Sea & Air transport

[fogger]

I have noticed that at the beginning of a turn units that are on a port or airfield can be loaded, moved to a new port or airfield and unloaded and then move. The movement points remaining relate to the distance travel by the ship or plane. However one can not moved a unit to a port or airfield and then load that unit and move to another port or airfield. Why is it so?

[larryfulkerson]

I'd like to hear the answer to this one also.

[golden delicious]

There's not an "official" reason but I find this aspect of the game appropriate. Generally, at least a little bit of extra preparation has to be put in to make this kind of strategic movement. For units to dash to a port on a whim and be able to immediately ship out would be pretty weird. What's more without this restriction, the unit could hop off the boat and get straight on a plane to complete it's journey.

Of course a unit might just happen to be in port without the player planning to move it by sea- but that's by the by. The current restriction makes things more realistic, not less.

[desert]

That gets really aggravating with 1-week turns, though. Why does a unit have to wait 6 days before it can be embarked on transports or trains?

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: desert

That gets really aggravating with 1-week turns, though. Why does a unit have to wait 6 days before it can be embarked on transports or trains?

Well, in most scenarios with week-long turns, most units are going to be divisions or bigger. Moving a division by rail or sea is a pretty big enterprise.

Like I said, it's not perfect- but it's better than no restriction at all. I'm sure Bob's wishlist contains a more complete solution, but don't hold your breath.

[Panama]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

There's not an "official" reason but I find this aspect of the game appropriate. Generally, at least a little bit of extra preparation has to be put in to make this kind of strategic movement. For units to dash to a port on a whim and be able to immediately ship out would be pretty weird. What's more without this restriction, the unit could hop off the boat and get straight on a plane to complete it's journey.

Of course a unit might just happen to be in port without the player planning to move it by sea- but that's by the by. The current restriction makes things more realistic, not less.

Moving to a port and boarding the next turn was called D-Day. Moving to a port and loading the same turn was called Dunkerque. If you want to take heavy equipment along opt for D-Day. [;)]

BTW, it's much easier to unload a ship than to load it. Try it some time. [:D]

[fogger]

I disagree with your comment that “the current restriction makes things more realistic, not less”. I was an Australian Army officer and on one exercise was involved with the planning and execution of moving 3 regiments consisting of 100+ armoured vehicles, a couple of hundred B vehicles and approx 800 soldiers by rail. The move was from a base to a rail head (20kms), load the vehicles onto flat tops, move them 600kms on a single line (in-between civilian rail traffic) to a rail head, unload and then travel 50kms to a training area. The vehicles and crews where all loaded on the Saturday, and the soldiers late Saturday night. By late Sunday evening all vehicles and personal were in the training area and the exercise started 0600 hrs Monday morning. Now I know that the Australian Army is the best in the world (that will start another round of discussions) but I do believe that other armies would be capable of the same level of planning. Now in TOAW that move would take 2 weeks if you are playing a 1 week per turn. i.e. The first turn (week 1) would be to move 2 hexes to the railhead sit and wait. Next turn (week 2), load and move to the 600kms. Turn 3 unload and move 5 hexes. One can hardly call that realistic. As for sea movement alas I have no experience.

[Panama]

ORIGINAL: fogger

I disagree with your comment that “the current restriction makes things more realistic, not less”. I was an Australian Army officer and on one exercise was involved with the planning and execution of moving 3 regiments consisting of 100+ armoured vehicles, a couple of hundred B vehicles and approx 800 soldiers by rail. The move was from a base to a rail head (20kms), load the vehicles onto flat tops, move them 600kms on a single line (in-between civilian rail traffic) to a rail head, unload and then travel 50kms to a training area. The vehicles and crews where all loaded on the Saturday, and the soldiers late Saturday night. By late Sunday evening all vehicles and personal were in the training area and the exercise started 0600 hrs Monday morning. Now I know that the Australian Army is the best in the world (that will start another round of discussions) but I do believe that other armies would be capable of the same level of planning. Now in TOAW that move would take 2 weeks if you are playing a 1 week per turn. i.e. The first turn (week 1) would be to move 2 hexes to the railhead sit and wait. Next turn (week 2), load and move to the 600kms. Turn 3 unload and move 5 hexes. One can hardly call that realistic. As for sea movement alas I have no experience.

The one problem that's pretty obvious is that the process is handled the same regardless of time scale and/or unit size as pointed out by Desert. Takes a lot less time to load a company than a division but it's all the same in the game.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Panama

Moving to a port and boarding the next turn was called D-Day.

Right. Care to guess how long those units had been planning to move off?

If you let players just run to the coast and jump off, the Allies can launch Operation Overlord with a phone call to the port authority. That would be insane.

Moving to a port and loading the same turn was called Dunkerque.

....and the Dunkerque evacuation took a week.

BTW, it's much easier to unload a ship than to load it. Try it some time. [:D]

That's why units move off from the anchorage immediately after they have landed.

Actually, whether it's faster or not depends on the type of ship and what is being unloaded. You can't just roll crated artillery off the deck onto the quay.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: fogger

I disagree with your comment that “the current restriction makes things more realistic, not less”. I was an Australian Army officer and on one exercise was involved with the planning and execution of moving 3 regiments consisting of 100+ armoured vehicles, a couple of hundred B vehicles and approx 800 soldiers by rail. The move was from a base to a rail head (20kms), load the vehicles onto flat tops, move them 600kms on a single line (in-between civilian rail traffic) to a rail head, unload and then travel 50kms to a training area. The vehicles and crews where all loaded on the Saturday, and the soldiers late Saturday night. By late Sunday evening all vehicles and personal were in the training area and the exercise started 0600 hrs Monday morning.

Right. How long had you been planning to do this? Had the units been moving and fighting at all in the preceding days and weeks?

If you remove the restriction you will be able to do it with no planning and no notice. The unit can even fight a round of combat, charge five hexes and still ship out on the same turn. That's insane- it would never happen. To take the example of Dunkirk, there were hundreds of thousands of armed men on the beach, but only a few thousand fought in the rearguard. You can't fight and board ships at the same time.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Panama

The one problem that's pretty obvious is that the process is handled the same regardless of time scale and/or unit size as pointed out by Desert. Takes a lot less time to load a company than a division but it's all the same in the game.

Well the two scales partially cancel one another out. Scenarios with long turns will usually have large units.

[fogger]

In the above exercise the units where moving forward to do “battle”. If we where to reproduce this exercise in TOAW it would take 2.25 turns for the units to reach their start lines whereas it only took 36 hours or .21 of a turn. As it was a 3 week exercise it would have been almost over before it started.

As for a withdrawal, one of the principles is to make a clean break and run like hell back to the next defence line. Rearguards are used to impose delay on the enemy allowing the main body to make this break. If it was to be a big step back then trains would have to be used or a lot of equipment would be abandon during the withdrawal.

As stated above I have no experience in sea operations but in your example of Dunkirk, the bulk of the forces moved onto the beaches and in some cases straight on to the ships because of the delay caused by the rearguards. The soldiers on the beaches were not fighting.

[Panama]

ORIGINAL: fogger

If it was to be a big step back then trains would have to be used or a lot of equipment would be abandon during the withdrawal.

Can think of at least two or three WW2 examples where this wasn't true. We're talking about huge withdrawals. Lots of corps and lots of real estate. As always it's a situational situation. [;)]