Michael Clarke
-
Posts
18 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Michael Clarke
-
-
I would highly recommend, to all whom are interested, the book:
"Panzer Operations: The Eastern Front Memoir of General Raus, 1941-1945"
Here is an author who skillfully interweaves tactical accounts within the broader operational narrative. I found the accounts more believable than "In Deadly Combat", and the operational descriptions much more readable than let's say, "Panzer Leader".
Raus's mantra is what he calls "Zone Defense Tactics". Simply put, this is an evasive maneuver where a first main battle line is abandoned to a second main battle line, when the anticipated Soviet attack was imminent. The purpose of such a maneuver was to avoid destruction of the main force from Soviet artillery preparations.
What follows is his account of the July 14/1944 attack by the Soviet First Ukrainian Front against his ArmeeGruppe Raus:
The Russians did not disappoint us with regard to the location of the main attack but began their offensive on 14 July, two days later than expected. Interrogation of prisoners confirmed that the attack had been postponed by forty-eight hours at the last moment. As a result of this delay, the evasive maneuver had to be repeated on three successive nights. On the night of 11-12 July the Russians either did not notice the withdrawal because our rear guards left in the forward positions successfully simulated weak harassing fire, or they lacked the time and tactical flexibility to react to this sudden change. On the night of 12-13 July they attacked several evacuated positions with combat teams up to regimental strength and pushed back our rear guards.Even this turn of events, however, had been anticipated. Strong counter-thrusts, supported by massed artillery fire from the regular firing positions, sealed off these Soviet penetrations, and at dusk on the night of 13-14 July our infantry once again occupied the front lines. As expected, the Russians resumed their attacks during the night to determine whether or not we would continue to occupy the positions. When these night attacks had been repulsed along the entire line, and the Soviets had convinced themselves that the positions were being held in strength, the fighting broke off and the front calmed down. After midnight our advanced positions were evacuated for the third time, and when First Ukrainian Front unleashed its main fire concentration at dawn it struck empty positions. The divisions that had retired into their battle positions suffered hardly any losses and—supported by assault guns and Tiger Battalion 531—were able to drive back nearly all Russian forces that had advanced beyond the empty positions. Our artillery preserved its entire firepower because the shelling and aerial bombardments hit the empty battery positions that had assumed the role of dummies. Not a single gun, not a single command post, was hit. Telephone communications from army headquarters down to regimental levels suffered no disruption. The former positions that had been evacuated, on the contrary, were in poor shape, the towns badly damaged by air attacks, and the debris of bombed buildings blocked main roads through several villages. Nevertheless, traffic continued to move along the previously designated alternate routes and halted only intermittently when Soviet aircraft scored direct hits on individual convoys.
Our reserves had not been touched by Russian air attacks, since they had used the darkness to move into locations unknown to the enemy. On the other hand, advancing Soviet infantry was hit by the defensive fire of artillery and rocket launchers that were fully intact and well supplied with ammunition. Reeling from this concentration, the Red Army infantry attempted to disperse and take cover but walked straight into the minefields we had positioned behind the front-line battle positions. This took the initial momentum out of the attack and prevented the Russian infantry from concentrating its effort in a single direction. First Ukrainian Front's advance slowed down and became hesitant, and practically all its territorial gains had to be abandoned when our troops, having evaded the destructive effect of the initial barrage, started to counterattack that afternoon.Distress signals from the beleaguered Russian infantry brought their tanks to the scene. Like a cataract released by the sudden opening of a dam, the massed tanks poured across the Seret River into the historic battleground of Yaroslavichi, where exactly thirty years before, during the summer of 1914, Austro-Hungarian and imperial Russian cavalry divisions had clashed head-on in the last major cavalry charge in history. History now repeated itself, as once again the Russians enjoyed numerical superiority, and once again the battle ended in a draw. In 1914 the defenders achieved this result by the use of new machine-gun and artillery tactics, whereas in 1944 we introduced zone defense tactics to overcome our inferiority. On 14 July alone, First Ukrainian Front lost eighty-five tanks to our minefields. The number of disabled tanks increased rapidly, and the entire Soviet armored advance broke down when it came within reach of our carefully deployed antitank and flak guns. The losses assumed truly disastrous proportions when General Breith proceeded on 15 July to counterattack with the 1st and 8th Panzer Divisions.
