Revising The Road to Montebourg campaign

[Centurian52]

On 12/17/2023 at 5:20 AM, Paper Tiger said:

I'll just have to make sure that it's winnable

I appreciate the thought, but I'll always take realism over balance. I'm perfectly happy to take a punishment in the name of historical accuracy. So please don't dumb it down too much on our account.

Edited December 19, 2023 by Centurian52

[Paper Tiger]

9 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Which units would the Stugs have belonged to mate? I can't find any record of there being any on the Cotentin on D-day. Of course, we didn't have horseless fighting vehicles in my day. So what the hell do I know?

I don't have my old research as it was all lost but I have had it confirmed very recently that the formation was the Panzerjager-Abteilung 709. The StuGs in the following mission, Licornets, came from the same formation.

[Warts 'n' all]

3 hours ago, Paper Tiger said:

 Panzerjager-Abteilung 709. The StuGs in the following mission, Licornets, came from the same formation.

Oh, yes. That would make sense. I'd forgotten about them. Blame a rotten cold. Were they included in AH's "The Longest Day" by any chance?

Edited December 20, 2023 by Warts 'n' all

[Warts 'n' all]

@Paper Tiger I've taken a break from hanging up my girlfriend's Xmas decorations, and dug out my old D-day Then and Now Vol. 2. There is indeed a picture of a knocked out Stug from 709 on page 398. Okeh, back to work.

[Paper Tiger]

6 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Oh, yes. That would make sense. I'd forgotten about them. Blame a rotten cold. Were they included in AH's "The Longest Day" by any chance?

Avalon Hill's 'The Longest day?' That was an absolute MONSTER. It was really expensive and just setting it up took longer than most other AH wargames took to play to completion. Believe me, I wanted to buy it and the guy in the wargaming shop tried to persuade me to buy it but I just couldn't see any way that I'd be able to play that so no. 

I got that info from another forumite, Mr X. I have lost all my original Montebourg research materials but today I rediscovered the free history of the fight from Utah to Cherbourg by the Center of Military History and found nothing on this. Most of my OOB  knowledge of this came from John Keegan's 'Six Armies in Normandy' and a little from the ASL scenario, The Roadblock.

Be warned, this mission is almost entirely different from the original version. My playtests today showed that this was going to need more work to make it playable. The victory conditions, the OOBs for both sides and the map itself have all changed a lot.

Now, I'm going to get back to work on this mission as I've decided to give it a rework which hopefully will keep almost all of the work and testing I've done these last three days and I'm eager to see how the new mission works.

[Warts 'n' all]

57 minutes ago, Paper Tiger said:

Avalon Hill's 'The Longest day?' That was an absolute MONSTER. It was really expensive.

Yes, it was a bit pricey. I payed for it entirely in £1 coins. much to the bemusement of the bloke on the counter in the Megastore on Oxford Street. Ah, we were all so much younger then, I had a massive crush on Liz Fraser from Cocteau Twins at the time.

Meanwhile this is the photo I mentioned above. ...

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by Warts 'n' all

[Warts 'n' all]

53 minutes ago, Paper Tiger said:

Most of my OOB  knowledge of this came from John Keegan's 'Six Armies in Normandy' 

That is a really good book. Sadly, my copy fell victim to water damage at my old hovel some years past.

[thilio]

13 hours ago, Paper Tiger said:

I don't have my old research as it was all lost but I have had it confirmed very recently that the formation was the Panzerjager-Abteilung 709. The StuGs in the following mission, Licornets, came from the same formation.

Steven Zaloga suggested it was Sturm-Abteilung-AOK.7

https://www.ospreypublishing.com/uk/osprey-blog/2019/utah-beach/

[Mr.X]

@thilio:

It‘s the Sturm-Bataillon AOK 7 (Assault-Battalion AOK7). Every German Army had an own motorized Infantry-Batallion, so did the 7th German Army. These battalions usually consisted of combat experienced soldiers and were used as a kind of reserve units for critical situations. They had no own armored sub units. During these battles, Stugs and captured French tanks of Pz.Jg.Abteilung 709 and Pz.Aus.u.Ers.Abteilung 100 were attached/subordinated to the Sturm-Battalion AOK 7. 

Regards

Mr.X

[Warts 'n' all]

As long as they fall victim to our colonial cousins, I don't really mind the correct name of the unit they belonged to. But, thanks for the input guys.

