Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: smckechnie

I think that you keep the LRT’s as is. Against veteran or elite opponents the axis already have the advantage so this would be tilting something else in there direction.

...

5. What is not realistic is LRT’s going all the way into the Adriatic or Baltic without the allies controlling a significant part of the air or land areas around the movement. It would have been suicidal for the allies to have tried to landing without control of the air or some parts of the land masses surrounding those areas. The game does not accurately take into account shore defenses. Maybe there should be more shore fortifications to stop gamey LRT movements. Or there should be more blockage of movement of LRTs based on surrounding control of land masses. This is already in place at lots of places on the map.


Scott

quote:

ORIGINAL: smckechnie

For my bullet point 4. I meant that as a ZOC for the Adriatic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for all the comments everyone, it's great to see the discussion that has followed my original post.

The most significant argument against changing it seems to be that the Allies will need some sweeteners to help make up for this in terms of game balance, which is fair enough.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this, one way or the other, please do let us know.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for all the comments everyone, it's great to see the discussion that has followed my original post.

The most significant argument against changing it seems to be that the Allies will need some sweeteners to help make up for this in terms of game balance, which is fair enough.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this, one way or the other, please do let us know.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Unfortunate Son

Some more thoughts:

Do not allow landings in northern climate hexes between November and April. Or October thru May. Due to rough seas in winter. Maybe scale the window back further south you go, until you are in warmer climates where you can allow landing all year.

Only SF unit on a LRT can cruise and perform a landing.

Allow to build more TP boats at a reduced coast to be used as a coast guard defense. Maybe limit their range slightly more than it is currently. (Japan, Italy, US, Australia, India)

UK gets the home guard. Maybe Japan, Italy, Australia and US spawn 2-3 Garrisons once they enter the war. Japan, would get theirs once the US enters the war. Possible India would get them at some point once Japan controls DEI Sumatra and Java. Players can decide if they want to keep them home or transport to another location.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for all the comments everyone, it's great to see the discussion that has followed my original post.

The most significant argument against changing it seems to be that the Allies will need some sweeteners to help make up for this in terms of game balance, which is fair enough.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this, one way or the other, please do let us know.

Wait why does everyone think this will hurt the allies only? As Japan LR Transport is my greatest weapon! Allies need more sweeteners? What?? This hurts Axis just as much...We are talking about the entire Pacific War!

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for all the comments everyone, it's great to see the discussion that has followed my original post.

The most significant argument against changing it seems to be that the Allies will need some sweeteners to help make up for this in terms of game balance, which is fair enough.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this, one way or the other, please do let us know.

Wait why does everyone think this will hurt the allies only? As Japan LR Transport is my greatest weapon! Allies need more sweeteners? What?? This hurts Axis just as much...We are talking about the entire Pacific War!

Yeah it hurts equally. The sweetener is beefing up the Soviets a bit, some how. (scorched earch a little more brutal comes the mind).

Unfortunate Son has just made some good points...particularly garrisons. These were placed in a variety of patches for SC-WW1 to help with the micro-landing problems on the Ottomans and deep 1st turn cavalry penetrations in Russian Poland in SC-WW1.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for all the comments everyone, it's great to see the discussion that has followed my original post.

The most significant argument against changing it seems to be that the Allies will need some sweeteners to help make up for this in terms of game balance, which is fair enough.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this, one way or the other, please do let us know.

Wait why does everyone think this will hurt the allies only? As Japan LR Transport is my greatest weapon! Allies need more sweeteners? What?? This hurts Axis just as much...We are talking about the entire Pacific War!

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElvisJJonesRambo

I vote 'No', this is the wrong fix to the game.

My desire, is the best simulation, BUT allows a 50/50 chance of winning the game. Game needs to have many "what IFs" and options for the player.

Trying to emulate reality, with a 2-week turns is not easy at this strategic level. Being turn based (My Turn / Your Turn) it's not exactly easy to keep the game fun. I would try Naval & Air Intercepts, maybe. Maybe, not sure. Whoever wants to change this behavior, I guarantee they "got stung" in a few games, no garrison or not guarding their keys cities. How about you defend your property? I've played this game alot, because of the world situation, else I wouldn't have returned to gaming. Believe me, I got "mad" alot playing. Dudes pull all kinds of stunts, it happens, I lose. I also return the favor.

