Fall Grau 2.27 Ben (Axis) versus Jeremy

[golden delicious]

Overview:
[For those not already aware, Jeremy was the original designer of Fall Grau at 50km/hex, and I'm responsible for the 25km/hex version]

So Jeremy asked me to take him on one more time in this scenario. I've beaten him the last few times but he's beaten me in the past. I was vaguely thinking he had some Axis plan up his sleeve but it turns out he wants to take the Allies, which puts the onus of coming up with a strategy onto me. Against some newbie I would be inclined either to rehash old ground or do something crazy (and stupid) but for Jeremy I need something both novel and effective- not easy when we've been playing versions of this scenario for 20 years.

I chewed over a couple of things in my head but really what the Axis needs is a way to get into a position in which the Allies are screwed. Typically, this means putting an Axis army in the space between the Mississippi, the Ohio, and the Great Lakes. This area contains six industrial cities [in Fall Grau, Allied replacements increase exponentially over time but the Axis can limit this by capturing specific cities], two of them doubles, and crucially it contains no good defensive terrain whatsoever. However, it's bounded by super rivers from every direction except for the northwest (where the Axis are unlikely to approach) and by mountains to the east and southeast.

Looking at the map, however, I think I see a way in: two prongs from the southwest and southeast could meet in southern Illinois, enabling the Axis player to mount a concentric attack on this exposed corner, opening the door into the American heartlands. This approach comes with an added bonus: a linkup cuts off a significant chunk of the southeast. Memphis, New Orleans and Mobile fall into the player's lap (provided Montgomery, AL with its limited supply point, is already secured). The southwest can only be Galveston but the southeast could either be Savannah, GA or Charleston, SC. I don't like the available anchorages at Savannah (4 hexes from the port) so I opt for Charleston. It's better protected with costal guns, but these only cover a direct assault on the port which I'm forgoing anyway.

That's two landings of the maximum permitted three. I think it's more or less essential to dip a toe into the northeast, to keep the Allied player focused on the existential threat this poses. In the release version of the scenario, a few of these cities are out of bounds altogether without sacrificing a significant airborne force to knock out coastal guns: New York and Baltimore are totally unapproachable and Norfolk can only be approached with difficulty. That leaves Boston (which I feel can be too easily locked in early by the Allied player), Portland (which feels irrelevant) and Quebec City. I like this last choice: while it's tough to push south from here, it does rapidly expose a long front for the Allies to cover, and when the Axis are inevitably pushed away to the west, that option has prizes of its own.

Because this plan doesn't bring a huge number of industrial cities under my sway immediately, I have to consider it a longer term one, in keeping with Jeremy's stated preference for a long match. As such, I'll be taking zero theatre options and keeping my supply and replacements high [The Axis player has a choice of TOs starting turn 3 which boil down to deploying the available forces much faster but with less staying power]. This means that Axis strength will continue to climb well past turn 30, at which point I intend to be firmly established over the Ohio and engaged in a heavy fight in the open field with my opponent.

Outline Axis plan for the first phase of the scenario. Blue arrows represent secondary offensives for local objectives, stars show the three industrial cities which will be cut off if the linkup is successful.

FG Strategic Outline.png (729.45 KiB) Viewed 2720 times

[golden delicious]

Turn 1:
First question is what lands where. I intend to use the paratroops as far as possible to support the immediate landings, so will drop one division each behind Galveston and Quebec City and another west of Charleston to ensure that if the ports don't fall immediately, they at least go out of supply and so will fall pretty easily on turn 2. That leaves two, which will for now drop either side of South Carolina, giving me a clear run at securing the state to move west and northwest as soon as possible. If this plan falls on its face, it'll be here.

I'm able to attack Galveston and Charleston this turn; the latter falls but not the former. That's about all for now.

FG1.png (2.53 MiB) Viewed 2719 times

[Jeremy Mac Donald]

Turn 1
Well after a fair number of years Ben has agreed to play this scenario with me again. He takes the Axis (because I insist) and goes with an expansive assault with 3 invasion points roughly equally spaced across the continent including Quebec City, Charleston and Galveston.

Ambitious ass these are widely spread out but with a player of Ben’s Caliber I don’t believe I can pull off a defeat in detail, at least not early on.

My initial thoughts are that I will gather my forces in the West, try and mostly pull back and look for opportunities to counter attack.

In the South I want to focus on defending the route north. I’ll screen the south more then really try and defend it.

The attack on Quebec in interesting as there are natural bottlenecks here that I will start trying to occupy. Mostly aim to slow him down with blown bridges initially.

By turns end the rough outlines of my defense plans are emerging. One thing that looks to be changing is I might go for the defense against the invasion of Quebec a little more strongly then the other areas initially. There really are good choke points on good defensive terrain here that I don’t want to lose.



