Amphibious Assaults

I think it is a fine way to change this strange habit of not defending cost line (actually it is the optimized way when a lot of cruiser and battleship are parts of the assault).
So in amphibious assault, you get a special phase where warships shore bombardments and defending artillery units can roll without retaliation.

In addition, I believe 5 IPCs AAA unit should be considered a 2 hits units, making it a much better defending units to simulate all concrete and bunkers.

That way, Germany will be incente to put these first strike Artillery units (Anti-Aircraft and regular Art) as a much better defending position which can do damage before the main battle start.

On Marines unit, here is my two cents, coming from Black Elk redesign thread:
@Baron:

@Lit:

My view on elite/commando infantry is that they generally did not cost anymore industrial resources than regular troops, rather they are special because of the endurance and toughness of the men selected for the unit. Only a fraction of the military age population could serve in these units. Why not have them cost 3, since they require no more industrial input than regular infantry, but then limit the total numbers each nation can build too a fraction of there IPC production(IPC being a rough estimate of population) for instance for every 10 IPC you can maintain one commando infantry. Perhaps also require they are built over the course of 2 turns to simulate the additional training time.

…

@Narvik:

@Baron:

The other way, still impressionistic, try to be more accurate at strategic and unit level to figure how 1 army group/division is different from a Marines group/division in combat value.

First, the army group is equipped with heavy infantry weapons like field artillery, grenade launchers, mortars, heavy machineguns etc etc that delivers a heavy punch, while the Marines and Paratroopers only have their rifles and must gamble on surprise and tactics.

Second, the army group got trucks and horses to supply them with ammo and stuff so they keep a good combat perseverance over long time, while the Marines and Paras only have food and ammo for 2 days of fighting.

To not ruin this very abstract game, I figure that Marines and Paras can only have special abilities in the combat move and first round of combat. After that they act like regular infantry.

About the Marines, I think they should roll 2 or less as standard during amphibious assaults, but shore bombardment from a Battleship or Cruiser can boost a matching Marine to a 3 or less as hit. Field artillery should of course not be allowed to boost any unit during amphibious assaults, since it takes a lot of time to move them ashore and get them working. Its not like a tank that just drive ashore and start shooting. Anyway I strongly believe in the A&A 1914 rules that let defending artillery fire one pre-emptive round at the landing party when they are swimming defenseless to the beach. Amphibious assaults against defended shores are actually very weak attacks, and it strongly favors the dug-in defenders in the bunker line. Its the Panzer blitzkrieg attack against surprised defenders in plain fields that are true strong attacks.

@Baron:

@Narvik:

Pay attention. First, if Elite units should have a production cap, then so should tanks and battleships too. There are no good reason a nation can spam the map with Bombers or Battleships, but only build one or two Elite units during the game. Second, if Elite units must be taken as first casualties, then so should tanks and planes too. It is very ahistorical that after a great battle, millions of infantry are dead but all the tanks and bombers survived. Actually in the real war it was the other way around, so the idea is not bad, but it sure break the old A&A tradition of owner picking casualties.

…
Yes, Marc is correct, Paras are light armed, but sometimes surprise is stronger than heavy guns. I figure the surprise factor justifies a first roll of 2 or less as hits.

…

@CWO:

Based on actual WWII USMC practice, I’d say that Marine detachments should be limited to aircraft carriers and battleships and perhaps also to cruisers, and they should be restricted to one Marine per ship maximum. Minor warships didn’t carry Marine detachments, and the major warships which did carry them only carried them in small numbers. The only ships that should be allowed to carry more than one Marine should be the transport ships, and that’s because the Marines on trannies aren’t shipboard detachment, they’re the payload of an amphibious assault force.

Landing a full-sized, fully-fledged Marine division from amphibious assault transport ships is very different from putting ashore an improvised landing party composed of the Marine detachments of a handful of major warships. Such an improvised landing party would have several disadvantages over a proper amphibious assault force: it would be much smaller; its men would not have trained together as a unit (since they’re from different ships); its men would not have gone through months of intense preparation aimed at seizing a specific objective (amphibious assaults require lengthy, careful planning and training to be successful); and Marine contingents on warships don’t have access to large numbers of landing craft and AMTRAC vehicles (which are crucial to full-blown amphibious landings).

Going that way imply a totally different direction IMO, something like this:

Elite Infantry/Marines/Paratrooper/Shock troop:
Cost 3
Attack 1-2
Defense 1
Move 1-2

Sea movement bonus:
1 Elite unit can be carried on 1 Battleship or 1 Cruiser.
Transport can load 2 Elites or 1 Elite Infantry plus any other 1 ground unit.

