Vulnerability of Sct. Petersborg to invasion.

Adanac's Strategic level World War I grand campaign game designed by Frank Hunter

Moderator: SeanD

FM WarB
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:40 pm

RE: Vulnerability of Sct. Petersborg to invasion.

Post by FM WarB »

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

Which I should add would make Petrograd vulnerable to invasion if the fleet was beaten up but I think that gives the Russians a reason to avoid contesting the Baltic.

The same also applies to the Austrian fleet and the port of Trieste.

Can the Austrian fleet without losses prevent Trieste amphibious invasion?

The Russian fleet is weak, and was split between Petrograd and Sevastapol. Lower fleet protection number and this may affect Sevastapol, too. There would go my Brit/French light Bde amphib attack! ( wait, Russia is their ally,,,forgive the Raglan moment.
boogada
Posts: 353
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:45 pm
Location: Germany

RE: Vulnerability of Sct. Petersborg to invasion.

Post by boogada »

2 modern Russian Battleships were also commissioned in the Black Sea in 1915. They were able to outgun Goeben, while Goeben was able to outrun them (she's a battlecruiser for a reason). But those limited Goebens movement a lot (especially because of low maintance Goeben was facing engine breakdowns). But both Russian fleets would sure have been strong enough to protect the ports of Sewastopol/Odessa and St. Petersburg.

Maybe the rule could change like this: For a certain amount of naval units in port the port gets a fortification (the more units the better the fort) or trenches? Invasions would still be allowed but are unlikely to succeed. I think this would model the reality a lot more accurate.
FM WarB
Posts: 292
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 4:40 pm

RE: Vulnerability of Sct. Petersborg to invasion.

Post by FM WarB »

Historically, what makes amphibious invasion of a port impracticable? Which gives a port better defense, an anchored fleet or land based fortifications?
Constantinople's land based fort guns did a number on the Brit fleet, so they tried invading at Galipoli to take it from the land.
boogada
Posts: 353
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:45 pm
Location: Germany

RE: Vulnerability of Sct. Petersborg to invasion.

Post by boogada »

I don't think an anchored fleet would be helpful. But if you have capitol vessels you usually have some supporting units around them. FT-boats, patrol boats. Especially if this a big naval base. These small units might not do much in terms of a big scale fight, but they could stop transports from unloading troops.

Furthermore those bases are heavily mined, there are land based guns and there's active scouting to provide any sort of surprise attack. Not to mention that there's a garrison etc..

I think there are very few historical examples of somebody attacking and invading an enemy fleet base/harbor with capitol ships in it. Yes there were surprise attacks, but even those became more efficient during WWII with air based strike capabilities and advanced submarines.
Harrybanana
Posts: 4098
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Canada

RE: Vulnerability of Sct. Petersborg to invasion.

Post by Harrybanana »

Don't forget that each hex represents a very large area. Just because the German player invades, for example, the St. Petersburg hex does not mean he is invading the port directly. More likely it represents him landing several miles away and then marching on St. Petersburg.
Robert Harris
Post Reply

Return to “Guns of August 1914 - 1918”