I found the account interesting because it illustrates what was achieved when a defensive doctrine specifically designed to negate the Soviet artillery advantage was implemented.
Some take-aways from the doctrine: A dummy main line is evacuated before the artillery starts to fall; extensive minefields between the dummy line and the main line; artillery pre-registered to fire in front of the main line + on the occupied dummy line; AT+Flak strongpoints at the main line to parry Soviet armor breakthrough. Vicious, destabilizing infantry counterattacks are launched wherever Soviet hesitance is identified. Armored counterattacks to regain the dummy line. Sounds sort of like the optimal CM:RT German defensive battle eh? :cool:
As an aside, "In Deadly Combat" was one of the very first books on WW2 I ever bought. I remember it as being a vivid and entertaining read.
-
"What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."
-Oscar Wilde
-
The guys over at Slitherine (Panzer Corps) put this post together to answer that very same question:
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=121&t=42269&hilit=steam
It's a very interesting read, well thought-out decisions explaining why Steam would not be a good platform for the niche market of wargames. I imagine the same thought process influenced Battlefront's decision as well.
Well worth the read.
-
Wow, that does look like a beast!
Do you modify QB's for each battle by importing correct force; adding proper setup zones; changing ammo levels if out of supply, etc?
Tourney master workload seems intense! Just from that shot I can see Disrupted, Replenishing, Dugin and out of supply conditions for several counters... Preplanned arty, naval bombardments... Very impressive.
EDIT: Scenario Depot does not seem to have CMx2 scenarios.
-
Heh Aragorn, that speaks to the need for a library of SQB's, with logical force choice, etc...
Hey Shane, awesome to see the FGM still running strong. I see Rico's got a new tourney in the pipeline, CM:Risk??? Sounds Intriguing!
-
OK!
Failed to meet my 3 day deadline, playtesting took awhile longer than expected... But here it is:
"GL The Loyalty of Garibaldi"
"Italian partisans, under the veteran leadership of commander Victor Garibaldi, and with the support of several L3/35 tankettes, attack a German Flak position + town."
"Tiny, Allied vs AI scenario, 30 turns. Modified from quick battle map 420 MEET TINY AGRI. All credit to original scenario designer"
Download link: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9nefU0gCfvqVjdkeE9xNE5IWVU/edit?usp=sharing
That is a "Google Drive" link, will add repository link when up.
***
JonS is doing a DAR on scenario design at this link: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110294 Check it out. One thing I remember him mentioning is that good scenarios need a "hook", some unique thing that makes it stands out about the rest, and makes the player want to play it. The Hook Im employing in my scenario is that it is an "Axis vs Axis" fight, which you dont seen much of.
RepsolCBR:
Using the QB maps and keeping the scenario fairly simple makes these scenarios quite fast to make. I have not really kept track of how many hours a have spent on this first one but i would guess maybe 10 (including 2 quick playtestings).Yes, I found about the same. Maybe 3-5 hours modifying the map, changing terrain features, size+width etc. Another few hours tweaking the OOB's, experience, etc. Maybe 4-5 hours total playtesting. 12-13 hours total I would imagine. One-a-week scenario's are do-able with this method, although a definite focus and dedication would be required.
I'll check out QBS One more roadblock when its up.
gundolf:
Michael C Clarke with 12 posts from CMBB, I smell Alter-Ego here. I think we are in for some rather experienced scenario creation. Bring it all anyways we could use them.I've been playing CM off/on since the CMBO demo, played the heck out of CMBB, took a break for a couple years until getting back in with Fortress Italy. But I'm not yet a scenario designer, not by a long shot. This will only be my second released scenario... I've mucked about in the editor a wee bit, and I think it's time to get a little more serious about it. I've been enjoying the creations of other designers for years now, time to give back, in whatever capacity I am able. Oh, and the reason for only 12 posts is due to my creating a new account after getting back into CM when Fortress Italy came out. Went by the tag "Mikey" before. Long time lurker.
There does indeed seem to be a lack of user made scenarios for Fortress Italy+Gustav Line... I have fond memories of those Quick, tough, vs AI CMBB scenarios made by "AL" for CMBB, so If I can emulate that style it would be time well invested.
