Amphibious assault – MAJOR ISSUE

[Edwin P.]

Allowing air units to automatically attack/intercept amphibious transports that stop next to a coastal tile would weaken any invasion force that attacked without air escorts.

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

With a real world, the USA wouldn't have to pay 350 MMPs for Patton.

Correct - they'd have to pay more 'cos of their relatively high tail:teeth ratio.

US leaders should cost heaps more than others!

[ May 02, 2006, 06:31 PM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organist ]

[Guest Mike]

The "real" answer is probably an Amphibious tech that has to be researched, combined with beach tiles.

Germany's efforts in 1940 would ahve been laughable had they actually put them into practice and if it wasn't for the fact that 10's of thousandes of men would ahve died.

The allies had to learn the art of assault landings in the Pacific, at Torch and Dieppe - D-Day didn't just happen!

[SeaMonkey]

Alright Edwin, but AFs would have to be on auto or intercept. If your opponents attacks with air first then they will be deemed neutralized unless you have more AFs in range than your opponent attacks with first.

Makes complete sense and realistic.

Now...how about Rocket defensive fire? Ok guys here's the deal, a preliminary conclusion but none the less building to a consensus.

What are we going to do to make Rockets and Bombers worth their purchase and maintenance?

Since Rockets are artillery, we know that IRL one of their most effective uses was to be called in for defensive support.

If Rockets are not used for attack in your own turn, they should have the ability for defensive fire. Heck maybe they should have it for both! Perhaps you could attach them to a certain unit like HQs for defensive fire, like IRL fields of fire were preliminarily targeted.

Let's face it, it seems we must provide Rockets and Bombers with "other" attributes to make them viable or make them cheaper.

Because "The Attack" is so overpowering in SC2, we need something that will damper its effect. The answer, massed defensive fire from artillery, just like IRL. Sitting behind the lines, perhaps unnoticed(FoW), if your opponent has not provided for reconnaissance(AF spotting), what a surprise when he attacks.

Someone tell me this is not the way it was. Don't tell me about the scale of SC....I know...I don't care, my imagination is vivid and yet abstract, I see it works.

Would that provide an incentive to buy Rockets?

Now what to do about Bombers?

[Edwin P.]

"If Rockets are not used for attack in your own turn, they should have the ability for defensive fire. Heck maybe they should have it for both! Perhaps you could attach them to a certain unit like HQs for defensive fire, like IRL fields of fire were preliminarily targeted."

Good idea. Attach a rocket to a unit within range, makes sense. That unit's defense (Soft Defense or Armor Defense) is boosted during the first attack. A 0-2 attack result might become a 7-0 attack result.

Of course, the attacker would not know it until he attacked, as the effect of supporting artillery would not be shown in the pre-battle forcast of friendly and enemy losses.

Rocket Tech Suggestions Summary:

1. Shore Batteries in Cities

2. Artillery support to attached unit

3. Auto Attack on Amphibious Transports that unload in range.

[ May 02, 2006, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Edwin P.]

I like bombers as they are, but would allow them to auto intercept amphibious units.

[Guest Mike]

Rockets are almost completely useless in defence, unlike other artillery.

They are inaccurate - so can't be reliedupon to hit anything smaller than a city - and they have a low rate of fire.

Making rockets defensive weapons is silly IMO.

Also why shuold bombers be cheaper/more effective? Only 2 nations actually put any effort into them - the British into night, the US into day.

Everyone else was too busy trying to stay alive.

Pretty much like SC I reckon!

The only change I'd suggest for bombers is that there be a "night bombing" tech that cuts down casualties from intercepts, and also cuts down damage to the target.

[SeaMonkey]

"Making rockets defensive weapons is silly IMO."

You just don't "get it" SO?

Now very slowly......conjure this image up in your mind.......Rockets are not really Rockets, this is all about FoW and your Intel level.

You just think they're Rockets because HC duped you...you were easy.

But because my Intel level is 5 and the Fog has been lifted the Rocket image changed :eek: . It now resembles a field artillery piece.

Don't you see it??? Put 5 chits in Intel, maybe with a little luck you'll wake up.

[Guest Mike]

OMG it's a conspiracy - the Govt is hiding the rockets from us and telling us they'er artillery......

Sorry - Rockets in SC are not field artillery

[jon_j_rambo]

If you don't want men landing from boats on your land, put troops their.

[vveedd]

Well, I started this post so it will be polite to say something more isn’t it? So what solutions we suggested so far:

1.Decrease amphibious transports range and no movement for unloaded units

2.Amphibious assault concept from SC1

3.Auto Attack with artillery or/and rockets on Amphibious Transports that unload in range

4.Air units to automatically attack/intercept amphibious transports that stop next to a coastal tile

5.Implementing beach tile that allows amphibious transports of landing

6.Soft Limit for Amphibious Units, Hard Limit for other units.

7.If you don't want men landing from boats on your land, put troops their

Did I miss something?

