Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Invasion of Red Sea

 
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] >> WarPlan >> Invasion of Red Sea Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Invasion of Red Sea - 7/8/2020 5:17:41 PM   
baloo7777


Posts: 947
Joined: 5/18/2009
From: eastern CT
Status: offline
Does the game allow a German invasion force to use the sea-transfer route near the bottom of Africa to enter the Red Sea, and can they invade using an oiler to resupply the fleet? Is it necessary for the Allies to garrison the ports on the Red Sea?

_____________________________

JRR
Post #: 1
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/8/2020 6:48:41 PM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 1962
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: online
My understanding is that yes the Axis can do this. But I think it is a cheesy move and I would never do it as the Axis. From now on I will make it a house rule before all of my games.

(in reply to baloo7777)
Post #: 2
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/8/2020 7:35:03 PM   
sveint


Posts: 2801
Joined: 1/19/2001
From: Glorious Europe
Status: offline
You can have more cheese!

Bring a paratrooper and take all of India (Allied Pacific Resources) with no fighting required!

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 3
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/8/2020 8:45:30 PM   
baloo7777


Posts: 947
Joined: 5/18/2009
From: eastern CT
Status: offline
OK. I agree it's cheese. I will not do it either (like I could in our game) and will not garrison those ports in the future.

_____________________________

JRR

(in reply to sveint)
Post #: 4
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 1:29:24 AM   
MorningDew

 

Posts: 863
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
Yes, don't think either the Red Sea or Persian Gulf should be usable by the Axis.

_____________________________

(formerly user AndrewKurtz)

(in reply to baloo7777)
Post #: 5
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 1:38:51 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7463
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Yeah, I've never liked this and think it should be disallowed. Maybe if the Suez canal is captured by the Axis you can allow transit from the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf and vice versa, but the Atlantic transit route is way too long to be logistically viable for the Axis.

< Message edited by Flaviusx -- 7/9/2020 1:39:19 AM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to MorningDew)
Post #: 6
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 8:22:29 AM   
sillyflower


Posts: 3112
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Back in Blighty
Status: offline
+1

sveint did it to me in our 1st game, but I suppose that I should have been grateful that he did not send a para unit too.

Another opponent did it but we agreed it was too cheesy. In return for leaving I gave his troops safe passage back to Germany.

_____________________________

web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 7
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 8:58:18 AM   
sveint


Posts: 2801
Joined: 1/19/2001
From: Glorious Europe
Status: offline
I think we still need some minor adjustments to prevent these wilder, unhistorical moves. But only Alvaro can decide.

(in reply to sillyflower)
Post #: 8
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 2:03:29 PM   
kennonlightfoot

 

Posts: 832
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
I also noticed that the Axis can now invade in the Black Sea and Caspian Sea. I don't no for sure if there are prerequisites for using Landing Ships in the Black Sea, but it seems a stretch to be able to use them in a land locked Caspian Sea.

Seams like there should be restrictions on how far from home ports you can use Landing Ships since in the Atlantic theater they were not designed for thousand mile voyages like in the Pacific.

Maybe a restriction on the German in the Mediterranean if it doesn't hold Gibraltar.
Both Italy and Germany restricted from Red Sea and Persian Gulf if they don't hold Egypt.
I can think of any reason the Germans should be able to use Landing Ships in the Black Sea unless they have taken Turkey (maybe if Turkey reaches a certain percentage of pro Axis).
And Germans using Landing Ships in the Caspian Sea should be impossible.

(in reply to sveint)
Post #: 9
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 2:11:10 PM   
kennonlightfoot

 

Posts: 832
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
Also, another observation. Spur of the moment invasions has become the tactic of choice for flanking and cutting off supply to enemy formations. It is extremely easy and cheap to do. Just build lots of Landing Ships and Marines. Either the opponent has to build a line of divisions all the way back to their supply base or you can cut them off with an instant coastal invasion. Since air power usually targets capital ships it is usually easy to get away with unless there is massive air coverage.

It appears to be so easy and so effective that even the Russians build half a dozen marines with Landing Ships.

It looks like there needs to be some kind of preparation for a water invasion similar to what paratroopers have to do.

(in reply to kennonlightfoot)
Post #: 10
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 2:21:04 PM   
MorningDew

 

Posts: 863
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kennonlightfoot
It looks like there needs to be some kind of preparation for a water invasion similar to what paratroopers have to do.


Great point...requiring a minimum level of effectiveness would be a real positive change to the invasion process and make it significantly more realistic. Might make all other recommended changes moot.

_____________________________

(formerly user AndrewKurtz)

(in reply to kennonlightfoot)
Post #: 11
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 3:48:36 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6295
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
All it takes it a single split army to cover both ports, 1 air unit, and patrolling with the 1 naval group at sea to stop any Axis action in the Black Sea in 1941/1942.

If the Germans want to spend 45PPs on landing craft and 360PPs on 3x 1941 marines.... be my guest.

