Jump to content

Any Chance for a New Afrikakorps game?


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, danfrodo said:

Monty is intelligent and skilled, like you said, but he was also impossible to work with and in September 44 made one of the great military blunders of the war. 

A blunder foisted on him quite a bit by London. This is what annoys me about the pop history since the effort to make Montgomery out to be the 2nd coming of Wellington is just as wrong as the efforts to depict him is a bloody moron. Market Garden came down from London, and while the details of the operation were worked out by Montgomery the operation was in fact the detritus of Churchill's administration, one the Imperial General Staff couldn't contain this time, so Monty had to work with it and unfortunately he did make things worse. It didn't really all start with him though. 

2 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

Here, here. Growing up, I was taught that Monty rescued the Allied situation in North Africa. Wavell and Auchinleck were seen as tired, dusty, and obsolete generals, that had let the situation deteriorate to a fiasco. Yet, it seems that they sowed the seeds for victory at El Alamein. Now, I hold Wavell in high esteem. After a bit of reading on Market Garden, I do question Montgomery's decision making.

Unfortunately it seems Wavell and Auchinleck fell afoul of the Prime Minister, a surefire way to get sacked or sent to India. Yet Churchill wasn't entirely wrong here, men in Auchinleck's command like Neil Ritchie were highly questionable leaders and Churchill was tired of wondering when the next aide was going to inform him of more bad news from the Middle East. Bonus awkward if he's in the middle of lunch with Roosevelt. Auchinleck was retreating again? Victory is in the other direction! So he did what any leader would do, he took action and had Auchinleck removed. Originally he was going to send General Gott but Gott's plane was shot down so instead command went to Montgomery, a man very adept at playing to Churchill's desires and concerns but this proved a rather important talent didn't it? 

Auchinleck and Wavell didn't seem like heroes to the media which was unfortunate since they were actually good tacticians. Auchinleck came off as a stuffy British Elite while the stubborn roughneck Wavell had too many enemies in the Imperial General Staff and had taken the fall for the disaster in Greece (which he didn't want any part of to begin with). Ironically Rommel thought highly of both, but a war waged on public consent needed at least some men who could parlay with the media successfully since public opinion mattered so much. I can think of nations that were fighting the war with zero consideration of public consent, I wouldn't want to have lived in any of them much less fought for them. 

2 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

All this being said, all these great generals and marshals (including Zhukov) were just men. During the war, propaganda made them seem as titans -- after the war, as legends. In reality, they sometimes made uninformed decisions. Often, got involved in sticky politics. Right place, right time. Wrong place, wrong time. Reality is very complex, and it's hard to attribute "good" or "bad" without a specific context.

Indeed. Something these guys had to deal with was being constantly being overruled or second guessed by Washington, London, and Moscow. Sound strategies were ruined all the time by politics, but that's because the Grand Alliance was the most important strategy of them all and Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin knew it. 

 

Edited by SimpleSimon
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 156
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is a very good point, and one that is often overlooked. During war, lots of chances are taken, usually based on incomplete information. Some generals are brilliant, most are at least decently com

How did he put up with Patton assaulting an American servicemen or Bradley's childish temper tantrums all the time? He was mindful of the fact he was the boss of all these men and that he had to be re

This is such a fascinating period or warfare - and history. Enormous leaps in technology, equipment, and tactics; plus such a variety of forces and organizational types. Would love to see a re-working

Posted Images

Italians would need a huge revamp for an Afrika Korps title.

What I would gently suggest is a major pack for Fortress Italy filling out the Italian roster in Sicily, then moving on to add Partisans, RSI and Co-Belligerents.

This way all of the work needed to bring the Italians to North Africa is done in advance and the pack is at least making money in the meantime during the very long development time needed for maps, scenarios, campaigns and TOE and OOBs for the other nations.

All of that Italian content needs to be created anyway, why not put it in an existing product line rather than sit on it until the base game is ready for release?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

A blunder foisted on him quite a bit by London. This is what annoys me about the pop history since the effort to make Montgomery out to be the 2nd coming of Wellington is just as wrong as the efforts to depict him is a bloody moron. Market Garden came down from London, and while the details of the operation were worked out by Montgomery the operation was in fact the detritus of Churchill's administration, one the Imperial General Staff couldn't contain this time, so Monty had to work with it and unfortunately he did make things worse. It didn't really all start with him though. 

