Normandy bocage hedges impassable? Really?

[PEB14]

Just a small post regarding bocage hedges.

When playing CMBN scenarios, more often than not, scenario designers create intricate maps with lots of bocage hedges completely impassable to infantry, with little to no holes, like fortress walls. Infantry movement is thus channeled into bottlenecks that are easy to defend.

For those of you that don't know, I'm actually living in Normandy. As a matter of fact, the countryside has changed a lot and most bocage hedges are gone, in order to open bigger fields that are easier to cultivate with mechanized means. Nevertheless, I'm more and more convinced that formidable, impassable bocage hedges are more a legend than anything else. This conviction is based both on observation and litterature.

It is absolutely SURE that bocage hedges were impassable to VEHICLES. But to infantry? Not as much as most scenarios tend to show. I've read lot of books lately, in particular regarding 82nd Airborne in Cotentin. I've NEVER read any testimony regarding hedges impossible to cross, that must be breached with explosives to go through. Yes, they were impassable to vehicles. Yes, they were a thick obstacle to line of sights, making communications between neighbouring units difficult. Yes, they made ambushes easy as it was possible to hide INSIDE hedges (something which is not possible in CMBN). Yes, they were thick and diffficult to cross. But as far as I could read, when troopers wanted or had to cross a bocage hedge, they managed to do so, and without explosives of any kind…

I would be very grateful and extremely interested if anybody could provide references of veterans' testimonies regarding bocage hedges impassable to infantry. And this is no rhetorical question, as an amateur historian, I'm really interested in reading such testimonies!

Thank you in advance!

NB: CMBN allows the designers to model both impassable and permeable hedges, thanks to the holes concept, so this post is absolutely no attack against the game!

[Warts 'n' all]

You are spot on. There are a lot of sunken lanes in southern England not dissimilar to those in Normandy. Movement for infantry might be slow, or even difficult, when trying to get through the hedges and tree roots that line them, but never impossible. I've always thought since CMx1 that it was a mistake to make hedgerows impassable to infantry.

[OldSarge]

I think any book covering the approach to St-Lô from the US side will explain why it was difficult it from the tactical POV. Beyond the Beachhead by Joseph Balkoski, covers the difficulties the GIs of the 29th ID had with the terrain.

From what i remember reading, the Germans knew the terrain quite well. Every lane was ranged by artillery, every lane was covered, where there were gaps there were minefields.

A short video:

 

Edited August 11 by OldSarge

[Silentkilarz]

WW2 tv on YT has a excellent video about the Hedgerows.

[PEB14]

5 hours ago, OldSarge said:

I think any book covering the approach to St-Lô from the US side will explain why it was difficult it from the tactical POV. Beyond the Beachhead by Joseph Balkoski, covers the difficulties the GIs of the 29th ID had with the terrain.

From what i remember reading, the Germans knew the terrain quite well. Every lane was ranged by artillery, every lane was covered, where there were gaps there were minefields.

Thank you. And I certainly agree with your description: in prepared positions, easiest gaps through the hedgerows were covered with mines, snipers, machine guns… But from a game POV having them mined or covered is very different from impassable.

Thank you for the reference.

[JoMac]

I know many WWII Miniature Rules have Infantry going over Hedgerows as if rough terrain (quarter speed or crawling speed)...Basically taken a turn worth of movement to cross that linear obstacle.

 

[OldSarge]

2 hours ago, PEB14 said:

Thank you. And I certainly agree with your description: in prepared positions, easiest gaps through the hedgerows were covered with mines, snipers, machine guns… But from a game POV having them mined or covered is very different from impassable.

Thank you for the reference.

Sure, but from the GI descriptions of the hedgerows it certainly seems like there were plenty of hedges deemed impassable because of both the thick intertwining branches of vegetation and the height of the earthen berms they rested upon.

