How to make invasions less easy

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

How to make invasions less easy

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 >> How to make invasions less easy

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

How to make invasions less easy - 1/12/2021 11:28:45 PM

squatter

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

Ok, so I've thought from my first games of Warplan that large invasions are too easy to orchestrate.

I'm thinking now that one of the main issues is that land units embarked in transports don't draw any supply.

You can have ten infantry corps at Gibraltar or Malta (for example ) in transports, sitting waiting for a good moment to invade. While they are in transport mode, they don't require any supplies, and they continue to recover readiness. You can keep them there indefinitely like this.

Obviously this is not realistic. Also, it is part of the factors that make invasions too easy to organise and execute, especially from distant locations.

Shouldn't land units in transport mode draw some supply off the port supply grid, and lose rather than gain readiness every turn they are crammed in their ships?

Post #: 1

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/13/2021 12:15:15 AM

Harrybanana

Posts: 2372
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline

Squatter,

Once you have played a few more games I think you will come to realize that invasions are both too easy, as you say, but also too difficult. The easy part about them is:

1. Landing Ships are, IMHO, still too cheap. They used to only cost 15 production but the cost was raised to 25.
2. No planning is required. If you see that your opponent has left a port vacant or left an air unit by itself too near a beach, you just load up any division within range and away you go. Of course, historically even commando raids required weeks of planning.

So, IMHO, if you want to make invasions more difficult increase the cost of LSs and require some sort of planning (similar perhaps to what is done in War in the Wets).

But it can also be very hard to successfully invade a well defended coastline and capture a port. If the Allied (and Axis) player is limited to only invading with a limited number of corps (say 3) then good luck invading France in 44. One way to make invading a defended coastline easier would be to allow players to build Mulberries, at considerable cost of course.

In any event, there is a limit to how many units you can invade with as as each time you load a unit onto a transport it consumes some of that nations transport capacity. So you could only have 10 large corps on transports in Gibraltar if you have a 300 transport capacity.

< Message edited by Harrybanana -- 1/13/2021 12:19:44 AM >

(in reply to squatter)

Post #: 2

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/13/2021 11:31:30 AM

squatter

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

Squatter,

Once you have played a few more games I think you will come to realize that invasions are both too easy, as you say, but also too difficult. The easy part about them is:

1. Landing Ships are, IMHO, still too cheap. They used to only cost 15 production but the cost was raised to 25.
2. No planning is required. If you see that your opponent has left a port vacant or left an air unit by itself too near a beach, you just load up any division within range and away you go. Of course, historically even commando raids required weeks of planning.

So, IMHO, if you want to make invasions more difficult increase the cost of LSs and require some sort of planning (similar perhaps to what is done in War in the Wets).

But it can also be very hard to successfully invade a well defended coastline and capture a port. If the Allied (and Axis) player is limited to only invading with a limited number of corps (say 3) then good luck invading France in 44. One way to make invading a defended coastline easier would be to allow players to build Mulberries, at considerable cost of course.

In any event, there is a limit to how many units you can invade with as as each time you load a unit onto a transport it consumes some of that nations transport capacity. So you could only have 10 large corps on transports in Gibraltar if you have a 300 transport capacity.

Yes, I basically agree with you. I've played enough to learn the hard way how difficult it is to invade a well defended Italian/French coastline, and my suggestion above isn't aimed at making that any harder.

My suggestion that units sitting in transports should require supply and shouldn't gain readiness wouldn't affect a cross channel invasion as the UK has unlimited supply, and enough ports that an invasion force wouldn't need to be in ships for more than a turn.

I'm interested in addressing the ease in which invasions can be tossed around like confetti, and one of the issues is that you can have large amounts of units sitting around in ships waiting to pounce, and that these units are gaining readiness, gaining reinforcement and upgrading, without requiring any supply. As well as helping enable off-the-cuff invasions, this as leads to gamey exploits: let's say I have reached port supply capacity in the Middle East. Never mind, put a couple of damaged units in ships, they come off the supply grid while miraculously repairing, upgrading, and refreshing in the ships. Rotate and repeat.