Here we can see my initial defensive line forming around Montreal. The Blue lines are the shortest line I can make and where I'll want to really make my stand. The flank is completely open to the West but the only thing of real value that way is Sault Ste. Marie which can be reasonably easily defended - if the Allied Player is not surprised there. You can keep going further west around the Great Lakes but Canada is such a wilderness that in practice it is not feasible - the supply line is just to long with no rewards.

[Response to Ben's Post] You did not have to take 0 TO's. I felt that I had improved enough that I could handle whatever you chose.

[golden delicious]

Turn 2:
No terrible outrages from Jeremy: the worst is a destroyed bridge over the St. Lawrence south of Quebec City, which puts two divisions out of supply. I'll need to get an engineer up here urgently. Otherwise my main bodies at both Galveston and Quebec have trace supply drawn from El Salvador or Charleston, which is very helpful.

In South Carolina, I take advantage of one airborne division being sat already on an airfield next to Charleston and drop it further ahead- not so much that it'll be vulnerable as it's only two hexes from its neighbour, but enough that Jeremy won't be able to swing easily into my path as I move east by northeast away from the coast here. Reinforcements are pretty much evenly split between the three fronts, each receiving a panzergrenadier division and one or two infantry divisions.

Numerous Medals of Honour dished out at Galveston as the garrison holds out the entire turn against heavy attacks, wrecking pretty much my whole force here. This is not encouraging.

Quebec City secured but part of the force here is still cut off south of the St. Lawrence

FG2.png (2.04 MiB) Viewed 2674 times

You did not have to take 0 TO's. I felt that I had improved enough that I could handle whatever you chose.

Well, as you know I tend to go light on TOs and keep my strength building gradually but more sustainably. In hindsight this plan could be executed with a forward load. Anyway in principle all the options are equal; while my approach makes it easier on you for the first 30-40 turns it'll make it harder on you the rest of the match.

[Jeremy Mac Donald]

Turn 2
This is going well for me as Ben suffers something of a disaster at Galveston where he fails to take the supply point for the second turn in a row.

Ben’s Falchijagers cutting off Galveston evaporate when pushed and change my defensive plans. I had planned to make a battle group in the West and do mobile counter attacks all the way back to the Missouri, but now I am going for something more high risk/high reward. I am going to fight on the beaches of Texas. I have seen this go different ways and it can turn into a big Allied defeat, so I’ll need to be careful in knowing if the game is up and I have to bug out. However, I like the idea of taking advantage of the developing situation and pressuring Ben and I have seen the Axis get stuck here as well.

The rest of the fronts continue as expected with me drawing up where I hope the battle lines will be in most locations and gathering a mobile force for the South as that is ultimately indefensible but might be an opportunity to screw with Ben’s plans if he ignores the flank.

[No picture this turn as I somehow erased my end of turn 2 file - I have the rest of them so this is a one time problem]

[golden delicious]

Turn 3:
The Galveston landing is now a bit of a huddled mess. The whole plan falls apart if I fail here so I throw everything I have in this direction this turn: SS Das Reich and 2. Panzer land at Galveston and hope to be enough to turn the tables here, but it leaves me understrength everywhere else. It does pay off, and I get Galveston and some imagination allows me to put one of the Allied divisions out of supply to the northeast. Perhaps I can turn this to my advantage, perhaps not.

From South Carolina, I make a perhaps ill-judged lunge and drop 2. Fallschirmjaeger onto one of the bridges over the upper Tennessee east of Knoxville. I was expecting to get to within two hexes of it with 3. Panzergrenadier, but this is blocked by the reserve division which I RBC'd from Columbia last turn and now refuses to budge, so the paratroops are left rather out on their own, and I see at least one Allied armoured division in striking distance of it.

Jeremy's gone absolutely nuts for bridge blowing. I see 4 in Texas, 22 in the southeast and 8 in the northeast. Well, this is mostly just diligence but in the southeast he's blown all but two of the rail bridges leading out of North Carolina. Taking the cue, I target the last two for airstrikes: this will put any units on my northern flank down to a much reduced supply, but it looks like Jeremy has no intention of defending the state at all. I add two more engineer units to each of Quebec and Charleston- the only units either front receives this turn except for aircraft and one HQ.

Otherwise, I take Jeremy's weak defence in North Carolina as a chance to grab Charlotte [an industrial city]: I drive the defenders out but can't advance. Again, at Quebec he's chosen to defend back, so I follow up with a Panzergrenadier division all the way to Montreal, trusting to the very difficult terrain on the flank here to protect me from being cut off.

The effects of two turns heavy fighting and no supply very visible on the German infantry at Galveston, but with the port now captured things should improve.

