Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Blockade +Jutland?

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Guns of August 1914 - 1918 >> RE: Blockade +Jutland? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/12/2007 4:33:05 PM   
Joel Rauber

 

Posts: 195
Joined: 10/4/2000
From: Brookings, SD, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

I don't think there was any credible threat of invasion of the UK by Germany in WW1. and there were only a few coastal bombardments too.

Much RN activity was in support of the mine war - sweeping and laying mine barrages and channels - mainly done by smaller craft, with close support from Cruisers, and often the capital ships "ready to steam" or just over the horizon.

Why was the RN in the North Sea? Because het North Sea was their back yard!! :)



I suspect that there were only a few coastal bombardments because the RN was in the North Sea. So I'm not sure which is the cause and which the effect.

And certainly the invasion threat was not credible as long as the RN was in the NS; and I'd say as long as the RN existed.

The question that was raised was what makes it useful to be located in the NS for the RN in game terms. The person who posed the question mentioned the idea of amphibious transfer. What else. Does it actually help in the blockade of Germany?
A reasonable response I think. However, the question

_____________________________

Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 61
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/12/2007 5:11:37 PM   
SteveD64

 

Posts: 570
Joined: 10/26/2006
From: Shaker Hts, Ohio, USA
Status: offline 		In the current game I'm playing as the CP I had complete control of the North Sea for one turn.   As far as I can see I gained nothing other than denying the Brits amphib capabililty.  Perhaps Britain could take a morale hit when this happens? Since there is no way I could keep it up every turn it doesn't make much sense to even sortie once.  The cost doesn't justify it.

On top of that I've lost three uboats (two in 1914 and one in 1915), which is completely unrelated but I need to whine about something. 

(in reply to Joel Rauber)
Post #: 62
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/12/2007 7:05:00 PM   
jimwinsor


Posts: 1076
Joined: 11/21/2005
Status: offline 		The German coastal bombardment raids of Britain happened in November 1914, and was allowed due to the British fleet fleeing for bases in west Scotland and Ireland, due to a (false) periscope siting in Scapa Flow. The Brits had neglected sub defense at Scapa Flow, and were apparantly jumpy.

The bombardments were thus opportunistic, didn't really cause a whole lot of damage, and as it turned out short lived; British battlecruises sailed out and defeated a third raid, and by 1915 the British Fleet was back at Scapa Flow.


_____________________________

Streaming as "Grognerd" at https://www.twitch.tv/grognerd

(in reply to SteveD64)
Post #: 63
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/12/2007 7:10:55 PM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

How long were planning on allowing a conquered food resource to contribute to the conquering nation?


There's a 30% chance each turn after food is harvested from the hex that the hex will become exhausted.


quote:

#1 to blockade the Germans
#2 to prevent sorties of the high seas fleet; in particular coastal bombardments
#3 and probably only incidental to #2, prevent invasion.

Any others?


It also allows the Brits to use amphibious movement. 

Blockading the German navy in the North Sea is easier than in the Atlantic.  The basic Search value in the North Sea is much less than in the Atlantic.  If the blockade is instead moved to the Atlantic the Brits could easily lose control of that area and allow it to become contested. 


(in reply to SteveD64)
Post #: 64
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/13/2007 5:20:52 AM   
Joel Rauber

 

Posts: 195
Joined: 10/4/2000
From: Brookings, SD, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter



quote:

#1 to blockade the Germans
#2 to prevent sorties of the high seas fleet; in particular coastal bombardments
#3 and probably only incidental to #2, prevent invasion.

Any others?


It also allows the Brits to use amphibious movement.

Blockading the German navy in the North Sea is easier than in the Atlantic. The basic Search value in the North Sea is much less than in the Atlantic. If the blockade is instead moved to the Atlantic the Brits could easily lose control of that area and allow it to become contested.




That might be the most powerful reason in game terms for the Brits to want to control the North Sea. The amphibious capability being another of course as mentioned


_____________________________

Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber

(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 65
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/14/2007 12:58:54 AM   
esteban


Posts: 618
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline 		Eh, without making Frank go nuts creating a new "blockade" mission, and to simulate the fact that Germany did have some non-Baltic trade going on, how about if we move "1 transport" from the North Atlantic to the North Sea? 