P.S. If there are any concerns regarding copyright/original owner issues due to the fact that I'm modifying a map not of my own, I am all ears. I'm only trying to cut down some of my workload by modifying pre-made maps, but if anyone knows the official stance regarding this, like I said, I'm all ears.
Time to get started on the next one.
-
RepsolCBR,
You're absolutely right.
There was this scenario designer back in CMBB, AL was his name, who made maybe 20-30 tiny, enjoyable vs AI scenarios. Under-hour battles that were tough, VERY re-playable. I sometimes replayed one scenario 6-10 times.
Well, you've recruited me. I'm going to do just as you suggested, find a cool QB map and tweak to give a neat little vs AI tactical challenge. What's more, It's going to be ready by Friday night. I made my first scenario a couple of weeks ago, and have been dragging my ass on the second. Three days is my deadline.
Will post here again when it's up.
-
Try "The Battle of San Pietro," filmed and narrated by John Huston:
Battlefield series, "Battle for Italy". 2 hour program. Pretty good, some talk of what divisions where involved, strategic plan of combatants, weapons systems employed, etc: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag8uSgZnIGM
Battle of Salerno: Ignore the godawful intro:
Another DOD b&w feature, propaghandish:
****
There really isn't much good stuff on Italy out there an the inter-webs. That Battlefield program is really the best I've found, the rest is pretty meh.
Might need to stick to printed material to get in debt battle descriptions.
I'm sure there are at least half a dozen good books out there covering the Italian front.
-
Pevs86,
At the risk of being branded a shameless self promoter, may I direct your mouse cursor to the following link: http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=2720
Therein, you may be delighted to discover a spreadsheet detailing the unit availability of Gustav Line forces, broken down into month of first appearance.
You are free to scorn the author of said document for the conniving and backhanded method of self-aggrandizing advertising he is employing here, of the most foppish fashion.
-
Awesome!
This guy approves too ->
-
Glad to be of service.
Link to repository upload: http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=2720
-
Since there seemed to be some interest, I threw together a spreadsheet of unit availabilities for Gustav Line, as noted in the GL manual.
Attached as zip file.
From what I understand, these units are those specifically introduced with the module, so vanilla Fortress Italy units are not included in this list.
Also to note is that the manual didn't specify any "End Dates" for formation availability, so as such, all formations are assumed to be available from the specified introduction month to the end of the "war", May 1944.
American units:
German units:
Commonwealth units:
Sequoia, if you're planning on tackling an availability spread for Fortress Italy proper, I could lend a hand.
Will also post to repository, and update a link here when available.
Mike.
-
Owing to the fact that this scenario was just deleted in Favor of "GL - Bloody Beachtown", the first "More..." link above no longer works.
Perhaps it would be best to delete this thread? Many thanks forum mod.
-
Hello all,
I was unsure whether this had uploaded or not, so I double posted. Also, I had put it in the Fortress Italy section instead of the Gustav Line section. .
Incidentally, this file (identical to GL - Bloody Beachtown), was deleted to keep things organized.
You can download the scenario (GL - Bloody Beachtown) from here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110090
Thank you for your interest.
-
Ian,
No difference, I was just unsure if it had uploaded or not, so I re-uploaded, adding the GL prefix. The other (non-GL file) is now deleted to keep things organized.
You're the commander of the British airborne company. Early this morning, a recon patrol from your troop came under fire from forces unknown operating in town. You've been assigned to clear them out:
You have 3 objectives: The town center, the winery and an outlying church. The Winery holds a dominating field of fire into the town, so occupying it will be the main objective:
You have at your command a well armed half company of airborne infantry. Lots of sten guns, lots of demo packs, lots of firepower. Remember that Brit paratroop squads carry 2" smoke mortars. Use them:
First real attempt at a proper scenario, came together pretty well overall. One thing I'm still not too competent with is AI plans. Just need to put some time into the editor and test scenarios to get a better feel for how to best work with the AI plan maker; how to bring out the best of the system to make an enjoyable , challenging vs AI scenario..
I would like this to be the first of many scenarios, with the final goal of an Ortona Canadian vs AI campaign. I really enjoyed the few narrative campaigns made for CMBN like "Devils Descent". A brutal Ortona street slog would be a good backdrop for a interesting narrative, and would keep the focus on infantry actions. That's the scope I feel this game excels at simulating: 1 (or less!) Company infantry engagements.