[PEB14]

1 hour ago, Mr.X said:

@thilio:

It‘s the Sturm-Bataillon AOK 7 (Assault-Battalion AOK7). Every German Army had an own motorized Infantry-Batallion, so did the 7th German Army. These battalions usually consisted of combat experienced soldiers and were used as a kind of reserve units for critical situations. They had no own armored sub units. During these battles, Stugs and captured French tanks of Pz.Jg.Abteilung 709 and Pz.Aus.u.Ers.Abteilung 100 were attached/subordinated to the Sturm-Battalion AOK 7. 

Regards

Mr.X

Hi @Mr.X,

I made some thorough researches for my own campaign and, for sure, Pz.Ers.u.Aus.Abteilung 100 was NOT subordinated to Sturm-Bataillon AOK 7. It was subordinated to the 91. Infanterie Division, HQ Picauville, while IIRC correctly Sturm-Bataillon AOK 7 was in position close to Cherbourg.

Pz.Ers.u.Aus.Abteilung 100 tanks (a couple of Panzer III and a mix of Hotchkiss and Renault 1940 vintage French tanks) never reached Sainte-Mère-Eglise; they were stopped on the La Fière causeway. But that's the matter of another campaign ( @WimO's Mission Boston).

[Mr.X]

@PEB14: Of course, you are right
I actually just wanted to say that Sturm-Battalions didn‘t have their own armored vehicles…

Regards

Mr.X

[JM Stuff]

7 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Yes, it was a bit pricey. I payed for it entirely in £1 coins. much to the bemusement of the bloke on the counter in the Megastore on Oxford Street. Ah, we were all so much younger then, I had a massive crush on Liz Fraser from Cocteau Twins at the time.

Meanwhile this is the photo I mentioned above. ...

 

 

You said Cocteau Twins, you are my friend !

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by JM Stuff

[Warts 'n' all]

@JM Stuff Don't ask how I know. But, Liz does sing in the bath.

[JM Stuff]

33 minutes ago, Warts 'n' all said:

@JM Stuff Don't ask how I know. But, Liz does sing in the bath.

I think more this is her natural voice, but you could be right for this song they put perhaps a reverberation effect, who knows ?

[Paper Tiger]

14 hours ago, PEB14 said:

Oops ... wrong quote

Edit to add:

I was responding to Warts and All's post above...

What an ungrateful bastidge - it would take me less than 30 seconds to count 50+ coins and I'd be grateful for the sale.  Not to mention the free space the box would give me in the shop.

My crush was on Anne Wilson but that's an earlier time, back in the Heart - Little Queen - Dog and Butterfly - Magazine era.

 

Now a few comments on my OB for Turnbull's force. Most of the sources I've read agree that he had a team of 42 men including himself. This included two BAR teams and a Bazooka team. There is some disagree ment on the number of AT guns though, some say two but having read Keegan's account of the morning, I've made some assumptions - the paras jogged to Neuville from Ste Mere Eglise. They found a .30mm machine gun along the way. Vandervoort arrived in a jeep with a 57mm AT gun which was given to the Bazooka team in a building near the road. He sent a runner to communicate with Turnbull from which I infer that he was near the orchard and not on the east side of the road.

I'm going with Turnbull's HQ (5 men), 2 squads (24 men - 2nd squad w Bazooka)), two BARs (4 men), 1 Para LMG (2 men),  57mm AT gun team (7 men) reduced strength for a total of 42 men. (The AT gun team is not core so should be okay when the mcampaign is complied. However, sometimes the reduction rounds up rather than down and you can occasionally get 43 men. But they're AT gunners so it's not going to break anything. And that's the best I can do with the way the game engine is.

I'm glad the French tanks and one of the AT teams are gone because this is how playtesting went:

First tank shows up - one shot - one kill.

Second tank shows up - one shot - one kill

Marder shows its face (MGs can take it out but again, one shot - one kill.

Leaving my two AT guns with about 12 rounds of ammo left to rip the German squads apart. They are very effective when used against infantry. Easy win for Turnbull.

 

So that's my OB for this mission. I have approximately two companies of German infantry with two StuGs on the attack so I've made the infantry Green and Low morale so that they're not too much for the defender. You'll need to keep them suppressed so that they don't overwhelm you with machine gun fire. Now it's the mortars which will kill you which is how it went down that day.

Edited December 21, 2023 by Paper Tiger

[PEB14]

6 hours ago, Paper Tiger said:

So that's my OB for this mission. I have approximately two companies of German infantry with two StuGs on the attack so I've made the infantry Green and Low morale so that they're not too much for the defender. You'll need to keep them suppressed so that they don't overwhelm you with machine gun fire. Now it's the mortars which will kill you which is how it went down that day.

