D-Day

[uxbridge]

It has been very quiet about the question of how to handle amphibious assaults! Has this been decided upon by now? Could Ian or Johan give us a hint how it came out?

[vypuero]

You can land your troops anywhere where there are no enemies, and it is not possible to cover a whole coast with units so this is feasable. It is difficult in that transports are vulnerable, so you need naval and air superiority, plus you need to have an adjacent naval unit or you are out of supply, and that supply requires a link of units adjacent to go further. So you need to capture a city in order to get supply other than by sea, then you have a base you can expand from. So far it seems to work but is still being tested so it could change of course.

[Redpossum]

You can land your troops anywhere where there are no enemies, and it is not possible to cover a whole coast with units so this is feasable. It is difficult in that transports are vulnerable, so you need naval and air superiority, plus you need to have an adjacent naval unit or you are out of supply, and that supply requires a link of units adjacent to go further. So you need to capture a city in order to get supply other than by sea, then you have a base you can expand from. So far it seems to work but is still being tested so it could change of course.

Umm, cough cough, Vyppy, remember the NDA, bro...

[vveedd]

You can land your troops anywhere where there are no enemies, and it is not possible to cover a whole coast with units so this is feasable. It is difficult in that transports are vulnerable, so you need naval and air superiority, plus you need to have an adjacent naval unit or you are out of supply, and that supply requires a link of units adjacent to go further. So you need to capture a city in order to get supply other than by sea, then you have a base you can expand from. So far it seems to work but is still being tested so it could change of course.

Hm, hm remember Strategic Command 2 bad amphibious concept. I asked about amphibious assaults earlier but it was too early I suppose. Now we got something but still information??™s are incomplete.
1.) Does opponent player has chance to intercept amphibious transports with his naval and air units?
2.) In which order will be load, move and unload amphibious transports movement (load and move unit in one turn, unload in next or load unit in one turn, move and unload in next)?
3.) Range of amphibious transports?

[IainMcNeil]

It's really not been tackled properly yet. So beta testers please don't comment!

[vveedd]

It's really not been tackled properly yet. So beta testers please don't comment!

Hey! Just trying to help!!

[vypuero]

This topic was discussed before in the forum - so I though we should let people know. I think it is pretty good the way it works.

[vypuero]

I can answer but since Iain does not want me to I will leave it to him or you can join the beta.

[uxbridge]

So, it was a secret, was it?

Well, time will tell what you have figured out. Just keep in mind that the "can't land here because there's someone standing on the beach-rule" is one of SC2's greatest drawbacks. Me and my friend has played it extensively ever since it was released, but the fun always goes out of it when the Allied invasions is looming nearer. The Allied forces have to land in Denmark, or the French coast close to the Spanish border, where there's no enemy units. Just doesn't feel right. Another point is Malta. Surely one can cover Malta with units?

The rule regarding the transports, so graciously given away by vypuero, seems like a good idea, though, and it adresses some of the problems in SC2.

As a final reminder, consider ways to block the much used Allied tactic to land a single, weak unit on the Continent from time to time, forcing the Axis player to relocate several units just to block this intruder's advance towards some strategic point. I don't really mind that if one is considering the game played just as any game and nothing else. But it is insufferably silly!

I don't expect a reaction to this post; just voicing ideas! Continue with the testing, Beta guys.

[vypuero]

the map is too large to use that tactic, and units too few. It won't be an issue in the game.

[vveedd]

the map is too large to use that tactic, and units too few. It won't be an issue in the game.

This is what concern me even more then blocking tactic. So, there always will be a place to land and if you don??™t have a good rule for amphibious assaults every sea invasion will be successful. And this is, actually, much worse. This is what destroyed SC2 game. Blocking tactic is just small piece of bad SC2 concept and 98% of successful Sea Lion (for example) is rest of the piece.

[firepowerjohan]

the map is too large to use that tactic, and units too few. It won't be an issue in the game.

This is what concern me even more then blocking tactic. So, there always will be a place to land and if you don??™t have a good rule for amphibious assaults every sea invasion will be successful. And this is, actually, much worse. This is what destroyed SC2 game. Blocking tactic is just small piece of bad SC2 concept and 98% of successful Sea Lion (for example) is rest of the piece.

