Invasion has begun

[Granfali]

Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen of the Allied Expeditionary Force! You are about to embark upon a great crusade, toward which we have striven these many months. The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes and prayers of liberty loving people everywhere march with you. In company with our brave Allies and brothers in arms on other fronts, you will bring about the destruction of the German war machine, the elimination of Nazi tyranny over the oppressed peoples of Europe, and security for ourselves in a free world.
Your task will not be an easy one. Your enemy is well trained, well equipped and battle hardened, he will fight savagely.
But this is the year 1944! Much has happened since the Nazi triumphs of 1940-41. The United Nations have inflicted upon the Germans great defeats, in open battle, man to man. Our air offensive has seriously reduced their strength in the air and their capacity to wage war on the ground. Our home fronts have given us an overwhelming superiority in weapons and munitions of war, and placed at our disposal great reserves of trained fighting men. The tide has turned! The free men of the world are marching together to victory!
I have full confidence in your courage, devotion to duty and skill in battle. We will accept nothing less than full victory!
Good Luck! And let us all beseech the blessings of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking.
-- Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower

Invasion has begun!!!



GJS is created to provide a strategic sense to BA. Each player is responsible for the battles that fight their Battle Groups (BG) brigade size. After the battle, casualties and conquered flags are recorded to determine the conquest of the area. BGs move in a strategic map that represents the Normandy area covered by CW units . The map and counters come from GJS Close Combat mod. Due to BA characteristics, GJS is not a real and exact simulation (nor is the intention), I say it to anyone to question why not appear SdKfz 251/10 than were part of 2nd Bon 130th Panzer Lehr Regiment.



Each BG has a "pool" with their available units: type and number of infantry, armor, support weapons... Troops are determined in relation to the pool, some will be fixed, the other will be chosen by each player according to the pool specifications.

There will be two sort of battles: attack/defense (if a BG enters an enemy occupied area) or ME (if BGs come at same time). In the first type, 26 units attack 20 defenders units; in the second, fight 20 points by side.

I carried out a series of modifications experimentally:
-number of men increased: HMG to 5, Infantry to 8, Inf AT, flamethrowers, scouts and mortars to 4
-the HMGs move a tile, as mortars.
(these issues, together with the number of units per battle (26-20) can be changed acording to the experience of campaign's first turns)

I need four British players. It will be tritated responsability in matches and the way shown in this forum. Refrain casual players, minimum of nine/ten turns per week. According as campaign progresses, there will be more BGs and number of players will be increased. Any unjustified delay sending turns will cause the loss of command, being relieved immediately by another player.

1 german player: Granfali
4 british players:
-3rd British Infantry Division:
-3rd Canadian Infantry Division:
-50th British Infantry Division:
-6th British Airborne Division:

All those interested in participating send me an email to granfali -at- gmail dot com (do not do it through this thread please)


RULEBOOK (press here)

[pipfromslitherine]

Wow. Very impressive!

Cheers

Pip

[gortwillsaveus]

I'm in (at least I sent an e-mail)

Hopefully,..once this test campaign is over,..Granfali makes these maps available to all.

[random27]

i would be interested

[GottaLove88s]

Granfali, this looks absolutely phenomenal. please sign me up. emailed directly.

Smart idea to use GJS maps from Close Combat mod. What's your plan for extension to other Battle Groups?

Do you need some help as the Jerries? If four Allied players are making 10 turns/week each, that sounds like a heavy schedule for you...

Lock and load... Can't wait!

[GottaLove88s]

Ps. Technical stuff... these look like big maps... are 20-26 units enough? can a clever player avoid detection? sneak around the back sort of thing?

[GottaLove88s]

Pps. Intrigued by your unit modifications, bumping up infantry to 8, HMG to 5, flamethrower to 4, etc...
What does this do to the actual battle mechanics? is it like getting extra lives? or does it reduce the impact on morale?

[GottaLove88s]

3Ps. Sorry to bombard your post, Granfali, but really love your plan... if BA doesn't include it as standard by the time GJS kicks off, RF900 has written some cool code and icons to permit wounded infantry units to merge, and to permit adjacent units to swap places (so long as doing so doesn't break terrain rules, eg. swapping panzers into trees).... they're downloadable on viewtopic.php?f=104&t=35219 if you'd like to try?

