Personally, I don't think this is a good feature to add, simply because it is so open to abuse. It seems to guarantee that WWII goes totally ahistorical very, very quickly.
For example, now the UK always gets taken out by Germany, because Germany takes over so many European land fabs and spams the units. It is also unspeakably annoying when Italy for example keeps inject single units of 'motorized engineer' up and down the North African coast. These units are OP and just one of them will kill a full stack of garrisons.
I see an interesting, but totally ahistorical AI strategy of sending these things to distant countries' beaches, then as far inland as they can get before they take a town or run out of fuel.
Amphibious landings are supposed to be costly and risky (and only possible with ampibious units). The biggest danger for an amphibious landing is that it is destroyed while unloading. This isn't possible with the new feature because you have dozens of these MM ships landing all over the place and the ships are sufficiently tough that you can't sink them fast enough.
Amphibious merchant marine
Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 646
- Joined: May 20 2013
- Human: Yes
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 646
- Joined: May 20 2013
- Human: Yes
Re: Amphibious merchant marine
Also, this happens if there is a bit of land in the way of your destination:
It will now be impossible to extricate these suckers, since it's also not possible to build a sea pier in an ally's colony's territory (with no supply).
It will now be impossible to extricate these suckers, since it's also not possible to build a sea pier in an ally's colony's territory (with no supply).
-
- General
- Posts: 1286
- Joined: Jun 08 2005
Re: Amphibious merchant marine
There should NOT be Amphibious Merchant Marine unit(s) within SR-1935 or SR-Ultimate.
This is what during WW2 were the specialized Amphibious Attack (AKA) and Amphibious Personnel (APA) types were for....they were not merchant ships (which had to await either construction of a wharf or pier offshore, or await clearing of nearby port for unloading).
Each of the APA and AKA types were based on a cargo ship design but extensively modified with amphibious landing craft (LCP, LCVP) for over-the-side unloading of troops or cargo. Their cast was also therefore more expensive. The various wartime classes are represented in my work-copy mdb, but this has yet to be incorporated into SR-1936 (Bathagor says it will be looked at later.....).
Similarly, most Stores Ships (AF) often had a minimal landing craft (LCVP or other) capacity to unload offshore - these are (according to Bathagor) - NOT to be modeled in the game (represented as Civilian Cargo Ship).....unfortunate, for there are about a dozen navies that have them during the 1930s (and, decades later).
In past SR-CW and SR-2020, there were in the mdb some RO-RO ships, but like the WW 2 merchant ships, they also require a Pier (Sea Pier or Sea Port) to unload at. That is as it should be.
My view anyway.
This is what during WW2 were the specialized Amphibious Attack (AKA) and Amphibious Personnel (APA) types were for....they were not merchant ships (which had to await either construction of a wharf or pier offshore, or await clearing of nearby port for unloading).
Each of the APA and AKA types were based on a cargo ship design but extensively modified with amphibious landing craft (LCP, LCVP) for over-the-side unloading of troops or cargo. Their cast was also therefore more expensive. The various wartime classes are represented in my work-copy mdb, but this has yet to be incorporated into SR-1936 (Bathagor says it will be looked at later.....).
Similarly, most Stores Ships (AF) often had a minimal landing craft (LCVP or other) capacity to unload offshore - these are (according to Bathagor) - NOT to be modeled in the game (represented as Civilian Cargo Ship).....unfortunate, for there are about a dozen navies that have them during the 1930s (and, decades later).
In past SR-CW and SR-2020, there were in the mdb some RO-RO ships, but like the WW 2 merchant ships, they also require a Pier (Sea Pier or Sea Port) to unload at. That is as it should be.
My view anyway.
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 646
- Joined: May 20 2013
- Human: Yes
Re: Amphibious merchant marine
At present, this is causing real problems in my game and it is very frustrating. I suggest maybe it would be better to withdraw this feature until it has been balanced and refined. It was applied to SR1936 in a patch, a game which is no longer in beta.
EDIT: This feature is a real mess right now. As it stands, if a merchant marine for whatever reason has a pathfinding problem they will magically unload their cargo into whatever piece of land they run into. Combined with the sea pier problem, this often leads to large numbers of units being tragically lost for no real reason. This should never have been implemented and the concept as a whole runs against the original argument for having merchant marine. Right now, the only benefit this feature is providing is dynamism: in the sense that WWII is completely broken and everything happens completely the opposite way from how it really did (consistently). /rant
EDIT: This feature is a real mess right now. As it stands, if a merchant marine for whatever reason has a pathfinding problem they will magically unload their cargo into whatever piece of land they run into. Combined with the sea pier problem, this often leads to large numbers of units being tragically lost for no real reason. This should never have been implemented and the concept as a whole runs against the original argument for having merchant marine. Right now, the only benefit this feature is providing is dynamism: in the sense that WWII is completely broken and everything happens completely the opposite way from how it really did (consistently). /rant
-
- General
- Posts: 1286
- Joined: Jun 08 2005
Re: Amphibious merchant marine
MAC OS X SR-1936 beta.....
this is also happening with MAC version, in a variation of the above.
Example: Japanese civilian merchant ships will unload at Sumatra ports in the Malacca Strait routinely, if their course if not
adjusted when they clear the Singapore Strait areas, en-route to the Indian Ocean.
One cannot set a final destination in the Indian Ocean when they depart Formosa (Taiwan) or Japan, and have them always make
it there without unloading, because they routinely route themselves thru Japanese ally Dutch East Indies territorial waters, and then
off-load their Equipment / unit if they come close to a port.
Programming should be adjusted so that Merchant Marine units do not ENTER foreign territorial waters UNTIL they are in the waters
for where they are scheduled to do UNLOAD function.
------------
This discussion is also relevant to the overall M/M discussion: http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 70&t=23421.
this is also happening with MAC version, in a variation of the above.
Example: Japanese civilian merchant ships will unload at Sumatra ports in the Malacca Strait routinely, if their course if not
adjusted when they clear the Singapore Strait areas, en-route to the Indian Ocean.
One cannot set a final destination in the Indian Ocean when they depart Formosa (Taiwan) or Japan, and have them always make
it there without unloading, because they routinely route themselves thru Japanese ally Dutch East Indies territorial waters, and then
off-load their Equipment / unit if they come close to a port.
Programming should be adjusted so that Merchant Marine units do not ENTER foreign territorial waters UNTIL they are in the waters
for where they are scheduled to do UNLOAD function.
------------
This discussion is also relevant to the overall M/M discussion: http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 70&t=23421.