air fleets (+ a HQ if bruxelles turns blue), while german air force is by no way over 3 air fleets.

Even with HQ helping germany, numbers are greatly in allies favor!

And you want to tone down germany? That's fault of the "Chamberlaine way of thinking" very common to early years of ww2 play. It's obvious that we think of a preminence of axis in the first offensives, so you can say "that cannot be!" and let france fall, leave axis player live, and build 20 air fleets that will crush you in a moment.

It can be "ahistorical" or "gamey", but maybe the allies have their best chance of winning the war in the early months of the war, at least in this GAME, because this game, with the current settings, is designed this way.

That's "my two cents", kent brockman here, bye bye springfield

[JerseyJohn]

Piumarcobaleno

The purpose of this Forum isn't to tone down one side in favor of the other. It's to improve the amphibeous invasion proceedure used in the game.

Just putting units adrift and having them wander till they find a nice spot to land is not a realistic ambphibeous invasion. Nor is forcing them to sit offshore a turn and watch the defender move troops in to block the hexes they would have landed at, probably raking them with air attacks as well.

The point of this forum is very simple:

Amphibeous Invasion units leave a port for a specific target hex. When they're adjacent to it they land if it is unoccupied, if not, it is attacked by friendly aircraft carriers, land based aircraft, and, if applicable, by naval bombardment. At the conclusion of which the amphibeous unit either lands on the hex or fights the surviving defenders in the normal manner. If the defender is eliminated the amphibeous unit lands and occupies the hex, it's movement for that turn being finished.

Reinforcing units, including HQs can be brought in through normal naval transport, but those units cannot be landed on enemy controled hexes.

Everything else is totally irrelevant and clouds the real issue -- amphibeous invasions.

[ March 03, 2003, 12:27 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Piumarcobaleno]

I agree to the amphib assault issue, but someone in the post before mine speaked about this regarding a more difficult sea lion for axis etc.; i was just suggesting to think twice on a patch that would burden axis even more on the earlier stages of game.

Maybe just setting unloading troops readiness and supply near 0 on the first turn when they land would do the trick, without having to implement a new transport option in the game; this way a defender would have one turn of "0 supply" invasion to counter, giving him the chance to severely cripple the assault. Even a landed HQ would have supply 0 on the turn it touches the shores, so it could not supply the troops during the enemy turn; the turn after hq would go back to their normal 5 supply level, let's say Hq lands, establish his communication and supply lines and THEN is able to coordinate troops.

[JerseyJohn]

Piumarcobaleno

I'm not looking to penalize the Germans or place a handicap on invading units that have come ashore. It's already hard enough launching a successful invasion, especially Sea Lion. What I'm looking to do is stop the practice of sending units to sea and having them wander around looking for a good spot. It doesn't happen that way and is ridiculous. A game killer.

As far as Sea Lion goes I don't wish to make it either harder or easier. Personally I think the Germans, if they were serious about it, might have given it real preparations and launched it in the summer of 1941, after assembling adequate transport and positioning the necessary air cover to dominate the English Channel with U-boats ready to intercept naval movements moving south from Scapa Flow, but that's a different topic and should be discussed in different forum, perhaps one on Sea Lion.

This one is only about the mechanics of amphibeous landings and nothing else.

As I said earlier, what I'm really concerned about is the practice of sending land units out to sea and having them wander till they find a good spot to make a landing. This is totally unrealistic and no country could have done it, especially not Germany or Italy.

My main goal is to make is so the invading player has to assign a target to his embarking troops and that's the only place they go to. If they can't capture that objective the invasion is a failure and they return home. No wandering, no looking for targets of opportunity, just an objective and an invasion force. If the mission fails the survivors return home. If it succeeds the beachead is reinforced and exploited, or possibly driven back into the sea by a defender's counterattack.

