Baseless Speculation on the Market-Garden Module

[JonS]

I'm convinced that XXXcorps had the materials upfront to do so. They weren't stupid back then.

I'm sure you are right, on both points. However my deduction from that is presumably different to yours.

XXX Corps (and any other comparable military force facing a similar task) would indeed have had engineering plant and equipment well forward to facilitate route clearance. However they were, as you rightly note, not stupid. They wouldn't risk scarce equipment that they knew would be needed again and again and again in the midst of an ongoing battle. They would let the combat arms - armour, infantry, artillery - take care of the opposition, then only once the location was relatively secure and safe would the sappers be sent in to remove wrecks and what not.

Not always, of course. Absolutes are always wrong. Dozer tanks were committed in amongst the first waves on D-Day, and I've little doubt other example can be found. The point is that commitment of those kinds of resources was rare enough that BFC are on firm ground in their decision to omit them. Would I like them? Hell yes, of course I would, and I want a pony too. But the game is fine without them.

[womble]

So I guess what Jon's post suggests is that designers might build around an already-KOed tank a scenario where the attacker has to clear out the defenders in order to make things safe for the engineers (waiting just off camera) to come clear the obstruction.

[Michael Emrys]

And as for The Island (some writers have used the term Hell's Highway to refer to the whole length from the Wilhelmina Canal to the Arnhem bridge), the best solution would have been to avoid it altogether and turn left right after Nijmegen. I believe that this was the textbook correct answer to the examination problem Seedorf81 was referring to. In fact, it may have been the case that the Dutch liaison officers to 21st. AG staff tried to inform them of that but were brushed off.

Michael

[Seedorf81]

I'm sure you are right, on both points. However my deduction from that is presumably different to yours.

XXX Corps (and any other comparable military force facing a similar task) would indeed have had engineering plant and equipment well forward to facilitate route clearance. However they were, as you rightly note, not stupid. They wouldn't risk scarce equipment that they knew would be needed again and again and again in the midst of an ongoing battle. They would let the combat arms - armour, infantry, artillery - take care of the opposition, then only once the location was relatively secure and safe would the sappers be sent in to remove wrecks and what not.

Not always, of course. Absolutes are always wrong. Dozer tanks were committed in amongst the first waves on D-Day, and I've little doubt other example can be found. The point is that commitment of those kinds of resources was rare enough that BFC are on firm ground in their decision to omit them. Would I like them? Hell yes, of course I would, and I want a pony too. But the game is fine without them.

As a "junior member" (still in doubt whether to see that as an insult, for I'm fifty years of age. "Old", "senior", "wise", "antiquated", "granddad-like" or "senile" might cover my membershiptitle, but surely not "junior".) I sometimes looked a little horrified at what seemed to be ferocious fanatisicm on the forumdebates. Boy, did those participants stick to their, usually very well argumented, opinions. Weren't they a little too hardheaded at times?

Well, I now must plead guilty to becoming a stubborn little f#*k myself. Because I continue to believe that tanks were shoving other tanks, trucks and so on right out of their paths on Hells Highway. Whether they were under fire or not. One of the reasons, besides the obvious need for speed to get to Arnhem, was that it sometimes was their only option.

When you're second in a tankcolumn that's exposed on a road off wich the sides are too soggy to move on, and the leadtank blows up, you know that you can't reverse because of the other tanks behind you. Even if there was enough room behind them, it would take too much time for them to reverse in an orderly fashion. So in order to be able to engage the enemy you go forward and push the burnin' bugger in front of you out of your way. The tankcorpsofficers were brought up with the tradition of horsecavalry (Georgie Patton!), where one had only one goal: going forward and engage. Besides, the alternative is staying put, waiting to get blown up yourself.

I agree that this wasn't common practise, but the circumstances on this peticular stretch of Dutch highway made it a necessity. And I persist in stating that for MARKET GARDEN we as players should be able to push stuff off Hell's Highway.

[Lt Belenko]

Takes me back to my old Panzer Biltz days. Trying to blast that 3rd tank on the stack to make the road impassable.

Seedorf81 your earlier comment about, they were on a time table and wouldn't wait the 2 or 3 hours to bring up a dozer. But the way the battle went, is seems they did indeed wait those precious hours thus the results of the battle being days behind schedule and the 1st Br Airborne being decimated.

I think in combat, many things were done on a spur of the moment out of necessity, but BFC tries to limit things to realistic/often occurring events to prevent "gamey" tactics. Take for instance dead cows - were there dead cows in Normandy? - yes. But did they really affect the battle out come? - probably not thus no dead cows provided.

