Invading with an AVL in "cruise" mode

[havoc1371]

Invading with an long range amphibious unit "AVL" using the naval "cruise" mode is highly unrealistic. It allows players to just check the pathway with subs, then launch an invasion of Italy from outside the Med (and many other examples). This kind of "super" amphibious delivery is not realistic to WW2 capabilities. If someone moves an AVL using "cruise", it should just go dark at the end of the move, or not be able to cruise at all.

[petedalby]

FWIW I wholeheartedly agree.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Also agree. Seems like this current capability is abused frequently in MPs from what I have read and heard through the grapevine. At the very least, they should not be able to land on the turn that they cruised.

Also, I am coming around to the idea that maybe they shouldn't be able to cruise at all. For one thing..they are already powerful considering the unit is in full supply indefinitely.

The other thing that seems just wrong is that they can be sent like an arrow...without escorts of any type, except for the pathfinders to check the way. And...I don't think that's always the case either (checking the route beforehand).

Doing stunts like cruise mode AVL's containing cheap cavalry units or the like on one way NM city strikes is just rude gameplay. Its not realistic. Its not strategic, innovative, or cunning. Its just exploiting a game mechanic.

[ForzaA]

The Western Task Force of operation Torch sailed directly from the US (Hampton Roads) - that's 60ish tiles in WaW - in all of two weeks.
So I don't think "the AVLs on cruise are too fast" is the real problem here - rather that the things abstracted away (e.g the need to resupply those units landing, territorial defense units opposing the landings), as well as effects "on landing"(such as NM loss) allow for an outsize impact of "cruise landings"

Not exactly sure how to address that, but I feel like making Torch take even more time to carry out is not really the way forward here.
Supply (and morale) of the AVL'ed units would definitely be one angle to attack, but that'd still not prevent suicide landings on NM objectives.