CMPzC Normandy '44 Operation - Caen

[noob]

You have control over the stacking limits? I would keep the battles to rarely larger than company plus rather than battalion plus... that is going to get overwhelming I would think.

I was looking in an Osprey book about infantry tactics, and it mentioned that an attacking battalion on the had a frontage of between 600 to 1000m. Given a PzC hex represents 1000 x 1000m, I decided to make the hex stacking limit conform to that of a battalion. If the CM battles generated prove to be too large, i will have to rethink.

[noob]

Or there's a limitation of just one assault allowed from a given hex each turn?

A defending stack can only be attacked by an attacking stack from one hex only.

So I guess the idea only up to a whole Bn will be able to participate in a 'close assault'

An attacking stack can be reinforced with a stack from another non adjacent hex as shown in the guide under the section Panzer Campaigns / Assault and Reinforcement. However, that stack cannot appear on the CM battlefield until turn 31 of 60. That way there can never be more than one battalion per player to set up at the start of a CM battle, but the attacker can still have a numerical advantage in the last half of the battle.

[noob]

Noob

I would be very happy to contribute time to this. I could post between 7-10 turns a week. Happy to play allied or axis

Welcome aboard. I will be creating threads for the respective HQ's in a day or two, so post to the HQ thread of the side you want to play.

I cannot guarantee everyone in a team that wants to, will get to play a CM battle, this will depend on how many battles are generated in a given operational turn. I expect that there will be two for the first couple of operational turns, with possibly more as more units become engaged. Any players without a battle will of be substitutes if other players cannot continue with a battle.

[ForwardObserver]

A defending stack can only be attacked by an attacking stack from one hex only.

An attacking stack can be reinforced with a stack from another non adjacent hex as shown in the guide under the section Panzer Campaigns / Assault and Reinforcement. However, that stack cannot appear on the CM battlefield until turn 31 of 60. That way there can never be more than one battalion per player to set up at the start of a CM battle, but the attacker can still have a numerical advantage in the last half of the battle.

Thank you for your answers/clarifications - I do indeed need to go again over the ruleset

[Fizou]

A defending stack can only be attacked by an attacking stack from one hex only.

So its not possible to flank the enemy by strategic/operational movement?

[noob]

So its not possible to flank the enemy by strategic/operational movement?

It is possible to flank the enemy at the operational level, but the flanking unit would not be allowed to declare an assault (CM battle) because of two reasons.

Firstly, if it was possible for two stacks to attack from two different hexes, it would double the amount of units the attacker has at the start, which would make the CM battles far to big. The current system for introducing a second attacking battalion onto the CM battlefield after 30 turns of 60 have elapsed reduces the work load at the start of a battle, and allows blown units to be replaced, thus helping to maintain a manageable amount of forces.

Secondly, I don't like the idea of battalions converging on one hex. This seems to contrary to what I imagine would happen in reality. As far as i know, foot unit formations at that level would be tasked with pretty simple orders. i.e. move forward in that direction, with supporting battalions moving parallel to the battalion, and reinforcements coming up from the rear. With that in mind, i have no problem restricting the movements of PzC units to reinforce that belief when it comes to assaulting.

[noob]

I would suggest you to upload it to Google Drive and change the sharing settings from "Private" to "Anyone with the Link".

I tried GD and it works, nice call. I will post a link to it in my signature as soon as i can, i will set it to Public for accessibility. It will be a downloadable .rar file containing the reduced PzC game, the PzC Caen scenario, and two 2000 x 2000m CM maps of Buron and Authie, which are the operational victory locations.

The CM maps are from Rocko's Caen Map Project, and are historically accurate. I will also add some CM maps of non historically accurate villages and open fields that can be modified, if necessary, to conform to the required terrain type.

[Rocky Balboa]

It is possible to flank the enemy at the operational level, but the flanking unit would not be allowed to declare an assault (CM battle) because of two reasons.

Firstly, if it was possible for two stacks to attack from two different hexes, it would double the amount of units the attacker has at the start, which would make the CM battles far to big. The current system for introducing a second attacking battalion onto the CM battlefield after 30 turns of 60 have elapsed reduces the work load at the start of a battle, and allows blown units to be replaced, thus helping to maintain a manageable amount of forces.

