Long Range Amphibious Transports

[DrZom]

Using the Cruise function deprives a war ship the ability to make an attack at the end of its movement. Why wouldn't it be the same for an amphib assault? One step further, why should a troop transport be able to disembark troops in a port after using Cruise? Shouldn't the limitation of action be consistent? At the end of moving by Cruise the unit is done, across the board.

After all, isn't the purpose of Naval Cruise to simulate non-combat movement across the vast ocean?

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: DrZom

Using the Cruise function deprives a war ship the ability to make an attack at the end of its movement. Why wouldn't it be the same for an amphib assault? One step further, why should a troop transport be able to disembark troops in a port after using Cruise? Shouldn't the limitation of action be consistent? At the end of moving by Cruise the unit is done, across the board.

After all, isn't the purpose of Naval Cruise to simulate non-combat movement across the vast ocean?

Yeah I am in agreement with this. There needs to be some disadvantages to the super advantages of cruise.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

ORIGINAL: DrZom

Using the Cruise function deprives a war ship the ability to make an attack at the end of its movement. Why wouldn't it be the same for an amphib assault? One step further, why should a troop transport be able to disembark troops in a port after using Cruise? Shouldn't the limitation of action be consistent? At the end of moving by Cruise the unit is done, across the board.

After all, isn't the purpose of Naval Cruise to simulate non-combat movement across the vast ocean?

Yeah I am in agreement with this. There needs to be some disadvantages to the super advantages of cruise.

DrZom makes an excellent point here...and Tanaka agrees...well now. [8D]

[taffjones]

That's the point I was trying to make in my 1st post.

You should be able to use cruise to cover long distances, but then need to use normal transport mode (slow down) to land the troops.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

Always goto other people's funerals. Otherwise, they won't come to yours.

[LoneRunner]

LRTs should not be able to cruise and invade on the same turn. The practice is extremely unrealistic. And an amphibious assault is nothing like landing troops in port.

Look at the planning that went into invading Normandy. Yes, just a short jump across the Channel. But the invasion required massive air and sea support. And why did the USA bother with island hopping during WWII? Why not just slide across the Pacific and invade Japan? Because invasions require enormous logistics and support. You can't just send transports sailing across the ocean. You got to control the air and sea before you can consider invasion.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

How long is a turn?
How long to sail on those American Transports?
How long to unload?

[BillRunacre]

Thanks for all the comments everyone, it's great to see the discussion that has followed my original post. [:)]

The most significant argument against changing it seems to be that the Allies will need some sweeteners to help make up for this in terms of game balance, which is fair enough.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this, one way or the other, please do let us know.

[petedalby]

LRTs should not be able to cruise and invade on the same turn. The practice is extremely unrealistic. And an amphibious assault is nothing like landing troops in port.

I agree whole heartedly. Allow me to share an embarrassing example. It is August 1943. Russia has surrendered. Australia & NZ have surrendered. China is down to less than 10 units. Most of the Japanese land forces are engaged in Burma & India or are on their way back from Russia.

The US launches 3 LRTS in cruise mode and take out Seoul, Osaka & Tokyo in 1 turn. No home troops deploy. Japan surrenders.

Totally unrealistic and a complete game changer. A great move by my opponent and a simple learning point for me.

But LRTs should not be able to Naval Cruise and invade on the same turn.

[Taifun]

Vice Almiral Henry Kent Hewitt sailed from the USA October 24 1942 with the Operation Torch invading fleet. Arrived to the Moroccan Coast November 8 1942, disembarked and attacked. In the Pacific all the invading fleets attacked within weeks after loading. I wouldn't change the LRTs ability to cruise and attack. I would limit this ability after reaching level 1 Amphibious Warfare so the French wouldn't get it at the beginning of WWII.

[smckechnie]

I think that you keep the LRT’s as is. Against veteran or elite opponents the axis already have the advantage so this would be tilting something else in there direction.

A few other comments:

1. Tunis should be able to be taken and the port not damaged hardly at all from either side taking it from a neutral status. Come on it is the Tunisians, not the Wehrmacht.
2. As it is, if the allies land in previously neutral Algiers or Tunis the ports are damaged way more than what historically happened. Every port in North Africa in reality is back in action within a week of capture this is historical.
3. The French and even England really did not have the ability to do what LRT’s can do until later in the war. I would agree that France LRT should be nerfed.
4. Despite being basically destroyed, the port of Naples was being used by the allies within a week of capture. Look it up. In general, every Italian port that was captured in WW 2 by the allies was up and operating within a week or so.
5. What is not realistic is LRT’s going all the way into the Adriatic or Baltic without the allies controlling a significant part of the air or land areas around the movement. It would have been suicidal for the allies to have tried to landing without control of the air or some parts of the land masses surrounding those areas. The game does not accurately take into account shore defenses. Maybe there should be more shore fortifications to stop gamey LRT movements. Or there should be more blockage of movement of LRTs based on surrounding control of land masses. This is already in place at lots of places on the map.

Here are a few suggestions.