Historically, it sounds good. The 1058. Grenadier Regiment performed pretty badly during its attacks on June 6th and 7th. Not only was it battle untested, but it looks like it was poorly led as well, from the top of the regiment down to company level…

That's for History. Now it has to come out as a good scenario. That's were it gets difficult for a young designer like myself… but you're an old grognard so we all trust in you!

[PEB14]

14 hours ago, Mr.X said:

@PEB14: Of course, you are right
I actually just wanted to say that Sturm-Battalions didn‘t have their own armored vehicles…

Regards

Mr.X

I obviously agree with you, but honestly I understood the opposite from your post…

By the way, I don't think Pz.Jg.Abteilung 709 was attached to Sturm-Bataillon AOK 7 either. I think to remember that both the Sturm-Bataillon AOK 7 and (at least part of) Pz.Jg.Abteilung 243 (not 709) were attached to the Grenadier-Regiment 1058 for the counterattack towards Sainte-Mère-Eglise.

To be more specific, It appears that attacks from the North towards Ste-Mère-Eglise on D-Day were performed by the G.R. 1058 with some support (Stugs) of 2./Pz.Jg.Abt.243 (a.k.a. Stu.Gesch.Abt.1243) ; because of the disastrous results achieved, G.R. 1058 was reinforced on D-Day+1 by Sturm-Bataillon AOK 7 and heavy artillery (I think it was schwere Heeres-Artillerie-Abteilung (mot.) 456 with its eight 15,2cm KH 433(r) and four 12,2cm K (r) - captured russian guns). The reinforcement by Sturm-Bataillon AOK 7 proved nearly decisive as on June 7th the Germans reached Ste-Mère-Eglise. US accounts are quite confused and it's not clear how far into the city the Germans entered.

Anyway, to answer the initial question, based on my own research, the StuG which attacked Turnbull belonged to 2./Pz.Jg.Abt.243.

[PEB14]

19 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Yes, very well known picture.

Except that, as indicated from my post above, latest research tend to indicate that this vehicle did in fact belong to 2./Pz.Jg.Abt.243.

According to my archives, Pz.Jg.Abt.709 had no StuG in its OOB:

• 1.Kp: 9x Marder I (Lorraine)
• 2.Kp: 12x motorized Pak40
• 3.Kp: 9x 3,7cm Flak (at least some self-propelled)

 

[Warts 'n' all]

@PEB14 I don't mind being wrong. That's how we learn things. But, I can only go by what is on the page in front of me. It would be nice to give @Paper Tiger a definitive answer, although I think his reworking of the campaign will be great whether we are up against Stugs or Marders. Perhaps BFC could pay for us all to go on a Jolly Boy's outing to Koblenz. Spend our days in the Bundesarchiv, and our evenings in a pub, or two.

[PEB14]

12 minutes ago, Warts 'n' all said:

@PEB14 I don't mind being wrong. That's how we learn things. But, I can only go by what is on the page in front of me. It would be nice to give @Paper Tiger a definitive answer, although I think his reworking of the campaign will be great whether we are up against Stugs or Marders. Perhaps BFC could pay for us all to go on a Jolly Boy's outing to Koblenz. Spend our days in the Bundesarchiv, and our evenings in a pub, or two.

You're correct, we cannot do but with what we have at hand…

Unfortunately, information regarding German forces on the Cotentin peninsula are sketchy, mostly because they were destroyed in a matter of days and weeks — with most of their archives gone with them.

I consider Dutch historian Niels Henkemans as the main authority regarding German OOB on the Cotentin peninsula. Please find a link to a long post of his, mentioning information regarding StuG and the offensive on Ste-Mère-Eglise:

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/missinglynx/panzers-on-the-cotentin-take-3-long-post-t37056-s11923620480.html)

Here's the part of the post dealing with Stugs:

Quote

Cotentin Marder I and StuG III
It might seem strange to address these two vehicle types together but in order to identify them this is the most convenient way. As you will see the history of these vehicles and their units on the Cotentin can shed more light on them, and those histories are highly connected, either direct or indirect.

While Sturmgeschütze were widely used in the German army, very few were available in the Utah sector on D-Day. In fact the only unit to be equipped with such vehicles on D-day on was the 243rd Infantry division. Her Panzerjäger Abteilung was located in near Saint-Jacques-de-Néhou. While the 243 Division was positioned along the western coast of the peninsula, it didnt take long before elements went into action against the American forces.
On June 7th the Germans renewed their attempts to seize Sainte-Mere-Eglise. Several units were committed in this attack in southerly direction. Supported by the 456th and 457th Artillery Battalions, the 1st and 2nd battalion from 1058 attacked along the Cherbourg-Ste.-Mere-Eglise road, while further to the east Sturmabteilung AOK 7 also marched towards the town with support of the Panzerjäger Abteilung from 709ID. The 243ID was involved in the fighting with Kampfgruppe Müller. This improvised unit consisted of III/922, I/920 as well as the 243th Engineer Battalion and was supported by the guns of 456th and 457th Artillery regiment. During the day III/922 attacked most to the east in the direction of Saint-Marcouf but was eventually pushed back north.

