Jump to content

SOTW... Beda Fomm Spoiler Alert


Shep

Recommended Posts

And again you are basing everything on the FIRST day,not the second. Everyone, here are the quotes:

"The Generals discussed their next move while Free French marines poured rifle fire into delayed action bombs the Italian Air Force had dropped in an effort to block the trails"?

"Feb. 6th dawned...Tasked with the breakout at Beda Fomm Bergonzoli knew his 21st Corps was on its own. Lacking reconaissance and adequate information, he voted for s short hook east through the desert to outflank the British defenders, relying on superior numers."

Decide for yourself if David Lippman said this or I am making it up as implied. Oh, just found this, while not the exact article I have, it is close. Notice the part where the attack came from the east.

http://www.magweb.com/sample/seuropa/seu55daw.htm

Rune

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Last comment on this, since the poster has less interest in why I did something, but rather insult amd guess at my intentions, INSTEAD of just asking.

You can believe the attack of the 1st RTR followed the 2nd RTR, [Also look tot eh French web site listed below] or, you can trust the AAR from the 11th Hussars:

RHQ.

While at MSUS another “Force” was formed consisting of 11th Hussars, less A & B Sqns, plus one Sqn of the KDGs, the Rifle Bde and guns under Lt Col Campbell, the whole force under command of Lt Col Combe.

RHQ left MSUS at first light in the tracks of C Sqn. The remainder of the Force followed a little later. On reaching ANTELAT, the B vehicles were left there and the 4 ACs plus Col Campbell in an 8cwt truck went on towards the main road. On arrival at SIDI SALEH the Colonel and Colonel Campbell carried out a recce. A suitable position for RHQ was found and the rest of the Sqn sent for. They eventually arrived with the rest of the Force. The guns were positioned and the Rifle Bde took up positions on the road.

6/2/41 C Sqn.

At 0800 hours 2Lt Crankshaw 5Tp moved to X1876 to contact 4th Armd Bde and to observe any enemy movement to the SE.

At 1000 hours the Sqn moved to the White Mosque on the road and on the way contacted Cols Renton and Campbell as the Sqn task was to protect the right flank of the Rifle Bde and the guns while they blocked the road. Sgt Lamb captured 1 Italian officer and 13 ORs. [rune note: Right flank is the east, the Rifle Brigade was across the N_S road and then some, and was deploed east and west.]

Found the Regimental History of the 1st Royal Tank Regiment, that differs with the tank type. According to the History of the 1st RTR, it states they had A9s and Light tanks, then were re-equipped with the Matilda. The article I have, definitely has a picture of 1 RTR under the Matilda, and since the article is about the battle of Beda Fomm, why would I not expect it to be there? However, I am guessing they grabbed a picture of 1 RTR AFTER it has re-equipped. Here is the web site:

http://www.mikekemble.com/1RTR/history.html

Last, as for why I didn't go out and buy books on the subject, I bought a few hundred dollars worth of books already just for CMAK. If anyone would like to buy me a book to make a scenario, be glad to do it.

O, and The Rifle Brigade, anyone have more information on it? When I did a search on it, I found the Aussies, obviously this is now wrong. However, I still cannot find anything more in detail about them. Anyone?

The rest, I think the web sites speak for themselves. As you see, if there are errors, then it was honest errors on the part of authors who I followed. It was not to make the scenario "cool" or anything else. Between the comment of the authors, who say the Italians came from the east, the 11th Hussars who protected the flank to the east. The 2nd RTR being forced off the pimple. This shows the relief column

coming in from Sidi Saleh, which is S of beda Fomm:

February 6, one second column of 7th brigade armoured arrived of Sidi Saleh to support Combe, which was attacked by Italians

site: http://hsgm.free.fr/batailles/bedafomm.htm

Needless to say, it was a large swirling battle with the Italians trying every route to get past the british.

