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: Amphibious Assault

 
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] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Amphibious Assault Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/4/2011 8:27:10 AM   
Adnan Meshuggi

 

Posts: 2220
Joined: 8/2/2001
From: Center of the universe (Lippoldsweiler in Württemb
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty_01

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. 


well, they needed em because they advanced.
in 1917 their fleet was larger as anything in the baltic.

So this is nothing we can compare.
But the germans could do landings... they just had no use for it in 1941 in the baltic.

But they should have the possibility to land troops - esp. if they have no russian force in a hex.
Supply can be done by air.... so, why not?
Not in the first 10 weeks, later on? yes. But in normal games, in this stage it makes no sense. So - it should be allowed but it is not significant for the gameplay

_____________________________

Don't tickle yourself with some moralist crap thinking we have some sort of obligation to help these people. We're there for our self-interest, and anything we do to be 'nice' should be considered a courtesy
dweebespit

(in reply to marty_01)
Post #: 31
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/4/2011 1:25:42 PM   
marty_01

 

Posts: 288
Joined: 2/10/2011
Status: offline
quote:

But they should have the possibility to land troops - esp. if they have no russian force in a hex.
Supply can be done by air.... so, why not?
Not in the first 10 weeks, later on? yes. But in normal games, in this stage it makes no sense. So - it should be allowed but it is not significant for the gameplay


I don't disagree. If I had my druthers my tendency would be to give the Germans a small amphib lift capability in the Baltic -- maybe a regiment, but certainly not more than a division. I'd also restrict use of the amphib capability near Leningrad -- ala standard German Naval transport. This to simulate both the Soviet Baltic Fleet and its potential to sortie against any amphibious operations close to Leningrad, as well as to simulate the heavy Soviet coastal defense works in this area of the Baltic.

The lack of German amphibious capability in the Baltic is not at all crucial to the game -- nor does the lack of the capability detract in any way from my personal playing experience. But it might be a fun layer to add to the playing options provided to players, and the capability – albeit a small one -- can certainly be justified from a historical perspective.


< Message edited by marty_01 -- 3/4/2011 1:26:53 PM >

(in reply to Adnan Meshuggi)
Post #: 32
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/4/2011 2:18:53 PM   
Zort

 

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline
I agree the germans should have some amphib lift capability, would be supplied by sea more likely then by air.The threat of some type of amphib assault should be there IMO.

I can't find my link but once Kalinn fell most of the soviet surface flt in the baltic was destroyed, just submarines able to sortie.  Also I remember reading that the area just outside leningrad was very heavily mined by both sides.  Remember the soviet navy was divided between the Baltic, Black Sea and Pacific.  They also lost about 33% of all their ships. 

Total soviet navy:
  • 4 battleships,
  • 7 cruisers
  • 59 destroyer-leaders and squadron-destroyers
  • 218 submarines,
  • 269 torpedo boats,
  • 22 patrol vessels,
  • 88 minesweepers,
  • 77 submarine-hunters,



< Message edited by Zort -- 3/4/2011 2:19:20 PM >

(in reply to marty_01)
Post #: 33
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/4/2011 3:56:48 PM   
PyleDriver


Posts: 6152
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas
Status: offline
In the game the Gulf of Finland is considered Soviet controled until Leningrad falls...Zort on your post was that the Baltic fleet or the whole Soviet navy?

_____________________________

Jon Pyle
AWD Beta tester
WBTS Alpha tester
WitE Alpha tester
WitW Alpha tester
WitE2 Alpha tester

(in reply to Zort)
Post #: 34
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/4/2011 4:59:01 PM   
GFelz

 

Posts: 472
Joined: 8/27/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline
This has turned into a very interesting discussion. I am looking forward to see how the mechanics of invasion and shore support etc would be covered in future titles.

(in reply to PyleDriver)
Post #: 35
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/4/2011 5:05:11 PM   
LiquidSky


Posts: 2798
Joined: 6/24/2008
Status: offline


Isnt the German fleet rather preoccupied with convoy raiding during the summer of 1941?

