Omaha Beach West

[JoMac]

4 minutes ago, carcer said:

Tried the campaign which is fun in it's own right and no offense to the author (mission and map making is a pain in the butt and it's stated only based on), but historically way off. Not that many mg's, tank guns, front facing tank guns, bunkers, 81mm mortars and all of that. For mine I'm using a google earth overlay, aerial recon photos, and the polygon elevation method for the map with minor adjustments here and there.

Are you referring to the 'CMx2 Campaign not being as accurate, and indeed there are supposed to be more Mg's, Mortars, etc...Or, are you saying there are to many of these weapons in the CMx2 Campaign, and you are going to reduce them. 

[rocketman]

@carcer: please enlighten me on what "polygon elevation method" is and how to use it in the editor.

[rocketman]

Just remembered, there was a scenario called "Bloody Omaha" that I playtested years ago, but not sure if it was ever released. IIRC the map was pretty good. Might serve as insporation. I can PM the scenario file if you want @carcer.

[carcer]

1 hour ago, JoMc67 said:

Are you referring to the 'CMx2 Campaign not being as accurate, and indeed there are supposed to be more Mg's, Mortars, etc...Or, are you saying there are to many of these weapons in the CMx2 Campaign, and you are going to reduce them. 

My mistake on typing; I meant too many of these weapons and that I am going to reduce them according to the TOE's I've found. I guess that Blue and Grey was somewhat close. For the D1 draw (wn71-73) I'm looking at 3 forward observers in bunkers in contact with 2 105mm batteries, 1 47mm At gun in open pit facing forward, 1 88mm pak43 concrete facing east, 1 50mm AT in concrete with tank turret facing east or west, 1 75mm AT french conversion in concrete (equivalent to a 50mm) facing east, 2 mg42's in concrete (facing into draw), 3 50mm mortars, 2 81mm mortars, 7 mg34's teams (2 in tobruks), 1 mg42 team, 6 rifle squads (no heavy weapons), and 3 command teams. Ok dang, I guess that is a lot. I'm sure there's TOE corrections to make and if I half the force pools for game-play reasons I'd cut the mg34's and rifle squads in half.

That would be cool if you pm the Bloody Omaha scenario Rocketman; I'll check it out. The polygon elevation method is a way to make elevation contours on a google earth map that I learned from one of the forum posts on here I think. In google earth you draw a large polygon like a rectangle or something to cover your map area (needs to be in enclosed object). In properties for that polygon you can set the height by going to the altitude tab and set the clamping to absolute. I believe in layer options on the left side with borders, labels, etc that the terrain box needs to be checked. After that you can change the polygon altitude in meters to what you want (I was going with 5m distances and then 2.5m rounded up or down where it seemed useful) and then with the add path button at the top you can color trace the contour line made by the polygon. I was using a path with a number 2 width that you can select in the named path properties. The methods fairly accurate in abstract terms and the only issue I had with it for this map was the elevation before the bluffs.

[A Canadian Cat]

17 hours ago, rocketman said:

Just remembered, there was a scenario called "Bloody Omaha" that I playtested years ago, but not sure if it was ever released. IIRC the map was pretty good. Might serve as insporation. I can PM the scenario file if you want @carcer.

Yep it is available: http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/BattleForNormandy/Scenarios/Bloody Omaha1-1.html

I also found:

http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/BattleForNormandy/Scenarios/Omaha Beach.html

and

http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/BattleForNormandy/Scenarios/Omaha beach, Vierville Draw Attack.html

I should have looked at my own site when this first came up...

[carcer]

Thanks IanL, no idea that you hosted your own site. Looks really convenient for missions to download.

