I figure there aren’t too many things classified as Islands that would have air bases so far away as to make them invulnerable to shore bombardment. The air fields on Guadalcanal and Wake island certainly got hit and both Hickam and Pearl could be hit from the sea. By definition, this ability assumes no defenders. Even a single scrambling fighter or defending destroyer nullifies the ability.
Shore Bombardments
-
I was working from memory when I posted the above, but it turns out that Wikipedia (which I checked a moment ago) has a whole article on this subject:
Allied naval bombardments of Japan during World War II
During the last weeks of World War II, warships of the United States Navy, the British Royal Navy, and the Royal New Zealand Navy bombarded industrial and military facilities in Japan. Most of these bombardments involved battleships and caused heavy damage to several of the factories targeted, as well as nearby civilian areas. A major goal of the attacks was to provoke the Japanese military into committing some of its reserve force of aircraft into battle. However, the Japanese did not attempt to attack the Allied bombardment forces, and none of the involved warships suffered any damage.
-
Bombarding factories - now that sounds kind of cool!
-
@Der:
Bombarding factories - now that sounds kind of cool!
Yes, that sounds awesome… our games rarely conduct bombing raids on facilities such as bases, a fly by salvo from a battleship or cruiser that has nothing better to do would really bring damage on bases into our games.
-
IMHO - The limiting of one ship per landing ground unit is to prevent you from landing one infantry and firing 30 bombardment shots draining the enemy player’s defenses for minimal attacker losses. (This was a big problem in 2nd edition classic).
So it is definitely ahistorical, but it’s definitely needed for game balance. Again, IMHO.
-
@Young:
@Der:
Bombarding factories - now that sounds kind of cool!
Yes, that sounds awesome… our games rarely conduct bombing raids on facilities such as bases, a fly by salvo from a battleship or cruiser that has nothing better to do would really bring damage on bases into our games.
And if it turns out that this ability is overpowered, it could be tweaked in some way to trim it back a bit. For example, to pick up on what YG said about fly-by salvos, there could be a limitation saying that battleships and cruisers can’t remain in the same coastal sea zone indefinitely, lobbing shells at enemy installations on consecutive turns, because staying too long next to an enemy coast in real life would induce the enemy to counter-attack by using planes or by moving artillery into the area. (In fact, the Allied shelling of Japan in 1945 was in part designed to provoke the Japanese into expending some of their aircraft on counter-attacks. The Japanese, however, didn’t take the bait.) So in the game, battleships and cruisers who’ve attracted attention by bombarding enemy land facilities might be required to exit the coastal sea zone and stay away from it for one turn before being allowed to return to the same costal sea zone for another bombardment raid. Though perhaps they might be allowed to carry out a bombardment raid from coastal sea zone A on one turn, then move on the next turn to coastal sea zone B and carry out a bombardment raid from there, without having to skip a turn. It would all depend on what’s considered too powerful or not.
To expand, by the way, on a point I made earlier, limiting this game ability to battleships and cruisers would be justifiable, even though some Allied destroyers did take part in the naval bombardment of Japan in 1945 (most of which was conducted by battleships). In anti-aircraft defense, WWII battleships and cruisers and destroyers were all using the same weapons (5-inch dual-purpose guns, 40mm and 20mm autocannons, and .50-caliber heavy machine guns), though in vastly different numbers (because the bigger the ship, the more weapons could be carried). In the case of naval bombardment, however, there’s a difference in weapon type, not just in weapon numbers. Destroyers would have used their 5-inch dual-purpose guns for such bombardment. Cruisers and battleships carried 5-inch guns too (in larger numbers than destroyers), but they also had heavier artillery (which destroyers lacked) as their primary armament. Light cruisers typically had 6-inch guns, heavy cruisers had 8-inch guns, and WWII battleships had 14-inch, 15-inch, 16-inch or 18-inch guns. Those guns fired much heavier and more destructive shells than 5-inch guns, and had much longer range, so they could reach targets further inland and/or allow the ship to stay further away from the enemy coastline when shooting. As an example, the 16-inch guns of the Iowa class battleships had a maximum range of about 24 miles, and the explosive power of their high-capacity shells (the armour-piercing ones carried less explosive filling) was sufficiently large that, as was later demonstrated in Vietnam, a single shell landing in a jungle would clear away enough trees to instantly create a helicopter landing zone. I also seem to recall that, when the four Iowas were used in Korea for shore bombardment, the enemy troops on the receiving end disliked not just the obvious blast effects but also the fact that the incoming shells apparently sounded like an approaching freight train when they were in flight.
-
@Cmdr:
IMHO - The limiting of one ship per landing ground unit is to prevent you from landing one infantry and firing 30 bombardment shots draining the enemy player’s defenses for minimal attacker losses. (This was a big problem in 2nd edition classic).Â
So it is definitely ahistorical, but it’s definitely needed for game balance. Again, IMHO.