If the invaders are 3:1 ratio or more then I think there is no way to prevent them landing (as in real WW2). On the other hand, if you have a 1:1 ratio and do land you will be slaughtered due to lower supply levels than the enemy so just being able to land... does not mean success

[vypuero]

Join the beta and try it out - we just tested an invasion of Sweden and even outnumbering the Swedes by a lot it took a long time to win

[vveedd]

If the invaders are 3:1 ratio or more then I think there is no way to prevent them landing (as in real WW2). On the other hand, if you have a 1:1 ratio and do land you will be slaughtered due to lower supply levels than the enemy so just being able to land... does not mean success

I agree but you are now talking about land combat. I hope that player can prevent sea invasions with air and naval units before land combat. As I recall, great concern for German generals in Sea Lion, except no enough transport vessels, was British air and naval superiority.

Join the beta and try it out - we just tested an invasion of Sweden and even outnumbering the Swedes by a lot it took a long time to win

Gladly, but I am family man and I don??™t think that I have time as you request for beta testing. But in my post called "More about knowing turn based game issues??¦" I have mentioned all key issues on which you must pay attention. This is my contribution to this game and I hope it will help.

[vypuero]

Naval and Air can smash up transports pretty badly so yeah, you would need to have superiority or prepare for very heavy losses

[vveedd]

There was good discussion on the SC forum about this air and naval interception which you should know because you don??™t want to make same mistake. In SC1 game it is possible to intercept amphibious transports because order of movement is load and move unit it to hex adjacent to enemy shore in one turn and in next unload it. So opponent player can in his turn move and attack with his naval and air units. Nevertheless, Hubert (game creator) received numberless critics about this because time frame concept in turns was, let say, ridiculous - First player playing his turn in one time period and second in different time period after time period from first turn. To be more understandable here is example: time period in first player turn was from 01.January 1941 to 24.January 1941. Time period in second player turn was from 24.January 1941 to 15.February 1941. And so on (turn length was longer or shorter, can??™t remember now). SO everybody says it is stupid that unity wait nearby enemy shore whole, let say, month, before they unload and they were absolutely right. So Hubert accepted critics and in SC2 he left same turn time period and changed order of movement. Now player can load unit in one turn and move and unload it in next. In this case you can??™t intercept amphibious transports except in enemy port which is suicide.
AND my point is : you can have movement order - load and move unit to enemy shore in one and unload in next turn IF you will have turn from first and second player in SAME time period. In that way amphibious transports will not wait on sea and opponent player can intercept them. Eventually, bad thing in this case is that opponent player can use blocking tactic on the land but it is much, much better then amphibious concept in SC2 and absolutely better then turn time concept in SC games.

[firepowerjohan]

AND my point is : you can have movement order - load and move unit to enemy shore in one and unload in next turn IF you will have turn from first and second player in SAME time period. In that way amphibious transports will not wait on sea and opponent player can intercept them. Eventually, bad thing in this case is that opponent player can use blocking tactic on the land but it is much, much better then amphibious concept in SC2 and absolutely better then turn time concept in SC games.

Exactly what we have. You can transport+move and then turn after you will unload. That is a way to make naval+air superiority play a role. Since we decided NOT to abstract naval+air warfare I think this is the only way to include them.

Our sequence is Axis move + Allies move = end of date.

So if Axis move in January 1, then Allies move in January 1 and then it jumps to January 21. But, this still means if Allies move a transport the date will change and then Axis move. I do not think there is a way around that problem.

However, we have an even flow of days so a turn is 20 days past the whole year, so no unit will sit in boat and wait for months.

[vypuero]

Yes - Let us say the axis loads up transports to invade UK. The Allies on their turn can blow them up with air and naval forces. Both turns are played in sequence but represent the same time (20 days) so it represents simultaneous action, as it were. I think it works fine as far as a game like this can work.

[vveedd]

Yes - Let us say the axis loads up transports to invade UK. The Allies on their turn can blow them up with air and naval forces. Both turns are played in sequence but represent the same time (20 days) so it represents simultaneous action, as it were. I think it works fine as far as a game like this can work.

And this is right way to do it. Still can??™t catch what Hubert wanted to accomplish with that time concept in SC games. You guys are at right path to make great game. Thx.

[Plainian]

Except that firepowerjohn is not saying that interceptions are done the same turn. Only axis invasions will get attacked in same turn/time period. Allied invasions will get attacked the following turn.......but yes all invasions can be intercepted/interdicted.