"In any event, there is a limit to how many units you can invade with as as each time you load a unit onto a transport it consumes some of that nations transport capacity. So you could only have 10 large corps on transports in Gibraltar if you have a 300 transport capacity."

The USA has 240 transport capacity in 1939, easily above 300 by 1942.

So yes I agree that big invasions against well defended coasts shouldn't be made any harder (in fact, given complete air and naval supremacy they should be made slightly easier.)

But I don't think my suggestion would make cross channel invasions/Italian invasions significantly more difficult.

I like the idea of mulberry option. Also the idea that a unit would have to be put into prep mode for a turn before sailing (and after this, if they don't sail, they should start to lose readiness, as per OP)

My question to you: are you happy that units in transports can repair/upgrade and gain supply level and readiness for unlimited time without requiring any supplies?

(in reply to Harrybanana)

Post #: 3

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/13/2021 1:47:52 PM

AlvaroSousa

Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline

I will point out that I have seen many AARs where people leave their entire coast open to invasion which wasn't the reality of the situation.
I have not seen any player keep a back up reserve that can react to invasions which wasn't the case of reality.

So if you leave the west coast of Italy wide open with no port defenders and no air cover.... YES you are asking to be invaded.

In my games I always have enough of a garrison in France and a rotating depleted armor or 2 as cover from 1942 onward.

_____________________________

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 squatter)

Post #: 4

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/13/2021 3:40:03 PM

battlevonwar

Posts: 1001
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline

Only issue with naval invasions is maybe range... Historically and really should you be able drop 1000 tanks and a million men on a beachhead 1000 miles away from your base of supplies. There is no way you can defend against every naval invasion even as the Allies and the MidEast plop 5 Panzers into Syria Strategy goes. If the Allies don't have a Corp on every Naval Base in the MidEast they risk losing it.

Similarly as the Axis you just can't defend that many ports and in fact the fewer you have the better off you are... Ports don't give you any production, for the most part. They have no value which makes defending them only for the purposes of protecting your supply and real estate.

I find that by '42 if the Russians are geared up every last Panzer and every last corp is required to be facing them. You can move stuff over to the West but you will be slowly pulled apart which I suppose is historical ... Only a portion of the German Army was in the East ... Many men tied up all over the place. Doesn't give much incentive for Yugoslavia, Greece, etc... though why would you create more of a hassle? Up the Production for these at least cause the manpower isn't worth it and imagine most games are decided in 1942. So you don't get paid by invading Norway/Yugoslavia/Greece in 1940 until much later?

As for the Allied side Major Naval Invasions are the only way they hassle the Axis and stay in the game. Their immense numbers is a bit insane. I have a game with literally what appears to me 20 Army Corps after my opponent lost 20 Corps invading France at the end of 1942. I feel like I couldn't kill enough Allies if you paid me to stop him. Though on the flipside this has saved the Soviets from being steamrolled and at this point is just sort of funny to watch. Allies couldn't of afforded to lose a million men and explain it to their public in botched invasions without a huge morale hit and say that's cool and dandy and send in another million. Though in game terms it's the certain way to win for the Allies...

< Message edited by battlevonwar -- 1/13/2021 3:42:08 PM >

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)

Post #: 5

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/13/2021 6:56:55 PM

squatter

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

All good comments.

But nobody seems to want to address to core point of the thread:

Are you happy that units in transports can repair/upgrade and gain supply level and readiness for unlimited time without requiring any supplies?

(in reply to battlevonwar)

Post #: 6

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 12:06:27 AM

Harrybanana

Posts: 2372
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline

Squatter,

I agree with you. A player should not be rewarded for loading units onto transports and then just let them sit while the units gain repairs/upgrades and readiness. I did not know this is what actually happens. I assume you have tested this. Do they gain readiness as if they are in level 9 supply? If so, that is truly bad. I agree with you that they should lose readiness once the supply of the transport is exhausted. But as you say, what happens if they just stay in port so never have reduced supply? I would be happy in that case if they neither gain nor lose readiness. It seems to me that the only player who can really afford to do this is the Western Allies. The Axis and Russians need every unit they have on the map.

