Shore Bombardments

Yeah that makes sense

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

IMHO shore bombardment are way too strong even with the OOB rules. In the real war shelling from warships would never inflict any significant damage on land units, they would just soften the beach defense before the landings. But in one case, shelling from a battleship outside Normandy did in fact flip a Tiger tank that was two miles in land, but this rare incident do not justify a common A&A rule to let shelling from light cruisers ruin great million men strong armies that are dug in far away from any beach. This rule is more for fun, not historical accuracy

In a strategic game; how about giving the naval bases (cost 15ipc ) a roll against ships during an amphibious assault. After the naval shore bombardment the naval base gets to fire one die at each ship, like AA roll. This would add more usefulness to the naval bases an make an opposing player think again on how to take a zone by amphibious assaults!

Good thinking - I’ve often thought that coastal zones and islands need to be tougher to take.

@timerover51:

Hmmm, that would be a reasonable approach as well.

I was merely making an observation that each bombardment ship supporting each infantry +1 on 1-to-1 basis…is the same as rolling one bombardment die per infantry at 1 and not preemptive

like you can arrange the rules to appear as only a minimal rule change, and then people are less resistive

yea me too :-D

:lol: I’ve got this great idea for a new unit! Tell me what you think of it! :D

Shore-to-Ship Guns
Movement: 0
Attack Factor: 2
Defense Factor: 0/2
Cost: 15 IPCs

They would basically be like forts with guns like those bases in Hawaii that were built during WWII. They could be placed anywhere that you have one of your own inf. units to build it. The inf. could not be used for anything else that round, though. When faced with an amphibious assault they get to return fire for the bombardement. Otherwise they defend @ zero! zip! nada! When there are ships in an adjoining seazone, they can attack those, but only one round of combat unless there are friendly ships in the same zone. If all friendly ships are destroyed, then combat ends. At the end of a land battle, if only the fort remains, it is taken over by the enemy. A fort can be destroyed, though it takes two hits. :D

:wink: If you need clarification of some thing, please ask! :wink:

I’m trying to make it good enough that my friend will agree to play with the new unit , so if you have any advice, please post it. 8)