Gook
That was done for the scenario, a small ship with half a dozen marines could take out the listening post, most of the SFB scenarios made no sense, they were just vehicles.
1. see examples given, you don't need to garrison, the threat of desrtuction is enough to compel compliance
2. see one above
3. not sure what you do with the rest of space and even a shippling lane isn't wall to wall escorts
4. Again you don't need to the threat of reprisal is enough
5. I don't think we have enough peeps for anything other than 2 sides any more, unless the board is huge and its very long term
6. not until 1943 and the Japs used their subs all wrong too, US did the job properly, but even in the Atlantic ships were still lost until the end, as for DS what about the Royal Oak and scapa Flow? I am familair with WW2
7. Exactly my point if they use forces they should be able to regain control if they don't then no.
8. Not sure what you mean by this, embassies are evacuated on the out break of war. (Beligerant ones)
9. see my comments on number of ships killed and supplies. Your WW2 sub carried say 18 torps, it didn't need more as if each one was a kill that was a fantastic return ratio, we kill thousand of ships per server.
10. the problem is simulating the raider being run down by the fast warship, I have no problem with either solution just not both.
1) You run on the assumption that the host race wont send a relief flottilla to drive away the gun boat diplomacy ship. One ship can blockade a planet, but the blockade would eventually be relieved by the owning race.
2) see above
3) The low DV hexes off the shipping lanes would become the open battle ground that is easy to take and easy to retake. Shipping lanes by the nature of higher DV and higher Econ would by default mean that they are garrisoned more heavily, why else would you have to do more missions to flip one.
4) Threat of reprisal also has a time limit on it. As I will only allow you to hold a gun to my head for so long before SWAT shows up and puts a bullet in your head. Reprisal can get a short term demand done, Long term you only allow the people you are extorting to retaliate. cf your gun boat diplomacy analogy, didnt japan subsequently declare war to remove the extortion, isnt china now a belligerent.
5) sorry what i meant here is that.... in mirak space there should be a hydran embassy hex with a base in it or low econ planet so the hydrans can be supplied from a same side race. didnt mean a 3 or 4+ way fight. just embassys
6) did the germans get any economic benefit from the atlantic war NO they did not. Did they INTERDICT the allies econ of course they did. Did they ever have control of the atlantic no they did not. did the allies end up with control of the atlantic yes they did. hence i would call the german effort interdiction and thus deep striking.
As to the comment about Scapa Flow then you agree with me that one shot distruction of TARGETS is good but flipping the hex is not.... as i dont think Gunther Prein had any intention of trying to actually CAPTURE scapa flow, other great examples of interdiction assissination type missions are... Pearl Harbour, Taranto, Dieppe, Killing Admiral Yamamoto, Ploesti Oil Field Raids, Dam Busters in the RHurr, Miriannas Turkey Shoot, Midway and most dramatically Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Actual long term gains required ground pounding GIs with lots of LOS !!!!!!!!!!
Japanese subs were used well for their doctrine. Unfortunately the doctrine was flawed at the time. We still use some elements of this doctrine today for modern sub operations, Look up the standard contingent for a US Battle Carrier Group. You will find that 2 - 4 Hunter Killer subs are part of the screening fleet. The Japanese had the right idea Just the wrong sub technologies and era. Remember that the Yorktown was actually lost at Midway ultimately due to I-168 boat blowing out her bottoms. If the japanese had the subs the germans were working on late in the war then midway could have become a japanese slaughter. The slower diesel boats couldnt effectivly attack fleets only convoys, but IJN doctrine didnt focus on these targets. Also the US supply couldnt be severely interdicted this way. As it is hard to torpedo land gasoline lines in texas. The peroxide subs the germans were working on late in the war could have been devastating to the allies.
7) Ever hear of resistance fighting. Also IMHO I think it is idiotic and game wise dangerous to allow flipping of home space hexes without LOS. Again this would be from the carcass picking analogy. Right now on LB5 I am one of two lyrans. IF the coalition tried to DS lyran space we would not be able to stop them at all, where is the fun in that?
Embassies were to be single hexes of another friendly empire within your home space. That could be used for resupply for that race.
9) D2/3 IMHO is intended to be a strategic game that is driven by tactical combat. Resupply is a tool to force reasonable strategic advances. Tactically I could deepstrike your homeworld from you, but strategically it makes no sense. Imagine market garden but done only on berlin. It would be a slaughter once the defenders mobilize.
10) For DSing I would really propose a long disengagement penalty from that hex, to simulate increased patrols to disway the DSer. If not then I envision poorly represented races being picked clean by DSers in short order.
Topic: Socky's campaign guide VERY LONG (Read 35396 times)