Major reasons against it:

1.Still no influence on amphibious transports with Navy and air force

2.As much I don’t like this Jon_J_Rambo dude he is right – troops have to wait whole week (turn) in transports? Ridiculous.

3.We don’t have artillery units and at this scale it is better that we don’t have it, rockets as defense units? Ridiculous.

4.Good idea but naval units should be enabling to do the same. Too many changes in code for Hubert, I think.

5.Good idea but we have again stupid defense tactic for SC1 to put troops on it and too many changes in code for Hubert, I think.

6.To my opinion, the best idea so far but still no influence on amphibious transports with Navy and air force.

7.Yeah, right.

So what is the best solution? Honestly, I don’t know. My suggestion was the first one but now I am not sure anymore. Following suggestion number six, one new idea came to my mind – adding Marine units into game. Marine units will be only units enabling to make amphibious assaults; the rest can be moved across the sea only in normal transports. With build limits this could be good solution but, of course, this especially needs major changes in code. Hubert have difficult task here.

[SeaMonkey]

You forgot making amphibious transport cost half the unit cost that is being transported.

This would bring in PT to the equation, sort of an amphibious tech.

[jon_j_rambo]

The problem is this, Germany didn't have the boats to land on UK with such power as SC-2 shows. And the RN isn't able to react, nor is the RAF. That's a problem.

On the flip side, don't screw the United States over on any rules changes. We have/had the materials, men, & know how to pull off world wide headcrackings via the sea.

[Rolend]

Ok well this is my first post on these forums so be nice.

I have to agree I think amphibious ops are way to easy, or better put to simplified in SC 2. Historically large scale amphib ops were very tough to do and REQUIRED landing craft made for that purpose when assaulting defended beaches. What is needed is a 'Landing Craft' tech (LC).

Level 0) Barges and portable boats. All landings would require the unit to spend one turn in the coastal hex before off loading. The unit could attack but not move on the turn that it landed.

Level 1) Landing Craft such as Higgins Boats. Units can unload the same turn they enter the coastal square, units could attack but not move the turn they unload.

Level 2) Amphibious Craft such as the Ducks. Units can unload, attack and move on the same turn.

With each new level of LC the movement range would be increased, hit on supply and moral lowered. I would also limit the number of units allowed to be in LC mode. Even the Americans with so much industrial might had trouble finding enough LC for all the operations in the Med, the Pacific and France.

I would also give Engineers the ability to build Coastal Barriers (CB). Any unit except Engineers landing in a CB would take a random amount of damage and not be able to move even if you have LC 2. CB's would represent mines, tank/LC traps, pre sighted artty etc.

I believe that the real reason the Germans needed to have complete control of the air for Sealion was the fact that they had no real Landing Craft. What they did have were barges and portable boats that were slow to move, load and unload. Had they been able to get their troops ashore mostly in tact the English would of been in serious trouble, after all the BEF had left all its heavy equipment in France.

This is a fine game and I am having lots of fun playing it, landing craft played a large roll in the out come of WWII and yet it is to simplified for my tastes.

[jon_j_rambo]

It didn't take technology to make "better boats" for the United States. It took factories, materials, & labor. The United States had it, the German Nazis didn't, it's that simple. This country was built on freedom, not hate.

"Haven't you heard of Ford & General Motors?" --- Webster, in Band of Brothers.

In one small factory in Washington State alone, 144 Warships were manufactured with 50% of the labor force made up of women. When you get sin out of your country, positive things are done. The Germans are so full of hate, they gotta devote their energy to that, instead of preparing & focusing for ultimate victory.

My Uncle had the priviledge & duty of dumping depth charges on Wolfgang in the Battle of the Atlantic. Never underestimate the power & will of the American people...while overrating some Bunta General who ran tanks over sleeping farmers.

[jon_j_rambo]

Hubert did a GREAT JOB by correcting landings from SC-1 to SC-2. Waiting a week to land is stupid. Guard your shores with troops, ships, whatever. You can't have it both ways. If you don't want to expose your troops on coast, don't be surprised if somebody lands there. The Germans kept the Panzers off the Coast on D-Day, they lost. You're not going to hid 500 miles away with your units, and shoot up Americans in a boat sitting there for a week.

[xwormwood]

"When you get sin out of your country, positive things are done."

But while sin is everywhere around you as well, a larger population, more industry and the atlantic & pacific <s>as natural anti-tank moats</s> oceans to protect your native farmer come in handy as well, eh?

[Exel]

The only suggestions I've found reasonable so far are the ones about decreasing amphib. movement and including amphib. tech. In fact, since this isn't really that big of an issue, I think those are the only changes needed.

Automatic attacks? Come on, we don't have such anywhere else in the game either. Why make amphibians a special case?

Beach tile restrictions? Blocking was the biggest problem in amphibious invasions in SC1. Do you really want that back?