Quote

Never having encountered land that looked anything like Normandy, American soldiers had to understand its composition. Norman farmers, centuries prior, enclosed their fields with hedgerows to delineate property lines, slow land erosion from English Channel winds, and corral livestock.Hedgerows were composed of solid mounds of earth resembling parapets that surrounded individual land plots and were between three and 12 feet high and one and four feet thick. Growing on top were vines, brush, small trees, thorns, and brambles, which intertwined and grew into solid barriers, extending the height in some cases to 15 feet. The fields had different shapes, but on average were 400 yards long and 200 yards wide, giving the layout across northwestern France an asymmetrical appearance. Entrances to the fields were accessible via sunken lanes used for farm equipment and livestock. These were connected to other hedgerow fields and led to farmers’ houses, wagon trails, and roads.
-- Combat in Normandy's hedgerows.

One of the other problems was the sheer confusion generated by the maze of hedgerows. Soldiers seldom had any land references they could use to orient themselves. There are numerous accounts of platoons and even an entire company getting lost in the maze. From a game perspective, we have a bird's eye view of the map and getting lost isn't an issue.
 

Quote

GIs, consequently, perceived the hedgerows as a confusing maze and each field as an impervious citadel. During a skirmish with a German squad, for example, Captain Edward K. Rogers, a chaplain in the 18th Regiment, observed a French “family of about eight sitting in the corner of a field with the hedgerows for protection while our infantry and supporting tanks fired away at the enemy in the next field a few hundred yards away.”

The valley separating the armies served as an immediate test to Company C’s adaptability. A four-man reconnaissance patrol left camp at midnight on June 14 and found open fields, hedgerow fields, and wagon trails along the valley floor. The men became confused and disoriented. After being challenged and fired on, they headed southeast, deeper into enemy territory where they observed infantrymen in the forest. At dawn they went northeast toward the British Second Army’s sector. They returned to camp after nearly 19 hours on patrol. The GIs had been surrounded by hedgerows, which, in some instances, skewed their bearing to the point that when looking at a map they could not ascertain their own location.

 

[Warts 'n' all]

"Hedgerow to us implies some neat little privet hedge around a church or something". Who is/are this "us" that this condescending plonker is talking about?. You'd have to be thick as a plank not to know the difference between a hedgerow, and a hedge.This is video making for the brain dead.

[PEB14]

7 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

"Hedgerow to us implies some neat little privet hedge around a church or something". Who is/are this "us" that this condescending plonker is talking about?. You'd have to be thick as a plank not to know the difference between a hedgerow, and a hedge.This is video making for the brain dead.

No, you probably just had to be American from the great plains or from New York...

(Or a Frenchman from southern France...)

Edited August 12 by PEB14

[PEB14]

9 hours ago, OldSarge said:

Sure, but from the GI descriptions of the hedgerows it certainly seems like there were plenty of hedges deemed impassable because of both the thick intertwining branches of vegetation and the height of the earthen berms they rested upon.

There certainly were (and there still are) thick and impassable hedgerows (for infantry). I don't deny it. But not to the extent shown in many CMBN scenarios, in which bocage is represented by a maze of fields enclosed in completely impassable, medieval castle-like hedges!

 

9 hours ago, OldSarge said:

One of the other problems was the sheer confusion generated by the maze of hedgerows. Soldiers seldom had any land references they could use to orient themselves. There are numerous accounts of platoons and even an entire company getting lost in the maze. From a game perspective, we have a bird's eye view of the map and getting lost isn't an issue.

Absolutely right.

[Warts 'n' all]

54 minutes ago, PEB14 said:

No, you probably just had to be American from the great plains or from New York...

(Or a Frenchman from southern France...)

You're right about the two groups that you mentioned. But, he said "us".

[PEB14]

5 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

You're right about the two groups that you mentioned. But, he said "us".

That's because "us" is "them" and "we" are are not "us". Isn't it?

[slysniper]

The best thing to do is adjust the game maps, by adding a bunch of passages for infantry and leaving them in as layout. It does a much better job at getting you a more realistic feel.

No the game is not perfect.