That is = a 1941 Armor corps. The armor corps is far more effective in inflicting casualties on the Russians than a group of marines.

This is just my perspective. Marines should be used by the Allies to harrass empty locations the Germans leave open. They come in run over a resource location damaging it. Run back evacuate. The Italians can also use it as a strong cheap landing craft force to initially invade Crete or Cyprus. It is a very specific mission unit. I usually build 1-2 UK Marines I call Commandos to mess with the German garrisoned positions forcing them to withdraw troops from the Eastern Front to deal with it. If the Germans garrison well maybe I build one.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to MorningDew)
Post #: 12
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 8:47:08 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3118
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kennonlightfoot

Maybe a restriction on the German in the Mediterranean if it doesn't hold Gibraltar.
Both Italy and Germany restricted from Red Sea and Persian Gulf if they don't hold Egypt.
...
And Germans using Landing Ships in the Caspian Sea should be impossible.


+1 for these three. Not sure for Black Sea, you can think of some available Romanian ships.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to kennonlightfoot)
Post #: 13
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 9:11:37 PM   
MorningDew

 

Posts: 863
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
I have less concerns with the Caspian Sea (see it a separate issue from Red Sea/Suez).

I do think the Axis should be unable to use the Red Sea/Suez hexes for movement to/from without control of the Egypt. Adds another element of realism based on the global British naval capacity (and then US once they enter the war).

Another concept could be that there is a way for the UK to commit resources to blocking this route (i.e. a box where, if the UK has naval units, they are committed to protecting against transit around South Africa).

< Message edited by AndrewKurtz -- 7/9/2020 9:13:59 PM >


_____________________________

(formerly user AndrewKurtz)

(in reply to ncc1701e)
Post #: 14
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/9/2020 9:32:09 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6295
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
You can always leave a fleet on patrol near Iraq. Or even a division.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to MorningDew)
Post #: 15
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 12:36:26 AM   
MorningDew

 

Posts: 863
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

You can always leave a fleet on patrol near Iraq. Or even a division.


Excellent point. The funny thing is my brain for some reason looks at them differently.

_____________________________

(formerly user AndrewKurtz)

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 16
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 1:27:05 AM   
Harrybanana

 

Posts: 1962
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

You can always leave a fleet on patrol near Iraq. Or even a division.



But why should the Allied player have to do this? Historically it would have been impossible for the Axis to move an invasion fleet from Europe around the Horn of Africa, through the Indian Ocean and into either the Red Sea or the Persian Gulf without being detected and intercepted. But even if by some miracle they could accomplish this and even capture a port, there is no way they could ever have gotten supplies to that port (well not unless the Italians won in Ethiopia and Somaliland, which is not an option in this game). So my usual rant, that if something is historically impossible I don't think it is fair to say that it is OK because there is a counter to it. See my post about Nazi Dawn.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 17
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 1:56:03 AM   
baloo7777


Posts: 947
Joined: 5/18/2009
From: eastern CT
Status: offline
With a turn representing about 2 weeks time, shouldn't the logistics necessary for an invasion take 2 turns at a minimum to assemble and plan? Really, I don't think even commando raids by the British took any less than 6 weeks in planning and assembling logistics, let alone an entire operational level invasion of a distant place. How are the free-form invasions allowed even remotely historical for the time period? I am guessing this is a gaming rule for play balance and ease of use in a game.

_____________________________

JRR

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 18
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 2:00:01 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7463
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
While the British can certainly keep something in the Gulf to intercept raids, they shouldn't have to do this. South Africa is a thing and so are various offmap British bases and none of that is represented and I think the simplest way to reflect this would be to disallow the Atlantic transit outright for the Axis. If they want to bypass all of that, they need to get the Suez canal. If it's not possible to code this, I think most players will go with a house rule here, because this is very sketchy.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to baloo7777)
Post #: 19
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 1:29:23 PM   
AlvaroSousa


Posts: 6295
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline
I generally assume players won't do cheezy things like this. Pacific resources isn't meant to be invaded. But I needed something there to represent convoys from the Pacific.
Same for the Red Sea.

_____________________________

Games worked on

Designer of the Strategic Command 2 products
- Brute Force (mod)
- Assault on Communism
- Assault on Democracy

Designer of the Strategic Command 3 products
- Map Image Importer

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 20
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 1:32:40 PM   
MorningDew

 

Posts: 863
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
If it can be done, players will do it. If it isn't intended, any reason not to implement what Flavius suggested? Axis can never use the two boxes for transit (as they would never control South Africa in the context of this game)? Seems like a simple change and stops a big cheezy option.

_____________________________

(formerly user AndrewKurtz)

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 21
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 2:18:58 PM   
kennonlightfoot

 

Posts: 832
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa

You can always leave a fleet on patrol near Iraq. Or even a division.