One thing I learned while building this scenario is how door placement on buildings can have a drastic effect on gameplay... Units routing out from buildings will run in any direction, be it perpendicular to the enemy, or strait at them. Careful positioning of doors in occupied buildings can force a routing AI to retreat along safe covered paths, away from the advancing player.
-
Just arrived in Ottawa!
No complaints whatsoever, slick case, plenty of room for more modules, etc.. ;-)
Combat Mission Commander (Campaign Tool)
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
Falke88:
Interesting.
I've been working on my own op-layer for a few months myself, coding the tool with Flash AS3, using external, PBEM'able XML files to "save" and "load" counter/hex data. Many 10's of thousands of lines of code written, some significant progress made. It's awesome to see that several other members have answered the call as well to develop their own Op-layers for a game that is just crying out for one.
One main sticky point I've been trying to solve is how best to reduce the bookkeeping for the players/umpire. I.E.: After a battle, I don't want to force the player/umpire to go through a gargantuan spreadsheet for every single unit to adjust ammo, casualties, morale, etc. I want that "Unit updating" process to be quick and painless.
One solution is as follows:
On the CM AAR screen, there are the following categories:"Men Ok","Men Killed","Men Wounded","Men Missing","Tanks Lost","Arm Vehicles Lost","Other Vehicles Lost". You could develop a tool that would let the player assign these casualties him/herself to the involved units of his force. For example:
Axis Counters "Ax1,Ax2 & Ax3" attack into Hex 38, contained a stacked Soviet force of 2 units, "Sov1 and Sov2". The result is an Axis victory. The AAR screen for Axis casualties reads the following: "..., 45 men killed, 32 men wounded,...". This End Screen is sent to the umpire, who pre-loads a master "Unit Updater" tool with those totals, as well as pre-selecting those Axis units that were involved in the battle (Ax1,Ax2,Ax3). That XML is send to the Axis player.
The Axis player opens the XML file with their "Unit Updater" tool. The player would then assign casualty points based on his best guess as to how the casualties were distributed amongst his committed units. For example:
Let's say in the battle Axis 1 suffered most of the casualties, with Axis 2 & 3 suffering lighter. The player need only click the little black KIA buttons next to the affect units. That will decrease the "KIA remaining" number by 1, while decreasing the "Men Ok" of what ever unit, let's say Ax1,1stPlt. So, maybe the player assigns 10 KIA & 5 WIA to each of his platoons in Ax1; that would leave 15 KIA points remaining, and 17 WIA points remaining to be assigned to the other units. He then allocates 5 KIA & 5 WIA points to each of the Ax3 platoons. That reduces the counters down to 0 KIA and 2 WIA remaining. The last 2 WIA are assigned to Ax2,1stPlt.
Final updated units strengths: Ax1.1 = "OK:15, KIA:10, WIA:5"........ etc for others.
An unknown here: Does an umpire then have to manually open up a "Core Units" file, and adjust each and every individual unit to reflect the changes? I'm trying to design that laborious necessity out... I'm leaning more towards quick battles rather than umpire-built game files with updated core-units files.. The system Im working on relies on percentages of unit types within counters, along with force ratios between sides to calculate the amount of points each player will be allowed to allocate to certain types of units... Reliant on players to spend points honestly, but quick battles have SO much less bookkeeping... Can give more details if interested.
More on the "Unit Updater Tool":
The advantage of such a tool/interface is that all the player is doing is clicking buttons to assign casualties: much less painful that scrolling through spreadsheets. Of course, the disadvantage is that is relies on players to allocate casualties honestly, as near as possible to what he remembers from the battle. But it's a fair tradeoff in my mind.
With this, you could also throw in a board wargame mechanic called "soak-off", where a player intentionally commits a unit of lower quality to an attack with the intention of allocating all endured casualties to that unit afterwards. That would be do-able here too, if desired by the players. In such a case, regardless of whatever casualties the elite PzGren Ax1 & Ax2 units ACTUALLY took on the CM battle, the Axis player could allocate ALL the "KIA & WIA remaining" points to his crummy Ax3 Green Garrison infantry. Would feel like assigning step-losses. Matter of preference for the players.
Some questions:
What coding environment are you using?
How will you be modelling supply?
Will there be FOW?
Hex or "Area" game Map?
PM me to continue conversation is desired.
Mike.