Jump to content

Modeling amphibious assault


JMS

Recommended Posts

I had one of this insane ideas the other day, the problem with simulating amphibious warfare is that the only way to do it now is to have the landing ships x time on station, but would it be possible to create standard weapon loadouts simulating the troops and something similar for the defences, like assault helicopters have now?

 

So you will have platoon, company, battalion weapon loadouts with LAND attack capability and something similar (which already exists in terms of brigades and divsions) for defenders - probably the battalion would be superfluous and could be replaced by x Cos - there's something similar on subs and the LCS in the form of SF teams - but this would take space for the air loadouts?

 

You are the experts, what do you say?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a good idea but out of the game scoop, the scale and simulation is inadecuate. The Divisions in the DB, as example, are modelled almost only as targets for air and sea units.

But you can do some test playing this interesting and relative old scenario (Phillipine Crunch by Stanlintc) to test the virtues and shorcomings of land combat:

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...mp;showfile=297

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had one of this insane ideas the other day, the problem with simulating amphibious warfare is that the only way to do it now is to have the landing ships x time on station, but would it be possible to create standard weapon loadouts simulating the troops and something similar for the defences, like assault helicopters have now? So you will have platoon, company, battalion weapon loadouts with LAND attack capability and something similar (which already exists in terms of brigades and divsions) for defenders - probably the battalion would be superfluous and could be replaced by x Cos - there's something similar on subs and the LCS in the form of SF teams - but this would take space for the air loadouts? You are the experts, what do you say?

 

As you might imagine, the issue has popped up now and again over the years and continues to push its way to the front of my mind now and again.

 

The principal problem, as I see it, is this:

 

(1) firstly, there is a disconnect between the amphibious ships and the landing craft (of various types) that they would disgorge offshore during an amphibious assault, i.e. no way to have a ship "unload" other ships.

 

(2) secondly, there is a further disconnect between the landing craft (the LCVP, LCU, LCM, LCAC, etc, etc) and the forces (the soldiers, crew served weapons, vehicles, etc) that they would disgorge at the beach, i.e. no way to have those landing craft "unload" their cargo upon reaching the shore.

 

(3) thirdly, there is yet another disconnect between the landing forces and their ultimate objective, i.e. no way to have those soldiers (mounted or dismounted), tanks, APCs, and the like move off the beach toward the enemy.

 

Of course, you can model each component separately. You can model the individual LPD, the individual LCU, the individual tank or APC. This is basically what has been done. But there is no way to stack them one on top of the other (or inside each other) and thereby achieve a more closely modeled simulation of an amphibious assault.

 

Now, you could potentially model the spearhead units (the soldiers, tanks, etc) as weapons (say, guns or missiles) and have the phibs or landing craft "fire" them as they approach within a certain distance of the shore. But I think it would be less than satisfactory. You still face a substantial risk of having the landing craft "run aground" (a huge embarrassment for a landing craft :P ), effective range of the "weapon" is an issue, and its a "one shot" deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thought was more along the lines of doing away with the landing craft entirely, and abstracting the ammunition up to a point, for example:

 

LHA: Marine battalion of 1000 men would equal, say, 4 Infantry companies or 16 platoons

LHD: 2 companies or 8 platoons

LST: 2 companies or 8 platoons

LCU: 1 company or 3 platoons

etc.

 

The firepower for the loadouts already exist in the helicopters, so it would be a question of creating the platoon "SSM" for the landing ships - already there are numerous larger landing ships in the DB, and this will do away with the LCUs/LCAs/landing boats and will give an additional capacity for the patrol boats. The Virginia SSNs already have SEAL teams, this would be similar for the landing ships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thought was more along the lines of doing away with the landing craft entirely, and abstracting the ammunition up to a point, for example:

LHA: Marine battalion of 1000 men would equal, say, 4 Infantry companies or 16 platoons

LHD: 2 companies or 8 platoons

LST: 2 companies or 8 platoons

LCU: 1 company or 3 platoons

etc.

The firepower for the loadouts already exist in the helicopters, so it would be a question of creating the platoon "SSM" for the landing ships - already there are numerous larger landing ships in the DB, and this will do away with the LCUs/LCAs/landing boats and will give an additional capacity for the patrol boats. The Virginia SSNs already have SEAL teams, this would be similar for the landing ships.

 

Yeah, 'shooting' the marines via missiles or guns is one of the less satisfactory options, imho. If you're familiar with the PE, I'd suggest testing it and seeing how you like it (or dislike it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a good idea but out of the game scoop, the scale and simulation is inadecuate. The Divisions in the DB, as example, are modelled almost only as targets for air and sea units.

But you can do some test playing this interesting and relative old scenario (Phillipine Crunch by Stanlintc) to test the virtues and shorcomings of land combat:

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...mp;showfile=297

 

I agree, you can't do land combat with Harpoon, so it would be the phibs vs land installations like Beachead red and such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, you can't do land combat with Harpoon, so it would be the phibs vs land installations like Beachead red and such.

 

I happen to think you can do land combat despite shortcomings there are places where it adds tremendous flair and tension to scenarios, Phillipine Crunch being a good example). The abilities as they stand certainly can reinforce that spotting an opposing ground force can be very difficult. We think of the huge open ocean but if you don't have eyes in the air you can have a troop formation a few miles away and never even notice it. When you do notice it in HC it may have moved a few klicks before you next get eyes in the area, will you even find it again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, you can't do land combat with Harpoon, so it would be the phibs vs land installations like Beachead red and such.

 

I happen to think you can do land combat despite shortcomings there are places where it adds tremendous flair and tension to scenarios, Phillipine Crunch being a good example). The abilities as they stand certainly can reinforce that spotting an opposing ground force can be very difficult. We think of the huge open ocean but if you don't have eyes in the air you can have a troop formation a few miles away and never even notice it. When you do notice it in HC it may have moved a few klicks before you next get eyes in the area, will you even find it again...

 

Sure, but you are missing some effects that are essential, like different terrains - in HC everything is flat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have considered amphib warfare and land operations as well, but it just does not model well in Harpoon. I can see a scenario where one half is in Harpoon, and the other half in TacOps or TAOW. During the Harpoon half, it's about getting the Gator Navy to the area. Beyond that, modeling individual landing craft - running agound, and landing craft as missiles is a bit of an extreme abstraction. For land warfare, I played around with some of my test range scenarios, and the AI's behavior can be flaky - a tank running away at the sight of a truck. Of course in Harpoon airborne assets is modeled as ordnance. Sort of like "The British Army is a projectile fired by the Royal Navy", or something like that going back to the beginning of the 20th Century, if not before.

The other two games are better for modelling land and amphibious (as in at and near the beach), can model landing craft and AFV's discharging more assets (the poor bloody infantry), but, it does not model air support too well. Aircraft are just artillery pieces that run up to the target, unload, and go home. Stand off weapons are modeled at best very abstractly (TacOps air ordnance seems to be all cluster bombs and unguided rockets).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...