[GottaLove88s]

Granfali, Checking out your maps above... If that hedging for Gold Beach means what I think it means, there are only three small access points leading off the landing grounds... 50th ID is really going to eat some... Are you planning to give them naval barrage and air cover?

[leci]

Love to play, but I am afraid that nowadays I only play via iPad.

The key success window for the Allies was c24 hours in elasped time, conversely of course, this was true of the Germans - a factor that they failed to exploit given the Germans failure to deploy reserves and co-ordinate C&C on a dynamic, local, regional basis. The Germans were superior with regards to unit etc empowerment, initiative and freedom of action, but at a higher level were useless given the fear and infighting etc engendered by a dictator, Nazi regime - freedom of military action was not an option. Hence no meaningful release of reserves and or timely, dynamic coordinated action.

Allied air superiority was a factor, but it was 'boots on the ground' ie establishing a bridgehead(s) that really counted. Once the bridgeheads were established, the German military had lost. If allowed to conduct military affairs on a military basis, OKW, OKL etc would have probably won the Battle of Nomandy In that the Allies without a close UK-continental bridgehead(s) would not have been able to mount such a campaign for many years. Of course the Germans would have lost in the end, but almost certainly the whole continent would have been speaking Russian by now.

I guess one should also not forget that Allied commanders also suffered from ego and infighting - Montgomery stands out as an idiot, wherever his subsenquent accolades - accolade 'built on' Allied casualties.

All in all, an interesting 'what if' scenario.

Leci

[GottaLove88s]

All true... plus the impact of air superiority, of course... Didn't Eisenhower say, "The chief credit for smashing the enemy's spearhead must go to the rocket-firing Typhoon aircraft of the Second Tactical. The result of its strafing was that the enemy attack was brought to a halt, and a threat was turned into a great victory"... or some such...

[GottaLove88s]

And BA has Typhoon bonuses... Darned fine they are too

[leci]

However, air superiority apart, nothing would have been gained without a bridgehead - in fact much from the Allied viewpont would have been lost. Air superiority provides attrition against ground forces (Germany having little aircraft available in the Normandy theatre), but massive deployement of German rapid reserves would have negated/mitigated the attrition rate, if only to restrict Allied 'boots on the ground' ie not allowing a bridgehead to be created.

Alllied sea power, other than providing troop transport and supplies, achieved little except for noise and disrupting some German movements. Although some fire missions suppressed heavy gun batteries (manned by low grade troops) the main German strengths lay in heavy machine guns with mortar support on an interlocking defense basis supported by beach/terrain obstacles.

Certainly, given the problems of delivering airborne troops and coordinating dispered air landed troops, the Allies were on the 'back foot' a failure that the Germans failed to exploit.

Allied troops and supplies meant little without a bridgehead, again, German strengths in defensive postures coupled with freedom of independant action, should have not allowed any bridgehead to develop. Even isolated bridgeheads, could have been destroyed or made untenable by flank attrition given reserves and Divisional freedom of action - after all OKW, OKH etc succeeded in military goals when free of political pressure, which was not often.....

Tactical (as opposed to strategic) Allied air superiority was only achieved during daylight hours - and the German forces were past masters at movement, defense etc when given a free, non-political hand. When German reserves etc were released, they were still constrained by 'do it now or else' mentality as opposed to military imperatives and dictats.

Certainly within the wider context, Allied success in Normandy was dictated by German failure (despite all the negative efforts of Montgomery, Patton et al) ie not by Allied troop volumes or air superiority - Germany failed because they did not prevent the establishment of any bridgeheads within 24 hours and because their organistation was constrained by a dictatorial, fascist organisational structure.

In truth, Germany would have failed anyway because (if you were to construct a WW2 'what if scenario'), weapons production was based on slave labour even though a majority of 'liberated' Russian people's would have embraced a free society and thus used their skills, weapons production was targeted towards quantity as opposed to quality or military expertise/experience, 75% of transport was utilised for 'ethnic cleansing', economic activity was based on the state and war and as such opposed to growth and so on.

All that considered, a 'what if' Normandy Battle scenario would be welcome.

Levi

[leci]

However, air superiority apart, nothing would have been gained without a bridgehead - in fact much from the Allied viewpont would have been lost. Air superiority provides attrition against ground forces (Germany having little aircraft available in the Normandy theatre), but massive deployement of German rapid reserves would have negated/mitigated the attrition rate, if only to restrict Allied 'boots on the ground' ie not allowing a bridgehead to be created.