One more thing Seedorf81: Age 50 is not old on these forums.

[Broadsword56]

It does not seem unrealistic to me that a dozer tank would have already been assigned to facilitate the operation and would be on hand.

But what does "on hand" mean, specifically, in a situation where an entire corps is strung out along (and confined to) a single narrow road? Unless the dozer tank happens to be right at the location where the wreck happens, then the dozer tanks themselves will be somewhere else in the column and have to deal with "traffic" to reach the scene. Again, these things took time that would often have been beyond the time scale of a CM battle.

This discussion reminds me of ones involving German tank repair -- they had expert crews that dashed out to recover wrecked tanks and tow them back for repair so they could quickly return to action. Why isn't that in the game? Again, it's a logistical function that's beyond the scope of a tactical situation.

[Erwin]

I understand the issue re what can be achieved at a tactical level, but it is a shame that CM1 did allow for pushing units out of the way while CM2 doesn't. I dunno about pushing a tank that could explode at any second taking the pusher out as well. But, you'd think you could push a light vehicle with a tank and do so regularly in CM1. (I am thinking of playability and fun issues primarily.)

[Michael Emrys]

But what does "on hand" mean, specifically, in a situation where an entire corps is strung out along (and confined to) a single narrow road?

You're quite right. But that wasn't the situation I was referring to in the sentence you quoted. Perhaps you should go back and reread my post.

Michael

[Broadsword56]

I'd be OK with ordinary tanks being able to push light vehicle wrecks (trucks and jeeps) out of the way.

[JonS]

So I guess what Jon's post suggests is that designers might build around an already-KOed tank a scenario where the attacker has to clear out the defenders in order to make things safe for the engineers (waiting just off camera) to come clear the obstruction.

Exactly, it's a scenario design function.

Also, in the case of a tank or vehicle getting destroyed during a battle, well, that then becomes something the player must plan around. Or - better yet - plan forward so that you don't get anything KOd at an inconvenient spot. If you send your tanks through a narrow defile in LOS of an unsuppressed A-Tk gun ... well, maybe you should lose because you foolishly allowed your only route of advance to become blocked.

Seedorf81:

I agree that this wasn't common practice

The problem, for BFC, is that allowing rare but plausible events is two fold.

Firstly, they have to write the code to enable it, and then test it, and try to ensure that the way they have it working is usefully accurate. Can a Stuart push a Tiger? I hope not. Can a Tiger push a Stuart? Probably. Can a Tiger push a Stuart up a hill? Well ... that depends. Can a Tiger push a Stuart that's wedged up against the abutment of a bridge? ...! Figuring all that out and making it work and finding a way of communicating it to players all takes time away from adding something else to the game, something more common and generally useful.

Secondly, what is rare in the real world often becomes the norm in CM. I' wager there have been several orders of magnitude more Tigers destroyed in CM than were ever produced. I'd also bet that the overall proportion of Tigers used in scenarios and QBs to other German tank types is FAR in excess of the modest numbers they were actually available in. The same applies to game mechanics as well as equipment. Last year(?) there was a boisterous debate about whether tanks, and Churchills in particular, should be able to cross bocage, but in the end BFC came down on the "no" side of the fence. They acknowledged that there is incontrovertible evidence that tanks - and especially Churchills - sometimes could and did cross un-breached bocage. However they decided that, without a ton of work in other areas of the game to mitigate it, allowing tanks to cross bocage at all would seriously unbalance the game by negating one of the primary tactical effects of that terrain type. In other words, if tanks were allowed to cross any bocage, then players would send them racing helter skelter all over the map, and the restricted mobility that was such a fundamental part of tactical battles in the Normandy campaign would be utterly lost.

And, finally, I'm going to quote myself from my previous post

Would I like [dozer tanks]? Hell yes, of course I would. But the game is fine without them.

[Juri_JS]

Does anybody know if we can expect Kriegsmarine units in the Market Garden module? A number of naval detachments fought at Arnhem, for example Schiffsstammabteilung 10 and 14 were part of Kampfgruppe Von Tettau.

[Duckman]

The only weapon I heard commonly used by Allies that was German was Panzerfausts. And even then I wouldn't go so far to say it was necesarilly common. But I have heard a lot instances of US troops using them, not just one or two.