Part of the problem though is that historically units often did depart from far distant ports to perform an invasion. The American troops involved in Torch sailed from the States. The Canadians invading Sicily departed from the UK. As far as I am aware none of these troops suffered from their long voyage. Of course, a trans-Atlantic crossing only really took less than 14 days (1 turn); not the 42 days (3 turns) it takes in the game.

(in reply to squatter)

Post #: 7

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 11:20:55 AM

squatter

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

Squatter,

I agree with you. A player should not be rewarded for loading units onto transports and then just let them sit while the units gain repairs/upgrades and readiness. I did not know this is what actually happens. I assume you have tested this. Do they gain readiness as if they are in level 9 supply? If so, that is truly bad. I agree with you that they should lose readiness once the supply of the transport is exhausted. But as you say, what happens if they just stay in port so never have reduced supply? I would be happy in that case if they neither gain nor lose readiness. It seems to me that the only player who can really afford to do this is the Western Allies. The Axis and Russians need every unit they have on the map.

Part of the problem though is that historically units often did depart from far distant ports to perform an invasion. The American troops involved in Torch sailed from the States. The Canadians invading Sicily departed from the UK. As far as I am aware none of these troops suffered from their long voyage. Of course, a trans-Atlantic crossing only really took less than 14 days (1 turn); not the 42 days (3 turns) it takes in the game.

I have observed this closely, and Alvaro can confirm:

When a ground unit boards a transport, it is now treated as a naval unit for basically all purposes.

This means that it no longer draws supply from the port supply net, it is supplied by the port value.

A port of 5+ value can support an unlimited amount of naval units. Thus for example, Malta or Gibraltar can supply an unlimited amount of ground units in transports.

While in a port a ground unit in a transport will regain readiness, reinforce and upgrade - just like any other naval unit.

My suggestion is that while in transports and in port, ground units are treated as ground units for supply/upgrade/reinforce purposes, not as naval units.

Also, while at sea in transport, ground units should lose a small amount of readiness per turn.

(in reply to Harrybanana)

Post #: 8

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 2:36:37 PM

gwgardner

Posts: 5966
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

To address your concerns abstractly: why not treat amphibious assault units like airborne units - require them to be at nn efficiency level to do an assault. This would avoid the exploit, where a player parks a unit on a transport and just leaves it there awaiting an opportunity for an assault. This also requires that a unit lose efficiency each turn it is on a transport.

So make nn efficiency some figure less than 100, perhaps two turns worth of efficiency losses, like 88 or something. Has to be low enough for historical long-range amphibious assaults.

This has the effect of requiring planning and preparation before doing an amphibious assault.

< Message edited by gwgardner -- 1/14/2021 2:40:34 PM >

(in reply to squatter)

Post #: 9

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 4:39:46 PM

AlvaroSousa

Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline

The ground/air unit in a fleet issue has been resolved. It will have a slight effectiveness loss as long as it stays in a fleet.

As for invasions.....

I have a seperate proposal as I have been thinking about this.

An effectiveness loss once landing from an invasion that becomes less burdening as years pass.

1939 effectiveness loss -40%
1940 effectiveness loss -35%
1941 effectiveness loss -30%
1942 effectiveness loss -25%
1943 effectiveness loss -15%
1944 effectiveness loss -5%

In WPP it will be a new technology but I can't change that in WPE.

_____________________________

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 gwgardner)

Post #: 10

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 4:56:47 PM

squatter

Posts: 585
Joined: 6/24/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvaroSousa

The ground/air unit in a fleet issue has been resolved. It will have a slight effectiveness loss as long as it stays in a fleet.

As for invasions.....

I have a seperate proposal as I have been thinking about this.

An effectiveness loss once landing from an invasion that becomes less burdening as years pass.