Alllied sea power, other than providing troop transport and supplies, achieved little except for noise and disrupting some German movements. Although some fire missions suppressed heavy gun batteries (manned by low grade troops) the main German strengths lay in heavy machine guns with mortar support on an interlocking defense basis supported by beach/terrain obstacles.

Certainly, given the problems of delivering airborne troops and coordinating dispered air landed troops, the Allies were on the 'back foot' a failure that the Germans failed to exploit.

Allied troops and supplies meant little without a bridgehead, again, German strengths in defensive postures coupled with freedom of independant action, should have not allowed any bridgehead to develop. Even isolated bridgeheads, could have been destroyed or made untenable by flank attrition given reserves and Divisional freedom of action - after all OKW, OKH etc succeeded in military goals when free of political pressure, which was not often.....

Tactical (as opposed to strategic) Allied air superiority was only achieved during daylight hours - and the German forces were past masters at movement, defense etc when given a free, non-political hand. When German reserves etc were released, they were still constrained by 'do it now or else' mentality as opposed to military imperatives and dictats.

Certainly within the wider context, Allied success in Normandy was dictated by German failure (despite all the negative efforts of Montgomery, Patton et al) ie not by Allied troop volumes or air superiority - Germany failed because they did not prevent the establishment of any bridgeheads within 24 hours and because their organistation was constrained by a dictatorial, fascist organisational structure.

In truth, Germany would have failed anyway because (if you were to construct a WW2 'what if scenario'), weapons production was based on slave labour even though a majority of 'liberated' Russian people's would have embraced a free society and thus used their skills, weapons production was targeted towards quantity as opposed to quality or military expertise/experience, 75% of transport was utilised for 'ethnic cleansing', economic activity was based on the state and war and as such opposed to growth and so on.

All that considered, a 'what if' Normandy Battle scenario would be welcome.

Leci

[GottaLove88s]

True... Didn't Rommel actually say that the first 24 hours would decide it?... But certainly didn't help that he was away at his wife's birthday June 6th, and nobody was brave enough to wake Hitler to release the panzer reserves which only he had authority to do... There were a few other sneakies the Allies exploited, like targeting the Omaha, Utah, G-J-S beaches in the boundary between two German army groups... to maximise chain of command confusion... In a perfect world, without the Nazi political inefficiencies, slow reactions, the "Ost" brigades that really didn't want to be there (Volksgrenadiers in BA?), yup the Germans might have won 8 times in 10... Thank God though... I wouldn't want to live in a Nazi Europe

[leci]

....or a Russian political or environmental landscape based on 1940 - 1945 values, where real worldwide post 1945 values had not influenced events and Russian thinking.....

In fact on that basis, BA would not exist and we would have had to report each other to the authorities for even having such a dialogue.....

...unless of course if Patton (certainly a Germanic warrior) had conconqued Russia - unlikely.........certainly not with zippo Shermans.....!

Leci

[Granfali]

A lot of requests received guys. Give me a couple of days to square the business. I'm finishing the rulebook adding explanatory examples. Big trouble for me since English is not my native language (thx Mr Google...)

Smart idea to use GJS maps from Close Combat mod. What's your plan for extension to other Battle Groups?

Other BGs appear as reinforcements over specific areas

Do you need some help as the Jerries? If four Allied players are making 10 turns/week each, that sounds like a heavy schedule for you...

Sure mate, once finish first turn I will open German side to another players

Ps. Technical stuff... these look like big maps... are 20-26 units enough? can a clever player avoid detection? sneak around the back sort of thing?

Yes, are big enough, but prefer wide maps to make possible maneuvering. Over narrow maps we are forced into frontal assaults only.

RF900 has written some cool code and icons to permit wounded infantry units to merge, and to permit adjacent units to swap places (so long as doing so doesn't break terrain rules, eg. swapping panzers into trees).... they're downloadable on viewtopic.php?f=104&t=35219 if you'd like to try?

Thx GL88, but merge is not a option in GJS because of casualities recount. My modder level in BA not is not high, so prefer modify only aspects that I can resolve.

