edl123 Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 Hello all, Is there a scenarios or campaign for the Battle for St. lo? Haven't been able find one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 I only found this scenario: http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/BattleForNormandy/Scenarios/TWC Purple Heart Draw.html and this campaign: http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/BattleForNormandy/Campaigns/Blue and Gray.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edl123 Posted July 14, 2017 Author Share Posted July 14, 2017 Hello IanL, Thank you for the links, did not know about that site edl123 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) Green Hell, which comes with the Commonwealth module, is located just east of St Lo and was part of the fighting just before the Americans entered the town proper a few days later. Edited July 14, 2017 by ASL Veteran 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IICptMillerII Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 I've always been curious as to why no one took on the task of making a proper St. Lo. map. Although I can understand why no one wants to take it on, it would be quite the undertaking. By the time the Americans got to the town, it was pulverized. Modeling the complete destruction of the town in CM would be a very time consuming task. Hopefully however someone does take on the task of making it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 My understanding is that the important fighting took place outside of the city with not much happening inside. Although there were a dramatic incident or two, it was basically just a matter of moving in and occupying the town at that stage. The fighting that took place before that could happen though was often brutal and bloody. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 The Americans entered St Lo sometime around 1800 hours on July 18 and the Germans retreated from the town that night and the early morning hours of the 19th. While there was some fighting on the eastern outskirts of town on the 18th the extensive rubble in the town was caused by Allied bombing not by ground fighting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 IIRC, 'Clay pigeons of St Lo' refers to some fighting in the town, although that's probably the same fighting on the eastern outskirts that ASL Vet refers to above. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 1 hour ago, JonS said: IIRC, 'Clay pigeons of St Lo' refers to some fighting in the town, although that's probably the same fighting on the eastern outskirts that ASL Vet refers to above. That's how I recall it too, and from the same source. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edl123 Posted July 16, 2017 Author Share Posted July 16, 2017 (edited) Hello all, On the subject of the Battle of St. Lo, this is the article that peck my interested. "The United States Army Center of Military History, Breakout And Pursuit" Chapter VIII. The battle was more about the high ground around St. Lo. Like hill 192 and 122. It seemed to me that who own these hills owned the surrounding area. It was a bloody battle. Thanks, Ed Edited July 16, 2017 by edl123 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 The Battle of St Lo is really a campaign as you noted to take the high ground and prepare for the breakout. LongLeftFlank and Broadsword were both working on maps for the area. Broadsword and I also fought a mini campaign which accounts for my SIG on the 352 ID. As to making the St Lo map itself, it just doesn't lend itself to CM all that well. I considered it for a while and felt 1. there was no way to do it justice and 2. there really wasn't much fighting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IICptMillerII Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 I know that there wasn't a whole lot of fighting in the town itself, but I always thought it would be cool to have a master map that covered the St Lo area. Oh well, maybe this thread will inspire some scenario designers to make one, or more scenarios based around the St Lo campaign. One can hope. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 16, 2017 Share Posted July 16, 2017 5 hours ago, edl123 said: The battle was more about the high ground around St. Lo. Like hill 192 and 122. It seemed to me that who own these hills owned the surrounding area. It was a bloody battle. Exactly. And the thing that made it so bad was that the Germans had registered their artillery on the relevant heights. When the Americans moved onto them they got slaughtered. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 (edited) Don't forget the right bank of the Vire: Le Carillon/La Meauffe and the poor bloody 137th Infantry (and KG Kentner). Someday I will get back to that one. I am still seeking for the regimental history. Looks like surviving copies are all in Kansas. Edited July 24, 2017 by LongLeftFlank 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Hope you do, LLF! Even so, my master map and yours cover a good deal of the Saint-Lo campaign area already. I've shelved CMx2 until BFC gets around to fixing the tac AI that I feel they broke when they released version 4.0 (infantry fleeing unrealistically from perfectly good fortification objects like foxholes, trenches, etc.) I pop in here occasionally to see if there's any sign of a fix, but haven't seen anything to give me hope. :-( 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benpark Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 I made a map of Gaucherie a looooong time ago on GaJ's. Not sure if it made the move or