That's very interesting SimpleSimon.  I have never heard that.  I read Beevor's Arnhem book last year and he puts it all on Monty.  Very interesting. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

That's very interesting SimpleSimon.  I have never heard that.  I read Beevor's Arnhem book last year and he puts it all on Monty.  Very interesting. 

Pop History is Pop History. Citino, one of the best western historians of German Arms, while focusing on the Wehrmacht thoughtfully analyzes the Soviets and Western Allies where applicable, using the latest research. 

His judgement of Monty from the beginning to the end, including Market Garden, I think is fair. Monty was the epitome of the British Way of War, with all the good and bad that comes with that, in the way that some German generals embodied their way of making war. Americans judge him harshly because the American conception of battle, operation, campaign and generalship generally is different.

Maybe it's because I was trained and served in a Commonwealth military, but the Commonwealth campaign in Normandy is I think one of the best fought positional campaigns, featuring some of the best set-piece battles ever. Fire plans, firepower, shooting the infantry onto the target, displacing the enemy from their positions by weight of fire, these all make sense to me - probably for the reasons they frustrate Americans and Germans.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Market Garden had worked, though, Monty would have been regarded as brilliant. As it was, it was a close run thing. Consider the unfortunate coincidence of the 9th and 10th SS refitting in the area, or if the 1st Airborne had conducted a coup de main directly on the bridge with an LZ on the south side on the first lift. What amazes me about MG, and in fact the entire war, was how quickly the Allies were able to mount operations? Planning and logistics masters, AFAIC...all without computers, mind you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

   The attempt to jump the Rhine had failed. The sense of euphoria in the Allied camp—palpable just two weeks before—dissipated almost as rapidly as it had arrived. The bubble had burst, and it was now clear that final victory over Germany was going to have to wait until 1945.But why had Market Garden failed? Certainly the plan was risky, overly complex, and more suitable for a map exercise than an actual field battle against a live opponent. The commander of the British 1st Airborne Division, General Brian Urquhart, was correct when he wrote that “too much reliance was placed on armour and on the main axis.” All sorts of things had gone wrong, moreover: the fair weather turned, radios failed, and a full copy of the British operational order fell into German hands. American writers with a special dislike of Montgomery have, over the decades, indulged in a certain schadenfreude over his failure. Finally, the insufferable one had been laid low, caught in a trap of his own making.


   But remember the old saw: the enemy gets a vote. Market Garden opened just two weeks after one of the most ignominious defeats in German military history. Even a week before the Allied drop at Arnhem, German columns were scurrying out of France without order or discipline. The men were no longer listening to their officers and seemed only to want an end to the war and a chance to return home. They looked more like fugitives than a modern army, a coarse Soldateska: unshaven, unkempt, and inebriated on looted cognac. Not in its worst moments in World War I—not even at the very end—had a German field army ever approached the devolved state of the 1944 model in the west.


   But what a difference two weeks can make! In that brief span, the Wehrmacht had righted itself, restored its discipline, and regained its sense of purpose. Now it had won a clear and indisputable defensive victory over the Western Allies—the very thing the Führer had been calling for (and predicting) since the landings back in June. The Germans re-formed their lines, foiled a well-supplied Allied stratagem, and mauled an Allied airborne division, killing 1,500 and taking another 6,500 prisoners (out of a 12,000-man unit). Total Allied casualties numbered over 16,000, German less than half that (somewhere around 6,500). As these relatively small casualty figures indicate, Arnhem was a pocket battle within the grand scheme of World War II. Its implications and impact, however, were massive. The Wehrmacht had served notice that it was still game, still in the field, and still a force to be reckoned with. It wasn’t the return of Rundstedt, or the fanaticism of Model, or even the fear of draconian punishments that had done it, as much as each of these played a role. Rather, the victory over Market Garden was proof that enough German soldiers—company grades, noncommissioned officers, and enlisted men alike—still found the Hitler regime worth fighting for. No matter how distasteful that judgment appears in retrospect, no one can discuss the historical problem of the Wehrmacht honestly without recognizing that fact.

