Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

So, for example, can the UK garrison at Malta be transported to the Turkish coast to cut a railway line?

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

So, for example, can the UK garrison at Malta be transported to the Turkish coast to cut a railway line?

Garrison Units can't be Amphibiousily deployed, but can be transported.

Detachments, however, can do both.

A few years back..with WiE anyway..Garrison units were used all the time in an exploitive manner Amphibiousily, to raid Italy and other vulnerable places. Thank goodness...the Dev's heard the hue and cry, and stopped that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

So, for example, can the UK garrison at Malta be transported to the Turkish coast to cut a railway line?

Garrison Units can't be Amphibiousily deployed, but can be transported.

Detachments, however, can do both.

A few years back..with WiE anyway..Garrison units were used all the time in an exploitive manner Amphibiousily, to raid Italy and other vulnerable places. Thank goodness...the Dev's heard the hue and cry, and stopped that.

I am not quite clear about the difference between "amphibiously deployed" and "transported". Does it mean that you could move the UK garrison in Gibraltar to Egypt, say, but not land it on the Turkish coast for raiding purposes? I take it that is what the distinction is.

In that case, with all this business about "micro landings" in Turkey, which UK units are doing these raids in MP? Is it the Detachments you get at the start in Egypt and the Detachment in Cyprus? If so, one way to reduce this problem might be to make the Detachment in Cyprus a Garrison instead. Would that make enough of a difference in MP?

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

If you have a Corp or a Detachment (or Cavalry or Marine for that matter) next to a port and have the MMP's...click on it and you will have the option of transport mode or amphibious mode for that unit.

Transport mode is Port to Port. Amphibious mode is Port to any seacoast land hex.

Transport mode is significantly cheaper than Amphibious mode. Also, Transport mode is much faster (esp. if using cruise mode)

Marine units can Amphibious mode from any sea coast hex to sea...and that makes them particularly valuable. I see many time a Marine unit being wasted inland holding a line. I only do that if there's an emergency. However, Marine units do more morale damage on a attack..so, occasionally I have used them in that capacity. They are more fragile than a corp though...or an ANZAC for that matter, if you need some shock value.

Logistics are also tied to transport costs and capacity..and Amphibious tech increases the attack value of the AV ship the unit is loaded on. AV units (the ships that are carrying the Amphibiously moded unit) can make an attack on enemy land units it comes in contact with on shore. They can carry on and unload the unit they are carrying or continue on their way for a better beach. Watch supply each turn they are left at sea, for it dwindles.

AV and Lng Range AV units are a feature in WiE and WaW...and are significantly more powerful when they are teched up to 4 or 5 lvl. In SC-WW1, they are basically barges and cargo ships.

quote:

On the Garrison thing..yeah, I usually pull the Gibraltar one out and put it on Cyprus or Kuwait or whatever..Its just a speed bump, but sometimes...its all you need. :)

Edit: The micro landing deal is concerning Detachments. Its not that big of a problem except for the Ottomans....
Side note: I've given back what has been given to me before. Playing the Ottomans, in the past, I've taken a Cypress from the Brits using a Detachment from Beirut...and once Batum from the Russians. Its not my usual play, because its expensive for the Ottomans..but if someone has left an important port open..and I know about it, then it becomes an option.

Edit #2: Changing that UK Detachment in Cyprus to a Garrison unit would be Hugely detrimental to the Entente in the eastern Med. Sometimes, its been one of the only things that I have been able to muster up extra and place between The Ottomans and Suez or Kuwait.

Hope that helps.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

This stuff doesn't happen very often. I personally have changed my mind back and forth on whether to allow detachments to use amphib mode or not, but I lean in favor of keeping the status quo.

quote:

stockwellpete
OK, but I am still left wondering how the "micro landings" that damage the Ottomans so much happen in MP. Which Entente units usually conduct these landings? Are they usually British, or do the French and Italians join in? Are they the UK Detachments that start in Egypt that are freed up once UK reinforcements arrive there? I am just trying to understand the process.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bavre

Espejo hit me with one in our recent game. He landed a brit Detachment in Antalia and followed up with a massive invasion in the Gaza area. It was quite disruptive: cut supply and disabled the railway, so I could not send reinforcements. While the Detachment died quickly the fight destroyed the town and I had to wait 5 rounds for the railway to get operational again.
However by sheer dumb luck I had reinforced the Gaza front only 1 turn earlier, among others with the first turkish Arty, so the front held for the time being (but by a REALLY narrow margin!). Otherwise it would have probably been the early end for my already battered and overstretched turks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre


One question is whether changing the British Detachment on Cyprus would be a good move or not.

