|
Grey Hunter posted:
Sounds good, but are you going to go over the river straight into the city or detour slightly NW?
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 23:24 |
|
|
A major river crossing shock attack into a million Chinese soldiers seems par for the course.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
fredleander posted:Please scream when Operation Sealion is released! I have a vested interest: https://www.fredleander.com Oh, that's too cool! Do you think Sealion was at all a realistic goal for the Germans?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
I'd hope the plan is something like one of:  So that it follows roads and might get there in under a year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Oh, that's too cool! I'll give you a hint, part of the Germans plan for landing troops and equipment apparently involved the use of river barges.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Oh, that's too cool! http://www.philmasters.org.uk/SF/Sealion.htm An essay from the earliest days of the internet how unrealistic a sealion landing would be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Do you think Sealion was at all a realistic goal for the Germans? No, not really. If they'd won the Battle of Britain they might have been able to put a squeeze on the islands, and if they'd taken Egypt and effectively cut Great Britain off from the rest of their empire they'd have been within shouting distance of winning the war, but actual invasion just wasn't possible with the equipment they had on-hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Ikasuhito posted:I'll give you a hint, part of the Germans plan for landing troops and equipment apparently involved the use of river barges. Put tigers on river barges and you have pocket pocket battleships. (Probably a thought Hitler had.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:No, not really. If they'd won the Battle of Britain they might have been able to put a squeeze on the islands, and if they'd taken Egypt and effectively cut Great Britain off from the rest of their empire they'd have been within shouting distance of winning the war, but actual invasion just wasn't possible with the equipment they had on-hand. Winning the Battle of Britain was probably logistically impossible by itself, so yeah.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
SIGSEGV posted:Put tigers on river barges and you have pocket pocket battleships. (Probably a thought Hitler had.) "Behold! The Scharnhorstschitte!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Three months from now, Chungking will become a battle that will make KIAfeng look like children's playtime. The best (?) part is that it won't be Grey's fault. If Grey could knock out Chungking in 1942 I would be absolutely shocked. It would change the whole game. I really doubt that even in the best of circumstances he could do it before the end of 1943 though. If everything goes his way, maybe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Do you think Sealion was at all a realistic goal for the Germans? If they just believed hard enough, anything was possible, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
A White Guy posted:If Grey could knock out Chungking in 1942 I would be absolutely shocked. It would change the whole game. I really doubt that even in the best of circumstances he could do it before the end of 1943 though. If everything goes his way, maybe. On the one hand, Grey Hunter is playing against the AI. On the other hand, the AI is defiantly playing against Grey Hunter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Sometimes the UI and/or Grey Hunter is also playing against Grey Hunter. Big wild card if you ask me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:On the other hand, the AI is defiantly playing against Grey Hunter. low blow
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
When can we expect the Junyo to be ready? The building was accelerated in the Dec 7 post, but the delivery date was the same as its commissioning IRL (3 May). I'm not familiar with the industry mechanics; I'm guessing that date isn't updated immediately?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
every day a ship spends under acceleration is two days off the quene, IIRC. We'll probably be seeing Junyo in the middle of March.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
Nick Esasky posted:every day a ship spends under acceleration is two days off the quene, IIRC. We'll probably be seeing Junyo in the middle of March. So, by the time the IJN gets one new carrier, the Allies get like what? 1 CV and a couple of CVE/Ls? Grey's gonna have to do waaaaaay better than historical this time around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, when should I be expecting the Musashi to enter the game? I know she was commissioned in Aug '42, but dunno what that translates to in game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
Have there been any intelligence reports or sightings of the three USN carriers that are currently in-theater? I don't think we've seen a peep of them in this LP. Basically I want KB to hunt down these carriers where ever they may be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
Drone posted:Have there been any intelligence reports or sightings of the three USN carriers that are currently in-theater? I don't think we've seen a peep of them in this LP. A TF with a CV ran through the Marianna's doing ~naughty things~ to some of Grey's Invasion fleets in early December, but otherwise, they haven't really been out and about much which is kinda how the Allied player should be using his CVs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
Yeah, early on your air wings are underwhelming and the threat of getting your carriers KB'd makes doing much with em early very risky
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 11:09
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:http://www.philmasters.org.uk/SF/Sealion.htm I read that about a decade ago, it was one of my first exposures to more serious WW2 analysis.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
In essence then, the most likely Alternate history scenario for an attempted Sealion would probably have been a considerably shorter war. edit: Mein Furher! The Wehrmacht have captured the South-Eastern portion of Kent and are advancing on Canterbury! Aha! Excellent! We have captured some airfields that can be replaced by a guy using a horse drawn roller on one of England's 8 billion fields! lenoon fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
