How amphibious assaults will be handled?

[uxbridge]

One possible way to do this could be if the invading units "flow" to their invasion hex just like air units do. Stalin is right when he says that invasions, at least the important ones, took place in one or two days time. Considering the game scale of one month, it is therefore not necessary to acctually count how far the units may go (only them being within striking distance).

It could go like this: Right click on invading unit and choose "invasion" from drop down meny; click on the intervening sea hexes the unit pass, ending with target hex (the sea hexes must be friendly or empty). Now an invasion sign appears in the target hex. If more than one unit is in the operation the process is repeated. Now asign air units bombarding the defender to the target hex (they will automatically be part of the upcoming attack) and/or sea units lending support fire. Once all is ready, right click on the target hex and choose "execute attack" or something like that. All combat phases are then calculated just as if the units very fighting from adjacent hexes. If the attacker wins, the first unit of his attacking force enters the target hex; if not all attacking units simply take losses and remain in there departing hexes. This whay one doesn't have to muddle about in the sea with a mixture of troop transports an support naval units.

[Redpossum]

The post above started me thinking that a failed amphibious assault is likely to involve extremely high casualties for the attacker.

If you look at historical examples, even successful amphibious assaults have involved very high casualties. Look at what happened to the first units ashore on a few of the D-Day beaches. Look at Tarawa or Iwo Jima, if you have a strong stomach.

So sure a failed amphibious assault should, logically, be even more expensive. Like at...and I realised I couldn't really think of a historical example of a major amphibious assault failing to carry the beach, at least.

Gallipoli is about as close an example as I can think of, and it wasn't really the amphibious assault part that failed, but what came after.

You could sort of say Dieppe, but that was just a raid in boats, not really an amphibious assault.

Can anybody think of one?

[vveedd]

Ahhh I see, that makes much more sense now that I understand and is a possibilty, only allowing players to unload at specific locations around the coast. I see the beaches marked on the 3R map now. We'd need a way for you to attack units defending the hexes that could be unloaded to. We'll keep it in mind

I apologize if I was unclear with this issue. But YES, this is exactly my point. Thanks Uxbridge! You don??™t have to add new hexes just some of them make with beach. Blocking tactic is this ??“ defending player put his units deliberate in shore hexes to unable amphibious units to land and if you don??™t have possibility to attack these defending units without landing it will mess up whole game. Uxbridge suggestion is good but you must not forget to add Uxbridge??™s idea possibility that naval and air units can be involved in sea invasion battles.

I have one idea more for this. It will be a little improvisation but still. You should make some of shore hexes as beach hexes. Rules for these beach hexes will be:
1. Defending land units may NOT enter. Why? Answer: these hexes will represent only sand part of the beach and a few meters of sea before this sand part (this is a little improvisation I mentioned because these hexes are, of course, out of map scale) and in reality, defending units in WWII were never at sand part of beaches. They were always in grass,trees or rocks further inside. Also, with this rule blocking tactic is not possible.
2. Every naval unit except amphibious transports may NOT enter. Why? Answer: I have seen that you have different sea depth on map. In these hexes because they represent what I said above, it is too shallow for every other naval units except amphibious transports and with this you will avoid blocking tactic with naval units.

To my opinion this mechanic will work fine and what is more important it will have some parts of reality in it.

[James Taylor]

I like uxbridge's suggestion of assigning units with range/capability to assault a target hex, ala TOAW. In fact it represents a good combat model that could be used all over the map.

Different unit attributes would allow units advantages in the proper proportions when attacking, like a combined arms scheme. Doesn't have to be difficult, just like one from column A + one from category B in conjunction with set C allows the bonus, depending on terrain, entrenchments, weather, defensive configurations, etc.

I didn't say it would be easy for the code writers, just the players.

Now for unit attributes, something easy, based on tech advances and of course the ability of the group commanders' skills of organization and/or proficiencies.
I like to call them "assets" and they are attachable and of course detachable so that you can customize your forces for various tasks, like battlegroups, or kampfgruppes.

Basic ground, naval, and air units are all recipients of attachable assets. Assets like, recon, engineers, long range drop tanks, sophisticated ordinance types(researchable), anti-tank, anti-air, etc. etc. Since this is the amphibious thread, how would you make a basic unit amphious assault capable? That's it, attach the amphibious asset, which could allow greater combat strength if researched to higher levels for that type of task.

Now I know y'all can come up with all sorts of devious little interactions, both offensive and defensive by attaching the right "assets" in the right configurations, for the many missions to come.