   Perhaps it was all a matter of timing. When Montgomery was planning Market Garden in early September, the Wehrmacht had apparently fallen apart, and all sorts of risks seemed reasonable enough. When he attempted to execute it a short time later, that favorable moment had vanished. Toward the end of the previous global war, on August 22, 1918, Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig surveyed the dissolving German forces to his front and noted that “risks which a month ago would have been criminal to incur ought now to be incurred as a duty.” Perhaps Montgomery—a student of history—was thinking of these very words as he contemplated his options in early September. If so, he had gotten things exactly backward, and Montgomery was neither the first nor the last commander to fall victim to Clio’s caprice. Market Garden made perfect operational sense on September 10 but none at all on September 17.

Robert M. Citino. “The Wehrmacht's Last Stand”

Edited by DougPhresh
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think North Africa would also be the first module to require on-map depictions of field artillery and Allied anti-aircraft guns too. The 25pdr and French 75' frequently ended up being used as anti-tank guns since the 6pdr wasn't available in quantity until the end of 1942. Much like the East, the frontline in North Africa was highly permeable, and frequently artillery positions ended up in the fighting since there might be nothing other than a thin line of infantry between them and the enemy. Perhaps no one at all. 

57 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

That's very interesting SimpleSimon.  I have never heard that.  I read Beevor's Arnhem book last year and he puts it all on Monty.  Very interesting. 

Beevor's books are quite good and in fact he's one of my sources. You are correct too, Beevor asserts that Market Garden was all Montgomery. Mind you, Beevor is right that the operational plan was all Montgomery, but the basic directive to "end the war by Christmas" by attacking (ie: liberating) the Netherlands sounds like a plan hatched at a level far above Montgomery's pay grade. 

Beevor himself pointed out in Second World War that the Prime Minister was frequently at odds with Alan Brooke and the rest of the IGS. Churchill had a tendency to meddle in operational decisions and plans that were explicitly not his responsibility and Alan Brooke was only just able to talk him out of a number of misguided adventures during the war. Since the man was his boss Brooke had to give way sometimes and unfortunately I think one of the times he chose to give way was over a decision taken by the Prime Minister-formally or informally-to pre-empt the Americans and restore British honor by through an invasion of Germany through the Ruhr. 

The problem with the plan for attacking Germany through Holland is to me, too obvious for an experienced military man like Montgomery, whatever one thinks of him, for it to had been his idea. An attack calling for a rapid advance through German held Holland then turning into a complicated southward pivot into the Ruhr before winter set in just doesn't sound like something any General worth his salt would've considered easy, or maybe even sane. It sounds like something a...well, a politician would think up, a layperson. Think about some of the other circumstances that would've made it appealing from Churchill's perspective, like the prospect of liberating the Dutch and restoring Queen Wilhelmina's government or closing down the German V1 and V2 bases in Holland. Montgomery never would've considered vetoing it, the chance at capturing the Ruhr before November and opening the path to Berlin in an audacious operation thought up entirely by His Majesty's Finest while the Americans were busy shooting up trees in the Hurtgen? All of these rewards and promises in one plan and if it's successful Britain gets to own every single one of them

The specific Operational plan though? That was all Montgomery, and as Beevor highlights there were many, many problems with it. 

 

Edited by SimpleSimon
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sequoia said:

Doug, what is missing from the Italian Sicily roster? I thought the Italians had no real armor formations in Sicily for example?

Catching Up To The Engine:

It's more that engine updates have left Italy behind. Italy has no AT bunkers, no AA, no flamethrowers not even tank hunter teams.

Now, I'm not sure what guns they had casemated on Sicily, or if those played any part beyond the first day, so I suppose that can be discounted.

On-Map AA would make a big difference. It would be a nice addition to scenarios where the Italians are defending a static position, and in QB both for fire support and to lessen the plastering by Allied air.

The Italians have both Pioneers and the specialized assault troops - Guastatori who had flamethrowers.

There are perfectly serviceable AA guns and AT rifles mounted on the AS.42 Sahariana. They would just need to be added in the dismounted role. 

These are all small additions, more to bring Italy up to the engine standards, using much of what already exists in Fortress Italy and laying the foundations for the larger role Italy played in Africa.

Moving on from what we mostly already have:

Some of the Italian artillery in the 75mm - 105mm range would be nice to have on-map in Sicily, and crucial to have on-map in Africa. Italian Artillery was not only commonly used in the direct role (they had slow and inefficient management of indirect fires) but the Italian Artillerymen were almost uniquely courageous and competent. Field Guns were often the only component of entire Italian brigades that gave the British any trouble. They had some pretty good guns, although rare compared to museum pieces or French trophies.