not. I also had a scenario somewhere that depicted the brief, but sharp action there . The 113th Cavalry Group fought dismounted into the town- an audacious and risky move to leave the M18's and mounted MG's behind, but the terrain necessitated such moves. The 113th was my grandfather's unit (a Captain by wars end). There was a unit history published towards the end of the war called "The Saga of the Red Horse" (in part here): http://www.redhorse.nl/The_Saga_of_the_Red_Horse.htm I had always intended on making a campaign based on the 113th, but have yet to have time to do it. I'm sure my grandfather would have been fascinated by the map making aspect in particular (as I am). A general overview of St. Lo fighting here for aspiring scenario makers: http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/100/100-13/CMH_Pub_100-13.pdf There's also the book "Dying for St. Lo", which as I recall is a good overview of the German angle on the situation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 One particularly good thing about the Saint-Lo campaign and hedgerow fighting: The compartmentalized nature of the combat in that terrain makes it particularly well-suited to CMBN, since it lends itself easily to smaller maps and smaller-unit actions. When I made my map for the British sector at Fontenoy-Le-Pesnel, visibility extended all across a brigade front. So it would have been unrealistic to restrict the map and battle scale to some smaller sub-unit in such an open area. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 (edited) On 7/25/2017 at 4:59 AM, Broadsword56 said: Hope you do, LLF! Even so, my master map and yours cover a good deal of the Saint-Lo campaign area already. I've shelved CMx2 until BFC gets around to fixing the tac AI that I feel they broke when they released version 4.0 (infantry fleeing unrealistically from perfectly good fortification objects like foxholes, trenches, etc.) I pop in here occasionally to see if there's any sign of a fix, but haven't seen anything to give me hope. :-( Yes, the root cause seems clear enough to me (although it's also possible I am wrong): fortifications are immobile vehicles and their occupants are 'passengers'. Also explains why entrenched infantry are so much easier to spot in concealment terrain. So whatever 4.0 tweak BFC did to make crews more prone to bail when hit by heavy HE has also made infantry prone to bail out of perfectly good fortifications and rout pell mell for cover like a crew. Please fix or sumfink.... PS: good to hear from you. Been a while! Edited July 28, 2017 by LongLeftFlank 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 I've since heard through the grapevine that BFC are actively working on a fix -- it's just not clear when we might see it. In the meantime, I'm thinking there might be a way I could still enjoy CMx2 while waiting if I play something involving more meeting engagements and mobile forces -- I'm following the efforts of the players making content for an Arracourt pack, for example. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 LLF, I'm sure an eventual fix to the tac AI behavior in fortifications would also make possible your awesome Dien Bien Phu mod -- which I was sorely disappointed to see shelved. But you were right to shelve it if the game's limitations make a realistic battle of that type impossible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 4 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said: ...fortifications are immobile vehicles and their occupants are 'passengers'. I thought that was only true of the various kinds of bunkers. Has it been extended to other types of fortifications as well? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 Like I said, slap me down if I'm wrong (I'm not a proud man lol) but I think that our beloved 'earth pimples' are just more of the same, basically an OT vehicle with a low-to-the-ground silhouette. BFC knew they needed a FoW replacement for the CMSF trenches/prefab mass graves for the WWII series, and this was the quickest hack. I have no doubt it's on the list for eventual improvement, no worries, but the infantry bailing out of them with a near miss is a little more urgent fix. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 6 hours ago, Broadsword56 said: LLF, I'm sure an eventual fix to the tac AI behavior in fortifications would also make possible your awesome Dien Bien Phu mod -- which I was sorely disappointed to see shelved. But you were right to shelve it if the game's limitations make a realistic battle of that type impossible. Yup, I now have about 300 photos of all the French emplacements at Eliane 2 (A1); a double row of 5' deep slit trenches and 2 man bunkers encircling the hill, with an underground command post up top (the one that got sapped by 304th dac cong) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IICptMillerII Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 8 hours ago, Broadsword56 said: I've since heard through the grapevine that BFC are actively working on a fix -- it's just not clear when we might see it. This is really good to hear. Even though it may be a while, I'm glad that a fix is on their radar for the wonky 4.0 behavior. Thanks for the small bit of info! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted July 28, 2017 Share Posted July 28, 2017 4 hours ago, Michael Emrys said: I thought that was only true of the various kinds of bunkers. Has it been extended to other types of fortifications as well? It is only true for bunkers. @LongLeftFlank is incorrect - I have no idea where he got that idea from. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.