Knocking Italy out of the war very early.

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Knocking Italy out of the war very early.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Knocking Italy out of the war very early.

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 5:16:59 PM

Guderian1940

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/24/2017
Status: offline

Bring NM to zero and it surrenders.

Post #: 1

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 5:43:36 PM

n0kn0k

Posts: 564
Joined: 6/23/2007
Status: offline

Goes for all countries.

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 2

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 5:56:30 PM

Guderian1940

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/24/2017
Status: offline

Italy is more vulnerable as a Major than any other Country. Think about it in an aggressive way. Knocking it out by early 41 is easy against an unwary opponent this is what I am getting at. A trick to use in line with London. Too many tricks in the game. AVL, AVL, AVL. Trying to point it out to some who are astute to understand.

I should point out it is done without taking Rome. Italy surrenders to Germany. All Italian military assets disappear.

< Message edited by Guderian1940 -- 4/29/2018 2:20:45 AM >

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 3

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 6:22:02 PM

HamburgerMeat

Posts: 361
Joined: 7/22/2017
Status: offline

It sounds very gamey to try and assault the Italian peninsula directly that early, especially if the Afrika Corps are still around. At the same time, Italy should have SOMETHING, at least a garrison, to defend their capital / NM objectives.

I'm not sure where I stand on this. But as the game stands right now, I think allies are at a big disadvantage, and need to take opportunities where they can.

Maybe when the next patch hits, I'd probably make it a house rule that the British need to take at least Algeria/Tunisia/Sicily/Greece/Spain/Southern France or beat the Axis out of Africa before landing in Italy.

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 4

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 6:32:26 PM

Ktonos

Posts: 282
Joined: 3/16/2018
Status: offline

Taking Rome by sneak amphibious landing is very hard if the Axis player has 1 garrison in Rome and lets say a destroyer in port. The most dangerous thing would be a simultaneous landing in unguarded Naples and Sicily. This would drop the morale drastically and even if the invasion ultimately is pushed back, the Italians will carry the lowered morale for the rest of the game. Plus Sicily is difficult to take back.

I dont think its gamey. If you hold back a couple of corps, 1-3 garrisons, and ships in ports then you are golden. But most Axis players move everything bar garrisons to NA to avoid the historical Italian collapse or even push an unprepared Allied player to El Alamein. if the Axis player moves everything to NA before Italian war entry, then he takes a gamble. If the Italians historically moved everything to NA I bet there would be a high chance of an early British invasion in mainland Italy.

(in reply to HamburgerMeat)

Post #: 5

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 7:26:03 PM

PvtBenjamin

Posts: 1066
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline

I partially agree with Ktonos, Guderian & Hamburger.

1) If a player keeps 0 defenses in key cities they get what they deserve. Its actually more "gamey" to send all your troops to NA.

2) I have always agreed with Guderian on the amphibious issue. The amphibious component leads to many of the games "gimmicks" that certainly were not near possible early in the war. I would propose the following changes to amphibious assaults based on research (specifics are debatable).

lv 0 - garrison only 5 range which disappear if they don't land 1 turn.
lv 1 - garrison & Special forces 6 range disappear don't land after 1 turn
lv 2 - add all units range 7 disappear after 1 turn
lv 3 - same as 2 add 2 turns

etc

landing penalties should also be much higher as they should in paratroopers

The authors have made great strides with recent updates and I hope we see these type changes soon. The issue is eventually wargamers will figure out the "loopholes" in PBEM and they need to be eliminated to maintain realistic play.

< Message edited by PvtBenjamin -- 4/28/2018 7:35:05 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Ktonos)

Post #: 6

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 8:10:21 PM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

quote:

Knocking it out by early 41 is easy against an unwary opponent this is what I am getting at.

Isn't this the problem, rather than the game itself ?

Don't you have to take Tobruk, Benghazi, Tripoli and several cities in Italy/Sicily to get that NM down to zero ? Seems like a lot to do for the UK player while an 'unwary' Italian player sits and watches.

quote:

1) If a player keeps 0 defenses in key cities they get what they deserve. Its actually more "gamey" to send all your troops to NA.

True that ! *high5*

quote:

I would propose the following changes to amphibious assaults based on research (specifics are debatable).

All those specifics are not doable without more coding. Wouldn't it be easier to edit your campaign so that no one has AVL's and only Majors have 1 AV at start, and Majors can increase builds of each by 1 with each Amphib Tech Level ?

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 7

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 8:30:48 PM

Ktonos

Posts: 282
Joined: 3/16/2018
Status: offline

Having Amphib transport start with minimal range and use the tech to expand said range (along with number of transports) is a very good idea. Having the units disappear seems harsh though. Maybe start losing strength each turn until they either disembark or invade.