Air movement bonus:
Up to three Elite Infantry can start from an active Air Base to make a paratrooper attack drop up to 3 TTs away in an enemy territory which doesn’t need to be attacked by other ground units.
Gets +1A on the first combat round when airdropped.
Must submit to pre-emptive AAA fire first.

Land movement bonus:
Gets move 2 if paired 1:1 with Mechanized Infantry (only).

Gets +1A combined arms with Artillery.
Gets +1A combined arms with Tank.

No limit number.

That way, in an amphibious assault Marines will be first casualty compared to regular infantry because it is the same attack factor but a lesser defense factor (very low 1), unless you need to move them on a Cruiser or BB and want to spare TP to turn back home for new supply.

From a game perspective, an interesting and very specialized unit would be like this one.
It has low cost but also lower combat values to balance with its carrying capacity on Cruiser and Battleship.
Try to see the game at army group level, Marines combat unit division are certainly smaller than a full fledge army unit. That is why I suggest low offense / defense values except in the one combat situations which gives Marines their reputation: amphibious assault.

Marines as simply Marines and nothing more
Cost 3
Attack 1-2
Defense 1
Move 1

Sea movement bonus:
1 Marines unit can be carried on 1 Battleship or 1 Cruiser.
Transport can load 2 Marines or 1 Marines plus any other 1 ground unit.
Gets +1A on amphibious assault only.

No combined arms with Artillery.
No production limit number.

That way, 2 Marines for 6 IPCs, A4 D2 on amphibious assault will be better cost ratio than regular Infantry paired with Artillery A4 D4 C7.
But, in defense, 2 Marines Defense @2 cannot hold the ground as 2 Infantry Defense @4.

And also 2 Marines being weaker if going inland combat by themselves because of the no pairing bonus with artillery. But they stay on par 1:1 compared to a single Infantry on offense.

Also, in amphibious assault, Marines will be probably taken amongst first casualties compared to regular infantry because it is the same attack factor than Inf with Artillery (but have a lesser defense factor (very low 1), unless you keep them to move on a Cruiser or BB and want to spare TP to turn back home for new supply on next turn. So, such Marines unit will more often die during debarkment and regular Infantry will last longer, in anticipation of next assault going inland.

So, it provides a different kind of tactical combat with 2 Marines on TP and still keeping Inf+Art a competitive combination too.

D1 was to reflect the smaller number of soldiers involved per unit compared to standard Infantry unit.
It is not for lesser morale but for less logistics and support required by this unit.
Lower defense @1, come from the lesser number of individuals being less equiped than regular Infantry unit.
Attack @2 on amphibious assault is balanced by lower defense @1 to allow a more balanced Cruiser and Battleship carrying capacity. This unit have a better attacking factor because of abilities, training and surprise tactics despise their fewer number of soldiers. They can do a lot with less but not for an extended period.

In addition, their lower defense factor would make them amongst the first casualty during counter-attack which can figure for they high risk mission they undertake.

Baron Munchhausen, thanks for the great summary of the earlier thread!

I very much like the idea of a single new type of “Elite / Special Forces” unit that could fill the roles of Marine, Paratrooper, Storm Trooper, and Commando, and that would trade off some of its sustained combat power for extra mobility and niche special attacks. I think introducing more than one new type of infantry unit would make it hard to find (and distinguish!) sculpts without adding much more in the way of tactical interest.

I also approve of efforts to make amphibious assaults weaker; I might even go so far as to deny artillery and tanks the power to roll dice in the first combat round. Just have a preemptive combat round with Elites, Cruisers, Battleships, and airplanes vs. Artillery, AAA, and airplanes. Then in round 2 of combat and on, roll as normal. I like the idea of having AAA continue to roll in each round of combat, but given the setup of the preemptive round (where AAA are one of only a few unit types that can fire), I don’t see the need to grant them special “double-shot” powers. The cost of an AAA unit might need to go up by $1 to keep them balanced.

To balance out weaker amphibious assaults, I think we need to make it much easier/cheaper/faster to ship troops across the ocean. I know there is at least one very long thread about redesigning the roster of naval unit types, and I BEG you all NOT to repeat that thread here, but I want to point out that if you make amphibious assaults weaker without finding a way to make transports more efficient, then it will become so difficult for the Allies to invade Europe that it will effectively remove Atlantic naval invasions as a practical option, so that the Allies will be limited to a handful of non-naval strategies like strategic bombing campaigns, flying fighters to Moscow, and putting 2+ factories in the Middle East. You will almost never get to play with your cool new marines and pre-emptive artillery strikes, because people will very rarely bother to invade Europe.

@Argothair:

Baron Munchhausen, thanks for the great summary of the earlier thread!