Rune

[ December 18, 2003, 11:14 AM: Message edited by: rune ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok thanks, now we are getting somewhere. I must admit I laughed when I read that you thought that the Rifle Brigade might be an Australian outfit. It is probably the most famous outfit in the British army, and thinking of Digger Sharpe at Waterloo armed with his trusty boomerang being led into battle behind the Regimental digeree-doo just cracked me up.

My previous post did not focus on the fighting on the 5th at all. Please re-read it if you think it did.

I found my copy of the 7th Armoured Division history this evening and checked that to see if there are any disagreements with my other three books, and there aren't.

Your RTR website clearly states that 1 RTR re-equipped after Compass was over.

Your French website is useless to me as I can't read French, and unfortunately I'm not even sure what you are tying to suggest it proves.

Mr Lippman's site has the wrong units listed (for example saying it was 1 Btn KRRC) and looks amateur to me. He says the Italians attempted 'a short hook East' to try to outflank Combeforce. Think on this, if you are facing South, and try a 'short hook East' which direction are you attacking from? Look at the map, the attack does not come from the East, it comes from the West and is heading East, trying to take the Pimple and then bypass Combeforce to the South. The only possible way they could attack from the East would be to break through 4th Armoured and then turn around behind them for another go back at them. The Italians took the Pimple a few times attacking it from the West, but never got further than that. If the Italians had attacked out of the East (i.e. heading West) from their column they would have got very wet indeed.

Finally the mythical Free French marines. I still am unable to find any trace of them at all, however if they did exist you might have provided a clue as to their location. To protect the flank of the retreating 10th Army the Regia Aeronautica dropped thermos-flask shaped mines to blow off the tracks of any pursuers across country. If your Free French Marines existed, then they were obviously a long way away from Beda Fomm taking pot shots at these mines scattered over the countryside between Mechilli and Antelat.

An object lesson here is to use written and published accounts of battles rather than a couple of websites. I'm suprised you didn't even find a map of the battle though, Google turned one up for me immediately, and I'm sure you would have realised you were labouring under a lot of misconceptions just by looking at that.

So if you admit that you have the wrong nation, attacking in the wrong direction, and with the wrong equipment and decide to request BFC withdraw the 'Historical' tag in the next patch because of honest mistakes, then that is very worthy and will be very much appreciated. If you persist in defending this fantasy re-writing of history and insulting the memory of those who were there, then I will insist on continuing this argument. However, this is supposed to be the season of goodwill and I'm sure we've both got better things to do :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, this is supposed to be the season of goodwill and I'm sure we've both got better things to do
You sound incredibly magnanimous, but I have this strong feeling that there's academic arrogance involved. In fact, your reply is wormy with it. As far as I'm concerned you can stuff the false goodwill and go find another place to spout your vast knowledge. This thread belongs to me and the good folks at BFC, who've proven themselves time and again to be both excellent scholars and humble on the rare occasions they've discovered themselves wrong. You've proven yourself to be a supercilious ass.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael,

Perhaps I was too subtle. What I meant was, PP could very well be right, but the arrogance he adds is inappropriate and not welcome.

You made the same point without the holier than thou attitude of PP, and kudos to you for that.

When PP made reference to Rune's scenario doing a disservice to the veterans of the Beda Fomm fight he went way over the line, and there was not a drop of kindness in the remark, despite his "goodwill" statement to the contrary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair comment, and apologies, if you construe my posts as sanctimonius. However I have a relative who died in the Beda Fomm battle, and ask for your forbearance if I get very focussed on a mis-representation (to be polite :rolleyes: ) of the action.

FWIW an honest admission will resolve it all for me, and I hope that even if/when this doesn't happen, a few people might have taken the trouble to have a look at the real story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pheasant, thanks for your response. The loss of a relative does up the sensitivities. I had a great uncle in the Bataan Death March, and another who served in the Army and was murdered for his race - my family is from native american stock. I'm real touchy about revisionists or apologists in those areas of study, so I can appreciate the sentiment.

