1942.2 & G40 Improving historical accuracy of amphibious assault

Combining both HR (all Art and Arm A1 & Art D2 preemptive strike) is clearly rising the difficulty of amphibious assault.
Even if each HR can work and are reflecting some interesting historical aspects, maybe both will be too much.
Unless you input some way to compensate the initial disadvantage of attacker…

Battleship, Cruiser and Destroyer shore bombard boost one matching unit + 1.

Maybe the later is the response to the former.

During the first round of an Amph. Ass.
Destroyer give +1A boost to any 1 ground unit.
Cruiser give +1A boost to any 1 ground unit, in addition to the shore bombardment.
Battleship give +1A, to any 2 ground units, in addition to the shore bombardment.

@Razor:

OK, all attacking units minus 1 point, to a minimum of A1, that may work. After all the Royal Marines Armor Support Group did make a successful amphibious assault with Centurion and Sherman tanks during D-day, the famous Hobbarts funnies. And the Americans that attacked with infantry only did take some heavy casualties.

Exactly how weak the Amphibious assault are, and how strong the defense are, depends on a lot of things.

HBG make Paratroopers, Marines and Landing Crafts that may strengthen the landing. But they also make Coastal Guns that may help the defender. Then you have the Shore bombardment, that in this game is far more stronger than in real life. Then you can use the 1914 rule and let aircrafts land in a newly taken territory, representing combat air patrol and air cover, like it were in the real war. Or take with US and land UK fighters next turn, but I prefer the 1914 rule.

It is important to me that the H. rules are simple, smooth, elegant and historical correct. Then, it will be the players decisions if they want to defend a coastline heavy, or vacate it and build up a strong counter attack force in the adjacent and interior territory.

That could be much easily simulated by the weak or strong presence of Artillery units.
Instead of adding some “bunkers unit” for Atlantic Walls, a player could just adds a lot of Art unit along the Western European coast.

In itself Art worth more on the offensive with Inf. 7 IPCs giving 4 attack points.
But this added element of preemptive Art strike, it is a way to amplify the defensive value of Art. unit.

@Razor:

OK, all attacking units minus 1 point, to a minimum of A1, that may work.

**After all the Royal Marines Armor Support Group did make a successful amphibious assault with Centurion and Sherman tanks during D-day, the famous Hobbarts funnies.

And the Americans that attacked with infantry only did take some heavy casualties.**

Good historical reference from ETO.
I don’t have any from PTO, but I’m sure Pacific Marines corps had some motorized landings crafts.
And could have done better if such a similar D-Day task had arisen in Japanese Islands campaign.

@Razor:

@Baron:

During the first round of an Amph. Ass.
Destroyer give +1A boost to any 1 ground unit.
Cruiser give +1A boost to any 1 ground unit, in addition to the shore bombardment.
Battleship give +1A, to any 2 ground units, in addition to the shore bombardment.

I like this, but think that shore bombardment should boost infantry only. Shore bombardment are naval artillery, and it makes no sense to let artillery boost artillery. No matter how heavy barrage or many shells, they shoot holes in the air unless the suppressing barrage are followed up by infantry charge. And only Tacs should be able to boost tanks.

I think all warships should Shore bombard on A2, and boost a inf unit +1.
A naval shell is designed to sink ships and are different from an artillery shell that is designed to kill men. During the attack on Narvik in 1940, HMS Warspite and several destroyers shore bombarded the city of Bjerkvik for hours and only 9 civilians died, and no German defenders. They used the wrong type of shells.

I will not name it shore bombardment, maybe Supporting debarkment or something else.
Let the Shore bombardment be as it is for Cruiser and Battleship.

You said, they don’t have the good ammunition. But maybe some (US) BBs did, once they see that their main role was to support marines debarkment? IDK.

You can certainly HR all shore bombardment @2 but you will cripple the costly BB.
Do you have something else to give some value to BB? Maybe as I suggested below.
(I also suggested elsewhere to give 2 rounds of fire to BB: so 2 rounds @2, because I think BB guns have a greater range than cruiser guns.)

Probably more interesting to give:
During the first round of an Amph. Ass.
Destroyer give +1A boost to 1 Infantry unit.
Cruiser give +1A boost to 1 Infantry unit, in addition to the shore bombardment.
Battleship give +1A, to up to 2 Infantry units, in addition to the shore bombardment.

@Imperious:

The map should be marked for possible landing sites. It is not a fact that major landings could take place “anywhere”.

