While the USMC wasn't used at all in the European theatre in WWII, if you look at the performance of Marine units versus Army units when both were used in the same amphibious operation in the Pacific theatre, the difference is glaringly obvious. When faced with heavy opposition, Army units simply ...

"Marines" should not be a separate type of unit IMO - any unit could land amphibiously - what was required was the gear to do it - the allies spent a massive amount on landing craft, the mulberries, pluto, etc to put ashore some standard infantry units that had had a bit of training on how to get ...

The trouble with having battleships not cause casualties (which I agree is moire realistic - they should lower readiness and destroy entrenchments and maybe do 1 casualty) - is that it's not really feasible to have battleships bombard an enemy unit the same turn as another unit tries to land 'cos ...

Why have paratroopers fight better at all?

They had the best recruits because they were lightly equipped - they are elite light infantry - just give them the same stat's as regular infantry IMO.

Yup - Yohan wants diplomacy by some means, and he's off sulking until he gets it

You mentioned Cherbourg....last I saw it was on the coast!!

however if the system allows you to kill units in ocastal cities then why not inland ones too? Having 2 combat systems for the sme thing seems like an even worse situation!!

You have to have the ability to clear a hex entirely by naval and iar or else the Axis just sits garrisons along the coastline of Europe and the Allies can never invade since there's there's no paratroops and no disembark-to-combat.

On bombing cities.....the production of cities (and mines and wells) will drop if you hit them hard enough - this is indicated by the production number next to them dropping. As it goes lower it will also change colour to yellow, orange and red pretty much as unit colours do for readiness.

Firepowerjohn wrote this in teh Matrix forums at http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1501766&mpage=2&key=realism&#1504200

However, our setups were a design decision rather than lack of historical realism because we want the game in 1939 to be playable, competetive and pretty even with ...

I didn't say it couldn't happen.....I said not may Axis players would let you...if they have 20 pp for the Italians they can build a garrison right in the city...or if they have any unit spare almost anywhere on hte map they can strat move it there.....it would be an unusual axis strategy to give up ...

Boer of course it undermines it - it makes it worse than it is now so what else could it be doing?

I agree that it's more realistic, but that's not the issue - Slitherine have said many times in this forum they are after a balanced game and that they deliberately chose to make it balanced rather ...

Yep - but het issue is, I think, Axis partisans operating behing allied lines prior to Italian surrender - which can only happen once Rome is captured whereas it actually happened 5 days after the first allied landing on mainland Italy hundreds of miles from Rome!

Interestingly this is one ...

Ys the distance from ports mattered on land....however the difference is that allies always had enough supplies at Alexandria - Axis submarines did not interdict convoys coming around Sth Africa or from Australasia and India and throught Suez.

OTOH the Axis did not always have enough supplies at ...

The main effect of Malta was as a naval base for submarines and small craft raiding Axis convoys - it did this long before it had a significant air-strike force, and "at this scale" the effect on Axis supply in Nth Africa should be simulated.

CEAW does it in a round-about-manner by having only 1/2 ...

Pah - call yourself a realist? It was a FLIGHT of Gladiators....however the UK shoudl be able to ferry in a couple of wings of Spitfires from US carriers.......oops..no stacking, and no seperate air units for carriers...that's right....

Everywhere gets partisans - I've seen reports of dutch partisans.

And of course yugoslavian partisans disappear after the country is conquered...go fighure!!

Originaly the game was not going to have partisans at all - only pressure from the beta testers had them put in, but even then all that ...

I sort of agree with Possum, event though I'm one who's not particularly happy with this game as it game out - I'd prefer a much more "realistic" game of WW2.

BUT....given that this game was designed and built for simplicty and "playability" above everythign else, including realism, trying to graft ...

this is all very well from a realism pov, but there are parts of the game that are not all that realistic, and putting these limitations on naval (predominantly a western allies resource) means the Axis has less to worry about from that direction, and is a little bit freer to direct resources to ...

Certainly he has...I completely agree with him.....but sadly it's irrelevant, because his view of how a game should work is not shared by the developers - they want a simplistic game, that's easy to play and "accuracy" and "realism" are firmly put in the rear seat.

so basically you have to enjoy ...

Yep I'll be happy to start a game with you when it comes out...ah the joys of running 2 versions of a game pre and post patch....