The Sealion Problem

[SeaMonkey]

A good point SO, but we know that if the Italian fleet would have been handled with a bit more novel thinking, the historical results could have been different.

Then as we have all addressed before a greater commitment or strategic thinking for the Med region by Germany would have definitely produce a different conclusion. Which an SC2 player surely recognizes and usually learns from that historical oversight and endeavors not to recreate that mistake. Which is what SC2 is about, IMO.

Maybe we should ask Hubert what he had in mind for the game, after all he is the creator.

[Edwin P.]

As I recall, and I may be mistaken, the biggest problem the Italian navy faced in WWII was a shortage of fuel.

Wilkipedia: Italian warships had a general reputation as well-designed and good-looking, but proved rather deficient in armour and anti-aircraft armament and they lacked radar. In addition, whereas British commanders at sea had discretion on how to act, Italian commanders were closely and precisely governed by Supermarina (Naval Headquarters). This lead to action being avoided when the Italians had a clear advantage, eg, during Operation Hats [1]. Supermarina were conscious that the British could replace ships lost in the Mediterranean, whereas the Regia Marina resources were limited....

The British had had the advantages of Ultra intercepts which predicted the Italian movements and also of radar which enabled them to locate ships and range their weapons at distance and at night......

The Regia Marina performed well and bravely in its North African convoy duties, but remained at a technical disadvantage. They relied on speed advantage but would easily be damaged by shell or torpedo, due to their relatively thin armour. The fatal and final blow to the Italian Navy was the shortage of fuel, which forced her main units to remain at anchor for most of the last year of the the Italian alliance with Germany.

[ September 11, 2006, 12:21 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Guest Mike]

"Final and fatal" seems more appropriate than "biggest" as adjectives for problems - without the various other hassles they had it might not have been so crippling.

However yet again - OIL MATTERS!!

In this case to naval no less - and yet naval costs nothing to move around in SC2........

[Liam]

Stalin's Organist:

As a little idea on the scope of an Amphibious Invasion this is a site I think you would take interest in, usually even a relatively small invasion force did require Thousands of support ships, something the Soviets likely did not possess. Not for what you call a true Amphibious Invasion Force comparable to the West... http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/articles/AmphibiousAssaults.aspx

Whether or not she could throw together Rifter Rafts and land 50,000 men on Stockholm, I won't argue, she did do well supplying Leningrad by Lake and Stalingrad over the Volga. Even still, those are very different operations than these more complex ones that were undertaken by the USA and UK combo... Both sides were very worried too of the possibility of a failure and the cost in time and men. Think of the logistics and technology that went into supplying Normandy and feeding it all the way Paris? Against such a Foe, would the Russians have succeeded, It is likely after the war on land was already decisive. With Airpower, naval power opposing them they better pray they had a land force to back up their main thrust. Early in the War what would've occurred if Sweden were invaded? There were plenty of German soldiers in Norway, I'm certian Sweden would've called upon them as an Ally, how long before the War become a brutal war of attrittion, would it have been worth the cost? The question also remains if the Russians were capable of Such amphibious Ops as you claim, how come none were performed? Crimea and the Sea Azow those regions in the Black Sea are not comparable to the icy baltic, or even worse the Dreadful North Sea.

If the Germans would've killed the BEF and destroyed the RAF, I think that the idea of Sea Lion would've been a little bit more possible. People say that the RAF could've just retreated away to the North and it was under no real threat. Then why was it engaging the Luftwaffe in full Force when it came across the channel? The RAF could've been defeated, but of course Goering made that an impossibility. Not the Luftwaffe or the RAF, he blundered every card he possessed. That and his Fuhrer

[JJColorado]

Blashy mentioned that Sealion is very difficult now. I've read this thread and read the patch notes. What makes Sealion harder in v1.04 than it was in v1.02? Has there been some change? Why would Blashy say this?

Thx

[hellraiser]

german amphib transport was reduced to 4 -> now allies can spot the incoming invasion and ships can interfere succesfully