Secondly, I don't like the idea of battalions converging on one hex. This seems to contrary to what I imagine would happen in reality. As far as i know, foot unit formations at that level would be tasked with pretty simple orders. i.e. move forward in that direction, with supporting battalions moving parallel to the battalion, and reinforcements coming up from the rear. With that in mind, i have no problem restricting the movements of PzC units to reinforce that belief when it comes to assaulting.

Here's a suggestion that might work to allow flanking movement but still maintain your Bn battle limit:

Allow units in multiple hexes to participate in the battle as long as they are not adjacent to another enemy occupied hex. However when attack from multiple locations, the attacking player would still have to declare which units would participate in the attack and this total should not exceed a Bn in size.

You could also allow other units in multiple adjacent locations to provide support for a battle as long as they are not adjacent to another enemy occupied hex.

[noob]

You could also allow other units in multiple adjacent locations to provide support for a battle as long as they are not adjacent to another enemy occupied hex.

That's a good idea. As long as there is no enemy unit adjacent to the attacking unit, and each wave of attacking units is no larger than 650 men (stacking limit) per wave, then there should be no problem. I will write it up in the guide, thanks for the input.

[noob]

I have changed the assault and reinforcement rules to accommodate assaults from multiple hexes.

However, i went a step further, and decided to allow stacks on different hexes to team up against a single enemy occupied hex, even if there are other enemy stacks occupying adjacent hexes. This will allow players more options when it comes to assaulting, and potentially more interesting problems.

For example, in the diagrams in the guide, if A and E want to attack 1, there is the potential for 2 to occupy the hex vacated by E during the next operational turn (If E's is assault successful).

Therefore, E might want to leave some units from its stack on its starting hex to block such a move, and at least force the enemy to fight a CM battle for the hex.

Also, if a player manages to get PzC stacks on hexes adjacent to the front and flank of an enemy occupied hex, the attacker can create a CM battle, if the stacks allow, where the bulk of the forces enter on the flank of the CM map, with just a holding force entering from the front.

Finally, allowing units to ignore adjacent enemy units will stop the inevitable tactic of placing small enemy units as blockers. So rather than trying to come up with a minimum size an enemy unit has to be to be a blocker, it's easier to allow them to be ignored.

I will add some diagrams to the guide for assaults from different directions, showing the location of the attackers CM deployment zones, and how the CM map should be sized.

[Fizou]

Good decisions noob, I think that will generate more interesting gameplay and battles

Id also like to sugest that defending units also can recieve reinforcements/support. This being if they have another unit that is adjacent to the hex that is being assaulted. The same stacking limits can apply. The arrival of such forces could be set to the same as for the attacker but with an additional variable for arrival time simulating the time it would take to call them in etc (radio/flares, assembly etc).

I think this will give a more dynamic game and can create some interesting situations. In the OP Im playing with Kuderian, the axis attacked a small artillery battery head on as it moved up adjacent to it. The axis unit dident spot the allied unit directly behind the artillery unit and was surprised as some infantry came to the rescue mid way through the battle.

Another question.. how do you plan to allocate off map support to the defending side?

[noob]

I will be creating the threads for each sides HQ soon. Each thread will contain screenshots of the starting deployments of each sides forces, and a unit identification key.

Because the Allied side move and fire first i will provide the Allied team with screenshots showing the reachable hexes for all the different unit types, and also the visible hexes.

It is then up to the Allied team to plot their operational moves. I will provide any information requested.

Once these HQ threads are created, anyone wanting to play a particular side needs to access only their sides thread for FOW purposes.

At the moment the teams will be.

Allies - Tank Hunter, Darknight Canuck.

Axis - Strachwitz, Ian Leslie.

[A Canadian Cat]

Allies - Tank Hunter, Darknight Canuck.

Axis - Strachwitz, Ian Leslie.

Woh, come on guys we need some more players. I have already said I am not going to be able to keep up the turn rate for CM battles so we need some more commanders here. Raise your hand and be counted.