55 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:

I think North Africa would also be the first module to require on-map depictions of field artillery and Allied anti-aircraft guns too. The 25pdr and French 75' frequently ended up being used as anti-tank guns since the 6pdr wasn't available in quantity until the end of 1942. Much like the East, the frontline in North Africa was highly permeable, and frequently artillery positions ended up in the fighting since there might be nothing other than a thin line of infantry between them and the enemy. Perhaps no one at all.

The Italian Dual-Purpose AA/AT guns were also pretty good. Never as famous as the 88, they gave the allies trouble. The 90/53 is already in Fortress Italy in a SP mount.

Having a HMG would be nice, and the ballistics are already done because this is mounted in a SP mount in Fortress Italy as well.

The Parachute Division "Nembo" was present in Sicily. It would be a nice addition, but I think more importantly would lay the foundation for the "Folgore" which became famous in Africa. The best of the Italian infantry in Africa, Italian Paras were also the better units available to the RSI and Co-Belligerents.

Edited by DougPhresh
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly Steve himself once mentioned the possibility of not partisans but an Elite forces pack for CMFI consisting of, iirc, the 1st Special Service Force and the 442 RCT among others. If there's still a chance of it happening "Nembo" and the other Italian add-ons would be good additions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sequoia said:

Interestingly Steve himself once mentioned the possibility of not partisans but an Elite forces pack for CMFI consisting of, iirc, the 1st Special Service Force and the 442 RCT among others. If there's still a chance of it happening "Nembo" and the other Italian add-ons would be good additions.

I'd like that a lot. The Vehicle Pack and Battle Pack for Battle for Normandy were outstanding. What I like best is how the additions of each module and pack make it over to other titles. I think that was a really smart way to do things. That's why I think Fortress Italy might be the best way to get North Africa.

I wouldn't expect Steve to tinker away at partisans just for Fortress Italy, but the addition of partisans elsewhere helps lay the foundation for an Italian module or pack (43-45) for Fortress Italy. The way I see it a pack or module focusing on Italy would require four things: The Partisans, The Co-Belligerent Army, The RSI and the Royal Italian Army. Because of how complete Fortress Italy is due to the other titles, the work that remains to be done for an Italy pack/module is also what would be needed for Africa, or at least Tunisia.

With Soviet Partisans and Volkssturm coming with Fire and Rubble, partisans may not be as remote a possibility as it used to be. Most of the work is already being done by making partisans from scratch over in Red Thunder.  Italian names and voice files are already in the Fortress Italy base game. Of course the exact organization, equipment and appearance of a partisan band in Milan would be different from one in Minsk. Luckily Stens and Brens are already in the game thanks to Gustav Line (Which is thanks to Battle For Normandy: Commonwealth Forces and that interconnected development strategy).

It's a smart way to use the work done for other titles. Allied and German equipment through the end of the war was done in Final Blitzkrieg and made it over to Fortress Italy with Rome to Victory (and the work bringing the Commonwealth to the end of the war in FI is now being used for FB). Equipment for British and Americans through the end of the war, plus the voice files, ranks and so on in the base game gets us most of the way to the Co-Belligerent Army.

A combination of the German equipment we have and the Italian Equipment already in the base game goes a long way towards the RSI. There would need to be a bit, maybe quite a bit of work done on ranks, uniforms, TOE and OOB there. Luckily that work wouldn't go to waste! Why? Because the RSI mostly used equipment and uniforms left over from the Royal Italian Army, plus some  rare mid-war vehicles and equipment which could be a nice treat like the Strumtiger, Elefant and Jagdtiger (To clarify: Not that the RSI used those AFVs! Mostly Pz IIIs and IVs - which already exist in-game - Just that the P26/40 might be fun in the way those other rare AFVs are).

The field guns, AA, AT and so on needed for their TOE from 43-45, and to match the rest of the forces across titles would also complete the Royal Italian Army in Sicily.

With a change of tan uniforms for the grey, a complete Italian Army in Sicily gets you North Africa at least through 1943.

It's a good way to add more to an existing Base Game while laying the foundations for a new title.

