Amphibious Assault (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

GFelz -> Amphibious Assault (3/2/2011 7:17:20 PM)

Can the Germans do this in the Baltic? If so, how? I have followed the manual's instructions to the letter (and variations) but nothing.



cookie monster -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/2/2011 7:21:41 PM)

Hover the mouse over the sea.

You will see you have no amphib points.

Therefore you cant amphib.

Strange that... The Axis can never amphib.



GFelz -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/2/2011 7:28:36 PM)

I do find that within the Axis lake (the Baltic) the are no amphibious assets. Most strange.



jomni -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 12:37:22 AM)

Because they never launched one historically unlike the Soviets. 



Mynok -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 4:01:45 AM)


The Soviets did an amphib in the Baltic?



mmarquo -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 4:07:39 AM)

IIRC the Soviets can only do amphibious assaults in the Black/Azoz sea zones.

Marquo



jomni -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 5:29:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


The Soviets did an amphib in the Baltic?




Sorry for my general comment.
Soviets did an amphib in the Black Sea though.



Mike Parker -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 2:20:21 PM)

quote:

Because they never launched one historically unlike the Soviets.

*cough* Norway *cough*

Now perhaps loosing the assets they did in that operation is considered enough to say they no longer had that ability or were unwilling to try it again, but there were considerable amphibious elements to the invasion of Norway.



alfonso -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 2:28:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


The Soviets did an amphib in the Baltic?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moonzund_Landing_Operation



ool -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 2:43:55 PM)

Get a atlas! Norway isn't in the Baltic.



morganbj -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 2:47:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ool

Get a atlas! Norway isn't in the Baltic.

The point is that not allowing the Germans the opportunity to conduct such an operation just because they didn't, while they clearly had the capability to do so, is a poor game design decision.

Just my opinion.



Mike Parker -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 3:12:47 PM)

quote:

Get a atlas! Norway isn't in the Baltic.


*Chuckles*

Well anybody that would suggest that the same assets that participated in the Norway operation could not have participated in Baltic operations would be in more need of an Atlas. Vessels sailed primarily from Wilhelmshaven and Kiel in this operation, and the ones departing from Kiel actually traversed the extreme western Baltic on the way to Oslo.

The fact that this operation was performed in both the Baltic and North Sea make it more difficult as it had legitimate interferance from the Royal Navy. Purely Baltic operations would in theory be easier, as they could be launched from Kiel or purely Baltic Ports and with Denmark and Norway Occupied, Sweden Neutral, and Finland allied they would find operational going much easier. Now I will say the Kriegsmarine rather took a bloody nose in the Norway Invasion and perhaps they lost the ability and/or will to conduct Amphibius. I wonder however if the loss of Naval assets caused Hitler to take a dim view of Amphibious ops just as the Crete operation pretty much did the same to paratroop operations. So perhaps a lack of amphibious options in WITE represents the belief that Hitler would not have authorized any sort of major amphib ops in the Baltic, as I am fairly certain that the capability existed.



alfonso -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 3:15:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan


quote:

ORIGINAL: ool

Get a atlas! Norway isn't in the Baltic.

The point is that not allowing the Germans the opportunity to conduct such an operation just because they didn't, while they clearly had the capability to do so, is a poor game design decision.

Just my opinion.


I think Mike Parker is right when assumes that after Norway the Germans did not want more amphibious adventures, and therefore they did not prepare any for Barbarossa. And, later in the war, it seems difficult to imagine in what circumstances they could consider it necessary.

In game terms, at the beginning of the 1941 GC you do not have the capability because the Germans did not have it at that moment. And afterwards, from the game perspective I do not see when it could be useful.

As a "what-if" option, it could be workable, although the ships necessary to escort the transports in the Baltic should in that case not be available in Norway to harass Allied convoys (increased Lend Lease?)



color -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 3:43:34 PM)

What's all this talk about invading Norway?!?!? [:-]

I'll be waiting for you [sm=00000106.gif]



Adnan Meshuggi -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 4:22:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan


quote:

ORIGINAL: ool

Get a atlas! Norway isn't in the Baltic.

The point is that not allowing the Germans the opportunity to conduct such an operation just because they didn't, while they clearly had the capability to do so, is a poor game design decision.