Starting to get bogged down by real life but pushing through. Found a really sweet book I'm waiting on that may answer all my issues as the main goal of this project is historical accuracy.  http://www.fortress-books.com/en/catalogue/cf-modern-fortifications-20th-century/atlantikwall-omaha-beach-from-port-en-bessin-to-grandcamp-maisy. That website publisher might be really useful for other peoples projects dealing with fortifications, but unfortunately I cant find copies sold in the US. They do ship though. My plan to get this map to a working condition that I can update over time is now to roughly go over the following:

1. strong points

2. beach and beach front- ocean runnels, terrain, ocean breakers, destroyed buildings

3. Inland- villages, trees, terrain

4. historical looking main buildings + interest points

5. touch ups and smooth out some of the squiggly lines

6. LOA, LACE, and re-consolidate for a new push

Here's work on wn70 for basic layout https://goo.gl/photos/6iCJeziqSMw1V6J99

and one of the references used:

German troops and equipment (spoilers): -1 leIG18 in concrete, 1 leIG18 in sand bag dug out, 1 81mm mortar, 1 50mm mortar, 1 20mm flak, 1 concrete shelter/bunker, 3 mg34's, 2 mg42's, 2 rifle squads, 1 HQ team-

 

[JonS]

Have you managed to get a look at a copy of "cracking Hitler's Atlantic wall" by Richard Anderson?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0811705897/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1497421138&sr=8-1&pi=SL75_QL70&keywords=Anderson+Hitler+Atlantic+wall

 

 

[carcer]

33 minutes ago, JonS said:

Have you managed to get a look at a copy of "cracking Hitler's Atlantic wall" by Richard Anderson?

I have now- at least for the parts on this subject matter. Found the book on scribd . Looks like a cool read for the full thing. I like how it fully details the actions of that tank unit I was looking for research material on. I enjoyed the AVRE possibility on Omaha segment as well although I would have to disagree with the conclusion for that part on needing more tank support. Hypothetical AVRE scenario may be the only way to find out . Any chance you've checked out https://www.amazon.com/Devils-Garden-Rommels-Desperate-Defense-ebook/dp/B00GB0Z5H6/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1497424155&sr=1-1&keywords=omaha+beach+devils+garden? I was finally able to read the full thing. For anyone that hasn't, is interested, and for discussion the author's main point of dissection is exploring the reason why Omaha had so many casualties in comparison to the other beaches. Main conclusion in the book was topography+gun concentration+extra number of veteran level artillery+pre-sighted all had a combined affect with the obstacle belt to keep the invading force trapped in the kill zone for a longer period of time. It also seems that allied planners/intelligence ignored the PTO generals they brought on board as advisors, and instead planned to meet basic German doctrine of a weak front line defense with mobile reserves to counter attack from the strong second line of defense. As a result the organization, landing schedule, and equipment was set-up with the focus of moving inland as fast as possible instead of facing strong resistance on the shore line.

 

 

 

[DesertFox]

On 12.6.2017 at 11:07 PM, carcer said:

[...] and the polygon elevation method for the map with minor adjustments here and there.

As for terrain elevation and topo lines I suggest to either use 1/25000 IGN maps or this site:

http://geocalvados.calvados.fr/wvsInternet/resources/index.html#

activate the SCAN25 IGN button in the upper right corner. Also you can play around with the 1947 and younger aerials overlays to get an idea how the landscape changed since the 1940s.

Decrease the "Carte" slider to near zero unless you want to get an idea about the field and land borders.

Good luck with your project. I´m looking forward to the finished map.

cheers

[carcer]

^ Oops I messed up on the quote tool last post. Thinking about my post from earlier I'm now really curious what the difference was for fortified beach attacks in the PTO during 1944 before the Japanese changed strategies towards inland defense. I'll throw up a brief if I find anything interesting.

That's a nifty site for topographic maps and geometry. I'll use it as an overlay to add to and correlate with the polygon method for a nicely accurate terrain expression. As a side note this community is pretty awesome for support and I look forward to participating in it. Hopefully I'll be able return all the help I've received here.

[Bulletpoint]

18 minutes ago, carcer said:

As a side note this community is pretty awesome for support and I look forward to participating in it. Hopefully I'll be able return all the help I've received here.

You're contributing more than enough already by making this scenario. With the amount of care you're putting in, it looks like it could turn out to become the definitive CMBN version of the Omaha beach landing.

[carcer]

Wn71 preview https://goo.gl/photos/wTcXRQ3jh2v6jaSY6

Troop strength: - 1 FO in concrete, pak 181(f) 47mm in dugout/sandbags (will have to use a 37mm or 50mm pak?), 50mm mortar in tobruk, 81mm in dug out, mg42 in concrete facing draw, 2 rifle squads, 1 HMG34, 1 HQ -

[carcer]

Update: I can see why true to life historical maps are so difficult to find- it's a time consuming pain. Here's a pic of the last WN's I wanted to get a rough outline of https://goo.gl/photos/eRoh36nTpX6H4vDb8. Les Moulins is a difficulty that I'll have to come back to. The trench line needs adjusted, building locations still an unknown, and I can't find any actual locations of the tank turrets. Hopefully the fortress book I ordered will have the answers I'm looking for.

