2 Bridges too far

[Kingfish]

2 Bridges too far

Operation Epsom - June 25th / July 1st 1944

Following two days of heavy fighting, the British VIII Corp succeeded in forcing a crossing of the Odon River at Tourmauville. During the night of 6/27 the tanks of the British 11th armored division began rolling across and assembling for their main assault on hill 112, scheduled for the following day. However, with only one bridge to use, the bridgehead became uncomfortably cramped, while a huge traffic jam developed on the north side. Clearly another crossing point was needed in order to deploy the full weight of the VIII Corp.

Accordingly, the 2nd battalion Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders (the "Argylls"), having assumed defensive positions on the south side of the Odon, dispatched a patrol towards the twin bridges at Gavrus, a small town located a few kilometers up stream. To their amazement, the patrol found both town and bridges undefended. The remainder of the Battalion quickly followed and before night fell the Argylls were in complete control of the bridges at Gavrus.

Unfortunately, the Germans quickly recovered and closed off the routes back to Tourmauville, isolating the Argylls. Attempts by the British 46th brigade to come to their relief made it as far as Le Valtru, 2 kilometers away, but could advance no further. The Argylls were surrounded, and the Germans were coming...

Sources:

"Steel inferno" Michael Reynolds

"6 armies in Normandy" John Keegan

http://www.geocities.com/~mspirit/2nd-ash.html

Special thanks goes to Tom Travisano, Jeff Smith and Craig Harvey for their help with testing and suggestions.

You can get it now at the depot. Enjoy!

[CombinedArms]

Playtester's Report:

This is a really good one! With strong historical content, an interesting force balance, and an excellent map that offers a variety of terrains convincingly melded together, this scenario offers real test of the defensive skills of the British commander, but with plenty of challenges for the Axis attacker as well.

I have really enjoyed testing it and I think you'll really enjoy playing it.

[arax3]

The view from the other side is quite well done by Kurt "Panzermeyer" Meyer commanding the Axis forces. His book is not too long and worth reading IMHO. L3

[athkatla]

Originally posted by Kingfish:

2 Bridges too far

Operation Epsom - June 25th / July 1st 1944

Following two days of heavy fighting, the British VIII Corp succeeded in forcing a crossing of the Odon River at Tourmauville. During the night of 6/27 the tanks of the British 11th armored division began rolling across and assembling for their main assault on hill 112, scheduled for the following day. However, with only one bridge to use, the bridgehead became uncomfortably cramped, while a huge traffic jam developed on the north side. Clearly another crossing point was needed in order to deploy the full weight of the VIII Corp.

Accordingly, the 2nd battalion Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders (the "Argylls"), having assumed defensive positions on the south side of the Odon, dispatched a patrol towards the twin bridges at Gavrus, a small town located a few kilometers up stream. To their amazement, the patrol found both town and bridges undefended. The remainder of the Battalion quickly followed and before night fell the Argylls were in complete control of the bridges at Gavrus.

Unfortunately, the Germans quickly recovered and closed off the routes back to Tourmauville, isolating the Argylls. Attempts by the British 46th brigade to come to their relief made it as far as Le Valtru, 2 kilometers away, but could advance no further. The Argylls were surrounded, and the Germans were coming...

Sources:

"Steel inferno" Michael Reynolds

"6 armies in Normandy" John Keegan

http://www.geocities.com/~mspirit/2nd-ash.html

Special thanks goes to Tom Travisano, Jeff Smith and Craig Harvey for their help with testing and suggestions.

You can get it now at the depot. Enjoy!

I don't know if you are Chris Kelly, who owns the site about the A&SOH linked to this post, but anyway, if you are you might be interested to know that the story of Pte Tom Barker interested me quite a lot, as he is my uncle. He is now retired and lives near Perth in Australia.

[Kingfish]

A bump for those who haven't played it yet, and a friendly request for those who have to review it.

[Sarge Saunders]

Kingfish- Playing it right now PBEM. A nice review is promised in twenty-something turns.

My SS troopies are doing fine but it (may) be slightly balanced against the allied player.

Though there's still a bit of game left to know for sure.

-Sarge

[Jim Harrison]

excellent senario, the only thing I could gripe about (which is a pet peeve of mine) is anti-tank guns in the attack, give me 2 more tanks instead

Nice map and good battle, I got a minor as the allies and a draw as the Germans (my german attack got scattered due to artillery). Of course if the AI couldn't lay smoke anywhere it wants I would have done better as the German.