But this time lets put the blame on the map making instead of the game design.

[PEB14]

21 minutes ago, slysniper said:

The best thing to do is adjust the game maps, by adding a bunch of passages for infantry and leaving them in as layout. It does a much better job at getting you a more realistic feel.

No the game is not perfect.

But this time lets put the blame on the map making instead of the game design.

Absolutely (and that was my original intent when posting this topic, as testified by the NB in my initial post).

[Warts 'n' all]

4 hours ago, PEB14 said:

That's because "us" is "them" and "we" are are not "us". Isn't it?

You've lost me there. All I can say is that I don't know anyone who would mistake a privet hedge, for a hedgerow. Perhaps he is trying to appeal to a certain kind of viewer.

[Centurian52]

There probably are far more impassable hedgerows in the game than there should be. There definitely are hedgerows that are either completely impassible to humans, or at least so difficult to pass as to deter most people from trying. But probably not to the extent as in most CMBN scenarios. I'm guessing that scenario designers should probably make greater use of narrow gaps to represent the somewhat more porous nature of real hedgerows. There was a great deal of discussion during the testing for BP2 about where wide gaps should be (the gaps left intentionally by the farmers so that they could access their fields), with a lot of valuable insight provided by @Andrew Kulin (don't suppose you've seen enough French hedgerows in person to have any input here?). But perhaps we should have had a bit more discussion about how common narrow gaps should be to represent a realistically porous hedgerow.

[Vacillator]

22 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:

There was a great deal of discussion during the testing for BP2 about where wide gaps should be

There was also discussion of 'blocked off' fields with no access, inadvertently created on certain maps.  On one in particular, by invitation, I added quite a few openings and gateways and I believe @Ithikial_AU also modified some others (La Madeleine comes to mind if I'm not mistaken) so that troops could pass through them without huge detours or use of demo charges. 

Overall, I find bocage a pain to fight in and that's probably a totally correct representation.  I can thank @Centurian52 for confirming this in our PBEM with his 'bocage defense' tactics.

Edited August 12 by Vacillator
I can't type simple words...

[Ithikial_AU]

If I never have to look at another hedgerow in the editor again I'll be a happy man.  

Generally the process that I follow when it comes to creating hedgerows:

- Source your reference map, 1:25000 scale or better, which will pick up the hedgerows. Add that as your overlay in the editor.

- Make your map and plot out all the hedgerows on a consistent basis.

- Go over the hedgerows adding some variety, adding trees (usually there are a line of trees running up against them) and suitable bushy or long grass ground cover. More concealment for pixeltruppen.

- Go back over it again once the rest of the map is drawn up and and replace the hedgerows with wire fences, wooden gates and similar. Usually these can't be identified on maps but aerial photos and AAR can help. Some artistic license is warranted to make things accessible for the player and the TacAI.

- Test. You've bound to miss some fields etc.

As for little natural gaps these can be added as well during the last steps but I wouldn't go overboard if it's part of a populated farmed area. Got to stop those trespassers. When adding these gaps, or man made gaps, I like to add in a red dirt tile to show wear and tear where people and vehicles have moved over the area multiple times. It also provides a visual cue to the player where the gaps are so there are no surprises.

Remember around the Utah Beach area virtually everything was being used as farmland which dictate field use. If things were a bit more wild and fields were left fallow for multiple years things would be a bit different.

All the readings I've done suggest the boccage effectively made the whole thing like a giant urban combat with battlefields being carved up into blocks and restricted LOS/LOF. Demo charges were the name of the game and progress was painfully slow. Things got better as innovations like the Rhino tanks became a thing in July but that was well out of scope of the pack. The first mission of the Purple Heart Lane has you in some what I would say light boccage country but you have Glider Infantry and very limited demo charges. Really highlights the differences in kit between them and the parachutists. Some testers found out the hard way.  Facing the tactical problems they did in June 1944 is part of the game. That means not all scenarios need to give the player the right tools for the job - particularly if there is a historical reason to do so.

