Be sure to garrison Constanta

[Joel Billings]

Now that we've fixed amphibious landings, Axis players need to be sure to garrison Constanta (at least once the next beta is released). We had a Soviet player using this version execute an amphibious invasion of Constanta which was ungarrisoned. This creates a very high chance that Rumania will surrender.

[2ndACR]

Great, at least it is fixed. 

[kirkgregerson]

oh? Ouch

[PeeDeeAitch]

Like the time in Third Reich when Scott didn't garrison the beach across from Rome and Italy was knocked out of the war on the 1st turn....oh, memories...

[Klydon]

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

Like the time in Third Reich when Scott didn't garrison the beach across from Rome and Italy was knocked out of the war on the 1st turn....oh, memories...

Been there, done that once. Fastest game of Third Reich I ever played. Hehe.

[Zort]

Russians can't invade it on the first turn can they?

Well I hope the russians can't do massive landings since they were very limited in what they wanted to do. They also didn't want to lose their shipping to the axis air so were very stingy on when and how much they used. So they should not be able to amphib multiple divisions or corps. And no armor or mech, they used fishing boats to transport troops.

So I hope interdiction is working to hit the amphib units while moving.

[ComradeP]

The maximum Soviet theoretical amphibious capacity might be a bit too generous at the moment, as has been noted in previous discussions.

[jaw]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

Now that we've fixed amphibious landings, Axis players need to be sure to garrison Constanta (at least once the next beta is released). We had a Soviet player using this version execute an amphibious invasion of Constanta which was ungarrisoned. This creates a very high chance that Rumania will surrender.

There should be a prohibition against Soviet amphibious operations west of Sevastopol before October, 1941. The combination of Rumanian naval forces, minefields, coastal artillery and the Luftwaffe and Rumanian Air Force would have made such an operation suicidal.

[amatteucci]

I still think that aviation should be able to attack naval transports and at least some sort of harbour defences should be represented in the game to use against amphibious assaults.

I don't know what could be the easiest way to add these features in the game. Of course a detailed representation à la WitP is out of question but I presume that allowing air units to effect interdiction also against units moving by sea ad let ampibious invasions suffer a pre-landing attrition based on the fortification level of the landing hex shouldn't bee to difficult to implement and would solve a lot of problems/inconsistencies.

[sillyflower]

ORIGINAL: Zort

Russians can't invade it on the first turn can they?

I didn't think obscentities were allowed on the forums.[:-]

Joel -pse can you lock and delete before my Soviet opponent reads this[&o]

[cookie monster]

ORIGINAL: amatteucci

I still think that aviation should be able to attack naval transports and at least some sort of harbour defences should be represented in the game to use against amphibious assaults.

I don't know what could be the easiest way to add these features in the game. Of course a detailed representation à la WitP is out of question but I presume that allowing air units to effect interdiction also against units moving by sea ad let ampibious invasions suffer a pre-landing attrition based on the fortification level of the landing hex shouldn't bee to difficult to implement and would solve a lot of problems/inconsistencies.

Naval transport interdiction is already in the game on page 200 of the ebook

14.2.3.4. INTERDICTION OF NAVAL MOVEMENT

Air and Naval interdiction of units moving by naval and amphibious transport may occur
automatically. Air units can interdict the movement just as they can interdict movement on
land (16.3.3).

[ComradeP]

It "may occur". Interdiction isn't too common on land, so I wouldn't bet on it being to common at sea. Besides, the further west your opponents lands, the less likely it is that there are air bases in range.

According to the manual, there's no surrender chance prior to 1942 unless Bucharest is captured.

[Zort]

My concern is the amphib transport capability is the same as sea transport capability.  And the soviets could not land an armor division or any division across a beach as I understand.  Mostly capturing a port then landing from transport ships then.  Is there a max range for amphib assaults?  Should be if there isn't.

I can see this as a major benefit for the russians and a round of loud posts to come.  And there is unlimited amphib/sea transport capability since ships aren't modeled in the game. 

Haven't see this yet but I hope there is some german sea transport in the Black Sea.  Finally should the german's be allowed to amphib assault since they did have transports?  I await to see how gamey it gets with amphib assaults.

[ComradeP]

My concern is the amphib transport capability is the same as sea transport capability.

It isn't, it's 1/4 as it's calculated as 25*port levels in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov, instead of 100*port levels in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov.

The abstraction is a problem. As the shipping is calculated per sea zone and is not actually physically present at a certain port, even the smallest port can be used to ship entire armies in a single turn.

[Zort]

Thanks. It's tough taking a land game and trying to build a workable sea game around it.  And to get it close to what were the capabilities were historically can be a programing issue.  Hate having house rules but see that a viable option if the game goes to far.  Still makes it interesting, gives the axis allies something to do.

[Farfarer61]

I did that too, using the so called "hyper agressive" British initail placement. The president of Game club was playing Italy too. Oh the old days...

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

Like the time in Third Reich when Scott didn't garrison the beach across from Rome and Italy was knocked out of the war on the 1st turn....oh, memories...

[Oleg Mastruko]

Obviously some seagoing dilemmas can only be solved by....

WITE - ADMIRAL'S EDITION!!!!!!!!!!

[:D]

[Q-Ball]

Question: Is a Romanian Fortified Zone enough to garrison Constanta? Or enough for any port for that matter?

How hard is it for the Reds to shoot their way in on an amphib landing?

[ComradeP]

Well, they supposedly launch a hasty attack on the hex they're supposed to land in provided there's an enemy unit there. I'm not sure if you can do that with an entire stack, or per unit. Still: they could land next to to a city and attack it next turn. If you have only a fortified zone in a city, and he lands several Rifle corps next to it, you're in trouble.

A fortified zone would still need help even against a handful of divisions.

The smartest thing to do is probably to leave a division or one of those fortress brigades there.

[Zort]

Great, we don't allow the germans to be smart and dig in to mitigate the blizzard but we give the soviets the capability to amphibious assault div/corps when they never had that capability.  If you are going to model sea power then it is needed to not be abstracted so it becomes so outrageous it might break the game.  Sorry to harp on this but the soviet navy was the pits, they didn't have the materials to regun the battleship once the barrel liners were worn out.  They wouldn't sail their ships because they feared the axis airpower.  What they did was well within their means not landing normandy style assaults.  Sorry.... the first time a soviet invades romanian captures a city then lands max divs, takes out the entire southern flank is so far from history might as well give the germans ray guns....[:)]