Or whether it is just easier to give the Ottomans a Garrison Build Limit of (say) 3. Maybe they could start with one at Jerusalem and buy the others?

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre


One question is whether changing the British Detachment on Cyprus would be a good move or not.

Or whether it is just easier to give the Ottomans a Garrison Build Limit of (say) 3. Maybe they could start with one at Jerusalem and buy the others?

Yes. Maybe the Garrison Build option is better as OCB said that the Detachment on Cyprus was important in MP. In SP though it just makes a fairly pointless sacrifice of itself when landing at either Beirut or Alexandretta (I think that is what it is called). Maybe the scripting for it could be adjusted?

Cyprus seemed to be a bit of a backwater though in WW1 and apparently the British government were thinking of giving it to Greece if they would enter the war. Whether there is a way of incorporating this in a DE, I am not sure.

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Yes, it sounds like a very powerful combination if you can get the timing right. Presumably the Detachment came from Cyprus, did it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre
One question is whether changing the British Detachment on Cyprus would be a good move or not.

Or whether it is just easier to give the Ottomans a Garrison Build Limit of (say) 3. Maybe they could start with one at Jerusalem and buy the others?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bavre

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Yes, it sounds like a very powerful combination if you can get the timing right. Presumably the Detachment came from Cyprus, did it?

No idea, gotta ask Espejo.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre
One question is whether changing the British Detachment on Cyprus would be a good move or not.

Or whether it is just easier to give the Ottomans a Garrison Build Limit of (say) 3. Maybe they could start with one at Jerusalem and buy the others?

In MP it is imho pretty irrelevant if there is a Detachment or Garrison in Cyprus. Entente has almost uncontested naval supremacy in the Med until Greece falls. So a human player can just ship in whatever he wants.
Allowing for some garrisons (even without spawning them, just the build limit) however would make Ottoman early game MUCH easier! They have a lot of weak spots along the coast plus the partisan hexes. And due to the recon capabilities of the french carrier and possible also the odd airship you can't really risk leaving a coastal town unguarded for long. As it is my early Ottoman game pretty much 100% consists of covering my bases so to speak. That means building both AA units (for partisan control) and all possible detachments.
An intermediate solution would be to just increase the Turks number of allowed detachments a bit. That basically would achieve the same thing as the additional garrisons, albeit at a higher MPP cost for the Turks.
Overall giving the Turks one of the two options would really strenghten them and forward the point, where they can go from scrambling for survival to actively contributing to the CP war effort, by quite a bit!
I don't really know whether that is a good or bad thing.

And regarding SP I think this whole matter is not really an issue. The AI does not have the coordination to capitalise on micro landings. Its landings are an irritation at best.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

I pretty much agree with all these points one way or another, for some kind of solution to help the Ottomans a bit early game..except changing the Detachment in Cyprus to a Garrison unit. At least in MP games, which what I do, Ive had to use that Detachment may times to save a hair raising situation in Suez or Kuwait from an aggressive Ottoman player.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bavre
In MP it is imho pretty irrelevant if there is a Detachment or Garrison in Cyprus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bavre

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

I pretty much agree with all these points one way or another, for some kind of solution to help the Ottomans a bit early game..except changing the Detachment in Cyprus to a Garrison unit. At least in MP games, which what I do, Ive had to use that Detachment may times to save a hair raising situation in Suez or Kuwait from an aggressive Ottoman player.

Poor wording on my part, by

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bavre
In MP it is imho pretty irrelevant if there is a Detachment or Garrison in Cyprus

I meant only in regard to the microlanding situation. In and on itself the Detachment is of course a lot more useful than a garrison.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

How about Airships to defend Ottoman shores, seeing as all three CP Majors can have one, and Germany and Austria-Hungary can always send theirs to the Ottoman Empire.

I doubt I'm the only one to have thought of that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

How about Airships to defend Ottoman shores, seeing as all three CP Majors can have one, and Germany and Austria-Hungary can always send theirs to the Ottoman Empire.

I doubt I'm the only one to have thought of that?