[PEB14]

7 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:

If I never have to look at another hedgerow in the editor again I'll be a happy man.

Agreed! A pain to draw! How many times have I erased the adjacent road while drawing a hedgerow?

 

7 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:

Generally the process that I follow when it comes to creating hedgerows:

- Source your reference map, 1:25000 scale or better, which will pick up the hedgerows. Add that as your overlay in the editor.

- Make your map and plot out all the hedgerows on a consistent basis.

- Go over the hedgerows adding some variety, adding trees (usually there are a line of trees running up against them) and suitable bushy or long grass ground cover. More concealment for pixeltruppen.

- Go back over it again once the rest of the map is drawn up and and replace the hedgerows with wire fences, wooden gates and similar. Usually these can't be identified on maps but aerial photos and AAR can help. Some artistic license is warranted to make things accessible for the player and the TacAI.

- Test. You've bound to miss some fields etc.

 

That's also the way I've drawn my own maps for the Baupte and Merderet areas.

I also perform a systematical check for each and every field: it should be accessible by some mean (either a gap or a gate or a wider opening). And I add small gaps here and there. In nearly all hedgerows. Except for specific purposes, obviously...

 

7 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:

As for little natural gaps these can be added as well during the last steps but I wouldn't go overboard if it's part of a populated farmed area. Got to stop those trespassers. When adding these gaps, or man made gaps, I like to add in a red dirt tile to show wear and tear where people and vehicles have moved over the area multiple times. It also provides a visual cue to the player where the gaps are so there are no surprises.

Remember around the Utah Beach area virtually everything was being used as farmland which dictate field use. If things were a bit more wild and fields were left fallow for multiple years things would be a bit different.

That's where I disagree with your bocage conception.

Hedgerows are NOT intended to stop trespassers. At least not in first intent. Bocage hedgerows are part of a complex ecological system with several purposes (among which: wind sheltering, water buffering, big farm animals confinement, etc.). They're clearly NOT exotical walls intended to forbid trespassers entering into fields.

From my experience and from my readings, hedgerows are NOT similar to hard, high walls. Most of them shall be crossable by foot soldiers, even though some are certainly formidable and intimidating enough (think of all the vegetation spines by example...) as to be as impassable as a wall. But not all of them. That's why I believe that small gaps shall be used more liberally than usually done by scenario designers.

 

7 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:

All the readings I've done suggest the boccage effectively made the whole thing like a giant urban combat with battlefields being carved up into blocks and restricted LOS/LOF. Demo charges were the name of the game and progress was painfully slow.

IMHO it's a mistake is to consider bocage fighting like a gigantic urban combat. Of course there are similarities; but many differences as well.

First of all, as already mentioned above, the maze aspect of hedgerows (very little high points, unlike in urban areas), certainly one of the most typical aspects of the combats in the Normandy bocage, and is impossible to render in Combat Mission.

Important roads aside, the roads between hedgerows are very narrow (much more than allowed by CMBN map systems) and unlike in urban areas long-ranged LOF are uncommon. The very geometrical map system of CMBN make the hedgerows look like a dystopic North American urban areas, with impenetrable, windowless and doorless hedgerow-lined streets beaten by long ranged MG LOF. We obviously have to live with that, but it makes realistic hedgerow combat rendering more difficult.

Also hedgerows are very different from a wall, you can cross it without doors or windows, you can hide INSIDE it or aginast it.

Etc. Etc.

All the readings I've done regarding bocage suggest combats based on ambushes, short-duration, short-ranged fightings, booby traps, sniper in trees, HMG hidden in hedges, coup-de-mains against MG positions using grenades, tanks blasted at short ranges. All very similar to urban combat indeed; but with a very limited vertical dimension (which is completely lost in CMBN by the way) and much more porous walls - I mean hedgerows. And that's my point.