Just my opinion.




the germans did amph. operations... they landed on dago and ösel... but true, they did not do such operations.
In 1941 and even more in 42 they could have done it.... but they had no need for doing so.
the baltic was a german lake, the russian fleed destroyed or captured by minefields and the frontline was near leningrad, so nobody need such risky operation
in 43 and even more in 44 the germans had no reserves left to do it. also to be honest, what purpose had a landing in Kronstadt, 500km behind the russian frontline, the own troops shattered and in full retreat?



pat.casey -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 4:25:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso


quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan


quote:

ORIGINAL: ool

Get a atlas! Norway isn't in the Baltic.

The point is that not allowing the Germans the opportunity to conduct such an operation just because they didn't, while they clearly had the capability to do so, is a poor game design decision.

Just my opinion.


I think Mike Parker is right when assumes that after Norway the Germans did not want more amphibious adventures, and therefore they did not prepare any for Barbarossa. And, later in the war, it seems difficult to imagine in what circumstances they could consider it necessary.

In game terms, at the beginning of the 1941 GC you do not have the capability because the Germans did not have it at that moment. And afterwards, from the game perspective I do not see when it could be useful.

As a "what-if" option, it could be workable, although the ships necessary to escort the transports in the Baltic should in that case not be available in Norway to harass Allied convoys (increased Lend Lease?)


I personally think a game like this should be about capabilities rather than historical actions.
So if the axis had the capability to launch a baltic invasion (which they did), then that should be modelled in game. If we think that there would be a political price to pay for that after the drubbing the Kriegsmarine took in norway, then you could model in a significant Admin Point cost for amphibious operations.



LiquidSky -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 4:42:55 PM)



Why would the Germans plan an amphibious invasion in the Baltic when the war will be over in a couple weeks? By the time they figured out that 'hey, this thing might be a little bit longer then we thought', they were up to Leningrad, with out any more coast to invade.




marty_01 -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 4:57:21 PM)

The Germans did conduct some rather historically obscure amphibious operations to capture those large islands north of Riga. I don’t recall the names of the islands, but the towns of Kuressaare and Muhu are located on them. This was done in 1941 during the Germans push toward Tallinn and Leningrad.



Adnan Meshuggi -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 5:01:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pat.casey


quote:

ORIGINAL: alfonso


quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan


quote:

ORIGINAL: ool

Get a atlas! Norway isn't in the Baltic.

The point is that not allowing the Germans the opportunity to conduct such an operation just because they didn't, while they clearly had the capability to do so, is a poor game design decision.

Just my opinion.


I think Mike Parker is right when assumes that after Norway the Germans did not want more amphibious adventures, and therefore they did not prepare any for Barbarossa. And, later in the war, it seems difficult to imagine in what circumstances they could consider it necessary.

In game terms, at the beginning of the 1941 GC you do not have the capability because the Germans did not have it at that moment. And afterwards, from the game perspective I do not see when it could be useful.

As a "what-if" option, it could be workable, although the ships necessary to escort the transports in the Baltic should in that case not be available in Norway to harass Allied convoys (increased Lend Lease?)


I personally think a game like this should be about capabilities rather than historical actions.
So if the axis had the capability to launch a baltic invasion (which they did), then that should be modelled in game. If we think that there would be a political price to pay for that after the drubbing the Kriegsmarine took in norway, then you could model in a significant Admin Point cost for amphibious operations.


this is part of the bigger problem.
Some people think, that one side should only reach historical results if they play perfect, every other result should be worse.
And in such a world nonhistorical event that favour for example the germans are a 100%-no-go.

i do belive that no larger invasion in the baltic could happen (axis side), because they thought "we win in 6 weeks".
But - i belive that a minor invasion was possible (and useful in the game if the game create such a possibility)

Sadly the amphib model is very abstract, so if you can invade with 6 german divisions, something is broken.
If we can´t change this model, we should ignore it. on the other hand, operations in the baltic by the russians are utterly nonsens in large scale operations - the game reflect this.

Invasions in the black sea should be limited in short range offensive action and "normal" defense action (supply)
an evacuation of sewastopol should only be possible if no axis troops are in the near hexes.

Oh - a last word: If you want some "impossible things should be forbidden" you need to tweak witp, cause the pearl-attack was also such event.



Adnan Meshuggi -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 5:02:17 PM)

the island(s) are Dagö and Ösel...



marty_01 -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 5:11:54 PM)

ok -- thanks. Many-many years ago I recall reading an Operational study of the German landings on these Islands that had been prepared by the United States Air Force.

