Amphibious landings on major same turn as DOW

[Kuniworth]

This was a tactic that could be exploited terrible in sc1. Will this be fixed in sc 2?

[JerseyJohn]

Great question, Kuni.

My main complaints in SC-1 were:

-- Seasons: in most sea areas invasions shouldn't be allowed during the winter turns, and in the more northerly areas, such as the North Sea and Baltic, they should only be allowed duing the summer.

English Channel & Bay of Biscay -- Summer okay, Spring and Fall very risky.

Iberian coast and Mediteranean -- perfect Summer conditions, very good Spring and Fall conditions and acceptable Winter conditions.

Those are all generalizations, of course, but I think that within the games turn scale they'd work well enough.

-- By more realistically reflecting invasion conditions, the Mediteranean First strategies would become much more popular.

[JerseyJohn]

Continued from above.

-- Regarding invasions on DOW turn ...

I think, if realistically provided for, they can be justified historically, I'm thinking specifically about Torch in North Africa and the German operation in Norway, during both of which no formal DoW was ever issued --I don't think Hitler issued them anyway except against the United States.

The key, in my opinion, would have to be allowing the country being attacked to realistically fight back.

-- In the case of the USSR, the Baltic ought to be barrier enough; it would have been a horrible coast to try and land on and only feasible during the summer. Historically Germany didn't have much amphibious capability so neither side bothered to include that aspect in their plans.

-- -- The Black Sea, of course, is a different situation. I forgot to mention it in the above the coast, but of course the Black Sea (and Persian Gulf/Red Seas if they're included) should be about as ideal as the Mediteranean.

The big problem lies with Italy. In SC-1 the Italian penninsula was ridiculously open on Italy's initial turn, particularly regarding Toranto. I think the cause of this is because at the time Italy was neutral neither Britain nor France would have been capable of large scale amphibious actions so the Italian coastal areas weren't well defended. Consequently, Hubert's initial deployment may accuratly depict the Italian OOB, but in game turns leaves the place open to assault.

A special rule like halving the attack factors if the invasion is on DoW, but I think that's ridiculous because, if anything, the attacked nation would be offguard.

-- So, let's go a different route. Create a buffer coastal zone that no beligerant can enter till it DOW's the neutral nation. If Italy, the USSR and the U. S. in SC-1 had even a one hex zone all around their coast that no country could enter till they were at war with them, this question would never have come up in the first place.

-- -- I don't think the same rule should apply to minor nations, which would include Vichy France, Spain, Sweden, Greece and Turkey. For game purposes their coasts should be considered more vulnerable than those of major nations.

[Kuniworth]

I think a buffer coastal zone would be a very good think but it will be trouble with the new move-land in one turn feature.

[JerseyJohn]

True, but wouldn't that serve to force a DoW before the invasion?

-- Except, of course, if the country's initial OOB is weak along the coasts we've got the same problem.

Back to square one. Maybe a toggle to implement the no Amphibious Invasion on DOW Turn rule against major countries; lifting it up one from a house rule.

[Retributar]

Not only what the two of you have mentioned...but i would also like to see included is a 'Preparation Phase', whether that be a month or several months...before a DOW would actually be able to be declared!.

This means that you would no-longer be able to whimsically, at a moment's notice pick any country on the War-Map, Declare War & Invade!!!...No-More!!!,...Instead you would need to Plan-Ahead and do 'Invasion Preparation Work' for a month or a few month's 1st before a DOW would be able to proceed!.[Depending on the Size of Target Country?].

What exactly this would include, im not sure, but perhaps...the Stockpiling of Fuel & Ammunition, Re-organizing & Emplacing of Units in Starting Postions & the Diverting of Air-Fleets would/could be some of tasks required before an invasion could take place!.

Also, with this system in effect...Russia now for example would/could get Report's/clue's that the German's on it's Frontier/Border Area ...are indicating unusuall German Troop Movement's...and the Russian's therefore would now have the chance to go-to a 'Heightened State Of Alert' EG:increased/Bonus Defense Factor...At % MPP Cost perhap's] ...and now have an opportunity to make preparations for a possible invasion!.