[ March 03, 2003, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Piumarcobaleno]

I agree with this, but it's maybe too complex to code in a game like SC. I'm not a programmer, so i'm not sure of this, but your suggestions, even smart and well thought, are maybe a difficult thing to see in a future patch (if there would be future patches)given its complexity.

Maybe doubling the cost for transport, giving landing units low supply, or maybe give each transport on sea a sub warfare-like cost (say 5 mpps each transport that ends a turn in open waters, not in a port).

I'm not saying that the option of an ampihibious attack, supported by battleships and aircrafts, that can let the landing unit fight its way on the beaches is a bad idea, instead, it's a wonderful one (like 3rd Reich, basically), but maybe it's too far away from SC, difficult to code, as i said before.

[Piumarcobaleno]

Ok, "i agree with this", my english teacher would tear me apart...

[Desert Dave]

The simplest solution is to provide special Marine units.

Presto! their higher cost would account for the specific landing-craft required. Alternately, this could be another tech to research on our expanded tech tree.

Also, as several have suggested, there can be some sort of Mulberry or otherwise established temporary port, say, lasting 3 turns. Then, either capture a port (... sure enough, there needs be a larger map and a couple more ports in northern France) or another one must be landed.

I also like the idea - I think it was in another thread, though I forget who came up with it, sorry, but... for each turn (after the first) at sea, there is a 1 strength point penalty, which would allow for the usual attrition due to failure of physic or psychic, and/or casualties from shore batteries and the like.

Absolutely no doubt this MUST be high on the list of changes for a potential SC2, since the utter inability of the Allied AI to get ashore in France is the major reason the Axis can ultimately defeat Russia. :eek:

Solve this particular difficulty and you have eliminated MANY other proposed solutions to the apparent imbalance in the game.

[JerseyJohn]

Originally posted by Piumarcobaleno:

Ok, "i agree with this", my english teacher would tear me apart...

Your English is just fine my friend and constantly improving. Your teacher should be proud.

Immer

Agreed on all counts. I think there are numerous solutions and whichever one Hubert chooses is fine, as long is it solves the several problems in this area. I like the Marine idea, but on a corps or even army level I don't think they should be allowed to wander looking for places to land. There should be a specific attack destination units head for right from the harbor.

[ March 03, 2003, 06:06 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[KDG]

I'd go with the loss of one supply per turn at sea for transports. Easy solution to do and program.

[JerseyJohn]

KDG

That would help take care of one aspect of the problem. Other aspects are blocked landing hexes that prevent a landing altogether. And the invading unit having to sit adjacent to the landing hex, giving the defender an unrealistic opportunity to move a unit in a blocking position. It would also help if the landing unit could fight it's way ashore.

[Shaka of Carthage]

Because there are no limits on the number of units that can be built, you get this ability to "block" an amphib invasion by placing Corps in front of the invasion. Once there are limits, this "problem" will go away.

We don't need a "marine" unit to represent a amphib invasion. All we need is an amphib option (just like we have a transport option). Amphib can land on any hex, transports can only land in Ports.

As I tried to explain in some detail in another topic, this Amphib unit should have a 300 to 400 MPP cost and should be limited to only Corp units, no Armies or Armor units.

If a HQ unit was allowed to "float" on a coastal hex, you now have your Mulberry.

Unless we want to make a distinction between true Amphib ships and "makeshift" Amphib ships, Amphib units should have the ability to linger in ocean hexes for multiple turns.

[JerseyJohn]

Shaka

Agreed on all points. I believe the amphib unit and Immer's marine unit have virtually the same objective with only slight differences. I think Immer's view is similar to my own, that the invading unit should have a good sea to ground combat ability as, even with limited unit quantities, there would still be instances where an occupied landing hex needs to be contested -- Malta, for example.

High MPP cost for Ambibious units is fine with me, hopefully it will help stop this horrible tactic of floating armies and corps.