It is also very difficult in a forum to demonstrate real academic excellence. I write technically all the time, and I know what it takes to "prove" something. Neither you nor Rune have done that in a significant sense just yet.

The hard part is laying aside the emotion:

1) Regarding work that you've done;

and 2) regarding a pet subject.

There remains usefulness of the historical discussion if you can stow the attitude. It is interesting and still unresolved, from where I stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Pheasant Plucker:

Fair comment, and apologies, if you construe my posts as sanctimonius. However I have a relative who died in the Beda Fomm battle, and ask for your forbearance if I get very focussed on a mis-representation (to be polite :rolleyes: ) of the action.

FWIW an honest admission will resolve it all for me, and I hope that even if/when this doesn't happen, a few people might have taken the trouble to have a look at the real story.

Having just popped up on this little gem of a thread I feel the need for the infamous $.02 hitting me.

First, let me say, that I greive for your loss. Sensitivities run deep with the death of family members involved.

Speaking of sensitivities think about Rune's for a moment. Is this how you would want someone to review one of your scenarios? All of you, not just PP. redface.gif

Rune obviously has done research on the scenario; so what if every tank isn't portrayed as EXACTLY accurate. He goes to the trouble of getting maps from the archives and that isn't enough? He has references both in books and on websites and that isn't enough? ANYBODY can make a mistake. I have seen some glaring ones out there. Rather than throw them to the wolves in public and that is what you ALL are doing you could simply email Rune and tell him of what you consider to be a glaring mistake.

How many of you have made a scenario and then had thousands of people review it? :confused:

Rune has, his work is reviewed by the masses. He puts his work on the CD. Every person who buys that CD will more than likely at one time or another play his game and have an opinion on it.

Making a wargame scenario is ALWAYS a compromise. You CAN'T make it EXACTLY as it was. I don't care what you know about the battle. The BEST that you can do is get it as close as possible and sometimes that means just the flavor or intent of the fight. I have seen some combats done that were in real life blow outs but the scenario was competitive and interesting. So it is up to the designer to make that happen for me.

This tread would be just as bad if the scenario was so lopsided it was unplayable now wouldn't it? :confused:

I believe the point he was trying to make with the French website is that he even looked there for information. I can't read French either and I for one am not apologizng for it... :D

So here is the deal... Did he research it? I think he did. Did he get some of it wrong? I think he did. Should we kill him for it? I think not or he won't ever make another scenario for the masses (that is you and me) to play.

Think about the time and effort that Rune not only putinto the scenario but what time and effort he has spent here defending his work to you. He could be using that same T&E in researching his next scenario. Hours are spent in research, making a map, setting troop levels, and then PLAYTESTING...PLAYTESTING...PLAYTESTING!!

Think about it. While you're at it, think about this too, if you don't like Rune's work don't play it. Getting ugly to Rune here won't change a thing.

There now you have my $.02 on the issue. Shoot at me awhle and let Rune catch his breath.

Panther Commander

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Panther Commander:

Making a wargame scenario is ALWAYS a compromise. You CAN'T make it EXACTLY as it was. I don't care what you know about the battle. The BEST that you can do is get it as close as possible and sometimes that means just the flavor or intent of the fight.

You are absolutely right, and so far as I can tell, that was never the issue. What was at issue was whether rune got it WAY wrong where there were sources available (though perhaps not to him?) that would have cast doubt on some of his pretty basic design decisions. This is what we are are trying to hash out. Although PP's wording in places may have been a little harsh, and he has apologized for that, I also note that rune has a tendency to be a tad hypersensitive toward criticism of his work. I certainly expect him to defend it, and vigorously, but I wish that he did not take it all so personally. He may be right about everything relating to this issue. His critics may be right. I suspect there is some right on both sides. At bottom, in this case as in all the others we are faced with, it comes down to a question of which sources you trust and how much. And we are all free to form our own opinions about that.

