Any way to cross Suez quickly?
Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
-
timek28
- Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
- Posts: 459
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
- Location: Novi Sad, Serbia
Any way to cross Suez quickly?
I'm playing Suez canal scenario. I was able to cross Nile quickly with bridge pioneers. The Suez canal however is different story. It cannot be crossed quickly with bridging units. Units have to go one by one, and are easy targets by ground defenders in the process. Is there a way to cross canal quickly? Maybe two bridge pioneers one by other or something like that?
Re: Any way to cross Suez quickly?
I haven't played this scenario in a while, but if I remember it correctly, I addressed this problem by lining up multiple units along the canal, backed by artillery, then moved them all at once.
-
timek28
- Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
- Posts: 459
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
- Location: Novi Sad, Serbia
Re: Any way to cross Suez quickly?
Yeah I basically did the same thing. It's just important to align units properly as some British units will expose themselves on the chanell. Got the DV on 21st turn, but I lost good amount of prestige in process... Going to Palestine now.
Re: Any way to cross Suez quickly?
That is how I did it too. With good artillery and having bombed the units on the opposing side with planes they shouldn't bother you too much.robman wrote:I haven't played this scenario in a while, but if I remember it correctly, I addressed this problem by lining up multiple units along the canal, backed by artillery, then moved them all at once.
Re: Any way to cross Suez quickly?
To answer the OP's question, my answer is "I believe not".
Technically, this is because the Nile is, well, a river, which the Bridge Engineers are designed to, well, bridge. But the Suez Canal is implemented as straits hexes, probably to allow the Red Sea cruiser to show off its ability to enter the canal; which it would not be able to do if the Suez consisted of river hexes.
Straits hexes act as ocean and as such can't be bridged, despite the "narrow" appearance. (It would appear that modern bridge construction technologies weren't yet available...)
In other words, the designer prioritized ship movement in the canal over the ability to bridge it (either using regular bridges or Bridge Engineers).
Personally, while I can see why this design was chosen as a "fun detail", I'm not sure I agree with that decision. I don't believe a warship would willingly enter the canal during direct combat - it would become a sitting duck (as the cruiser of the scenario so amply demonstrates
), the canal's ability to transfer ships between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea is an issue of strategy, supply and logistics, and not one of tactics. So the ability to model ship movement in the canal is not an ability I would prioritize.
On the other hand, the canal is straight and narrow, and it would appear much easier for engineers to bridge it than many rivers (including the mighty Nile!), not to speak about how there must have been road bridges already existing.
So in conclusion, I would have designed the Suez Canal as "thin blue line" (normal river), thinking the ability to bridge it much more important for verisimilitude than the ability for the Royal Navy to sail through it during combat operations.
Technically, this is because the Nile is, well, a river, which the Bridge Engineers are designed to, well, bridge. But the Suez Canal is implemented as straits hexes, probably to allow the Red Sea cruiser to show off its ability to enter the canal; which it would not be able to do if the Suez consisted of river hexes.
Straits hexes act as ocean and as such can't be bridged, despite the "narrow" appearance. (It would appear that modern bridge construction technologies weren't yet available...)
In other words, the designer prioritized ship movement in the canal over the ability to bridge it (either using regular bridges or Bridge Engineers).
Personally, while I can see why this design was chosen as a "fun detail", I'm not sure I agree with that decision. I don't believe a warship would willingly enter the canal during direct combat - it would become a sitting duck (as the cruiser of the scenario so amply demonstrates
), the canal's ability to transfer ships between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea is an issue of strategy, supply and logistics, and not one of tactics. So the ability to model ship movement in the canal is not an ability I would prioritize.On the other hand, the canal is straight and narrow, and it would appear much easier for engineers to bridge it than many rivers (including the mighty Nile!), not to speak about how there must have been road bridges already existing.
So in conclusion, I would have designed the Suez Canal as "thin blue line" (normal river), thinking the ability to bridge it much more important for verisimilitude than the ability for the Royal Navy to sail through it during combat operations.