Many CMBN scenarios are just impossible to win as the US side without blasting its way through hedgerows (like through hard walls in urban combat). This not at all the way I understand the bocage war. I've never seen any account of infantrymen blasting their way through hedgerows except to open ways for tanks; I certainly may have missed it, but I don't believe this was as common as shown in CMBN, and I'm pretty sure it was not done by the 82nd Airborne in Normandy (I don't know for 101st but there is no reason to believe they behaved differently).

Against the AI it makes obviously no difference (except that I find it personnally more funny to sneak through existing gaps, exactly like in the first 3 scenarios of your "We Start Here" campaign, which are pretty nice and realistic bocage maps IMHO). Against a human opponent blasting its way through hedges is like waving a big, red flag and hurling "Hi I'm here!." Which is the very opposite to the sneaking essence of bocage combat warfare.

 

7 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:

Things got better as innovations like the Rhino tanks became a thing in July but that was well out of scope of the pack. The first mission of the Purple Heart Lane has you in some what I would say light boccage country but you have Glider Infantry and very limited demo charges. Really highlights the differences in kit between them and the parachutists. Some testers found out the hard way.  Facing the tactical problems they did in June 1944 is part of the game. That means not all scenarios need to give the player the right tools for the job - particularly if there is a historical reason to do so.

That's an intereting point. I'm surprised by the explosives US paratroopers all get in CMBN. AFAIK they only got Gammon bombs, which were not suited for blowing holes inside thick hedgerows.

[Warts 'n' all]

1 hour ago, PEB14 said:

That's an intereting point. I'm surprised by the explosives US paratroopers all get in CMBN. AFAIK they only got Gammon bombs, which were not suited for blowing holes inside thick hedgerows.

In his campaign notes @WimO always told players to treat Demo Charges as "gammon bombs", and refrain from using them to blow gaps in hedgerows.

As for the hedgerows themselves, my understanding was that many (although not all) of them were planted to divide up the land. Particularly by families that did not practice primogeniture. Of course a lot of brain cells have been destroyed by booze since I first read that. So I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

[WimO]

I wanted to drop by to voice my support for PEB14's concern. The personal testimonies of both American and Commonwealth paratroopers on D-Day is that at varies times and places individuals were able to force their way through the bocage. At places it was so thick that they forced their way in and hid within its breadth. At other places the heges were planted as a double row such as along the road at the Chateau St. Come.

As a scenario designer I have taken pains to create numerous, hopefully not excessive,number of gaps in both low and tall bocage mindful that a scenario must be playable. For individual scenarios I have sometimes tailored extra gaps that are not shown on my master maps.

As a scenario player, I have sometimes given up playing existing campaigns due to the issue under discussion, i.e. that there was an absence of a reasonable number of gaps forcing the player's infantry to follow historically unrealistic lines of approach. At times I considered unpacking and editing the campaign maps but in the absence of being able to extract the Campaign text file that determines replacements etc, I avoided doing so.

[Ithikial_AU]

11 hours ago, PEB14 said:

That's an interesting point. I'm surprised by the explosives US paratroopers all get in CMBN. AFAIK they only got Gammon bombs, which were not suited for blowing holes inside thick hedgerows.

Agreed. That was always a small bit of a let down in my mind with the transfer from CMx1 to CMx2. Having Gammon Bombs, and to an extent AT Grenade bundles for the Germans is tactically something very different to lugging around demo charges. Not an OMG please fix now kind of problem, but something between the types of explosives and their uses would of been good.

[Warts 'n' all]

4 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:

 would of been good.

Would have, not "would of". You're meant to be from one of our colonies, not a member of the cast of Eastenders.

[Ithikial_AU]

5 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Would have, not "would of". You're meant to be from one of our colonies, not a member of the cast of Eastenders.

The colonies are doing alright actually...

[Warts 'n' all]

7 minutes ago, Ithikial_AU said:

The colonies are doing alright actually...

Hahahaha. A brilliant reply. 

Meanwhile a good way to remember the difference between "have" and "of". Try going into a pub and saying "I'll of a pint have (insert name of favourite tipple) please, barman.