Just to add as a general observation: I have worked in several of the arts. I have also had many artists bring their work to me for criticism. I know very well the extent to which we become attached to and identified with our brainchildren and I try to take that into account whenever I offer criticism. I try as much as possible to emphasize the positive in an artist's work and to offer encouragement. But sometimes it is necessary to resort to the knife. Sometimes it just can't be avoided. I just try not to twist it.

Well...not more than once or twice anyway.

;)

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Panther Commander:

Making a wargame scenario is ALWAYS a compromise. You CAN'T make it EXACTLY as it was. I don't care what you know about the battle. The BEST that you can do is get it as close as possible and sometimes that means just the flavor or intent of the fight.

You are absolutely right, and so far as I can tell, that was never the issue. What was at issue was whether rune got it WAY wrong where there were sources available (though perhaps not to him?) that would have cast doubt on some of his pretty basic design decisions. This is what we are are trying to hash out. Although PP's wording in places may have been a little harsh, and he has apologized for that, I also note that rune has a tendency to be a tad hypersensitive toward criticism of his work. I certainly expect him to defend it, and vigorously, but I wish that he did not take it all so personally. He may be right about everything relating to this issue. His critics may be right. I suspect there is some right on both sides. At bottom, in this case as in all the others we are faced with, it comes down to a question of which sources you trust and how much. And we are all free to form our own opinions about that.

Just to add as a general observation: I have worked in several of the arts. I have also had many artists bring their work to me for criticism. I know very well the extent to which we become attached to and identified with our brainchildren and I try to take that into account whenever I offer criticism. I try as much as possible to emphasize the positive in an artist's work and to offer encouragement. But sometimes it is necessary to resort to the knife. Sometimes it just can't be avoided. I just try not to twist it.

Well...not more than once or twice anyway.

;)

Michael </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Pheasant Plucker:

thinking of Digger Sharpe at Waterloo armed with his trusty boomerang being led into battle behind the Regimental digeree-doo just cracked me up.

And you pride yourself on research and accurate information sources, and berate others for innacuracy? ;)

Mace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Axis, 78 to 22, my M13's and 75 mm held. Two m13 platoons on the left flank ridge in front of the VL. Inf and AC and 75 mm in the middle. The rest of the infinite amount of M13's advanced up the right through the wadi. Opfor tried the middle valley and paid for it. By turn 20 my right had advanced to less than 100 m from the allied map edge. When the Matilda's and 2 lbers showed they were as good as dead; opfor gave up; ceasefire (I have a heart). Axis: 333 ok, 10 wia, 2 kia: Allies 90 ok, 127 wia, 41 kia, 18 pow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Pheasant Plucker:

Fair comment, and apologies, if you construe my posts as sanctimonius. However I have a relative who died in the Beda Fomm battle, and ask for your forbearance if I get very focussed on a mis-representation (to be polite :rolleyes: ) of the action.

I do admire your Italian heritage. Such a fiery and spirited temperament. It reminds me of Captain Correlli.

When can we expect your historically accurate and equally playable BF scenario? I for one can bearly contain my excitement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1RTR entered the fighting at Beda Fomm at around 1540 on the 6th Feb. When they arrived they had 10 Cruisers and 6 lights.

7RTR had all the Matildas, and I don't think they got far past Tobruk.

Info from various sources, but most notably from "Operations of Armoured Forces Western Desert - Libya - Cyrenaica", dated Nov 1941, kindly posted to this forum some months ago by 'ozi_digger'. It also has a good map of the Beda Fomm area, and an hour-by-hour account of the fighting over the three days.

[ December 25, 2003, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: JonS ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by JonS:

Info from various sources, but most notably from "Operations of Armoured Forces Western Desert - Libya - Cyrenaica", dated Nov 1941, kindly posted to this forum some months ago by 'ozi_digger'. It also has a good map of the Beda Fomm area, and an hour-by-hour account of the fighting over the three days.

Do you suppose you could please post a link to that thread, Jon?

Michael

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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.


×
×
  • Create New...