If WITP is successful, you never know, there might one day be a UV for the Med. If there were there are some points to consider.
My view is that the Long Scenario should begin in June 1940 with the Italian attack into southern France. And it should end with the fall of Rome – 6th June 1944
Of course the French fleets need to be represented as well.
In that time there was a lot of ground combat:
Greece
Crete
Syria
Egypt and Libya
North West Africa and Kasserine Pass
Sicily
Italy
There was even an invasion of Southern France
And if you consider southern Europe a part of the Med then the Russian army fought there too.
I feel the ground combat routines would need to be changed somewhat.
I also feel that Portsmouth, Hamburg and New York need to be represented at the top left corner of the map, in a separate little window so that these nations can send fleets to the Med. This would then allow Gibraltar to become an axis target.
Any ideas?
Mulling about UV for the Med
Moderators: Joel Billings, Tankerace, siRkid
As everyone knows I am one of the biggest supporters (and loudest) for UV Med. I would have to agree with Joe that the ground combat would need to be dramatically changed.
Stukas!!!!!!!!
Hurricanes!!!!!!
Oh my mouth is watering just thinking about this!
Stukas!!!!!!!!
Hurricanes!!!!!!
Oh my mouth is watering just thinking about this!
Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
I think that they would need to redo the Surface Combat routines.
The Italian escorts routinely stood off the Brits while the convoys
fled. This resulted in most of the convoys getting thru.
However that isnt what happens in UV.
Plus I have never seen a mid transit interception in UV.
They happened a great deal in the Med
The Italian escorts routinely stood off the Brits while the convoys
fled. This resulted in most of the convoys getting thru.
However that isnt what happens in UV.
Plus I have never seen a mid transit interception in UV.
They happened a great deal in the Med
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
-
pasternakski
- Posts: 5567
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 7:42 pm
Great post, Joe.
Just a few points of discussion in response.
I think that numerous hypothetical scenarios could cover time periods outside the limits you mention. Operations mounted by both sides were a definite possibility as early as September 1939. Also, there was no guarantee that Rome would fall on the date it historically did. Better Allied "play" during the Sicily, Avalanche, and Anzio campaigns could have opened up possibilities not confronted by the historical commanders. The British disgust at Allied neglect of the Eastern Med in 1943 could be treated, as well. Italian and German successes, most notably capture of Malta or Gibraltar, would have changed the course of the Mediterranean campaign remarkably. Shoot, even a failed British air attack on Taranto would have messed things up.
In short, the possibilities are myriad. The whole campaign was a crapshoot, and that in itself makes it an ideal subject for application of the UV system.
As far as ground combat is concerned, I don't think that the changes needed are as extensive as some people fear. Remember that this was not a theater where massive numbers of ground troops were committed. The North African desert campaign involved special tactics to fit the terrain, but this would not involve much more than changes to the movement allowances of units to simulate (along with special unit capabilities, of course, some of which already exist in UV ground units like engineers. Armored and mechanized infantry units, together with special light recon units, would have to be addressed, of course). Further, the focus on ownership and capture of bases is very much in line with the UV system as it was applied to the South Pacific theater. Some consideration has to be given to the fluid nature of desert warfare and maintenance of corps-sized units in the field outside bases, but this does not seem to me to be a major problem. In fact, handling of these design considerations could provide the springboard for - dare I say it - expansion of the UV system into a method of simulating the entirety of the war in Europe.
A couple of additional points for consideration:
-UV's handling of paratroop assaults is entirely insufficient to simulate such actions in the European theater
-Forget the Russians for this game. Abstract the Balkans or leave them off the map altogether, unless the ground combat modifications are easy enough to allow simulation of combat in the broad expanse of Europe.
-Spanish, Turkish, and other neutral country involvement could be explored through scenarios or special design of campaigns
-As in UV, the full campaign should receive the most design attention, with scenarios being treated as "fallout" from those. I don't want bits and pieces. I want the whole thing, from start to finish, stem to stern.
Just a few points of discussion in response.
I think that numerous hypothetical scenarios could cover time periods outside the limits you mention. Operations mounted by both sides were a definite possibility as early as September 1939. Also, there was no guarantee that Rome would fall on the date it historically did. Better Allied "play" during the Sicily, Avalanche, and Anzio campaigns could have opened up possibilities not confronted by the historical commanders. The British disgust at Allied neglect of the Eastern Med in 1943 could be treated, as well. Italian and German successes, most notably capture of Malta or Gibraltar, would have changed the course of the Mediterranean campaign remarkably. Shoot, even a failed British air attack on Taranto would have messed things up.
In short, the possibilities are myriad. The whole campaign was a crapshoot, and that in itself makes it an ideal subject for application of the UV system.