I very much like the idea of a single new type of “Elite / Special Forces” unit that could fill the roles of Marine, Paratrooper, Storm Trooper, and Commando, and that would trade off some of its sustained combat power for extra mobility and niche special attacks. I think introducing more than one new type of infantry unit would make it hard to find (and distinguish!) sculpts without adding much more in the way of tactical interest.

I also approve of efforts to make amphibious assaults weaker; I might even go so far as to deny artillery and tanks the power to roll dice in the first combat round. Just have a preemptive combat round with Elites, Cruisers, Battleships, and airplanes vs. Artillery, AAA, and airplanes. Then in round 2 of combat and on, roll as normal. I like the idea of having AAA continue to roll in each round of combat, but given the setup of the preemptive round (where AAA are one of only a few unit types that can fire), I don’t see the need to grant them special “double-shot” powers. The cost of an AAA unit might need to go up by $1 to keep them balanced.

To balance out weaker amphibious assaults, I think we need to make it much easier/cheaper/faster to ship troops across the ocean. I know there is at least one very long thread about redesigning the roster of naval unit types, and I BEG you all NOT to repeat that thread here, but I want to point out that if you make amphibious assaults weaker without finding a way to make transports more efficient, then it will become so difficult for the Allies to invade Europe that it will effectively remove Atlantic naval invasions as a practical option, so that the Allies will be limited to a handful of non-naval strategies like strategic bombing campaigns, flying fighters to Moscow, and putting 2+ factories in the Middle East. You will almost never get to play with your cool new marines and pre-emptive artillery strikes, because people will very rarely bother to invade Europe.

Thanks, my pleasure.
About increasing transport, first there is this:
Sea movement bonus:
1 Marines unit can be carried on 1 Battleship or 1 Cruiser.
Transport can load 2 Marines or 1 Marines plus any other 1 ground unit.

Also, Cruiser should be considered a A3 D3 C12 M3-4 unit (M4 with Naval Base bonus).
This would increase the number of ground units available as fast reinforcement, or as part of TP fleet.

Transport should not be able to load 3 units.
But US may receive 1 free TP on west coast and 1 free TP on east coast each turn when at war with Japan (+1 Western US TP) and/or Germany (+1 Eastern US TP).
This would figure the intensive and massive building of Liberty ships.

@WILD:

Thanks Baron Munchhausen, I wish I had seen that thread because there are so many similarities (wish I would have been a part of it). It is spot on for how I view an amphib should be, and then it even gets into a Special Forces Unit (that was awesome).

For amphibs def art getting a pre-empt strike in the first round (same time you fire AA gun), and attacking inf/mech not getting the art pairing boost in the first round would make the landings much more difficult. I agree that theoretically art and tanks should also be held out of the first round too, but I don’t want to go over board.

As for AA guns I’m looking at general house rule where AA guns fire 2 shots in the first round, and 1 shot every round after (probably still keeping them pre-empt). I just don’t think they should be a blow the wad and take one for the team type of unit. **AA should be allowed to continue to roll at air craft instead of having no use so you take it as a hit (it would still be able to take a hit if the owner wants).

In the same breath I’m also looking at tac bmrs being able to target navy or ground when they roll “1”. So it would be possible to take out an AA gun (or tank, art, damaged BB etc….) among other changes.**

I don’t know if you see this, maybe it can provide ideas for what you are looking for:

Here is where I actually stand about a cost structure and simplify interactions between planes,

Unit type        Cost    - 3 IPCs incremental scale
Combat values
Special abilities

AIRCRAFTS & ANTI-AIRCRAFT

All aircrafts can hit unsubmerged Submarines without Destroyer presence.
Any single attacking aircraft blocks special Scattering Transport capacity.
Air Retreat option: All attacking aircrafts can withdraw anytime while attacking ground units can continue combat (similar to amphibious assault air retreat).
AAA and Aircrafts special rolls have to be rolled first in regular combat phase and hits immediately allocated.

Fighter   9 IPCs
A3 D4 M4 (5 with Air Base bonus)
Air superiority unit: **On “1” or “2” roll hit aircraft first, then AAA, if available.  **
No combined arms.
Can land on Carrier.
SBR: A2 D2

Tactical Bomber   10 IPCs
A3 D3 M4 (5 with Air Base bonus)
Tank buster unit: On “1” or “2” roll pick any ground unit type as casualty.
Dive and Torpedo bomber unit: On “1” or “2” roll, hits must be taken on a Capital warship, owner choose individual unit type.
On a “1” roll can take plane as casualty instead of ground unit or Capital warship, owner still choose individual unit type.
No combined arms.
Can land on Carrier.
TBR: A1 first strike
Damage: 1D6 on Air Base and Naval Base.
Can do SBR air combat mission with StBs even if there is no AB or NB with IC. IC’s AAgun fire still apply to TcBs in this case.