FG3.png (1020.01 KiB) Viewed 2635 times

[Jeremy Mac Donald]

Turn 3
OK things in Texas go downhill fast as Ben throws in very heavy reinforcements to retrieve the situation, which he does by the end of his turn and I flee with pretty much everything I can get out of the area. I am back to a plan of looking to gather a mobile group to use in limited counter attacks until we get back to the Missouri.

Ben leaps an Airbourne Division onto a mountain pass through the Appalachians which makes me think he may be hoping for an early breakthrough there. I counterattack and destroy the Division so that should help.

Quebec Falls: 90% Replacement Rate.

All those blown bridges. With Ben's landing in Quebec there is nearly nothing left available for the south and the defense to the north barely exists. My defenses toward the Appalachians are somewhat better.

Fall Grau JB 03.jpg (2.18 MiB) Viewed 2619 times

[golden delicious]

Turn 4:
OK, well 2. Fallschirmjaeger is gone but I can sort of live with that. What I can't live with is that the Charleston supply point was removed- I checked back and I definitely picked this TO. Bugger- I realise belatedly that I reversed the way these work so you pick the ports you don't want instead of the ones you do... but then Quebec and Galveston are working, so THOSE events must be bugged [it turns out that the event strings only work as designed if you capture the port on turn 1... however unless you do the exact opposite of what the manual instructs, like I did, you should be OK]. This is pretty lousy, it's due to come back on turn 12 but that will be a bit late for me. I can in theory live off captured supply points in the meantime- but this does make matters fairly urgent down here. Charlotte (abandoned by the Allies) will be the first, then Atlanta, then Birmingham. With this in mind, and given the major attention lavished on Galveston last turn, this location becomes the target for my major reinforcements this turn: two Panzergrenadier and three infantry divisions, plus chancing a landing with one mountain division south of Savannah to open up Georgia. I'm hoping my lunge for Tennessee has really got Jeremy's attention and I should be free to swing to the west next turn. Then I realise I can just take Savannah or Wilmington, which (since I didn't take their TOs) should just have their supply points as normal.

Texas is better: the Americans are mostly gone, but two divisions are caught and I quickly throw a ring around Houston, which contains one of them, and hit it. At Quebec, all is calm, and I make an initial attack outside Montreal whilst also moving to destroy 4th British division, which is isolated forward on the other side of the St. Lawrence. I get Houston, and advance at Montreal. Interestingly, Montreal's only in supply by virtue of engineer brigades over the blown bridges. I realise this too late for this turn- but if I can kick them out of the hex then the city is doomed. I need to put some pressure on here as it's my weakest front but it's important Jeremy remains worried about it.

3. Panzergrenadier reaches the upper Tennessee too late to save 2. Fallschirmjaeger, but the door remains open to the west

FG4.png (2.46 MiB) Viewed 2604 times

[Jeremy Mac Donald]

Turn 4
Ben continues to suffer hiccups. Apparently, the Charleston Supply Point is bugged and never appeared. Ben say’s that he will get by because the Charlotte Supply Point will appear next turn but I am not sure that is good enough unless the Charleston supply point eventually appears as he won’t get supplies from ports until turn 12. Still Ben thinks he can get by with this so we continue the game. I hope we patch this issue however – weirdly I am not aware of when this went wrong. I don’t remember ever having any problems like this – at least not in recent versions of the scenario.

Otherwise, Ben seems to be clearly going for a plan to storm the Mountain Passes early strategy. I’m concerned and send some of my small reserve in the South up toward this fight – I can afford to lose the South. However, in this kind of a race I think I can get units into the mountain battle pretty much as fast as Ben can – at least as fast as a Ben that needs to focus on Quebec and the West as well, can.

Ben hits the line near Montreal and here I will throw in the Armour reserves for a counter attack. This is more of a delaying action. I don’t think Ben’s offensive is that strong here just yet.

The West is a different story. I have lost a few divisions out here and everything pulls back well beyond Axis range. I’ll gather strength for another tussle later on in this theater.

The counter attacks work, albeit with losses. Will Ben give up on the mountain pass?

Here is the Allied perspective of the south. Clearly I am focused on Tennessee - though I do have the beginnings of a mobile force gathering down near Montgomery. Though Ben does not have to worry much - this is a force meant to stop Ben from sending a small force to conquer the south - not to fight a pitched battle with his main line of attack (the south is very vulnerable if Galveston has also fallen).