As far as ground combat is concerned, I don't think that the changes needed are as extensive as some people fear. Remember that this was not a theater where massive numbers of ground troops were committed. The North African desert campaign involved special tactics to fit the terrain, but this would not involve much more than changes to the movement allowances of units to simulate (along with special unit capabilities, of course, some of which already exist in UV ground units like engineers. Armored and mechanized infantry units, together with special light recon units, would have to be addressed, of course). Further, the focus on ownership and capture of bases is very much in line with the UV system as it was applied to the South Pacific theater. Some consideration has to be given to the fluid nature of desert warfare and maintenance of corps-sized units in the field outside bases, but this does not seem to me to be a major problem. In fact, handling of these design considerations could provide the springboard for - dare I say it - expansion of the UV system into a method of simulating the entirety of the war in Europe.
A couple of additional points for consideration:
-UV's handling of paratroop assaults is entirely insufficient to simulate such actions in the European theater
-Forget the Russians for this game. Abstract the Balkans or leave them off the map altogether, unless the ground combat modifications are easy enough to allow simulation of combat in the broad expanse of Europe.
-Spanish, Turkish, and other neutral country involvement could be explored through scenarios or special design of campaigns
-As in UV, the full campaign should receive the most design attention, with scenarios being treated as "fallout" from those. I don't want bits and pieces. I want the whole thing, from start to finish, stem to stern.
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
Originally posted by pasternakski
In fact, handling of these design considerations could provide the springboard for - dare I say it - expansion of the UV system into a method of simulating the entirety of the war in Europe.
Now your talking!!!!!!!!
Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
-
AmiralLaurent
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 8:53 pm
- Location: Near Paris, France
UV in Med and beyond
UV in Med... and near it.
The best way to simulate WWII in the aera is to simulate a historical command.
Middle East Command covered North Africa, Malta and Balkans, but also Middle East (campains in Syria, Lebanon, Irak) and Eastern Africa (campains in Somalia and Ethiopia).
That is for June 1940 to end 1942. In the same time, convoys sail from Gibraltar to Malta or even Egypt. So the map should also show Western Medditerranean up to Gibraltar.
So you can also include in the game the operations in this part: Catapult, Torch, the Tunisia campain, Husky, Avalanche and so on.
But :
_ ground war, especially mobile, is far more important than in UV.
_ diplomatics were also important here. Spain, Turkey, Portugal are neutral and remained so during the war but the threat that they sided with Axis or Allies was ever present and they held ressources. Vichy France had a policy of firing on anything that attacks... but only applies it to Allies. All of this could change in a long game.
_ need to add guerilla rules (Ethiopia, Balkans, Italy).
_ in UV, we fight for ports and airfields. In the above 'Med and vicinity' aera, there are ressources that were used by both sides. So economics rules should also be included.
The best way to simulate WWII in the aera is to simulate a historical command.
Middle East Command covered North Africa, Malta and Balkans, but also Middle East (campains in Syria, Lebanon, Irak) and Eastern Africa (campains in Somalia and Ethiopia).
That is for June 1940 to end 1942. In the same time, convoys sail from Gibraltar to Malta or even Egypt. So the map should also show Western Medditerranean up to Gibraltar.
So you can also include in the game the operations in this part: Catapult, Torch, the Tunisia campain, Husky, Avalanche and so on.
But :
_ ground war, especially mobile, is far more important than in UV.
_ diplomatics were also important here. Spain, Turkey, Portugal are neutral and remained so during the war but the threat that they sided with Axis or Allies was ever present and they held ressources. Vichy France had a policy of firing on anything that attacks... but only applies it to Allies. All of this could change in a long game.
_ need to add guerilla rules (Ethiopia, Balkans, Italy).
_ in UV, we fight for ports and airfields. In the above 'Med and vicinity' aera, there are ressources that were used by both sides. So economics rules should also be included.
Posted by RavingMadMedHead
Mate, I don't know what substance you smoked to have this pipe dream but I'm sure it was illegal. :p
As everyone knows I am one of the biggest supporters (and loudest) for UV Med. I would have to agree with Joe that the ground combat would need to be dramatically changed.
Stukas!!!!!!!!
Hurricanes!!!!!!
Oh my mouth is watering just thinking about this!
Mate, I don't know what substance you smoked to have this pipe dream but I'm sure it was illegal. :p
Have no fear,
drink more beer.
drink more beer.
Originally posted by Chiteng
Plus I have never seen a mid transit interception in UV.
They happened a great deal in the Med
You must be playing the wrong opponents - I have seen 25+ mid ocean intercepts (all of them deliberate and well calculated by my opponent) in 1 PBEM alone. He is a master at it, although most of my other PBEM opponents have pulled it off at one time or another (I've only managed it twice).
With dancing Bananas and Storm Troopers who needs BBs?
-
Admiral_Arctic
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2002 3:22 pm
- Location: Nonamia
In PBEM games
Mid-ocean intercepts are my favourite battles in UV. Sometimes you are (un)lucky and have one, but with some good planning you can achieve great results. I have destroyed many fleets with mid-ocean intercepts. You just have to practice a bit and look at the different return paths too. Remember that damaged ships might reduce your return speed so give them some LRCAP. And you don't have to return to the base/TF you started from.