[ January 22, 2006, 05:07 AM: Message edited by: Retributar ]

[pzgndr]

This was a tactic that could be exploited terrible in sc1. Will this be fixed in sc 2?

It was exploited mainly against Italy and Russia because they had fixed deployments. In SC2, these countries are active and can deploy accordingly.

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by pzgndr:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> This was a tactic that could be exploited terrible in sc1. Will this be fixed in sc 2?

It was exploited mainly against Italy and Russia because they had fixed deployments. In SC2, these countries are active and can deploy accordingly. </font>

[JerseyJohn]

I like Retributer's idea, concept, as well.

Germany, from the midpoint of the war onwards, managed some very swift impromptu invasions, but they were all against their failing allies. I don't believe those ought to be in the same category as everything would have been on hand and the country being hit virtually defenseless, having already been bled dry and demoralized by war losses; which is why they'd have dropped out, of course.

[Sombra]

Well, IMHO it is although because landing units had a much much to high readiness. Come on, you are coming from a troop transport and ahving 100% combat ability? 10% would be more accurate.

[JerseyJohn]

Sombre

Interesting, and a good point.

Anyone reading the accounts of those landings can't help but agree with what you've just said. Units landed at the wrong locations, vital equipment not making it ashore, air and naval support missing the mark more often than hitting it. Etc & etc ... I don't know if I'd bring it down to 10%, but earlier I was thinking about 50 or 60% initial effectiveness.

The Atlantic Wall, like the Maginot Line, is often belittled. I don't agree with regard to either, the Maginot Line achieved it's purpose and so did the Atlantic Wall; despite all the preparations and overwhelming naval and air support, plus a large force of paratroopers dropped behind the lines, the Germans came closer than most people realize to holding the line.

The decisive difference between victory and defeat was probably the absense of so many top ranking German generals at the exact moment when they were most needed at the front. Rommel in particular, of course, but there were many others who'd gone home during what was supposed to be solid bad weather.

[Kuniworth]

Hitler holding back the panzers for too long did'nt help either.

[JerseyJohn]

Exactly.

There were only two men who could have gotten him to release them.

One was von Rundstedt, who refused to lower himself to "Beg" the Austrian Corporal to release them, and the other would have been Rommel. I'm sure Rommel would have gotten Jodl to wake him up and would have gotten the panzers released for a timely counterpunch.

Also, there doesn't seem to have been a German general at the actual scene of the fighting deploying reserves -- everything was static, with all the senior officers away, the ones remaining seemed afraid to do anything on their own.

[Sombra]

Jersey John, Kuniworth I agree 100%. Even with the vast material superiority, Paratroopers etc. D-Day wasn´t a piece of cake.

01% is perhaps a little bit to mauch but I think really that 25/50% (couldbe even a random value: As J:J pointed out sometimes material is not in place , units get missing etc.) would be much better for the game to reflect how hard it is, to do a succesful landing.

ALthoug would take out these gamey surprise landings in Rusia and Italy. A huge landing manoever should be the exception not the rule in this game.

[jon_j_rambo]

@SomeBra --- Dude, remember the Band of Brothers knocking out those 88's of your Bunta fathers. Even if your leader would have released the Panzers, Allied airpower would have dealth with it. Give me a break & show respect to the United States Military of both today & World War 2.

[SeaMonkey]

I'm wondering how long is the build delay for the amphibious capable unit?

Is this unit a corps, infantry only type unit, what are its attributes? How much additional cost in MPPs is this unit over its base type?

If the amphibs cost more and the build delay is longer this could be considered the "preparatory" phase Retributar referred to.

I vote to keep the 100% readiness of the landing unit as is. Like SC1 the units suffer casualties upon landings, same for the airborne also. Think about it, you're going to try an Amphib landing against a hostile shore with your forces not at their peak combat abilities? Sounds like bad generalship to me.

Obviously I agree with JJ on the landing seasonal restrictions, they are realistic. Unfortunately I believe SC2 will not have tiles with elligible amphib landing areas(beaches), perhaps a streak of yellow along the tile side.