That is almost correct, I remember it was named the Dieppe Raid, UK would land one inf in Western Europe and use 4 or 6 Battleships to kill Huns. In the Revised 2004 edition it was even worse, the Battleship would roll preemptive dice in the Opening Fire phase, the defenders would not even make it to the casualties zone on the battleboard. The Shore bombardment had become a game breaker, and something had to be done. The answer was to match each battleship with a matching infantry, just like with the artillery.
-
Strategic Shore Bombardment (SSB)
As a special combat (after Strategic Bombing Raids but before Amphibious Assaults in the resolve combat phase), Cruisers and/or Battleships may bombard enemy facilities on territories adjacent to their sea zone.
However, each facility has a built in coastal gun which can fire up to 3 shots each and all die rolls of 1 will hit bombarding ships (same rules as built in AA guns). Also, the defending player may scramble up to 3 air units per operational airbase adjacent to the bombarding ships.
Afterwards, assign any surviving ships to target facilities, and than roll 1 die each to damage targets. Each battleship will add +2 to their roll (unless they are damaged in which case they get no bonus), and each cruiser will receive a +1 to their damage roll.
Ships conducting SSBs may not attack in any other way during the same turn, nor may they move during the non combat movement phase.
-
@Young:
Strategic Shore Bombardment (SSB)
As a special combat (after Strategic Bombing Raids but before Amphibious Assaults in the resolve combat phase), Cruisers and/or Battleships may bombard enemy facilities on territories adjacent to their sea zone.
However, each facility has a built in coastal gun which can fire up to 3 shots each and all die rolls of 1 will hit bombarding ships (same rules as built in AA guns). Also, the defending player may scramble up to 3 air units per operational airbase adjacent to the bombarding ships.
Afterwards, assign any surviving ships to target facilities, and than roll 1 die each to damage targets. Each battleship will add +2 to their roll (unless they are damaged in which case they get no bonus), and each cruiser will receive a +1 to their damage roll.
Ships conducting SSBs may not attack in any other way during the same turn, nor may they move during the non combat movement phase.
Looks good, I think. Interesting idea to introduce coastal artillery as a counterpart to AAA. My one suggestion would be to call this a “Coastal Bombardment Raid” (modeled on the “raid” word in “strategic bombing raid” rather than on the “strategic” word), because I find it hard to think of shore bombardment as anything other than a tactical operation. Unless it’s being conducted by vessels armed with the 16-inch W-23 nuclear artillery shell that was developed for the Iowa-class battleships in the 1950s, and which had a yield roughly in the range of the Hiroshima bomb.
-
I believe only Naval base should have a defense @1 against any number of ships making Coastal bombardment Raid against any facility.
Depicting mines and coastal guns.
Airbase can scramble up to three planes, already enough.
IC gets no defense, need a Naval Base.
NB now gets something of its own, too.IMO, 1D6 damage is enough.
A lot of IC are out of range from the shore, but not for planes, hence D6+2 damage for StBs. -
@Young:
Strategic Shore Bombardment (SSB)
As a special combat (after Strategic Bombing Raids but before Amphibious Assaults in the resolve combat phase), Cruisers and/or Battleships may bombard enemy facilities on territories adjacent to their sea zone.
So it is done after SBR is resolved, but if you did SBR the SSB might be redundant or not needed. Need to look at this closer.
However, each facility has a built in coastal gun which can fire up to 3 shots each and all die rolls of 1 will hit bombarding ships (same rules as built in AA guns).
So is it only the facility that is being targeted by bombardment that gets to fire? First I would think that once the ships fire that any def facility able would return fire. I think that 3 shots from any one facility is too many, but 1 shot from multiple facilities might work. May limit it to naval base (and coastal bunker) only. Air bases and IC could be inland and not have shore defenses.
On another note I have long thought that a NB should have some limited coastal def roll at attacking ships in the adjacent sz.
Also, the defending player may scramble up to 3 air units per operational airbase adjacent to the bombarding ships.
This is why an air base probably shouldn’t be able to fire a shot at ships, because it already can send air units to deal with ships. Plus like I said air bases might be inland and wouldn’t have coastal art.
Afterwards, assign any surviving ships to target facilities, and than roll 1 die each to damage targets. Each battleship will add +2 to their roll (unless they are damaged in which case they get no bonus), and each cruiser will receive a +1 to their damage roll.
This is where you lose me. I would think that the ship and def facility (NB or bunker only IMO) fire simultaneously, so the targets are already chosen and there is no stopping it (with exception of maybe a sea battle before hand including a scramble?). I don’t think I would give Cruisers (3) or BB (4) a boost to their rolls, but that would depend on how the rule shakes out, and the over all risk.
Ships conducting SSBs may not attack in any other way during the same turn, nor may they move during the non combat movement phase.
Yea you can’t have them doing double duty. However I have always thought that as the attacker you should have the option to split your fleet and assign naval to do different tasks. Say there is a single dd def, but they can scramble. You have a rather large task force that will be in that sz so why can’t you assign some navy and air to the sea battle, and assign say a CA and BB to do bombardment (can’t participate in sea attack). If the sea battle fails, the ships can’t bombard.