 

 

Edited by DougPhresh
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2020 at 11:44 PM, mjkerner said:

If Market Garden had worked, though, Monty would have been regarded as brilliant. As it was, it was a close run thing. Consider the unfortunate coincidence of the 9th and 10th SS refitting in the area, or if the 1st Airborne had conducted a coup de main directly on the bridge with an LZ on the south side on the first lift. What amazes me about MG, and in fact the entire war, was how quickly the Allies were able to mount operations? Planning and logistics masters, AFAIC...all without computers, mind you.

Great staff work, that's for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2020 at 11:44 PM, mjkerner said:

If Market Garden had worked, though, Monty would have been regarded as brilliant.

This is a very good point, and one that is often overlooked. During war, lots of chances are taken, usually based on incomplete information. Some generals are brilliant, most are at least decently competent, but the ones that we praise the most are the lucky ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Great staff work, that's for sure.

Yes, the staff work was excellent which gives Montgomery no excuse whatsoever for giving the go-ahead for an Operation which made no provision for capture of its most important objectives on the first day of operations....

There were many basic flaws with Market Garden to varying degrees some of which could simply be attributable to egos, wounded or otherwise, among military men. Many of these flaws (some virtues too) were picked up by politics during and after the war to color the operation in all sorts of ways to fit a someone's personal agenda. So i'm not going to address those issues like sending an entire Corp up a single highway and landing an entire Division of Airborne troops in a region of the Netherlands covered by some of the heaviest anti-aircraft arrangements in Europe (the landing zones were on the route the RAF and 8th Air Force used to bomb the Ruhr) not to mention marooning lightly armed Airborne Divisions uncomfortably close to a Waffen SS Panzer training center. All of these issues were discovered in the planning phase by Monty's staff by the way, i'm not making them up. The Dutch Officer schools would automatically fail any cadet who proposed attacking Holland up the Eindhoven-Arnhem roadway, it was literally the worst answer you could give on a staff exam. 

No, the biggest issue of them all with the plan was that no provision whatsoever was made to actually capture the Nijmegan rail bridge.  If the Germans blew the rail bridge up the entire operation would automatically fail.  That they didn't end up doing this (for reasons no one has been able to explain) is not a testament to Montgomery's leadership since he couldn't possibly have known the Germans (ie: General Model) would fail to destroy the bridge and give the operation its only (slim) chance of success whatsoever. I won't address then what would happen if the Operation had been successful because that's all just counterfactual history at that point. It was foolishly reckless and this was known before the Operation commenced. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem w Market Garden is that is was a great idea but was a terrible, ridiculous  plan.  Growing wings and flying to work is a great idea.  It's not a very good plan.  With proper time to do that planning perhaps it could've worked, but there was no time because they believed they had to hit fast before weather worsened and german's got more organized.  Proper planning would've had 30 corps using every road in the network to get north, not being stranded along the main road, for example.  And better air support of the the Brit paras.  Of course, if they had taken more time for planning they also would've realized there were serious german forces in the area, which probably would have caused the cancellation of the whole operation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SimpleSimon said:

it was literally the worst answer you could give on a staff exam. 

Probably so was attacking through the Ardennes in 1940.  It's much easier to criticize with the benefit of hindsight.  Good Generals like Rommel were successful co they broke the old rules and invented new ones.  Obviously many efforts at innovation by other Generals failed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether Market Garden was a doomed or not doomed is really irrelevant to me as a gamer.  As an operational game (like in Operation Art or War) is really fun, though I have never won it.  And in CMBN it's great fun, with the mix of light airborne, mechanized & armored troops, offense & defense, brits & US.  I am actually replaying Nijmegan campaign now.  I played it when I first started back up w CM like 5 years ago, and didn't do very well because I was so new to the game.  It's really really fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Whether Market Garden was a doomed or not doomed is really irrelevant to me as a gamer.  As an operational game (like in Operation Art or War) is really fun, though I have never won it.  And in CMBN it's great fun, with the mix of light airborne, mechanized & armored troops, offense & defense, brits & US.  I am actually replaying Nijmegan campaign now.  I played it when I first started back up w CM like 5 years ago, and didn't do very well because I was so new to the game.  It's really really fun.

The Market Garden module of Command Opps 2 is also very realistic and offers the opportunity to study the entire operation from both sides in detail.  It also shows how close the Germans came to defeat.

Really underestimated game, CO 2.