In these series of attack the German forces were supported by some armoured elements. Looking at the available literature, the only armoured formation mentioned is Panzerjägerabteilung 709. Apart from towed anti-tank guns this unit was also equipped with 14 self-propelled Pak40 75mm antitank guns. Official documents do not specify the exact type, but as Zetterlings research shows, apparently no deliveries were made after May 43. This might indicate these vehicles were in fact based on French chassis. The images of StuGs destroyed in the fighting around Ste-Mere-Eglise show early Gs. While this vehicle type was produced from December 1942 onwards its highly unlikely the vehicles in the area were send to the division before May 1943. The reason for this is simple. The vehicles around the town are equipped with Zimmerit paste, a practice not used by the Germans until later in 1943. Except for a field application of the stuff, what seems unlikely in my eyes, these vehicles cant have been produced before August 1943. (And I suspect experts will see more details that can identify the production dates) For this reason, Zetterlings argues, some kind of French-German conversion is the most likely to have equipped Panzerjägerabteilung 709. Considering the production numbers and available images the most likely vehicle is probably the Marder I based on the Lorraine chassis.
While Hotchkiss based Marders were also used in France and FCM based vehicles were also build, these do not appear to have been used on the Peninsula. Only some 20 Hotchkiss based (75mm PAK) vehicles were build, with most, if not all, serving with 21PD. Of the 100 FCMs build by the French, the Germans converted 96 into tank-destroyers, but none appear to have been used in Normandy. On the other hand, of the 170 converted Lorraine tractors, many showed up in Normandy, both in the OoBs and on pictures.

That's the most up-to-date research I'm aware of regarding this topic. But I may be wrong!

[Paper Tiger]

I've got an attack plan that works reasonably well now. I managed to get a DRAW by cease firing at about T+40 and I hadn't exited any of my forces so that was a comfortable win. I made a few adjustments to the AI victory conditions as a result and so I think that's enough for now. It's quite a short mission with a very low unit count for the player so I'm going to continue to test it and tweak it while work is ongoing on the next missions in this chapter. Victory point adjustments made are basically now instead of having three TOUCH compound locations, I now have three phase lines which extend about 150m on both sides of the road on the south side of the stream which award the Germans points for touching. The further they advance, the more points they earn each line hot so you'll have to work hard to keep their heads down until you think it's time to run.

I started work on Licornets this afternoon. This is one mission that REALLY needs 16 AI groups and I'm using almost all of them already. Combined with a variety of triggers, I can really make some effective AI counter moves if the player activates them. With each StuG being in its own unique group, I can use them more aggressively in my defensive plans rather than just positioning them at the start of the game. Giving a movement order to an AI group with two vehicles on opposite sides of the road isn't going to end well.

I'm not going to agonise over this and will just get two working plans and create variants and that's that for this one. I'd really like to have the chapter 2 missions finished before Christmas.

I have very few plans to change much with the Glider Infantry missions in chapter 3 but I'm probably going to put the nebelwerfers into Hell in the Hedgerows as that also happened to these poor buggers in real life. They really took a pounding and lost that mission but I shied away from it when I made the original. But war is hell so why not? I need the casualties to make their following missions more challenging. So I expect a quick turn over on chapter 3 with perhaps only the Holding Action needing any real attention.

And that leaves the short chapter 4 missions which I'd really like to have finished before New year. Yes, that'll happen.  That's my plan though. Much as I'd like to do a compete overhaul of each mission, that would take me another 4-6 weeks after the New year and I'm almost certainly going to want to move onto something else in a couple of weeks.

[sttp]

6 hours ago, Paper Tiger said:

I started work on Licornets this afternoon. This is one mission that REALLY needs 16 AI groups and I'm using almost all of them already. Combined with a variety of triggers, I can really make some effective AI counter moves if the player activates them.

Given the stellar quality of the original campaign, I am really looking forward to your new revisions! Like so many others, I really appreciate you taking the time to do this. Happy holidays!

[Vacillator]

3 hours ago, sttp said:

Given the stellar quality of the original campaign

+1 to that.

[Warts 'n' all]

Roll on the New Year.