As the Allies I have saved PM from invasion twice solely using surface combat forces. (though in one of these, PM was invaded but I destroyed the second fleet of reinforcements and my opponent dropped out of the game.) Once using them after my CV were destroyed/damaged and once using my CV to round up the survivours of the surface combat TF. I have also saved Luganville from being reinforced by the Japs by solely using my surface forces. I have sunk the Shokaku twice (once the Shokaku was damaged and might have sunk anyway, the other time it was undamaged) with my SC TF and 100s of AP. The AP are my main targets. In one game there was 7 intercepts in one night just south of Gili Gili.
I haven't played as much as the Japanese, but in two different games I have done well. I have sunk many CVE, one CV and lots of AP. I have damaged several CVs too. The Allied CV are a lot tougher than the Jap ones. But I do remember landing a 14inch shell on the Essex in an exciting moment of success but it didn't sink of course. Keep trying for the APs though, becasue they are more predictable ( and slower).
I rarely use my SC ships for bombarding bases (unless I am about to invade it). They use too much ammo and I would prefer to try intercepts at sea when there is less chance of striking a mine and it is more fun. Also it forces the other player to escort his transport TF with more and that might give the air units an opportunity to get something too. And the enemy is racking up sys damage while using his escorts.
As the Allies I have saved PM from invasion twice solely using surface combat forces. (though in one of these, PM was invaded but I destroyed the second fleet of reinforcements and my opponent dropped out of the game.) Once using them after my CV were destroyed/damaged and once using my CV to round up the survivours of the surface combat TF. I have also saved Luganville from being reinforced by the Japs by solely using my surface forces. I have sunk the Shokaku twice (once the Shokaku was damaged and might have sunk anyway, the other time it was undamaged) with my SC TF and 100s of AP. The AP are my main targets. In one game there was 7 intercepts in one night just south of Gili Gili.
I haven't played as much as the Japanese, but in two different games I have done well. I have sunk many CVE, one CV and lots of AP. I have damaged several CVs too. The Allied CV are a lot tougher than the Jap ones. But I do remember landing a 14inch shell on the Essex in an exciting moment of success but it didn't sink of course. Keep trying for the APs though, becasue they are more predictable ( and slower).
I rarely use my SC ships for bombarding bases (unless I am about to invade it). They use too much ammo and I would prefer to try intercepts at sea when there is less chance of striking a mine and it is more fun. Also it forces the other player to escort his transport TF with more and that might give the air units an opportunity to get something too. And the enemy is racking up sys damage while using his escorts.
I'm a hazard to myself.
Want. Take. Have.
Want. Take. Have.
Re: In PBEM games
Originally posted by Admiral_Arctic
Mid-ocean intercepts are my favourite battles in UV. Sometimes you are (un)lucky and have one, but with some good planning you can achieve great results.
So talk us through how you do it.
Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
Re: Re: In PBEM games
Originally posted by Raverdave
So talk us through how you do it.
Its obvious he is good at guessing.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
-
pasternakski
- Posts: 5567
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2002 7:42 pm
Good, bad, or indifferent at player guessing, what UV Med will need is a means of placing TFs on "reaction" so that they can sortie in response to recon and other intelligence. They may not be able to locate and engage the enemy, and an enemy en route should be able to "re-react" either by engaging or withdrawing, again depending on the level and reliability of available intelligence. The system should allow for all the vagaries of fog of war, command breakdown, chance, and the other factors that come into play.
PacWar did a mediocre job of modeling this (good for its time, however). UV is lousy at it due to the "you gotta be in the exact place at the right time" dynamic. UV-Med can be the proving ground for a significant improvement in the system that can be retrofitted to UV-South Pacific (or maybe WITP will do a better job of simulating this crucial area of naval operations).
PacWar did a mediocre job of modeling this (good for its time, however). UV is lousy at it due to the "you gotta be in the exact place at the right time" dynamic. UV-Med can be the proving ground for a significant improvement in the system that can be retrofitted to UV-South Pacific (or maybe WITP will do a better job of simulating this crucial area of naval operations).
Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.
-
Admiral_Arctic
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2002 3:22 pm
- Location: Nonamia
No need to do that Adm. Arctic! heh . . . I'd like to mention that I've just got the Essex back from her 14 inch shell hit - not that she'll dfo much good at this late stage of our game.
Shamed to say that I've lost several CVEs and loads of APs to Adm. Arctics's mid ocean moves.
It isn't guessing - it is all maths.
Shamed to say that I've lost several CVEs and loads of APs to Adm. Arctics's mid ocean moves.
It isn't guessing - it is all maths.
With dancing Bananas and Storm Troopers who needs BBs?
I can't say for sure whether or how mid ocean intercepts will be in WitP (haven't seen anything in testing) but I will say that manual intercepts will be considerably easier since transports only move 1-2 hexes per day or night phase due to the larger scale of the game.
Have no fear,
drink more beer.
drink more beer.