[FFE]

A few things about these battles:

The June 29th German attack on Gravus failed. The Argyll's lost but then recaptured the town. According to Reynolds; British heavy artillery and airpower were able to beat back the daytime attacks. "The Second Tactical Air force was out in strength and inflicted heavy casualties on the attacking tanks (172)."

On the 1st, the Argyll's had to surrender their bridgeheads to the 10th SS after heavy fighting. But by the 1st, the Argyll’s were no longer cut off. Yet, they did not receive armor support. The Argyll’s did not surrender. Rather, they were able to fall back to British lines.

------------- SPOILER BELOW --------------

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

---- THIS IS YOUR LAST WARNING -----------

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The scenario depicts, what I believe, to be the June 29th attack on Gravus. The German’s come in with a splendid force, but using far too many halftracks. Although mounted halftrack assaults did happen during the late part of the war (1944-45), I seriously doubt a mounted halftrack assault into woods would have been authorized. Germans did not have the luxury of riding in armored transport into battles by this time of the war. Nevertheless, there are no accounts of halftracks being combated neither by the Argyll’s nor by the sources listed. The German side also seems to be composed of many outstanding (crack and veteran) formations. Perhaps, this is too outstanding. In game turns, these guys don’t give up. They continue to attack until their dead or a 5.5” round lands with 5 meters of them. Since the German OOB for this scenario incorporates several (at least two) battalion HQ’s plus a plethora of Coy HQ’s, those Veteran and Crack infantry units are (should) never out of command.

Balancing ideas:

</font>

• Remove most of the German halftracks. (Germans are considered to be deployed for an attack with their transport being safely hidden).</font>
• Remove the German guns and replace them with 81mm mortars.</font>
• Remove the British 40mm AA guns.</font>
• Add several more TRP’s for the British and at least two (perhaps locked – Gravus and the southern Bridge area) for the Germans. Realize the limitations of CMBO engine while adjusting fire from TRP’s causes a lot of grief (to both players). The British need several more registered target locations.</font>
• Add to the British: several Typhoons</font>
• Add to the British: more rounds for all their artillery. This is, after all, Epsom.</font>
• Remove all but 3 brens and all the trucks. The Argylls reached Gravus by moving through steep hills and dense woods. They were cut off from the rest of their command on the 29th.</font>
• Tone down the Crack'ness of the German units. Far too many 'above veteran' formations running around.
  </font>

That is all

[ July 31, 2002, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: FFE ]

[Kingfish]

Methinks a bit of clarification is in order, lest someone comes away with the impression I have a fetish for uber SS, or did nothing more than close my eyes and merrily clicked away on the purchase screen...

Although the scenario is based on an actual battle, it is not an attempt at recreating it. Therefore, the OOBs of each side are not accurate down to the last rifle clip or piat round. Likewise, the scenario doesn't attempt to depict any indivdual battle at Gavrus (the Argylls defended Gavrus from June 28th thru July 1st, my scenario is 40 turns long). So what you get is a fair amount of that one ingredient that goes into every scenario, compromise (Gasp!) :eek:

As for why certain units are in, and others were ommitted, I decided to give each player the option to try different tactics, even if it meant going against established doctrine. The German HTs are a good example. Some would argue that they have no place on the battlefield, and should be safely hidden once their passengers have disembarked. Others might want to use their HTs as mobile MGs, accepting the risk of heavy losses from enemy AT assets in return for providing support for the assault troops. By including the HTs I gave the German player the option to try each, or a combination, thereby increasing the re-playability of the scenario (I hope!).

As for the expereince level of each side's forces, that was based on my best guess, and again compromise (there's that word again) came into play. I ended up raising each side's level up one notch, just to increase the intensity of the fight, rather than give any one side an overwhelming advantage.

Anyway, I hope this clears up any confusing as to why this is in, that is not, or how come it's designed this way. I do appreciate your suggestions (all of you) and for taking time to play and review it.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by Kingfish:

As for why certain units are in, and others were ommitted, I decided to give each player the option to try different tactics, even if it meant going against established doctrine. The German HTs are a good example. Some would argue that they have no place on the battlefield, and should be safely hidden once their passengers have disembarked. Others might want to use their HTs as mobile MGs, accepting the risk of heavy losses from enemy AT assets in return for providing support for the assault troops. By including the HTs I gave the German player the option to try each, or a combination, thereby increasing the re-playability of the scenario (I hope!).