1. Fortifications for the axis at area north of Kiel.
2. Allies cannot enter the Baltic without control of Copenhagen. Destroying just the port is not enough to gain entrance.
3. Takeaway the French LRT at the beginning of the war.
4. Block allied ship movement, except subs, until Sicily, Albania, or Toronto are captured.
5. Both sides should be alllowed to be build fortifications at port locations.
6. Antwerp after being captured by the Germans, should never be able to be recaptured by the allies with more than 0 as the port. Read about what the Germans did at this port to see what I mean.
7. There should be an allied Mulberry unit that could be used in France to aid the allies in landing in Fortress Europe.


All for now.

Scott

[EarlyDoors]

ORIGINAL: smckechnie

I think that you keep the LRT’s as is. Against veteran or elite opponents the axis already have the advantage so this would be tilting something else in there direction.

...

5. What is not realistic is LRT’s going all the way into the Adriatic or Baltic without the allies controlling a significant part of the air or land areas around the movement. It would have been suicidal for the allies to have tried to landing without control of the air or some parts of the land masses surrounding those areas. The game does not accurately take into account shore defenses. Maybe there should be more shore fortifications to stop gamey LRT movements. Or there should be more blockage of movement of LRTs based on surrounding control of land masses. This is already in place at lots of places on the map.


Scott

I am in agreement and like the idea of ZOC from units preventing disembarkation if under naval crusie
This would have the effect of doing the last stage not under cruise for fear of being a stranded duck when try to land

[smckechnie]

For my bullet point 4. I meant that as a ZOC for the Adriatic.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

Need some action the Pacific.

How about allowing Naval to intercept Landing craft in they are in the area? Range of 2 or 3?

[EarlyDoors]

ORIGINAL: smckechnie

For my bullet point 4. I meant that as a ZOC for the Adriatic.

Ok, i quite like the idea of Full ZoC from land units preventing naval cruise from disembarking

That way if you defend the coasts, enemy can't cruise and disembark

[LoneRunner]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for all the comments everyone, it's great to see the discussion that has followed my original post. [:)]

The most significant argument against changing it seems to be that the Allies will need some sweeteners to help make up for this in terms of game balance, which is fair enough.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this, one way or the other, please do let us know.

Thank you for listening to our feedback Bill. I'm okay with whatever you decide because I know you value gamers' opinions and want to provide the best game experience you can.

You are right. Game balance is key. Limiting LRT invasions would hurt the Allies more than the Axis. Long-range invasions would be curtailed and not allowing transports to unload when cruising would delay USA reinforcement of a European invasion. Between good players the Allies are already at a slight disadvantage and building another roadblock could reduce the fun of a fairly even game.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

There's the short term duct tape fix.
There's the way I want it fix.
There's the Allies need help fix against Cookie Cutter pound Russia play.

Best fix, maybe allow a Ship unit to intercept, start with range of 2? There already is if you adjacent, would need some computer code.

[Unfortunate Son]

This is a game based on World War II. That being said some players feel the game should be more historical in game play. For the most part yes. Players should be able to think of others strategies otherwise they will just go through the same old tactics / game flow. Although I the think the naval cruise for LRTs is a bit gamey/unrealistic when they strike form long range. Because there is almost a zero chance of defending ones self other than the LRT runs into an enemy ship/sub.

If they have to sit a turn waiting to land then they have chance of being detected and attacked. That would be more realistic. Maybe increase fog of war a bit so it would be a bit harder to spot. More cat and mouse game play IMO would be better. If a player is concerned about an attack then they should provide an escort(s) for protection. Also think more about where is the best spot to station the LRT to avoid detection.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

Ideas:

1) How about "Beach hexes"? Not all landing areas can be the same. What does that mean? Transports can immediately land on beach hexes. It doesn't take dudes 2-weeks (turn) to get off a boat just because they sailed faster.
2) Reduce "how far" the LRT can travel. Meaning, still allow them to unload/attack same way, just not as far distance
3) Ship/Air intercepts. Allow defender another "mode" of defense on intercept. "Ship Intercept". I've been saying this for a Year, about Kamikazes. The entire Yankee fleet is pounding Japan, the pilots just sit their. Get them Japs (Japanese) into the action. Why nobody buys them. The most vulnerable area is Italian Adriatic sea. Allied LRT sailing to snag ports should be intercepted when there's half dozen ships/planes in clear view.

Another idea, guard what you don't want stolen.

[Unfortunate Son]

Some more thoughts:

Do not allow landings in northern climate hexes between November and April. Or October thru May. Due to rough seas in winter. Maybe scale the window back further south you go, until you are in warmer climates where you can allow landing all year.

Only SF unit on a LRT can cruise and perform a landing.

Allow to build more TP boats at a reduced coast to be used as a coast guard defense. Maybe limit their range slightly more than it is currently. (Japan, Italy, US, Australia, India)

UK gets the home guard. Maybe Japan, Italy, Australia and US spawn 2-3 Garrisons once they enter the war. Japan, would get theirs once the US enters the war. Possible India would get them at some point once Japan controls DEI Sumatra and Java. Players can decide if they want to keep them home or transport to another location.