First, the attacker should only be able to attack with infantry only on the first round ( and air units). This would be rolled after SB is performed

Second, Defending Infantry and Artillery should fire preemptively ( loses taken first do not fire in subsequent rounds)

Third, all remaining attacking units roll, then remaining

The attacker should be able to retreat, however all mech units are converted into infantry ( they leave the beaches with equipment…ala Dunkirk)

This is all in AARHE 2004 ( look it up for other ideas)

Thanks IL for your ideas. I’ve just take a look on the AARHE about ASW.

Your four ideas are interesting to compare with what has been develop 'till now.

And Toblerone77 post is just the way I look upon all your suggestions:
@toblerone77:

The only thing I would interject upon is that IF the goal is to move closer to historical accuracy, you must remember that the scale and scope of the game does not represent just one battle, but a macroscopic representation of a campaign of a specified region. In other words a battle on the board for one territory represents a much bigger campaign on a relatively “large” section of the world. However the idea could be very fun. I particularly find the aspect of dissecting the battle mechanic via round compelling.

I can say that your ideas are quite nearer a tactical perspective than the macroscopic representation implied in such a strategic game.

In addition, some of your changes can probably affect the balance to be much more in favour of the defensive side of the amphibious assault, something which may implies some kind of modification to the start-up board.

I cannot go that far, even if the steps you proposed give a better picture of the historical hardiness of any amphibious assault.

So, before a detail exam of all your points, I will take another look to AARHE2004 on amph. assault, nonetheless I will kept in mind the advice of Toblerone77 and if I introduce any mods this HR, it will be at the strategic level, not tactical.

Thanks again.

@Imperious:

The map should be marked for possible landing sites. It is not a fact that major landings could take place “anywhere”.
True but it is too much zoom-in tactical level geography.
Let’s suppose the amphibious assault is made in an appropriate places.
The bad or good luck of the first roll of dices in combat is making for a good or bad landing place.

First, the attacker should only be able to attack with infantry only on the first round ( and air units). This would be rolled after SB is performed.
AAA fire then Shore Bombardment are the first two steps. At a tactical level, artillery and armor have a bad moment to pass through during landing phase. The issue is to figure it all at strategical level and keep balance.
I suggested this penalty can be enough:
instead of saying all A1 for the first round of an Amph. Assault
Just say all attacking ground units get -1A to a minimum of A1, for the first round.
Hence, Artillery get A1.
But, at least Armor can get A2.
And according to this HR, even an Inf getting A2 for being paired with Art is reduced to A1.  
But, at a strategical level, the SB can give a little support to Infantry unit trying to land.
That’s why:

During the first round of an Amph. Ass.
Destroyer, on a 1:1 basis, give +1A boost to 1 Infantry unit.
Cruiser,  on a 1:1 basis, give +1A boost to 1 Infantry unit, in addition to the shore bombardment.
Battleship, on a 1:2 basis, give +1A, to up to 2 Infantry units, in addition to the shore bombardment.

So the warships heavy guns can make a difference (even Destroyer’s one), on landing round.

Second, Defending Infantry and Artillery should fire preemptively ( loses taken first do not fire in subsequent rounds)
This is a tough one, do we give it to Artillery unit only or to both units?
Here I followed Razor and also you, at the strategical level, and for balance (too much Inf vs Art), and for simplicity and also because 1914 give it only to Artillery unit. And it will be a weaker ones however:
All Artillery units get a preemptive strike (like subs) against incoming units.

Third, all remaining attacking units roll, then remaining

The attacker should be able to retreat, however all mech units are converted into infantry ( they leave the beaches with equipment…ala Dunkirk)
That one is new. It is alien to A&A system to convert 1 unit into another.
However, a retreat possibility could be interesting…
But usually the better units will survived last. This means it will probably be armor or artillery…

Instead, it can be something like this:
If amphibious assault units needs to retreat (at the beginning of the round), attacker must loose 1 Armor unit or 1 Art unit before any other 1 casualty.
Basically, attacker must loose 1 additional ground unit (the costlier and valuable one), and this unit cannot fire, then return the surviving units on landing barge (transports).
On most occasion this will mean 1 armor unit, an A3D3, 6 IPCs unit.

Thanks for this idea about amphibious assault retreat.

It can even more create an incentive for the defender, to throw an air/naval assault on transports to get ride of the surviving retreating units. Rarely see, ground troops going into the bottom of the ocean with transports units.