Edited by Aragorn2002
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, danfrodo said:

Command Opps 2 -- I will google that ASAP, thanks Aragorn2002

You're very welcome. The base game is for free and comes with some imteresting battles. Among them Greyhound Dash, about the role of the 116th Panzer Division, during the Ardennes offensive. A real masterpiece. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

Whether Market Garden was a doomed or not doomed is really irrelevant to me as a gamer.  As an operational game (like in Operation Art or War) is really fun, though I have never won it.  And in CMBN it's great fun, with the mix of light airborne, mechanized & armored troops, offense & defense, brits & US.  I am actually replaying Nijmegan campaign now.  I played it when I first started back up w CM like 5 years ago, and didn't do very well because I was so new to the game.  It's really really fun.

Anyone here who is interested in gaming this out should try Market-Garden '44 Gold by John Tiller. For those of you that have played his games before, they are absolutely brilliant. I think that they do many things better than TAOW, so you really do have to get the staff work right rather than stack and pile on! Check out his design notes and the work and thought put into this really comes through. All of his games are incredible, and wouldn't you know - there's one for pretty much every CM title. Normandy, The Bulge, Sicily, Salerno, Minsk '44, Budapest.

I know we wanted our own operational layer, but this is as good as operational games get.

If you want to get really deep, he also did a game with all of Normandy in 250m hexes! His OOB manual alone is 130 pages. The guy is a madman.

I like Command Op2, and their large Market-Garden scenario is great, but I don't like the supply system. There are no replacements or repairs, so while you may get gas and ammo you won't make back your manpower or get vehicles sent up. For scenarios that are a day or less that makes sense, but the fighting in MG was 8 days and I know XXX was able to make up some of their losses.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aragorn2002 said:

You're very welcome. The base game is for free and comes with some imteresting battles. Among them Greyhound Dash, about the role of the 116th Panzer Division, during the Ardennes offensive. A real masterpiece. 

With the base game you can download from the steam workshop, including the absolutely amazing Normandy scenarios. Sword Beach to Caen, XXX Corps at Villers-Bocage and Tilly-Sur-Seulles and the absolutely incredible Charnwood and Goodwood-Atlantic. If you thought that these deserved their own campaigns or scenarios in Battle for Normandy, this may be the next best thing, and if you didn't it may be enough to win you over and petition Steve for a Battle Pack for the fighting north of Caen.

Here's an example of a Canadian action, famous here probably less well known to our friends abroad. Tiller made a scenario of it, and I can tell you with a brother in the Algonquin Regiment and many friends over in the British Columbia Regiment, having these stories depicted means a lot. I was very saddened to see Ortona and the Liri valley, or any Canadian campaign absent from Fortress Italy.

Edited by DougPhresh
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DougPhresh said:

Anyone here who is interested in gaming this out should try Market-Garden '44 Gold by John Tiller. For those of you that have played his games before, they are absolutely brilliant. I think that they do many things better than TAOW, so you really do have to get the staff work right rather than stack and pile on! Check out his design notes and the work and thought put into this really comes through. All of his games are incredible, and wouldn't you know - there's one for pretty much every CM title. Normandy, The Bulge, Sicily, Salerno, Minsk '44, Budapest.

I know we wanted our own operational layer, but this is as good as operational games get.

If you want to get really deep, he also did a game with all of Normandy in 250m hexes! His OOB manual alone is 130 pages. The guy is a madman.

I like Command Op2, and their large Market-Garden scenario is great, but I don't like the supply system. There are no replacements or repairs, so while you may get gas and ammo you won't make back your manpower or get vehicles sent up. For scenarios that are a day or less that makes sense, but the fighting in MG was 8 days and I know XXX was able to make up some of their losses.

 

I like Tiller's games a lot, especially Rshew and Korsun. Great games indeed, although a little outdated perhaps. Never tried MG though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DougPhresh said:

With the base game you can download from the steam workshop, including the absolutely amazing Normandy scenarios. Sword Beach to Caen, XXX Corps at Villers-Bocage and Tilly-Sur-Seulles and the absolutely incredible Charnwood and Goodwood-Atlantic. If you thought that these deserved their own campaigns or scenarios in Battle for Normandy, this may be the next best thing, and if you didn't it may be enough to win you over and petition Steve for a Battle Pack for the fighting north of Caen.

And the best thing is they are working on an eastern front module, starting with the Russian-Japanese war of 1939.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...