Why?

1) You're gonna get some nasty slaughters of Allied Troops, by Air Power. Especially in Italy. Also, in the Pacific. Long Range invasions aren't as long as you think. This will force the Allies to only do "short" missions, cold & calculated. Yes, more realistic.
2) Realism, every aspect of the game can be argued. Sitting 2-weeks in boat, hanging out in the wind to get Air slaughter, is ugly.
3) The game will slow down, will just be one big "blob of crap" heading for Normandy & Sicily. Yeah, that's realistic. Dudes, won't be invading Northern Italy, cutting off supplies, and all the tricky stuff, but that's what makes the game.
4) Will completely ruin the Pacific Ocean, which already struggles for battles. Top talent just abandons the Pacific currently. Until that's fixed, I wouldn't change anything. Wanna talk about reality? Reality, the USA joined the war over Pearly Harbor, whether it was a set-up or not, that's what the ppl believed. 80% of the top players, do nothing as USA in the Pacific. The Russians are getting pounded. No choice.

I would be willing to considering changes, but need to know what everyone is looking for. Nobody talks about the Pacific.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThunderLizard2

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for all the comments everyone, it's great to see the discussion that has followed my original post.

The most significant argument against changing it seems to be that the Allies will need some sweeteners to help make up for this in terms of game balance, which is fair enough.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this, one way or the other, please do let us know.

Wait why does everyone think this will hurt the allies only? As Japan LR Transport is my greatest weapon! Allies need more sweeteners? What?? This hurts Axis just as much...We are talking about the entire Pacific War!

I hardly use cruise mode as Japan when invading - initial attacks are all set-piece so no need.

quote:

A number of players have expressed concern that the ability of Long Range Amphibious Transports to both Cruise and disembark in the same turn is a bit much.

I'd like to gauge opinion on this before we commit to making a change here, as we need to be certain that it is the right move to make, i.e. would removing the ability to do both in one turn upset any valid strategies?

quote:

ORIGINAL: firsteds

quote:

A number of players have expressed concern that the ability of Long Range Amphibious Transports to both Cruise and disembark in the same turn is a bit much.

I'd like to gauge opinion on this before we commit to making a change here, as we need to be certain that it is the right move to make, i.e. would removing the ability to do both in one turn upset any valid strategies?

Just going back to Bill's original question I vote a strong NO to the proposed change.

You can trial this in SP or Hotseat - just launch your LRAT in cruise but park it near the target instead of disembarking. Inevitably part of the invasion fleet will be spotted and damaged, even destroyed. Also, the opponent will reinforce the coast. I can't see any invasions succeeding if this change is made. LRATs are also incredibly vulnerable to maritime bombers and even fighters!

Players can/should defend key coasts and ports against LRATs with garrisons and subs. Defenders can 'operate in' reinforcements immediately after the landings.

Anyone who is supporting this change should try it in SP or Hotseat first. Italy, for example, becomes a fortress. The Pacific is a bloodbath. Imagine trying it in MP - it would be carnage.

I know there is some support here for making the change and offsetting it somewhere else, but I can't see that working because it impacts both sides (because Japan often needs LRATs to cruise and land in the same turn).

Maybe reducing LRAT APs a little would help, without upsetting everything.

Sorry for the long rant - I love the game and don't want to see it thrown off course.

quote:

You can still move at normal cruise speed on their final turn then attack/disembark all you want.

quote:

ORIGINAL: havoc1371

Taifun:

I don't believe you can build an AVL unless you're level 1 amphib anyway...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taifun

quote:

ORIGINAL: havoc1371

Taifun:

I don't believe you can build an AVL unless you're level 1 amphib anyway...

The French and British can use LRT with level 0 amphibian, but the Germans and Italians can't. I suggested the French to be level 1 in order to use LRT.