Many here support that long range was made solely for op Torch to be doable, if that is so we could modify the transports to have realistic range, and have Op Torch as an expensive event with US having 3 corps & an HQ in Amph.Transports near the target. US doesn't have many "units + position" events anyway. They could do with a strong one.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 8

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 8:43:18 PM

YohanTM

Posts: 114
Joined: 9/30/2013
Status: offline

i agree completely that Torch should be an event and AVL be removed from game. Also, per a note from a friend, you cannot amphib out of air range - it would not have happened for any meaningfully sized unit.

(in reply to Ktonos)

Post #: 9

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 8:44:57 PM

PvtBenjamin

Posts: 1066
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline

I like the Torch DE idea. In the end there should be a remedy that early amphibious assaults can't be carried out by large armies over very long distances & time. What programming is possible is way beyond my pay scale.

Ktonos at this pace we'll be buds soon and I can be ironic.

_____________________________

(in reply to Ktonos)

Post #: 10

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 8:48:56 PM

Ktonos

Posts: 282
Joined: 3/16/2018
Status: offline

Omg, that was good!

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)

Post #: 11

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 9:16:42 PM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

I think you guys are right - if AVL's are for Torch, then DE Torch as with Norway and remove AVL's !

AV's lose supply every turn, so if we try to do long distance with AV's, say for a German Amerika attack [or Torch, I know I tried] your units are at zero supply and can move one hex by the time they get there. So this is in line with what you guys are saying.

As for the other side, for those that want to do long range amphibious assaults, is there any basis in reality for this game ? I can thing of when I Amphibbed Northern Norway with USA AVL's, and also Overlorded direct from USA to Normandy when UK was out. Both of these moves left me feeling silly. As Yohan says, Air Support was primary for Amphibs, so the USA had Carrier borne Air for Torch, and total AS over Normandy for Overlord.

I'm thinking about this for 653N. No coding needed

(in reply to Ktonos)

Post #: 12

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/28/2018 10:42:34 PM

Ktonos

Posts: 282
Joined: 3/16/2018
Status: offline

Ah, yes, AVLs have one more reason of existing, to give an out if Britain is occupied. I guess if the Allies lost England, Egypt and Iraq, then there would be no means for the USA to transport troops without AVLs.

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 13

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/29/2018 12:13:47 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

Yes I thought about that. Probably rare for an Allied player to lose every possible friendly base, but still should be addressed. There is a possibility of the US using Diplo to gain an ally such as Persia, Portugal or Ireland.
For me its easy as I am working on a mod, but for the developers another story. For the mod there could be choices of where to invade via a Norway-like event [given the absence of AVL's].

(in reply to Ktonos)

Post #: 14

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/29/2018 2:12:29 AM

Guderian1940

Posts: 191
Joined: 2/24/2017
Status: offline

My post was cryptic on purpose. The point I was trying to make, with the initial post, was not to make any game changes but to highlight the need to garrison NM cities in Italy because of the AVL threat. As mentioned most just send everything to other tasks. Wanted to let people know about the possibility. Italy is not captured just surrenders to Germany.

Playing against Humans, with NA taken, and Italian Navy defeated. The planets have to be aligned but it is very possible. Scouting by naval units showed no garrisons.

I think Allies except, Russia should have AVL's to keep the Axis honest somewhat. The Allies do not have a lot of MPP's to spend on amphib so they have limited possibilities. This reduces the threat. When USA comes in the AVL threat increases which it should before not so much. 1 or 2 AVL's with Axis, can you spell, Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland, UK, USA, Syria, Algeria!!!

Germany, with a lot of spent resources, could mount short range AV's, Sealion, and build as many as you can in game terms but not AVl's. AVL's should be available in late 41 onward. I only advocate a limitation of their availability. I now think that the majority of players do not know that you can amphib land when using cruise mode in any WEATHER condition. Or able to Attack with an AVL (normal move) before unloading, reducing the defender then unload and destroy. This is not a transparent ability which most players, I am one, would imagine possible until you are subjected to the event.

What is doable? Maybe remove the AVL cruise mode landings. Restrict all weather and any hex landings. Restrict their availability Like AT or Shock etc till a reasonable time line. I would think some of these would be doable within the current game development.

Getting rid of these unrealistic quirks would make the game much more enjoyable for all IMHO.

< Message edited by Guderian1940 -- 4/29/2018 2:30:01 AM >

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 15

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/29/2018 2:58:47 AM

sPzAbt653

Posts: 9511
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline

quote:

to keep the Axis honest

Against an unguarded hex, I think an AV can still be effective.

(in reply to Guderian1940)

Post #: 16

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/29/2018 3:41:50 PM

xwormwood

Posts: 1149
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: Bremen, Germany
Status: offline

From my point of view the "problem" with AVL is not a real one IF the units would start as AVL transports with a standard transport icon which could be switched via right mouse click (menu) into a standard AV unit. The fast (supply point free) AVL-transport can'T do an amphib landing, but the slow AV unit can.

