Slitherine

The game is strategic and does not have these but in a TCPIP game I am playing the allied player flings multiple corps into occupied europe at differing locations on essentially suicide missions. It certainly feels like commando raids!

The point I am making is that invasions are 'free' as it costs no more resources to move a corps and invade than it does to just transport it to a friendly location, 4PP to load on the ship and away you go!.

Historically invasions took a lot of planning and preparation with specialist shipping, combat loading etc etc. For instance you could not just embark your troops in the USA and expect them to invade europe without chaos resulting. Normally troops crossed the Atlantic by fast steamer and the equipment went by cargo ship.

I think for the human player it should cost production points to unload in a enemy controlled hex, simulating the planning and logistical buildup needed for an invasion. I would suggest the cost be the same as additional rail moves, currently 7 points.

Dave

Easy invasions was one of my concerns during the beta test as well. They did a lot of work on it, but it might still require some tweaking. I kind of like the idea of a "cost" to initiate an actual invasion line of thinking.

We did look in to this but did not want to have lots of different types of naval transport and UI for each, so decided to keep it simple use the same UI for both. What we could do is add a cost in PP for disembarking into enemy held territory? Maybe 5-10 PP per unit?

A pp penalty for landing in enemy territory would add to the depth of gameplay but was all this not worked out during beta testing? and could the AI cope?

davetheroad wrote:A pp penalty for landing in enemy territory would add to the depth of gameplay but was all this not worked out during beta testing? and could the AI cope?

Actually, during the beta it was addressed in a number of ways Dave Can't show you the threads of course, but the whole invasion process has indeed evolved. Always room for improvement of course.

But wait a second, if you just land an unsupported corps and it gets wasted, isn't that a pretty heavy cost to pay for a raid already? Even if the Axis have few units, unless you attack with a very heavy invasion you are doomed to fail and lose all your units.

I have noticed that you can load air units on transports which is fine, what I don't like is that you can land them in any coastal hex you want, this doesn't make sense to me, imo they should only be able to be unloaded in ports.

Just my 2 cents.

Not sure if there sould be an additional cost to enter an enemy hex. Planning was expended in using the human players brain power. To sim this you would have to sim the cost of sending the best and brightest to West Point etc..

Building the invasion force is alreay simed on production costs.

Perhaps the cost should be in troops/equipment and suppiles to the invasion force. That would sim the friction of war. (-10%?)

However, the point made above on ports makes a lot of sense.

keep in mind you lose:

1 - no efficiency if you land from a port
2 - A greater amount of you don't
3 - the most if you land in enemy territory

vypuero wrote:keep in mind you lose:

1 - no efficiency if you land from a port
2 - A greater amount of you don't
3 - the most if you land in enemy territory

I have the impression that the manual was made in in a rush, there are so many little things that would be so hintful if they were collected in the manual.
I suppose the manual is the same wether you got the game from Matrix or Slitherine, right?

Potential simple fix.
Make so no unit can land except in a friendly beach or port hex. Then make a single expensive type of "Invasion" unit, that is an exception to this rule. eg it lands and converts its landing hex and adjacent to friendly thereby allowing other types to land.

the thing is, it really does not need a fix. It remains fairly difficult to mount a successful invasion. The threat of it also forces the player to at least commit realistic garrison forces, too.

vypuero wrote:keep in mind you lose:

1 - no efficiency if you land from a port
2 - A greater amount of you don't
3 - the most if you land in enemy territory

WHY isn't this documented in the manual? How in the name of seven demons are we supposed to know this?

The manuals are written before release because they have to laid out etc. This feature was added too late to be documented.

iainmcneil wrote:The manuals are written before release because they have to laid out etc. This feature was added too late to be documented.

When I first read saw the manual I thought it was just too short, and after reading it I had the impression that there were things that I would have to figure out for myself, for instance and this I haven't figured out yet so some help would be nice, what are the chances once you invest in laborotories to increase the R&D status of the navy, are the chances equally for surface ships, asw and submarines if you don't focus on any particular one, and if you do focus in just one of them do the others get any chance of progressing?
There is a number on the right side of the progressing bar that I don't know what it means.


This kind of little details and examples are what I feel are missing in the manual.

Don't get me wrong I'm not complaining, but I'm of the opinion of many others that this game has a huge potential and many things could be done to improve it, so many that I wouldn't be surprise to see the release of a second part.
And after being a beta tester for two of Gary Grigsbys wargames I know how much work and effort goes behind making a game and releasing it.

The number on the right side of the progress bar = difficulty of getting the Tech. So if you equally balance tech, you will get more progress in a lower difficulty tech than a higher one.

You still get progress in the other techs even when you focus.

I for one certainly would not want to see the invasion procedure changed. It takes a lot of resources to build up a suitable landing force. On the other hand, it would be nice if the German AI would actually defend France. As it stands now, the AI sends almost all Axis units to Russia (including hordes of Italians) and leaves France so lightly defended that it can be taken by a unit of Girl Guides.

Love the game, but currently, IMO the only way to have a challenging solo game is to let the AI run the Allies.

vypuero wrote:The number on the right side of the progress bar = difficulty of getting the Tech. So if you equally balance tech, you will get more progress in a lower difficulty tech than a higher one.

You still get progress in the other techs even when you focus.

Hi VYP could you be more specific, difficulty over what? say for it exampe it reads 45 how do I get a percentage of success, or failure? the game must have it and it be nice that it would show that percentage and how would it be increased or decreased when you buy/sell laboratories.

Do you know how much goes into research of the technology you have focused, say 60 (focused) and 20% for the two others?

Thanks.

I dont have those specifics. That the developers will have to let you know. I don't worry about it to that degree.

vypuero wrote:I dont have those specifics. That the developers will have to let you know. I don't worry about it to that degree.

I asked because sometimes you have to weigh your options, is it worth spending production in another laboratory or would you rather spend in a unit, if the R&D chances increase substantially then you would invest.

It's all about information the more you know the better to make the right choice.