It seems to me that the current naming scheme has relatively little to do with what's actually needed to conduct long-range invasions. Sure, you need landing craft, but it's not like the difference between a nation that can only invade across a strait and one that can cross a sea is what style of landing craft they use to cover the last few hundred yards.
Low-priority, sure, but it'd be nice to rename some of the Invasion techs after other aspects of transoceanic warfare. Combat Supply Loading already fits this bill, but the rest are all sort of last-mile techs that, to my eye, represent only a very narrow view of amphibious operations. (Imagine if Machinery had exclusively propeller-design names. Sure, you need a good propeller, but a modern propeller and an engine from 1900 isn't going to get you far.)
An obvious one would be Mulberry Harbors. Liberty Ships might fit as well: certainly you need a massive freighter fleet to support an effort like that. If you want to get deep into some logistics-nerd territory, the common-or-garden shipping pallet was invented as part of the island-hopping campaign in the Pacific...
Post by noshurviverse on Jun 29, 2019 8:45:29 GMT -5
I think the invasion mechanics as a whole could use some reworking. I think the general idea is good, but it can lead to alot of rather odd or frustrating situations. Techs could have various effects such as lowering the average amount of time to land troops, perhaps adjusting the invasion missions or lowering costs. I think making invasions possible via complete domination of a sea zone even if they're outside of your nominal range is a decent idea. It's quite annoying to completely dominate an area, but you can't land any troops because the port facility is a couple dozen miles outside the range circle. On the other hand, I've found that late game it's possible to invade the French island of Corsica...from Northern Germany.