There are also numerous archival film footage snippets of the operations that you come across on "Die Deutsche Wochenschau" or "Die Frontschau".



morganbj -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 6:08:02 PM)

I can't wait for War in the West.

There will be no possible German land invasion of England because they didn't do it historically.

And, the Allies can't land in France before June, 1944, because they didn't do it historically.

And, the British can't catch and utterly destroy the Afrika Korps in Egypt after Alamein, because they didn't do it historically.

And ...

It looks like pat.casey got my point. It's not about if it's a good idea or if there's a reason to do it. It's about the capability to do it. If they could have, then they should be able to do it in the game.



alfonso -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 6:15:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bjmorgan

And, the Allies can't land in France before June, 1944, because they didn't do it historically.



Well, they did. Dieppe, 1942. But I understand your point, though.



alfonso -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 6:53:39 PM)

I have a question. Before Barbarossa, it seems that the Germans did not plan any amphibious operations in the Baltic, except Dago and Osel, as Adnan points out. If they suddenly changed their mind the day after Barbarossa was launched (let's say TURN 1), how long would it take to prepare a landing in the continent, behind the Soviet lines?. I think the shorter that period, the more potential impact it could have. IF the planning and preparations take much time, the land forces in the meantime would arrive so near of Leningrad that the landing "would not have space enough to land..."



Zort -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 7:34:12 PM)

The Germans didn't have any landing craft as we did.  So that limits what could be done.  Landing in a port and offloading at a pier is what you would be looking at.  Any type of force projection over a beach would be very small with few or no vehicles.  Now they could have brought the barges up and maybe used them.  The Germans didn't need to land behind enemy lines since they advanced so quickly.  The time and effort to plan for an assault is fairly intensive unless you are just landing small units.





pat.casey -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 8:28:21 PM)

I don't think the lack of specialized landing craft was crippling. They managed to invade Norway just fine without them. Likewise the soviets landed major forces on the crimea also w/o landing craft.

If you're coming into a hot beach, landing craft are nice, but there's a lot of Baltic coast, so finding an undefended spot to come ashore doesn't seem unreasonable.



Zort -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/3/2011 8:49:11 PM)

Well yes and no.  The soviets landed at ports, that is where all their heavy equipment came across.  There were landings on beaches, they rowed in, in most cases that I can find.  Remember it took the soviets 7 days to land 42k men, so 6k a day.  I am not sure about norway but didn't they drive into the ports and land there, not across the beaches. 

My big concern is that amphib assaults were not the uber weapon in the east as some want them to be. If they were so great then both sides would have used them vigorously.  Soviets used them when they could then their navy with the loss of its major shipyard/repair had to limit their effects.  The Crimea was also a low priority to the soviets when moscow was threatened.  So giving both sides unrestricted sea assaults is a great mistake imo.  Having been on the planning side for some seaborne assaults I have a good understanding of what it takes to conduct this.  This is a point the game needs to drill down to so it can get it correct in the WitW game. 

So should the Germans be able to conduct an amphib type assault in mid 41, sure should be able to.  But hindsight is 20/20, we as gamers will try to land them in Talinn whereas in real life the Germans probably wouldn't have been that aggressive so range is an issue.  If the game is going to replicate the navy part of the war then it needs to have a detailed naval element, each ship, ammo, damage, etc etc... something most panzer generals don't want to manage.



jomni -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/4/2011 1:21:39 AM)

Well given the isolation game mechanic, the amphibioius troops will die the next turn if they don't get a port.
Read redmarkus' AAR vs carnage and see what happened to his aphibious assault.
So I wouldn't really use that feature even if it is available.



marty_01 -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/4/2011 2:29:30 AM)

Here is a video snippet of the German assault on either the island of Dagö or Ösel -- from "Die Deutsche Wochenschau"

The film snippets of the attacks pick-up at around midway into the video clip. It's not Tarawa or Anzio or Normandy by any stretch, but than neither were the various (historical) Soviet regimental and brigade sized amphibious attacks conducted in the Black Sea during the war.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrkGI_l8dFs



marty_01 -> RE: Amphibious Assault (3/4/2011 2:44:19 AM)

Even more historically obscure was the German amphibious assault on these same Islands in October of 1917.  The Germans apparently mustered a rather sizable invasion force consisting of about 25,000 soldiers along with a rather significant chunk of the High Seas Fleet. 



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1