As for the expereince level of each side's forces, that was based on my best guess, and again compromise (there's that word again) came into play. I ended up raising each side's level up one notch, just to increase the intensity of the fight, rather than give any one side an overwhelming advantage.

Hey Kingfish- I was on the other end of FFE's British wrath. I believe he has some very valid points to consider.

I seriously think this could be a better scenario with some force changes. What is happening now, is the better player played well on defense and still will probably lose to overwhelming odds.

*****SPOILER ALERT********

|

|

|

V

For one thing: he did almost everything right and executed his defense perfectly. For example, my force was slammed for the beginning with TRP'd heavy artillery. It was not enough to help the defender. Later, my massing force was engaged with more artillery for 5 or six turns as I approached the outskirts of Gavrus. That was still not enough despite killing dozens of halftracks to treebursts. The defender pulled a quick withdraw from town and counterattacked well immediately back into Gavrus. It hurt but it was still not enough. PIATs performed a textbook defense against my HTs and armor. Still not good enough. My ability to project firepower with halftracks is a bit gamey and may lead to a victory that is arguably undeserved. Yes, it did cost me in points to lose halftracks in droves but combine that with my crack troops and things appear to be unbalanced in favor of the axis side.

My suggestions: Tone down the crack troops and allow the HQ bonuses to give the combat advantage mirroring these veteran SS unit's fighting prowess. Only give enough halftracks to carry axis heavy weapons. These should still be enough to project mobile MG platforms in a pinch. By reducing the mounted MGs on HTs for the panzergrenadier, you may want to add some more LMG teams. Trade the worthless axis AT guns for on-board mortars. Give each company around one panzerschreck each because the brit carriers can also be used in a gamey way also, to a lesser extent. And very important: give the SS units some engineers to remove the daisy chain mines. IRL, these type of mines could be picked up(after checking for booby traps) by anyone. CM models only engineers removing them. They effectively deny armor advances in an unrealistic way.

I like the scenario, but I really do think the better player needs to take the British and that seems unbalanced. This was just one case, but it was with two decent players who may have tried different things than playtesters.

-Sarge

[ August 02, 2002, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: Sarge Saunders ]

[FFE]

I only seek to add constructive criticism. Sarge’s attack on my defense was very well executed. As he has already pointed out the German forces simply are unstoppable with their morale level, Coy HQ’s, Battalion HQ’s, and large number of halftracks. I count no less than 12 KO’ed halftracks, yet he has a wall of halftracks overrunning my positions down the road. It cannot be stopped, due to British infantry being unable to close assault a single halftrack with any degree of success. My artillery hit him hard at every corner. His advance was steady and unimpeded. My ammo levels are shot. Yet, he has two fresh platoons walking into my positions from my flank and his halftrack army is blazing away with their mg’s. He informed me the flankers were reinforcements. Piat’s may account for a kill here or there, but they simply are very ineffective when the German player uses infantry alongside their halftracks. Our game is nearing the end (last three turns) but the victory is totally in his court. As the British player, it is beyond difficult to defend from a four sided attack. The German infantry is vastly superior to their British counterparts, especially at ranges under 50 meters. Case and point: Sarge ran an entire platoon through an ambushing, fox-holed, reverse sloped British platoon. His men got chewed up on the way through, but the next turn they did a 180 and annihilated my entire platoon down to the last man. The British platoon quickly pinned and his veteran and crack infantry systematically mowed down the entire platoon from with 50 meters. It is to my understanding the German player can withdraw to at least three map edges. This ability aids his scouts immensely. I chose to defend a box and make the box tighter as he advanced, but used scouts myself. My scouts accounted for several worthwhile rear area kills such as an FO and a Stug. I counter attacked when the time called for it, which caused Sarge immense problems. But he did not break a sweat as his halftracks continued to decimate the British infantry. The end result is a bunch of German soldiers attacking where they choose. I rarely kept to my foxholes if he was threatening flank.

Historically, the British fought off the German’s quite well until the 10ss came into the picture. Even so, the 10 ss took a massive punishment trying to dislodge the Argyll’s.

In game terms: Defending is very difficult. Allowing the German’s to attack with superior forces from several sides simply spells doom for the British. This is compounded by a good German player. Instead of running the German forces into my positions, Sarge patiently waited for his reinforcements to get into position. Then he launched an attack.

I’d be more than willing to play you in a game. To make my point, I’d take the Axis and see how you fair. I presume Sarge would be willing to play you in a game, too. Anything to help balance this otherwise excellent fight.