-
@Young:
Are shore bombardments depicted as they should be in G40 according to military historic accuracy, or does the mechanic need to be tweaked?
Here is some posts to water the mill:
@WILD:Enemy tpts or subs don’t block movement. You can have a ship stay and kill it, and pass through the sz with the rest of your fleet, or move whole navy through and have a plane kill it. Of coarse that plane can’t be used in other combats that turn.
However if the transport (or sub) was in sz 93, then you can ignore it or attack it. If you kill it you can’t use bombardment on S France, but you can still amphib through the sz.
@P@nther:
@P@nther:
@WILD:
However if the transport (or sub) was in sz 93, then you can ignore it or attack it. If you kill it you can’t use bombardment on S France, but you can still amphib through the sz.
Why not? If a lone plane is sent to sink the lone xport, why would that negate the BB shore bombardment?
In case of an amphibious assault you can either conduct a sea battle or offshore bombard. Never both.
But I would think that since a xport is not a war ship, the BB can still ignore it because it is not blocking any navel movement. (Meaning there’s no “clearing of the sea zone” of warships before landing the amphibious assault.) And if no navel units are attacking the xport, then there is no navel battle that the warships are engaged in prior to the landing. The lone plane is simply sinking the lone xport with it cargo. It would be the same if the xport was in another SZ….
Sorry, this is simply wrong. The rules are pretty clear:
@rulebook:
Amphibious Assault Sequence
1. Sea combat
2. Battleship and cruiser bombardment
3. Land combatStep 1. Sea Combat
If there are defending surface warships and/or
scrambled air units, sea combat occurs. If there are
only defending submarines and/or transports, the
attacker can choose to ignore those units or conduct sea combat.
If sea combat occurs, all attacking and defending sea and air
units present must participate in the battle. (Even if the attacker
chose to ignore defending subs and/or transports, they will still
be involved in the battle if the defender scrambles air units and
forces a sea battle.) Conduct the sea combat using the rules for
General Combat (page 18), then go to step 3 (land combat).
If no sea combat occurs, go to step 2 (bombardment).Step 2. Battleship and Cruiser Bombardment
If there was NOT a combat in the sea zone from which you
are offloading units from transports, any accompanying
battleships and cruisers in that sea zone can conduct a one-time
bombardment of one coastal territory or island group being
attacked.The Plane attacking and sinking the Transport is a sea combat. Plus: If you decide to engange the Transport the Battleship participates in the sea battle.
Thus offshore bombardment is not possible.HTH :-)
@Young:
Yep, and if you were depending on those shore bombardments during a tough Amphibious assaults, all that’s needed from the defender is to scramble a single air unit into that sea zone forcing an unwanted sea battle, which would automatically negate all possible bombardments. So if there’s a sea battle (regardless of how or why), ships won’t get shore bombardments.
This make me realized that a large fleet can sink a TP in a different SZ by allocating a single warship on it while making an amphibious assault in another SZ (with a Shorebombardment allowed).
But if this TP is in the same SZ it forfeit all shore bombardment.I believe this rule oversimplified and gives silly result.
Amendment:
If any single warship (or plane) can be dispatch against lonely TPs in same SZ from which an amphibious assault is going on, it should not forfeit the shore bombardment of other warships (not taking part in the defenseless TPs slaughter festival).It is about the same kind of special tweak than second edition defending Submarine which require that any TP taking part in an amphibious assault be escorted by at least one surface warship. (In this specific case, Submarine cannot be ignored, like was said in the general rule which was applied thoroughly in first edition rule.)
Since it needs only a single unit to destroy an infinite number of lonely TPs, I just proposed that lonely TPs should be sink by a single dispatched warship which cannot make a shorebombardment. All others have a full blown shore bombardment.
-
If you want the shorebombardment rule to be accurate, you should think about what role it played historically.
In WW2, most divisions had an artillery component. If you count the number of light, medium and heavy guns in divisions, you quickly discover there where ALOT of guns, and the armies used a lot of resources to have them there. Artillery where extremely important. When an inf attacks at 1 and defends at 2, that unit has alot of artillery as a part of the piece. Otherwise it would attack on 1 for each 3 units or something. In essence, artillery is important.
When you have a regular battle, you deploy some artillery at the front, and some on the sides, and some in the back. What is deployed where is dependent on the type of artillery and the type of terrain. When you do an amphibious invasion, you can deploy none of your artillery. You can have some marine landing vehicles with some small caliber guns and perhaps a few amphibious tanks. This is how the ships guns where used, they where used as a replacement for artillery.
Therefor, If I where to try to make an accurate Shore Bombardment rule, I wouls make it so that, in the first round, you could only attack with 8 units per supporting BB, 4 units per supporting CR and 1 unit per supporting DD
Suggested Topics