[Baneman]

Ok, ok, I'll volunteer to command some Axis forlorn hope <clicks heels in the approved fashion>

My turnrate is generally 1 or more a day. I'll read up on the rules and so forth ( have been following with interest but not gotten into the details. )

[noob]

Ok, ok, I'll volunteer to command some Axis forlorn hope <clicks heels in the approved fashion>

My turnrate is generally 1 or more a day. I'll read up on the rules and so forth ( have been following with interest but not gotten into the details. )

Excellent, i will put you with the Axis team, and because Ian has declined to be a CM player, you are second on the Axis CM battle list, as it is based on a first come first served basis. This means you will only play a CM battle if there are two battles generated.

[noob]

Id also like to sugest that defending units also can recieve reinforcements/support.

The whole idea of having reinforcements for the attacker only is to allow the attacker a numerical superiority, as is standard in attack / defence CM battles. Also, allowing the defender to call on adjacent hex reinforcements allows the defender to make an operational move when it's not their operational movement phase.

Another question.. how do you plan to allocate off map support to the defending side?

If by support you mean indirect fire weapons, it's explained in the guide.

[Mad Mike]

I can play as an Allied commander.

Usually I play Axis in H2H, so it would be a nice change.

Turn rate is usually sufficient to support a couple of turnarounds on the weekend and at least 1 turn during the weekdays.

[Fizou]

If by support you mean indirect fire weapons, it's explained in the guide.

Thats what I mean but IMHO its still a bit unclear. If the first operational turn will lead to any CM battles. Will the defender have full access to all indirect assets in his inventory as long as they are in range? If more than one CM battle is generated, I guess that the assets have to be split and no asset can be used in more than one CM battle?

Does assets used during defense have any effect on what is available during the offensive part of the turn (i.e. when the player has actual control of what happens in PzC)? Or are all available assets OK to use both during defense and attack?

[noob]

Thats what I mean but IMHO its still a bit unclear.

You are right, I thought i had finished that section but i haven't, thanks for pointing it out.

[noob]

Could everyone that wants to be involved in the operation post a "hello" in the HQ thread of their choice.

[noob]

I have added a link to my signature that will allow anyone to download a reduced version of PzC Normandy '44 complete with the Caen scenario. This can be used in conjunction with the CMPzC guide to allow players to pla H2H operations using CM to resolve any .close combat.

[Bil Hardenberger]

The whole idea of having reinforcements for the attacker only is to allow the attacker a numerical superiority, as is standard in attack / defence CM battles. Also, allowing the defender to call on adjacent hex reinforcements allows the defender to make an operational move when it's not their operational movement phase.

Defender should definitely be allowed reinforcements.. you will be hamstringing the defensive player if you disallow it. Any reinforcements should come in seriously delayed of course.. say at the half way point of the CM battle.

I haven't read your rules so I'm not sure how you setup the reinforcement timing.

Bil

[noob]

Defender should definitely be allowed reinforcements.. you will be hamstringing the defensive player if you disallow it. Any reinforcements should come in seriously delayed of course.. say at the half way point of the CM battle.

I haven't read your rules so I'm not sure how you setup the reinforcement timing.

Bil

All CM battle are 60 turns fixed. Only the attacker gets reinforcements. These come on after 30 turns have been completed. This is to allow the attacker to have a numerical superiority at the tactical level, as is standard in CM attack defence battles. Allowing the defender to add reinforcements not only negates this, but allows the side whose operational turn it isn't, the ability to move operationally, which goes against the grain IMO. However, as I haven't tried my revised system in the field, I will wait and see if there needs to be changes regarding defender reinforcements.

[noob]

I have added two 2000 x 2000m CM maps to the.rar file containing the PzC demo. They were cut from Rocko's excellent Caen map project mega map.

[Strachwitz]

Experience will be Green for all forces except for the Axis CO HQ's. Motivation will be Fanatic for the Axis, and High for the Allies. The motivation level will be a hard factor, and will therefore remain unchanged for the duration of the operation.

If have one question regarding this. Shouldn't we a least set experience to regular? I know the reasoning behind it as units of both sides where actually units fresh to the battlefield. But I think these units at least are not drafted and volunteered and received quite a good training before deployment. So I guess even if they had no actual battlefield experience their good state of training should make them react better under combat situations than green troops perform in CM battles. I mean green troops literally get spooked by he slightest incoming fire and I don't think this really reflects the actual units involved. I would like to hear from someone playing the Allies and of course noob about my proposal.