Strategic Bomber   12 IPCs
A4 D1 M6 (7 with Air Base bonus)
On a “1” attack roll can take aircraft as casualty instead, owner still choose individual unit type.
SBR:  AA1 first strike up to two Fighters, which ever the lesser
Damage :  1D6+2

Anti-Aircraft Artillery    5 IPCs
A0 D1 regular AA1x3* M1 on CM or NCM, 1 hit,
*Fire in regular phase each combat round @1 against up to three aircrafts, which ever the lesser.
Regular defense @1 if there is no enemy’s attacking plane.

@WILD:

Reason being is that I don’t like how the axis rarely defend the coast, they generally set up a counter attack inland instead because of the games mechanics.

This is not a problem that is limited to coastal territories only. Because the game mechanic strongly favors the Attack, the rational players are forced to build huge stacks of units, surrendered by deadzones with a lonely infantry or destroyer as a blocker. You see this all over the map. An empty Normandy is no more historically uncorrect than a Poland with one infantry being traded every turn by another lone infantry. Maybe the game mechanic of A&A 1914 with one round of combat only and contested territories is more historical correct than Global 40 ? I dunno man.

That said, I really love the 1914 rule that let defending artillery roll one preemptive shot against landing units. It dont ruin game balance, but it do give the Amphibious assault a more autentich feeling. Of course it must be the first round of combat only, since that is the round the Attackers are supposed to be landing. The continuing rounds are supposed to be general land combat.

@WILD:

Baron, nice line up w/units. Most are in line with what I’m trying to develop. Not sure if I’m going to change units cost on planes but if there is too much attrition to air and navy I will probably lower some stuff as well.

Back to first strike art defending against an amphib (first round of battle). How do you handle it when a territory is attacked by land and sea. How do you assign the art that are in the defending territory. Do you allow only some art to roll first strike, maybe equal to the number of amphib units, and the rest roll normal?

PS: Do you think it would be over powering for all defending art to fire a first strike shot in the 1st round of battle. My original thought was all art should get a pre-empt shot in the 1st round, but I decided to test the waters on amphib defense first. I agree w/Narvic that the mechanics pretty much force you to back down and picket rather then set up to defend a territory (or region). Not sure if the Russians would attempt to put up more of a fight at the front lines or would they just retreat their art for the final assault on Moscow.

Your idea is much more simpler to apply. That way, all Artillery unit types, including Anti-Aircraft, roll a first shot. Then a regular combat begins. That way, defending Artillery would get two shots after first combat round completed. No need to make a distinction between amphib and others.
Debarkment difficulty is simulated by not allowing on first round attacker’s combined arms.

@Narvik:

@WILD:

Reason being is that I don’t like how the axis rarely defend the coast, they generally set up a counter attack inland instead because of the games mechanics.

This is not a problem that is limited to coastal territories only. Because the game mechanic strongly favors the Attack, the rational players are forced to build huge stacks of units, surrendered by deadzones with a lonely infantry or destroyer as a blocker. You see this all over the map. An empty Normandy is no more historically uncorrect than a Poland with one infantry being traded every turn by another lone infantry. Maybe the game mechanic of A&A 1914 with one round of combat only and contested territories is more historical correct than Global 40 ? I dunno man.

That said, I really love the 1914 rule that let defending artillery roll one preemptive shot against landing units. It dont ruin game balance, but it do give the Amphibious assault a more autentich feeling. Of course it must be the first round of combat only, since that is the round the Attackers are supposed to be landing. The continuing rounds are supposed to be general land combat.

I’m still thinking AAA should be the kind of unit to use in defensive stance to repel light trading.
I’m thinking about something like :
Anti-Aircraft Artillery (simulating defensive stronghold and bunker).
Attack 0
Defense 1, plus up to three first strike @1 against attacking planes, which ever the lesser
Move 1 (both CM or NCM)
Cost 4
Hits 2, no need to repair if it survives : one free hit repaired next turn.
That way, on first combat round AAA have two rolls (up to three vs planes) with first strike and one regular @1 vs any kind of units.
On next combat round, it still keep Def 1, thus one roll.

This kind of unit would be use as ground blocker.
Probably the optimized defense should be then 1 Inf and 1 AAA for 7 IPCs, total:  A1 D3, 3 hits
with up to 5 dice rolls in first combat round.
Or
1 Art and 1 AAA for sum : A2 D3, 3 hits, 8 IPCs
With up to 6 dice rolls in first combat round.
Such features would clearly be incentive to keep such units on defense rather than preparing a counter-offensive.

Well you could add any defenders killed by Battleships and Cruisers get no return fire or a defense roll.

What I meant was if art get a off shore shot then any casualties by battleship or cruiser are killed and removed .

Do you have any NA s or tech in yr game . You could make the off shore shot one of those .