_____________________________

"You will be dead, so long as you refuse to die" (George MacDonald)

(in reply to sPzAbt653)

Post #: 17

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/30/2018 12:31:24 AM

LordOfPants

Posts: 59
Joined: 4/5/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: YohanTM
i agree completely that Torch should be an event and AVL be removed from game. Also, per a note from a friend, you cannot amphib out of air range - it would not have happened for any meaningfully sized unit.

I disagree completely - while generally no one wanted to make opposed landings outside of air range, I don't see why anyone would avoid invading a chunk of open coast that had no significant land or air forces garrisoning it. Historically european nations kept large ground forces guarding against invasion, they didn't strip the coastline completely to feed the front line, leaving ports completely unguarded. If you're going to put limits on amphibious invasions, then you need to match it by forcing countries to leave significant garrisons. In the real war, in 1941 Germany still kept close to 30% of land forces in the 'not Russia, not DAK' areas, and there's nothing but the threat of landings to encourage that in the game now.

(in reply to YohanTM)

Post #: 18

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/30/2018 1:05:30 AM

Trump2016

Posts: 41
Joined: 8/24/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LordOfPants

quote:

ORIGINAL: YohanTM
i agree completely that Torch should be an event and AVL be removed from game. Also, per a note from a friend, you cannot amphib out of air range - it would not have happened for any meaningfully sized unit.

I disagree completely - while generally no one wanted to make opposed landings outside of air range, I don't see why anyone would avoid invading a chunk of open coast that had no significant land or air forces garrisoning it. Historically european nations kept large ground forces guarding against invasion, they didn't strip the coastline completely to feed the front line, leaving ports completely unguarded. If you're going to put limits on amphibious invasions, then you need to match it by forcing countries to leave significant garrisons. In the real war, in 1941 Germany still kept close to 30% of land forces in the 'not Russia, not DAK' areas, and there's nothing but the threat of landings to encourage that in the game now.

The issue isn't just a garrison problem, its a enemy air response problem, slow moving AMPH forces (corp.army level) would be sitting ducks operating outside friendly air cover. The first order of business for WW2 AMPH invasions was establishing air cover, if not air superiority before that operation commenced. One of the issues I see with the game design is that a player cannot have their air units automatically intercept enemy ships? this would solve the problem in my opinion. I think that is why players come up with house rules in this circumstance.

(in reply to LordOfPants)

Post #: 19

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 4/30/2018 2:43:59 PM

LordOfPants

Posts: 59
Joined: 4/5/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trump2016
The issue isn't just a garrison problem, its a enemy air response problem, slow moving AMPH forces (corp.army level) would be sitting ducks operating outside friendly air cover.

Only if there are air forces in the area to interdict them and ground forces for them to be sitting ducks to. In the real war, there were significant land and air garrisons, but people don't always do that in the game. If the real Axis acted like an Axis player in the game and had all of their bombers and ground forces running offensives in NA and Russia, there wouldn't be any bombers to pin a landing or ground forces to wipe them out, and certainly nowhere near enough air forces to destroy corps/army sized formations. And they wouldn't have long to pull air units back into the area during the 'sitting duck' time, US/UK forces were able to get a basic airfield up and running in 1-3 days in good conditions (favorable terrain or captured airfields), or a 3-10 days in more adverse conditions.

If you want to add severe restrictions on amphibious landings, those limits should be tied in to keeping ground and air forces garrisoning the coast.

(in reply to Trump2016)

Post #: 20

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 5/9/2018 8:23:18 AM

GiveWarAchance

Posts: 389
Joined: 2/11/2015
Status: offline

It's nice to have bombers for defense. In my current game after I finished with Malta, I sent 2 bombers & a fighter to Romania while the other 2 bombers & fighter remained on Sicily. Then the British roared into Tunisia to beat up the local tribals so I was just able to refit their one army unit and support it with the bombers & fighter against a massive horde of angry British swarming all around the Tunisian capital. The bombers are working the crowd while my fighter constantly escorts my planes and intercepts some of the many British bombers. The Tunisian army killed off one tank and one infantry of the British in a few turns thanks to bomber support and the fight is still ongoing. Most probably the gritty Tunisian warlords & gangsters that make up the army will eventually lose, but British losses will hopefully be quite heavy.

(in reply to LordOfPants)

Post #: 21

RE: Knocking Italy out of the war very early. - 5/9/2018 6:19:14 PM

GiveWarAchance

Posts: 389
Joined: 2/11/2015
Status: offline

Okay I lost Tunisia finally but I think the chance to bomb pepper the British with bombs over 4 or 5 turns was well worth it.

[image][URL=http://s288.photobucket.com/user/RodentDung/media/Strategic%20Command%20Tunisian%20defenset.jpg.html]

[/URL][/image]

(in reply to GiveWarAchance)

Post #: 22

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Knocking Italy out of the war very early.

Page: [1]