   We hit Ocean Island.  Its mine now.   They are learning, it seems.   We protect a leaving task force.   Low level fighting continues at Iba.   Dull day – they are going to happen. But hey – we're now winning a **Major Victory**!  This is optimistic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Oh, that's too cool! Well, the Brits thought so.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:No, not really. If they'd won the Battle of Britain they might have been able to put a squeeze on the islands, and if they'd taken Egypt and effectively cut Great Britain off from the rest of their empire they'd have been within shouting distance of winning the war, but actual invasion just wasn't possible with the equipment they had on-hand. The UK was "cut off" from "their empire" already weeks before the Italians entered the war. As for the equipment the Germans had on-hand - it was nothing wrong with that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Ikasuhito posted:I'll give you a hint, part of the Germans plan for landing troops and equipment apparently involved the use of river barges. Among many other things, yes. Actually, the German planning on the tactical landings were not dissimilar to those used by the Japanese. As for "river barges", more than 3.000 were modified for their particular purpose. BTW, did you know that the allies used 600 river barges in an auxiliary role during Operation Overlord? But, we really shouldn't use more space here. After all, this thread is not about Operation Sea Lion. I was just interested in knowing when/if such a scenario was released by Matrix. If anybody is interested in discussing Sea Lion they should establish a thread here. I can't promise to participate very much, though - I did my part on the Armchair General Forum some years ago on the thread that has gone down as - TTTSNBN - The Thread That Shall Not Be Named. It contained 15.000 postings. I also wrote a book on it. Presently I am busy with my "Saving MacArthur" project: https://www.fredleander.com. Which is why I am here in the first place. I am using the WitP as a sort of filing cabinet for the project.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
Even without that essay it's not difficult to understand why it would have failed (and of course us being afraid of it was simply that, fear - not always rational). Normandy went well due to complete and uncontested naval superiority and overwhelming control of the air coupled with planning, equipment and a literal gently caress ton of kit. Compare one issue - seaborne resupply. Normandy: secure beaches, specialist landing gear, sink enormous floating docks into strategic points. Sealion: we'll just take Dover and make it immediately ready for operations! Dover isn't even a good starting point of an invasion. So we lose Kent! Aside from some airfields and bits of the radar network bugger all is on the coast anyway. The impact is on morale rather than any strategic loss - especially with the navy then blockading supply, sealion ends with the most experienced German divisions doing POW farming in the very fields they were trying to fight through. Britain was never 100% cut off from the empire throughout the war. The happy times of the u-boat fleet made a huge impact, that goes without saying, but we were never truly and completely isolated. It plays really well into the deliberately constructed propaganda image of "very well then, alone!" To have embattled Britain constantly under threat of a credible invasion, but we should be able to separate fear and propaganda from military reality. Before the North Africa campaign we were also the home base for the vast majority of allied combatants - would have been like walking into a barracks with "tommies gently caress kids" pinned to your chest!
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Fred we have a *serious* military history thread here full of *serious* posts about StuG Lyfe, pikes, etc: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3585027 You can take your Seelöwe ramblings there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
 Hindsight truly is 20/20. Imagine if we applied the same thinking that Hitler's lieutenants used to landing at places like Tarawa. Even with equipment specifically designed for the purpose of amphibious landing,with the training to match,plus the air and naval support, a large number of contested landings in the Pacific theater were horrendous bloodbaths. Granted, the environments are fundamentally different, and Japanese strategy for a large part of the war was "fight them on the beaches", but still.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 07:40
|
|
|
fredleander posted:Among many other things, yes. Actually, the German planning on the tactical landings were not dissimilar to those used by the Japanese. As for "river barges", more than 3.000 were modified for their particular purpose. BTW, did you know that the allies used 600 river barges in an auxiliary role during Operation Overlord? Koesj, I am not the one continuing this.....:-). ...good idea to read others postings properly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
The only grognard game that I know of that comes packaged with a hypothetical Sealion scenario is Decisive Campaigns: Blitzkrieg from Warsaw to Paris. There's a scenario that starts with the Germans landed on the south/southeast coast of England, but as far as I know there's really no way to impact the logistics of it. There are several options that you can define at the start of the scenario though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:
Has there been any AAR's where the Japanese side has landed directly on Bataan as one of their first moves in the Philippines?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 11:44
|
|
|
fredleander posted:Has there been any AAR's where the Japanese side has landed directly on Bataan as one of their first moves in the Philippines? Not that I've seen. I assume the reason is because the map has Corregidor and other Manila Bay coastal defenses included in that hex and would thrash any attempted landing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
fredleander posted:Well, the Brits thought so. Gotta love the fog of war, I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
Drone posted:The only grognard game that I know of that comes packaged with a hypothetical Sealion scenario is Decisive Campaigns: Blitzkrieg from Warsaw to Paris. There's a scenario that starts with the Germans landed on the south/southeast coast of England, but as far as I know there's really no way to impact the logistics of it. There are several options that you can define at the start of the scenario though. Panzer General has three different hypothetical Sealion scenarios, but it also has the Amerika bomber and Maus tank so...
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
Bored, so I copied the list of variant rules options for the Sealion scenario from the DC:WtP manual, since I suppose it's relevant to the conversation.quote:17.5.1. VARIANT I: BEACH DEFENSE
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
   The pass here is still dangerous.  The S-38 is having a good day.   Oh, they do have some duds, I was starting to wonder.  We have planes in the Philippines?   We pick off another transport.  Nothing of import to say today – troops moved forwards, so we have men in Manilla now.  This is not unrealistic.  The West Point was one of those big liners right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 23:24 |
|
|
fredleander posted:Koesj, I am not the one continuing this.....:-). ...good idea to read others postings properly. No I mean that if you want to engage in a discussion about your work with jaded historians you can go there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2016 19:13
|
|