As relates to Piumarcoblaeno's earlier discussion in the context of Sea Lion it has to be remembered that Germany found itself at water's edge, gazing at England, with no meas of transport what so ever! The attempt to use converted barges for this purpose (which didn't work in any case) was extremely expensive not only in terms of conversion but more importantly in economic losses incurred by drastically reducing inland canal freighting.

I'm glad now that Mr P. kept bringing the matter up as it helped me analyze my own point of view on this topic and find justification for it.

BTW -- agreed emphatically that these units should only be corps. Armies and tang groups would be landed after a beachead is established.

The Mulberry vs HQ issue is still in there, but the topic is making a lot of headway.

[ March 04, 2003, 11:23 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Desert Dave]

JJ & Shaka:

If your invading unit is merely a Corps, then you have the problem of trying to establish enough STRIKING power to dislodge the (... sometimes entrenched) defender.

If you do not allow a special marine unit, where does this invasion POWER come from?

A plain old corps with "amphibious ability" would not have enough attack strength to even get ashore, would it?

Since it is generally agreed that Air alone shouldn't have quite so much power against ground units, and that shore bombardment is just too potent relative to actual historical performance, you are left with the problem of how? to eliminate the coastal defender.

If there were retreat rules, this could be fairly easily solved. But there aren't.

So. Provide a Marine unit, which would be more powerful than a mere corps, AND have an invasion turn attack bonus (... I appreciate the concern that ONLY the USA, and to some extent, Britain, had very many of these highly specialized marine troops, well, we can assume that a "what-if" game would allow other countries to build them... one way would be to tie it to a specific research tech, which would provide sufficient rationale, yes?)

Just enough of these very expensive units (... which would also partly alleviate the problem of the casual and aggravating nuisance raids)and you could clear 2 or 3 consecutive coastal hexes and then land a Mulberry, and at last... slowly and eventually establish a perimeter that can be reinforced.

Success would not be guaranteed, but at least the Germans would have to defend Fortress Europa with somewhat substantial reinforcement, thereby relieving the pressure on the East Front.

[JerseyJohn]

Immer

Yes, very good points. I keep getting confused as to normal historical scale and SC game scale. Historically Normandy (and most other amphibious operations) were a few divisions (in Europe never actually marines but that's a meaningless point as they were army trained in marine assault tactics) of attackers vs a few divisions of usually stunned defenders. That's real life scale.

In SC terms it's realistic to assume an army would have been landed within the game turn to reinforce the initial landing.

So, aside from agreeing with the point you've just made in game terms, I think it also bears out in relative reality terms. I've been converted and agree totally with your Marine suggestion.

In a documentary about Operation Sealion , a prominent historian, probably the late Steven Ambrose, said, "You have to remember there was no German version of the U. S. Marines." -- He didn't mean that in terms of macho toughness, he meant it in terms of knowing how to launch amphibious operations.

The only three countries possessing advanced knowledge of such tactics were the U. S., Japan and Britain.

Has anyone suggested an Amphibious Operations Research Field? It might [seriously] be a fine idea. If not I'm suggesting it now and believe it should be appended to Immer's Marine Unit Idea.

In 1939 I'd start the U. S. off with L2, Britain with L1 and all the others with L0.

[ March 04, 2003, 01:44 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Shaka of Carthage]

Immer Etwas

Lets back up one step. We seem to have a misunderstanding. In my mind, this amphib invasion is landing on a "empty" hex. I believe you want a unit that can fight its way ashore (either thru enemy retreating or eliminated).

To give you what you want, you are asking for the combat system to be changed. I don't feel that is necessary.

And in real life, Marine units do not have more combat power than other units, they just have the ability to take more losses before breaking.

The way it is in SC reflects things realisticly, as there is a chance you are suffering losses once you land (from the defenders not represented by a unit in SC).

I am aware though, that everything I said above means nothing, unless there are limits on the number of units. Without unit limitations, a realistic amphib system would have no chance of success, just as it would in real life if the invasion point was lined with 10,000 defenders every 10 miles.