Moving onto a beach and shoreline focus I've added in the hedgehog obstacle belt to its real location and another texture color for flare: https://goo.gl/photos/E86v9fXzE6EUSTJR9

There's 70 hedgehogs so might need to delete some for smoother game-play and could be beneficial to group them together where it makes sense for the mission.

Here is a pic of a mine on a pole concept I've been trying to make: https://goo.gl/photos/R6SxQ5SsrTFgaKnm7. Any suggestions on how to make it better would be greatly appreciated, or if someone could make a more convincing flavor object that would be sweet. I was hoping there would be an RGB color like on sprites to just make the bubble part of the pole model transparent but that doesn't seem to be the case so I tried to make the bubble look like some kind of sea like mine. The poles will just be for flavor. Maybe a tied down rock on-top could work? I don't know; I'm out of ideas other than maybe using a Black Sea pole model but then other player's would need to have CMBS.

As another added in thing; I've been working on some camo nets for the bunkers (textures are not my own).

https://goo.gl/photos/KjCp53eWmCHnqFNu5

https://goo.gl/photos/TgMksh3jPv93so637

 

[carcer]

Ha, figured it out! https://goo.gl/photos/QmDzDUdicWXZAS9X8. Minor clipping but we now have a teller mine on a pole!

[carcer]

Sweet, finally received the book Atlantikwall Omaha Beach by Alain Chazette (all in French though eek seems I'm learning how to read wee-wee). This book has everything that I was looking for and now kind of pissed by how difficult it was just to obtain the info. I would post some diagram pictures in the book but then with copyright's and despite being against most copyright's I feel it would be more appropriate to just a post a picture of the common's aerial photography that I can number and draw trench lines on. I'm now able to get an accurate depiction of Les Moulins as well as all the gun turret positions that funny enough are visible on the aerials if you know what your looking for. The new curiosity that I have is that there are these Wellblech (aluminum roofed) shelters for AT pieces. Not really sure what their use was yet or that they even existed before.

[carcer]

update: currently working on the mission with the map. Trying to get a working force pool for the first large wave landing between 0630 and 0700. This test composition depicts the action of the 743rd tank battalion, 2 companies from the 116th infantry regiment, and 3 gap assault teams. A lot of units but so far loading times on turn based aren't a bother and only takes a bit longer when reinforcements arrive on the map. I'm drifting more towards force pools out of the board game bloody Omaha which in turn is going in the direction of a direct adaptation. The historical composition doesn't work out too well for game balance but at least I can keep trench lines and gun positions to their historical placement. The Germans get 3 added AT guns in speculated positions that turned out not to exist and I'm turning improved MG positions (wooden bunkers) into concrete pillboxes. In the book mentioned above I found out that wn70,68,66 had these improved firing positions dug into the hill with dug out slits facing out the sides for enfilade fire so I believe the CM pillboxes represent this pretty well for how hard that would be to shoot even though it's not concrete; plus gives tanks something to shoot at. Once the test composition is at good standing I'll put it out for download if anyone wants to play around with it or get a preview.

On ‎6‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 0:19 AM, JonS said:

Have you managed to get a look at a copy of "cracking Hitler's Atlantic wall" by Richard Anderson?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0811705897/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1497421138&sr=8-1&pi=SL75_QL70&keywords=Anderson+Hitler+Atlantic+wall

 

 

JonS I was wrong about not needing more tanks. Even though CM isn't a complete realistic simulation; it's clear that in mission testing that armor landing with the infantry company, as was the case with dog red, greatly improves survivability.

[JonS]

 

CM is a learning tool ...