_____________________________

“My logisticians are a humorless lot … they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay.” – Alexander the Great

(in reply to GFelz)
Post #: 36
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/4/2011 5:43:16 PM   
Caranorn


Posts: 424
Joined: 8/31/2001
From: Luxembourg
Status: offline
After Norway and the cancelation of Sealion the German Navy as far as I recall wasn't all that concerned with ampibious operations. The catastropic casualties taken during the Norway invasion precluded the use of those old tactics. For Norway (iirc) the means to bring troops to shore was by transportation of light troops on cruisers and destroyers, heavier equipment on a small number of hastily assembled civilian cargo ships, all directly into defended (mines, torpedoes, shore artillery) ports. This system led to the loss of at least two cruisers and a large number of destroyers crippling the German surface navy for the rest of the war. Assets for an alternative assault system were established for Sealion, but left in North Sea ports after the cancellation of that operation (barges existed, though not comparable to those used by the Western Allies in 42, 43 and 44, , amphibious tanks §units disbanded iirc) also minesweepers, patrol boats of varyious tonnage and types, a number of destroyers). Those assets could not be transferred to the Baltic on a whim if at all. Accordingly I think a medium to long distance invasion by a substantial force was entirely out of the question for the German Navy in 1941...

P.S.: I don't recall whether the plans for an invasion of Sweden by Germany involved amphibious invasion, most likely not.


_____________________________

Marc aka Caran... ministerialis

(in reply to LiquidSky)
Post #: 37
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/4/2011 6:08:01 PM   
Mike Parker

 

Posts: 583
Joined: 12/30/2008
From: Houston TX
Status: offline
Caranorn,

The invasion of Sweden (or rather the veiled threat of it) was almost entirely from the rather substantial ground forces in Norway. I am sure some shore bombardment might have been used, but I am almost positive the operational plans had the relatively safer maritime component just ship replacement units into Norway while the forces in place invaded. Interestingly enough iirc the Swedish Govt. while taking it very seriously also made it plain they were prepard for such eventuality and would fight.

As for any purported Baltic Sea amphibious operations, while I agree the fiasco especially the loss of the Blucher to Norwegian shore batteries had made the Kreigsmarine and OKH rather gun shy of amphibious operations, I am also equally certain that the operational cabability to do the same sort of thing done in Norway existed in 41 and well into 43. Now getting high command to say anything but "Nein nein nein!" to the idea is another issue, I believe enough CA/CL and DD as well as TR's and smaller patrol craft existed to pull off landing similar in size to Norway, which in a week timeframe would be 1 or 2 Infantry divisions.

We allow German paratroopers to be used do we not? I have never done it in game myself but I believe it could be done i.e. the game mechanics exist to allow it. High command had soured on paradrops (from the debacle in Crete) as much as they had soured on amphibious operations (from the Norway operation). So if we allow one (i.e. paratroops) we should allow the other. I could be wrong on the capability I know alot of Kriegsmarine assets were kept in Bergen, Brest, and Wilhelmshaven but I cannot believe the Baltic Sea Squadron was not outfitted with enough assets to pull off a divisional landing over a week which is what is required to allow a landing in WITE, although some of you Naval OOB experts could chime in here if you know more than I.

(in reply to Caranorn)
Post #: 38
RE: Amphibious Assault - 3/5/2011 12:01:14 AM   
Zort

 

Posts: 684
Joined: 7/19/2004
From: Colorado Springs, CO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PyleDriver

In the game the Gulf of Finland is considered Soviet controled until Leningrad falls...Zort on your post was that the Baltic fleet or the whole Soviet navy?

That is the entire Soviet Flt. Can not find the link that shows losses but will continue to look. Got to remember to bookmark my references. And I forgot the Arctic flt is part of the total numbers. References don't all agree.

Found this for the Baltic soviet flt composition as of 1939(about the same for 41):
2 battleships
2 cruisers
21 destroyers and torpedo boats
52 submarines
41 motor topedo boats
13 minelayers, minesweepers and auxiliaries
2 escort and patrol boats.

< Message edited by Zort -- 3/5/2011 12:13:05 AM >

(in reply to PyleDriver)
Post #: 39
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Amphibious Assault Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.141