1939 effectiveness loss -40%
1940 effectiveness loss -35%
1941 effectiveness loss -30%
1942 effectiveness loss -25%
1943 effectiveness loss -15%
1944 effectiveness loss -5%

In WPP it will be a new technology but I can't change that in WPE.

You mean a tech category to research? Good idea

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)

Post #: 11

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 5:40:16 PM

AlvaroSousa

Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline

Can't modify tech due to the data structure. This would be hard coded.

_____________________________

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 squatter)

Post #: 12

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 8:12:54 PM

stjeand

Posts: 15
Joined: 1/10/2021
Status: offline

I think I unit sitting on a transport should be have the same loss as fighting each turn, 0% first turn they say 6% loss per turn sitting on a transport.
That would have an effect over time I suspect which is how it should be rather than sitting in a boat getting stronger.

That should be the same for naval transport. UK sending troops to Libya by way of the Red Sea? At sea for 2 months does not make a division arrive in perfect working order.

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)

Post #: 13

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 11:42:42 PM

Harrybanana

Posts: 2372
Joined: 11/27/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stjeand

I think I unit sitting on a transport should be have the same loss as fighting each turn, 0% first turn they say 6% loss per turn sitting on a transport.
That would have an effect over time I suspect which is how it should be rather than sitting in a boat getting stronger.

That should be the same for naval transport. UK sending troops to Libya by way of the Red Sea? At sea for 2 months does not make a division arrive in perfect working order.

Except that historically it would not have taken 2 months, it would have taken less than a month I think. Unless the transports stopped off at a friendly port along the way.

(in reply to stjeand)

Post #: 14

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/14/2021 11:53:47 PM

MorningDew

Posts: 1081
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline

What if the percent loss also scaled based on effectiveness. So units at 100% have less loss. Perhaps as simple as 100% or more cuts the loss in half. Simulates planning for the invasion.

_____________________________

(in reply to Harrybanana)

Post #: 15

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/15/2021 12:58:54 AM

AlvaroSousa

Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline

it is. The penalty X the current effectiveness

_____________________________

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 #: 16

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/15/2021 3:29:39 AM

MorningDew

Posts: 1081
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline

Proposal is linear - I was thinking more benefit to planning.

_____________________________

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)

Post #: 17

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/15/2021 2:37:24 PM

stjeand

Posts: 15
Joined: 1/10/2021
Status: offline

I agree that is should not take 2 months to sail to a location but...
To have a bonus to your effectiveness because you are on a transport...where as the same unit on a train receives an effectiveness hit...that does not make sense.
I would think naval transport should have the same effect at a rail move to say the least.

Regarding the planning...

Not sure how you would incorporate that...perhaps something like.
Unit X is planning a naval operation so for the Y turns it is unavailable to move due to "planning" and upon a set date they receive and efficiency bonus upon landing, or smaller negative.

I could not speak to what it would take to program that...

Interesting idea though.

(in reply to Harrybanana)

Post #: 18

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/15/2021 3:45:28 PM

AlvaroSousa

Posts: 7472
Joined: 7/29/2013
Status: offline

Let me make this clear.... say it is 1942.... You do the raid in France with a Marine division at 95%. 1941 penalty is 25%. Means .75 X .95 = 71% effectiveness after they land assuming you load, move, and invade the same turn.

So I guess let me rewrite the chart since I see how everyone took it the wrong way.

After successful invasion on top of coastal losses due to being next to the enemy
1939 effectiveness x60%
1940 effectiveness x65%
1941 effectiveness x70%
1942 effectiveness x75%
1943 effectiveness x85%
1944+ effectiveness x95%

_____________________________

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 stjeand)

Post #: 19

RE: How to make invasions less easy - 1/15/2021 6:44:48 PM

MorningDew

Posts: 1081
Joined: 9/20/2006
From: Greenville, SC
Status: offline

As I said before, I think it is a good change. Need to playtest to validate that the scale of effectiveness loss is correct, but I think it properly simulates improving amphibious tech. If I understood from another thread, it might be linked to a technology advancement in subsequent games, which I think makes even more sense.

_____________________________

(in reply to AlvaroSousa)

Post #: 20