According to Gavin's memoirs panzerfausts were used as standard equipment in the 82nd AB after Normandy, where they captured "truckloads". They had bad experiences with the bazooka in Sicily and other places. Gavin says they even translated panzerfaust manuals and conducted formal training with them.

I remember another source saying "a lot" of American units were carrying panzerfausts by war's end (in addition to more automatic weapons and demolitions it was probably a sign of veteran units), and I think the Soviets used them too. But it seems it was almost always a formal thing, i.e. not "picked up in the heat of battle".

[Sublime]

Duckman, do we have any sources? Id love for there to be proof of this, ESPECIALLY if it was formal, because then we could argue for BFC to include them in Allied Airborne units (very sparingly) or maybe only as an option when you do force selection in QBs, much as how now you pick whether squads get a zook, m1a1, m9a1 or none.

[JonS]

ISTR that 82nd A/B collected a metric buttload of fausts in Sicily (or maybe early on in Italy?) and continued to use them as quasi-official weapons ever after.

OTOH, a lot of that is based on some offhand comments in the US Official History, a few comments in Gavin's book, and an imperial buttload of mythmaking by SL/ASL which conveyed the impression that every member of 82nd A/B wandered around with two or three 'fausts strapped to his back, with a couple more in their bedroll.

[akd]

ISTR that 82nd A/B collected a metric buttload of fausts in Sicily (or maybe early on in Italy?) and continued to use them as quasi-official weapons ever after.

Although widely repeated across the intertubes (probably thanks to Wikipedia), I don't think this is correct. Nordyke says the capture of a large cache of Panzerfaust happened during Market-Garden. This makes more sense as it is unlikely any panzerfausts were issued to German units in Sicily.

[Michael Emrys]

Although widely repeated across the intertubes (probably thanks to Wikipedia), I don't think this is correct. Nordyke says the capture of a large cache of Panzerfaust happened during Market-Garden. This makes more sense as it is unlikely any panzerfausts were issued to German units in Sicily.

This is a lot closer to the truth. My impression from reading Gavin's memoir (though be advised that it has been something on the order of 30 years since I did) is that after M-G, when the 82nd. went into reserve, they got wind of a warehouse full of captured Fausts that nobody seemed to know what to do with. An enterprising 82nd. supply officer offered to take them off the then owner's hands (perhaps for several cases of captured booze?), and the rest is history.

Michael

[Lille Fiskerby]

Hi there

What I would like to see in OMG (or the last module):

OP Shermans for artillery observers from field Regt. riding

with front line troops.

AVRE Churchills.

Sherman Crab I frails.

Turretless Canadian RAM tank towing 17 pdr.

"Unfrocked Priest" SP M7 Priest where the 105 mm how.

was removed.

Humber Scout Car with room for (reduced) Bn. HQ.

LF

[para]

I'm a simple soul I would like to see parachute and supply canister flavour objects. On the ground on roofs and hanging from trees and poles It is OMG afterall

[Duckman]

Duckman, do we have any sources?

Sorry for the late reply. It was years since I read Gavin's book, but I clearly remember the panzerfaust part since this was discussed back in the Close Combat days as well. He says the 82nd first encountered them in Normandy.

When they started using panzerfausts on a large scale is a bit more uncertain, but a Google Books search seems to indicate post-Holland:

http://books.google.se/books?ei=QpvAUMTeOcedtQaiuYCIAg&hl=sv&id=DoYrENwKc4sC&dq=on+to+berlin&q=panzerfausts#search_anchor

[Duckman]

More info on Allied panzerfaust use, some of it properly sourced and some of it not:

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=271957

There is one example, from a medal citation, of an American officer picking up a panzerfaust during a battle. There is also one (sourced) mention of a US unit carrying panzerschrecks as well as panzerfausts. A bit more on airborne use too.

[Placebo]

I am going to have to add to the endless speculation and say whenever the battlefront team are this quiet it is because they are on a final push to get a release out. I think we could have some good news before Christmas.

*warning: this post contains baseless optimism

[Duckman]

It seems you were quite correct.

[Michael Emrys]

What will be interesting to see is whether the Long Silence continues now that the patch is out. If it does, that may signify that something else is in the works to appear before New Year's. Or it may not.

Michael

[Cpl.Upham]

I didnt know this thread existed until today but I would direct you all to a thread I started recently

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=107390

It covers much of what seems to be covered here. But my BIG question is: where oh where are the Falshirmjeager troops???????????????

[Mord]

They'll be in the MG module.

Mord.