Even returning to the SC1 amphibious system wouldn't be that bad now as the blocking tactic isn't viable thanks to reduced unit numbers. But personally I'd prefer the current system with the aforementioned tweaks.

[Jollyguy]

I agree w/Rambo. If you want to prevent landings, build corps. People bitched about transports in SC 1, so it got fixed, and now their bitching about that.

The fact is that England can't have the best of all worlds, it didn't have enough resources in the real war to be everywhere at once, and it certainly shouldn't in this game. So the Allies need to pick: 1) Fight in the Middle East with the risk of a Sea Lion 2) Protect against a Sea Lion with the risk of losing the Middle East 3) Put chits against Spain with the risk of not having enough to around in other areas.

And at least the Brits get a respectable Middle East force in SC 2, compared to SC 1

Bob

[LampCord]

Originally posted by Exel:

The only suggestions I've found reasonable so far are the ones about decreasing amphib. movement and including amphib. tech.

I like the idea of being able to land and attack but not MOVE right away.

This would allow the defender the chance to counter attack the units on the beach with any available air and navel units in the area before they can move inland and would make it very expensive to attack a coast before dealing with defensive air and navy. This brings defensive air and navy into play without any special rules like automatic attack.

[carverrt]

Weedd;

Do not forget technology build/research for amphibious capability.

[Jollyguy]

But at the same time that's not to say amphib landings couldn't be tweaked. But from a game balance perspective if your making things easier, mainly on the Brits and Sea Lion, then you would have to take something away from them also, or give the Germans something else. As it is now Sea Lion is a real threat, and forces the Brits to make hard choices with their limited resources.

I don't know what the answer is, but there have been some very good suggestions on this thread.

Bob

[SeaMonkey]

I'm with Rambo on this thing, even though I've made some suggestions.

If you don't want your shores invaded, simply protect them. Sorry if that depletes your ability for other operations, such is the way it was.

UK has the navy to intercept, just park those CAs, BBs, and CVs on your coastal tiles. Build land forces to counter the landings.

Add AFs, Bombers and Rockets to strike with.

It took awhile to load a full corps on transports with all their supporting equipment and supplies to sustain an attack.

A SC turn is one week, that's not an outlandish amount of time to accomplish the embarkation.

On D-Day, 6th of June, 1944, the assault force was landed in one day. Sounds like an immediate action similar to what happens in SC2.

Leave it alone.

[Panzerkeil]

The fact that there are so many strongly held opinions in this area shows there is something wrong with this aspect of the game. You cannot simply overlook the realities of war: to approach an enemy shore you had better be able to protect your landing force from air and naval attack. No defender is going to simply sit in port while the enemy lands, unimpeded, as it is forced upon him by this game's mechanics. Stop trying to defend the indefensible.

It takes shipping, and lots of it to move an army from one shore to another. And, it takes a long time to build and amass that shipping. Hitler and his generals thought it would be something on the order of a large river crossing. They envisioned landing along 200 miles of England's shores! Raeder did his best to rein in their ambitions and tried to get them to accept a less ambitious landing along about 25 miles of shoreline.

The Royal Navy would have torn such an adhoc landing party to shreds. This was why the stipulation was put in place that there must first be absolute air superiority before such an attempt. The Germans were proposing to land an army using canal barges pulled by tugs, river boats and assorted craft. In short, they were going to try a Dunkirk in reverse!

Sadly, this game gives us the impression that amphibious landings could have been pulled off almost anywhere and at any time with almost no preparation, other than spending a few MPP's and the requisite transport magically appears. It just wasn't so.

Ironically, it was Goering who had the most realistic plan for taking England: airdrop airborne onto a port and landing strips and quickly fly in reinforcements and fast surface transport under cover of darkness. This too would have required control of the skies. It was to this type of invasion that Britain was more seriously vulnerable.

We should just admit that this game cannot in its current form do justice to the amphibious assault concept. I hate to say it but Clash of Steel handled this aspect better: you had to buy naval transports like any other unit, wait for them to be produced and then you loaded your land units aboard and sailed. Along the way you were subject to naval and air interception. You made certain to control the air and sea in that game before you risked sending a landing force. It also had Mulberry units for the Allies and one for the Axis, I think it was called a Freiheit, which was able to provide supply for your invasion force for two turns, by which time you had better have captured a port. You could also put escorting naval units in with them and the game handled the interception routine. This could be possible, similar to the way air fleets do an automatic interception.

[ May 03, 2006, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: Panzerkiel ]

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

It didn't take technology to make "better boats" for the United States.

Of course it did!! It took considerable experimentation and a few disasters to get the technology right.

mulberries were not something that existed before the war, neither were LST's, the "Funnies" of the 79th armoured division, DUKW's, DD tanks, the "bobbin" fuel pipes (IIRC), and amyriad of other minutae that was required to successfully land troops on defended shores.

It took factories, materials, & labor.

that's a matter of how much is built, not whether it can be built in the first place.