I had multiple fleets and five Corps in the Persian Gulf area occupying every port and my opponent easily landed enough troops to seize a two ports and wipe out half my force. I can't see a single fleet patrolling the area stopping anything. They are very unreliable and easily "gamed".

I also usually garrison Kuwait but this isn't enough to stop any invasions in the area. The combination of it not being easy to know if the Axis has detached a major force to enter the Persian Gulf and the delay getting your own forces there in time once you know they are needed makes this and easy conquest for the Axis. The reverse works too but at least it is a bit more logical that the Allies would have this capacity.

But my main complaint is that invasions, both spoiler and major ones, are much to easy to throw together and the defending player has to few options for preventing it. There are coastal hexes just about everywhere now. Which makes these end runs very effective. There is no reasonable way to prevent them.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 22
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 2:25:32 PM   
kennonlightfoot

 

Posts: 832
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

I have less concerns with the Caspian Sea (see it a separate issue from Red Sea/Suez).

I do think the Axis should be unable to use the Red Sea/Suez hexes for movement to/from without control of the Egypt. Adds another element of realism based on the global British naval capacity (and then US once they enter the war).

Another concept could be that there is a way for the UK to commit resources to blocking this route (i.e. a box where, if the UK has naval units, they are committed to protecting against transit around South Africa).


I had an Axis opponent come up with a very neat trick for using invasion on the Caspian Sea. They just ran a couple of mobile units (mostly cavalry) out to take the Russian Port on its Eastern Side. They had already taken Persia using it as their base. Then advanced from Persia toward the Caucasus from the south. When my Russians advanced to hold the mountain line to block them, they landed one of the cavalry units behind them and cut the rail access. Isolating the whole force. Just the threat of being able to land behind any units that advanced was sufficient to force the whole line to fall back. The Russians don't have enough units to hold both the line and garrison the Caspian shore line. Just one or two units siting in that Eastern port are sufficient to tie down armies.

(in reply to MorningDew)
Post #: 23
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 4:30:57 PM   
ncc1701e


Posts: 3118
Joined: 10/29/2013
From: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

But why should the Allied player have to do this? Historically it would have been impossible for the Axis to move an invasion fleet from Europe around the Horn of Africa, through the Indian Ocean and into either the Red Sea or the Persian Gulf without being detected and intercepted. But even if by some miracle they could accomplish this and even capture a port, there is no way they could ever have gotten supplies to that port


You are forgetting the wonder weapons.

_____________________________

Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.

(in reply to Harrybanana)
Post #: 24
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 7:06:26 PM   
sveint


Posts: 2801
Joined: 1/19/2001
From: Glorious Europe
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alvaro Sousa
Pacific resources isn't meant to be invaded.


Just make the weather permanently heavy rain in that area.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)
Post #: 25
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 7:08:48 PM   
sveint


Posts: 2801
Joined: 1/19/2001
From: Glorious Europe
Status: offline
My personal unwritten house rule (that I now see I should be more explicit about), is that every invasion
must target a port, or be in direct support of land troops (immediately behind enemy lines).

Sending cavalry units on out-of-supply deep suicide penetrations is the very definition of cheesy tactics.

(in reply to sveint)
Post #: 26
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/10/2020 7:16:42 PM   
MorningDew

 

Posts: 863
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
How do you define "must target a port"?

_____________________________

(formerly user AndrewKurtz)

(in reply to sveint)
Post #: 27
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/11/2020 2:53:26 PM   
kennonlightfoot

 

Posts: 832
Joined: 8/15/2006
Status: offline
The primary place the end run invasion tactic is used is of course Africa and its single supply road. It is long and has few supply sources along it which makes it a prime target for a end run invasion. My personal opinion is it ought to be shutdown by making most of the coast off limits to invasion. This is a rather gamey solution to a gamey problem, but it will work without messing up the whole invasion system. Call them "to sandy" for landings.

(in reply to MorningDew)
Post #: 28
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/11/2020 4:47:54 PM   
MorningDew

 

Posts: 863
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline
Interestingly, I am reading Churchills book on WWII and he was pushing for exactly this - amphibious landings behind the Italians. I don't believe he had commanders with the guts to try it from my reading.

One thing I have been thinking - air power does make these small invasions a challenge. So perhaps the issue is people build too few air units (and then use them for air superiority) and too many land units?

< Message edited by AndrewKurtz -- 7/11/2020 4:49:09 PM >


_____________________________

(formerly user AndrewKurtz)

(in reply to kennonlightfoot)
Post #: 29
RE: Invasion of Red Sea - 7/11/2020 4:52:36 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7463
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Enemy airpower forces the naval invader to either suppress it with their own airstrikes or heavily escort amphibious assaults with big ships that draw strikes. Or to throw away naval units to soak off airstrikes in the alternative. The allies should have enough of a navy for such soak off tactics to do the job. The Axis not so much.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to MorningDew)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> WarPlan >> Invasion of Red Sea Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.250