 

Edit: which reminds me, one way to get additional value out of the map you've created is to develop plausible variants of the given tactical problem. So, for example, with your OMAHA map you could create a strictly historical scenario, then modify it a bit to assume that the tanks were landed directly on the beach rather than swimming in and therefore assume that all - or almost all - of the tanks landed in the correct location at the correct time. Then a variant that assumes the DDs landed directly off the LCTs AND that the US had gotten hold of some reasonable quantity of AVsRE. Then then you could do a slightly wilder variant that has the British (or Canadians) landing at OMAHA instead of the US, and employing the usual panoply of commonwealth forces as used on GOLD, JUNO, and SWORD (incidentally, http://www.6juin1944.com/ and especially http://www.6juin1944.com/assaut/en_index.html and especially especially http://www.6juin1944.com/assaut/gold/en_index.php and especially especially especially http://www.6juin1944.com/assaut/gold/en_page.php?page=231landing ). There is still a fair amount of work required to create these additional scenarios - including revised briefings and briefing imagery, but I think that the plausible "What Ifs?" are kinda more interesting than simply re-playing a battle as a strictly historical scenario.

Edited July 15, 2017 by JonS

[DesertFox]

Amazing detail Infos here:

http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/omaha-beach.69555/page-4

 

[carcer]

On 7/15/2017 at 1:36 PM, DesertFox said:

Amazing detail Infos here:

http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/omaha-beach.69555/page-4

 

Thanks desertfox, that link helped me fine tune the US reinforcement pool and gives a great account for how the battle proceeded. With more testing it's becoming obvious that the only fun/tactical possibility is to condense timelines with artistic liberties and a focus on establishing a beachhead instead of taking out the strongpoints. So far in the test dog green holds true, dog white falls pretty quick from tank support (will have to redesign wn70s terrain to be more resistant), and dog red doesnt last long.

for AI artillery support, is it best to use the support AI option by painting areas? Would mortar crews still target specific targets in painted areas?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Not as far as I'm aware, they just try to hit the area painted as best they can.....Useful for creating an ongoing rain of shells, but on-map spotters are what you will need for more precise bombardments.

[carcer]

Yup definitely need help with the artillery and landing force plan. Hmmm I'll add names in credits to mission design.

mission design issues involving spoilers:

The basic force pool template that I'm working with for the first wave is that the mission starts off with B and C companies of the 743rd off dog white sector having a pissing match against the shore guns. 5 minutes in 116th F Co with the 743rd A Co landing in front of dog red while 116th A Co lands at dog green. At 10 minutes that gap assault teams land (2 dog red, 3 dog white, and 1 dog green). 15 minutes in G Co of the 116th lands in dog red while C Co of the 2nd ranger battalion (plt strength) lands at Charlie. German heavy artillery includes 3 105mm batteries and a battery of 5 280mm nebwrf 41's.

What should happen/intention, is that German artillery dishes out a heavy toll on the first waves. What I want to progress is a build up with follow on waves in the dog white sector for the player to use as a flanking force to the right or left to get the units in front of the draws unstuck while blocking German reinforcements. What's happening instead is that I can't get the German heavy artillery into action. I thought maybe having pre-planned support AI with the German artillery coming in at 5 minutes as reinforcements to hit the oncoming infantry would work, but instead it seems the support AI is only for artillery on map at beginning of mission. Maybe it would work better with support AI plan for the mission to begin at the 5 minute plus mark above with the gap assault teams for dog white starting the mission with them as well. Reinforcements then would be the gap teams for dog red and green landing 5-10 minutes in and then G Co of 116th and the rangers landing 10-15 minutes in. Idk ideas?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Painting small zones works fine if you want to hit a particular area at the start of the mission, you may be able to achieve the same later in the battle by using the 'Target' AI order with on-map mortars.....I must confess I haven't tried this yet personally as I've mostly been looking at CM:SF & CM:A neither of which have on-map artillery.

Edited July 18, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[carcer]

Thanks Sgt. Squarehead, I'll play around with that 'target' order and see what all that does. Noticed I made a stupid mistake as well...because I added German mortars as a specialist teams they don't have radios, so c2 links were broken.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Not sure if that matters, depending on how you intend to use them.....I too will be experimenting with the 'Target' order shortly, but I'll be doing it in CB:BS (in anticipation of CM:SF II), if I discover anything interesting I'll give you a shout.

[JonS]

Put lots of trps down for the ai to use. Target zones are only used/targeted during the pre-battle setup phase

Edited July 19, 2017 by JonS