Granfali, Checking out your maps above... If that hedging for Gold Beach means what I think it means, there are only three small access points leading off the landing grounds... 50th ID is really going to eat some... Are you planning to give them naval barrage and air cover?

Sure, Allied General Commander allocate bonus among Battle Groups (counters), so you can obtain a maximum of three bonus per battle: artillery barrage (25pdr), naval artillery and aviation support (typhoon). So, you'd better get along with your commander. Do not forget Atlantic Wall is only a mith

Pps. Intrigued by your unit modifications, bumping up infantry to 8, HMG to 5, flamethrower to 4, etc...
What does this do to the actual battle mechanics? is it like getting extra lives? or does it reduce the impact on morale?

IMHO some units have few men. A couple of good shots and all KIA. It gives units more chance to survive after the battle. Changes don't affect morale or firepower. All test I have done were ok.
Final modification list is:
-mancount: HMG 5, Infantry 8, Inf AT, flamethrowers, scouts y mortars 4
-HMG and mortars can move 1 tile
-Tiger "breakdown chance" 0%
-Piat and PzSchreck AP attack increased (now Infatry AT can destroy a tank...)
-If BG is isolated: -yellow level --> Breakdown Chance (armors) = 20%; -red level --> Shots for infantry and armors = 1, and armor Breakdown Chance = 40%

[GottaLove88s]

Sure mate, once finish first turn I will open German side to another players

Tiger "breakdown chance" 0%

Ok you've sold me. Please cancel my application to be Brit 6th Airborne or 3rd ID... May I join you as a German when you start to introduce additional defenders? How historical do you propose to be? I'd love to take control of Von Geyr's Panzergruppe West, if they're released into action in time to achieve anything!

Thx GL88, but merge is not a option in GJS because of casualities recount. My modder level in BA not is not high, so prefer modify only aspects that I can resolve.

Makes sense not to use RF900's merge for this. Was thinking afterwards that the coding gets more complicated because you've also varied the number of men in a unit, eg. infantry 8, HMG 5, etc...

Happy to help you drop in the "swap" code, if you'd like? It's simple to add in and the Allies will certainly find it useful assaulting up the beaches.

HMG and mortars can move 1 tile

Good call. How about AT guns? (Ignore this question if you're ok to use RF900's swap code, because a swap with an adjacent infantry/tank can move an AT gun one space)

Piat and PzSchreck AP attack increased (now Infantry AT can destroy a tank...)

Please share how you're going to do this. I'd like to use it in my own scenarios.

If BG is isolated:
yellow level --> Breakdown Chance (armors) = 20%;
red level --> Shots for infantry and armors = 1, and armor Breakdown Chance = 40%

This is a really good way of handling "supply line suppression"... No access to maintenance, food or fuel replenishment... Can you make that happen at some universal level? Or will this require modifying the squads.csv line for every unit in play for that BG?

This is looking really good, Granfali. Can't wait!

[Granfali]

Ok you've sold me. Please cancel my application to be Brit 6th Airborne or 3rd ID... May I join you as a German when you start to introduce additional defenders? How historical do you propose to be? I'd love to take control of Von Geyr's Panzergruppe West, if they're released into action in time to achieve anything!

More or less, every player manage 2-3 Battlegroups (Bde/Rgt most of them)... let me think about BG allocation.

HMG and mortars can move 1 tile

Good call. How about AT guns? (Ignore this question if you're ok to use RF900's swap code, because a swap with an adjacent infantry/tank can move an AT gun one space)

No way for me, Ian told me it was necessary some scripts, so I leave it.

Piat and PzSchreck AP attack increased (now Infantry AT can destroy a tank...)

Please share how you're going to do this. I'd like to use it in my own scenarios.

Changing 48 and 49 values in squads.csv.

If BG is isolated:
yellow level --> Breakdown Chance (armors) = 20%;
red level --> Shots for infantry and armors = 1, and armor Breakdown Chance = 40%

This is a really good way of handling "supply line suppression"... No access to maintenance, food or fuel replenishment... Can you make that happen at some universal level? Or will this require modifying the squads.csv line for every unit in play for that BG?

Unfortunately that is the way to do it... because of that it is only restricted to infantry and armor.

[k9mike]

Very nice. Hope to be able to play this with you guys. Would love to help you an Jon out with the German's if you need anymore support there....just to get the chance to play would be an honor. Excellent work.
Mike