Since the tiles are 50 mile squares, only the coastal areas that could support a corps size landing force would get the beach denotation and be subject to landings.

The downside of this, is you could no longer have the simulation of raiding. Wait a minute, perhaps a corps size unit(amphib) of a specific max combat level, say 4, would be elligible for amphib operations anywhere and only full strength units restricted to the landing beaches?

We could use a highly experienced, teched 4 combat strength unit for our commando unit.

[SeaMonkey]

Hey Bill, or DD, what is the status of our airborne unit. Will it be able to be carried by the bomber unit to max range and perhaps dropped on or near an enemy resource tile(unoccupied) attacking it and rendering an MPP loss to our opponent?

[pzgndr]

The paratroops are handled like transports. Instead of loading, you set them to prepare and that takes a turn. On the next turn they get their drop range, and when you move them the icon changes to a transport plane. Note that long range aircraft tech will also increase paratroops drop range. Once dropped or otherwise not in prepare mode they get normal infantry movement range.

[Sombra]

QSea monkey: My point is not that you are sending your best troops with all their equipment. Simply that during your landing everything is messed up. In SC1 you had better combat values when a unit came of a transport then a unit in a city with more or less full supply , logistics sorted out etc. A unit coming ashore should have IMHO a very limited combat ability. The turn afterwards with HQs etc in place the real fighting should be beginning. I think we will see the situation that fully entrenched unit will have less readiness then a unit which has to drop of transport and climb up the beaches.

With limited units avaible for germany less combat readiness would reflect the vulnerability for direct counterattacks (the chance that Germany missed because they didn´t use the tank reserves to throw back the Allies)

[jon_j_rambo]

@SomeGerman --- Dude, the Allies went right to the heart of the Axis defenses in both Normandy & Sicily. Being exposed to fire on a beach doesn't mean you don't shoot back. The problem is simple, the United States is not represented correctly in SC. Two naval pieces? You kidding me? Where's the bombers to drop bombs on your house. By the way, I was watching "Hunting Nazis" last night on the Discovery Channel, do you know where Brunner is?

[Sombra]

@Rambo , at the end of the war the US was vastly superior in numbers , material, equipment you name it.

But this is not the point. The point is if there is one divison of soldiers entrenched on the beach I would like to to see a divison of "elite" fighters able to inflict more damage on the defenders while they are landing from their transports then the other way round. (Miltary doctrine of the US at this point called for a 10x superiority to guarantee sucess against a well entrenched enemy)

[JerseyJohn]

Actually, a lot of the success of the Normandy Invasion was decided by the paratroopers taking key objectives behind the beaches and there was no German general officer countering any of that. Guaranteed Rommel would have been all over those things, it was a simple matter of ordering the reserves into action, and no one did it!

Also, while it's true the US and UK had total air dominance, the German armor would have been moving by night and it's doubtful air interdiction would have decided this particular issue. For one thing, the American and German units would have been too close to call in air support except for runs behind the lines, much of which was wooded so men and vehicles could have been hidden with considerable success.

[Blashy]

I don't consider this an issue in SC2.

You can do amphibious landings same turn you DoW, but, the cost of amphibious is more than simple transports, the cost could be to high and the bigger map does make it harder to move about.

AND you will not have as many troops as you did in SC1 for your assault on Russia, because of reduced MPPs.

So if you do it, it is not an exploit but a tactic AND a gamble.

[Lars]

Don't see amphibious invasion on the same turn as a DOW as a gamey exploit at all. Would call it good generalship.

To those willing to take the risks goes the rewards.

Think the weather effects will take care of those winter invasion attempts.

[JerseyJohn]

The best solution I've seen covering the gamey aspect of this was mentioned earlier by SeaMonkay.

He said that in the process of preparing there's a risk that the invading country's plans are leaked to the country it's targetting. The neutral country goes on heightened alert. Vague, some details suggested by SeaMonkey, but it's something good to work with and more details could esily be worked out.