Also, a few questions about the naval changes in patch 1.2:

1. Bases with "large naval units" can no longer be invaded.  I take it that CA/PDs count as large naval units, so that a hex with CA/PD based in it can't be invaded?

2. Does the "large naval unit" need to be in the hex (and not at sea somewhere) to block the invasion of the port hex?  I would vote for yes, that at least one large naval unit needs to be in port. 

3. Also, what is the effect of ship damage on large naval units blocking invasion into a port hex?  If a DN unit with 18 hits on it is in port, does that block invasion for that port?


(in reply to Joel Rauber)
Post #: 66
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/14/2007 3:00:19 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		AFAIK the answers are yes, no and yes - it's not hte unit itself that is held to do the blocking, but the other defences that would be around a port that was able ot have a significant naval presence.

Letting Germany get some trade from a TR in hte Nth sea would certainly be simpler ...but it'd just look wrong I reckon! :)  Perhaps transports should only be interceptable by cruisers and subs instead, just to give hte British cruisers somethign to do, and to cut down the number of alied ships that can possibly interceptthem?

(in reply to esteban)
Post #: 67
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/15/2007 3:22:01 AM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

1. Bases with "large naval units" can no longer be invaded.  I take it that CA/PDs count as large naval units, so that a hex with CA/PD based in it can't be invaded?


Right, but its numbers thing with a CA being assigned a lower number than a DN.  I will have to come back to this later as I don't have the numbers in front of me at the moment.  However, I think its the equivalent of about 4 CAs or 1 DN.

quote:

2. Does the "large naval unit" need to be in the hex (and not at sea somewhere) to block the invasion of the port hex?  I would vote for yes, that at least one large naval unit needs to be in port. 


No, it just needs to be based from there.

quote:

3. Also, what is the effect of ship damage on large naval units blocking invasion into a port hex?  If a DN unit with 18 hits on it is in port, does that block invasion for that port?


Damage has no effect for that calculation.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 68
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/15/2007 3:53:47 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		I still think you're trying to make it more dynamic than it needs to be - Wilhelmschaven shouldn't be abel to be invaded regardless of what's based there, nor shoult Petrograd, Sevastopol & some other cities that are ports - jsut because they'er ehavily fortified even in peace time!

(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 69
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/15/2007 9:01:59 AM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline 		Except that "Wilhelmshaven" is representing the ability to invade Germany via the North Sea, not just that hex.  For example in game terms, "Sevastopol" was invaded during the Crimean War.  

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 70
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/15/2007 9:08:54 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		And yet somehow Sevastopol was beseiged on its land side!! :)

The allied invasion was at Evpatoria - a full hex or 2 north of Sevastopol.  Given that there's only Turkey & Bulgaria that are CP "naval powers" in the Black Sea I think it's a reasonable fudge that Sevastopol is not invadable.

The German Nth Sea Coast is not invadable - the Frisian islands form a barrier of low sand dunes 5-20 miles from the main coast for almost all of the German North Sea coast - the Brits knew this which is why the plan to invade Germany in 1919 was going to try the Baltic.



(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 71
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/15/2007 9:26:09 AM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline 		Wilhelmshaven, fair enough.  But regardless, if I don't allow invasions at ports then there's simply no invasions since the game doesn't allow invasions of non-ports.  In the case of Sevastopol, the Crimea was invaded.  In game terms, if no invasion is allowed at Sevastopol it means the Crimea is uninvadeable.



(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 72
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/15/2007 9:30:34 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		Would Bulgaria or Turkey have had the wherewithal to invade it anyway?  As it is Turkey can spend 3 pts to buy a transport and some spare naval points and land troops at Rostoc, Novosibirsk, Odessa and Sevastoplo which seems a bit much for the ol' Sublime Porte.......

(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 73
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/15/2007 9:37:10 AM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Would Bulgaria or Turkey have had the wherewithal to invade it anyway? 


Probably not

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 74
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/17/2007 11:25:34 AM   
stephenhamley

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Liverpool
Status: offline 		Well thanks for the intrest that you lot have put in. I want to explain better. I have only played against the AI, but if on turn 1 build 4 transports as the CP's send what transports I have out on shipping and send the half a dozen or so of my best ships out on patrol in the baltic and atlantic. My fleets aren't sent to Davy Jones' Locker and they bring back the Kaiser's people much bounty from abroad. This can be consistantly repeated so that the German has somewhere in the region of 30 industrial points a turn by 1915. Enough to smash the French, Italians and russians in turn.

The count has spoken!

(in reply to stephenhamley)
Post #: 75
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/17/2007 1:12:43 PM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		I'm having trouble with transports in hte Atlantic vs the aI - not that they're getting sunk, but that they often don't seem to want to bring anything back.

I'm not sure how transports are getting you to 30 industry Count - CP transports in hte Nth atlantic bring back food only as far as I can tell (2 per transport - I get 4 food when 2 are operating - haven't managed to get it to recognise when I have 3), while those in the baltic bring back resources - but only for teh 2 that are what is required.



(in reply to stephenhamley)
Post #: 76
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/18/2007 2:01:38 AM   
stephenhamley

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Liverpool
Status: offline 		Dunno dude, just happens, i think that the TE just gives up refitting its ships but here's a screenshot of a 1915 turn where I'm picking up 27.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 77
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/18/2007 2:10:10 AM   
stephenhamley

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Liverpool
Status: offline 		can't put the image in can you help??


(in reply to stephenhamley)
Post #: 78
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/18/2007 2:58:00 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		You can only put in a picture using the "post reply" button - not the quick reply.

(in reply to stephenhamley)
Post #: 79
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/19/2007 2:25:38 AM   
stephenhamley

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Liverpool
Status: offline 		here it is




Attachment (1)

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 80
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/19/2007 2:56:47 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline 		From the date (Sept-Oct 1915) it looks like you've traded in a lot of RM's from Turkey, which is standard practice - Turkey starts with a large surplus of RM production and builds up a stockpile in the turns before Bulgaria enters the war. 

Once the stockpile is used up it can still send a handful of RM's to Germany each turn, plus Austria can send 1-3 depending on how it's industry is going too.

< Message edited by SMK-at-work -- 10/19/2007 3:01:09 AM >

(in reply to stephenhamley)
Post #: 81
Blockade +Jutland? - 10/19/2007 4:33:39 PM   
stephenhamley

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Liverpool
Status: offline 		Accepted dude but here is a screen shot from a strat phase before bulgaria has entered so no overland trade with Turkey. I may have sent son AH resorces (cant remember as this was an old game and I'm not playing at the moment) but you will note that there are a significant amount of resources coming from trade.

_____________________________

The count has spoken !

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 82
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/19/2007 4:43:04 PM   
stephenhamley

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Liverpool
Status: offline 		Sorry, here is the screen shot still not au-fait with the system.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to stephenhamley)
Post #: 83
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/19/2007 8:54:47 PM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline 		You'd get 3 resources from Sweden if you have 2 shipping in the Baltic.  In the Atlantic you will get 2 resources per shipping. 

v.B6 does a better job at handling the Atlantic due to a bug I fixed where British naval units in the Atlantic had very little chance of finding German shipping unless they were on "Raider" missions.  Yet most British units would normally be on "Patrol".




(in reply to stephenhamley)
Post #: 84
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/19/2007 10:33:25 PM   
hjaco

 

Posts: 872
Joined: 3/23/2007
Status: offline 		Good. It was to easy to consistently have full trade as Germany in the first half of the war.

But it is still a fair strategy for CP to pursue if using the HSF aggressively on raid mission together with AH and OE fleets in the Med because it either ties up a large amount of Entente fleet in the Atlantic thereby protecting OE or vice versa.

(in reply to FrankHunter)
Post #: 85
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/19/2007 11:24:12 PM   
James Ward

 

Posts: 1183
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Status: offline 		You now get resources for German trade in the Atlantic? I thought you got food before.

(in reply to hjaco)
Post #: 86
RE: Blockade +Jutland? - 10/20/2007 1:21:13 AM   
FrankHunter

 

Posts: 2111
Joined: 3/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

You now get resources for German trade in the Atlantic? I thought you got food before.


You get both, its split.

(in reply to James Ward)
Post #: 87
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Guns of August 1914 - 1918 >> RE: Blockade +Jutland? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.000