Fall Grau JB 04.jpg (911.55 KiB) Viewed 2574 times

[golden delicious]

Turn 4
Ben continues to suffer hiccups. Apparently, the Charleston Supply Point is bugged and never appeared. Ben say’s that he will get by because the Charlotte Supply Point will appear next turn but I am not sure that is good enough unless the Charleston supply point eventually appears as he won’t get supplies from ports until turn 12. Still Ben thinks he can get by with this so we continue the game. I hope we patch this issue however – weirdly I am not aware of when this went wrong. I don’t remember ever having any problems like this – at least not in recent versions of the scenario.

For the benefit of readers and the avoidance of doubt- this is my own incompetence rather than a bug.

[golden delicious]

Turn 5:
OK, so we've established I need Savannah, and it happens that the city is out of supply with two German units either side of it already, so I start by hitting that. Jeremy has, as expected, formed a rather solid line across my previous line of advance towards Tennessee, so I throw some infantry forward to try pinning this in place, while throwing my two fresh panzergrenadier divisions directly west, putting them between Atlanta and the Allied armoured reserve.

In Quebec, it looks like Jeremy is concentrating on locking down the front to the south, as besides Montreal itself I've not encountered any Allied units; I expect to find a strong position running from Portland, Maine to Lake Ontario, and then another barring the approach to Toronto. In fact it looks like I'll be able to walk right up to the flank of Montreal for a potential direct assault with a flank bonus next turn; for the meantime, I continue to work on the few mobile units around the city while they're exposed.

It's a similar story in Texas: the Allied army has simply left the area; I see armour gathered around Oklahoma City and light infantry in Louisiana but that's all. I would love to be subtle here but I don't think Jeremy is going to do anything unless I really plough on regardless, so I simply throw two of my mechanised divisions either side of Dallas to put the garrison out of supply (and make a late-turn attack), with the other two sat slightly to the rear to respond in case there is a counterattack.

Now I don't feel like I have a particular crisis, I can be more measured in my distribution of reinforcements. The Quebec front is expanding rapidly but I expect it to condense again fairly quickly. I send two infantry divisions here plus an HQ, and the other four arrived this turn to South Carolina. I also add another two panzergrenadier divisions there to power the drive west and/or respond if the Allies attempt to counterattack at Ashville, NC- entirely possible as there are three armoured divisions plus artillery here. Texas, where I don't expect much fighting for a while and where I'm already very strong, receives only another Columbia division (the first four arrived last turn) and a second engineer brigade.

Not super inspiring- but if Jeremy keeps playing it safe in Texas and Quebec then I can expand cheaply there while pumping troops into the southeast, hopefully enough to get me over the Tennessee river. If I get Montreal, Atlanta and Dallas in the next couple of turns then that's the Allies down to 53% replacements, which is a good start and stops him going into the stratosphere when they increase on turn 10 [Each Allied industrial city cuts replacements 10% (or 20% for the six largest cities), but every ten turns Allied replacements increase by 50%]. I'm hoping I'll be so far spread over the southeast by the time Allied strength reaches its early peak around turn 16 that he won't be able to stop me pushing north. Note to self: it's worth trying to push north from here, too.

Axis forces spread out in all directions from Quebec City

FG5.png (2.19 MiB) Viewed 2549 times

[Jeremy Mac Donald]

Turn 5
Well the game is having hiccups with Ben having to deal with just trace supply for a turn. Fortunately it is determined that the game is not ruined and we can continue.

The situation continues to evolve with Ben continuing his attacks west of Montreal in the North. In the South East he seems to halt the attack through the mountain pass for at least this turn with forces heading west deeper into the south. I’m a little surprised that Ben is really not putting much into an advance to the North toward Washington DC, here. Instead, he appears to be probing, looking for a way through the difficult terrain of the Appalachians and/or Tennessee River.

In Texas Ben races forward cutting off Dallas.

I find it interesting that I am using a different kind of defense in each of the three fronts. In the North near Quebec it is primarily static defenses. I am trying to block off the choke points here and fortify. Do that and maybe I can defend the whole area with nothing but a mobile reserve to cover the Western flank.

In the South East I’m leaning on an Armoured Group of about four divisions (hope to grow it) and some HQs for artillery support. When Ben thrusts through the mountains or over a river I counterattack and then feed in Infantry Divisions to hopefully lock things down.

Finally in Texas – well here I have just retreated and have a couple of Battle Groups, maybe 10 Divisions. I’m hoping Ben will get overly aggressive and send like 3 Panzer Divisions racing forward and I can fall on them with 10 Divisions, murder them and then run away. That is the way I want to fight here. Counter attacks and then retreats.

Axis Loss Rate = 8 / Allied Loss Rate =24 / Spread = 16

Houston: 81%
Charlotte: 73%

Grand Strategic Situation of Turn 5

Fall Grau Turn 5 Overview.jpg (803.17 KiB) Viewed 2539 times

[rhinobones]

Turn 5
Axis Loss Rate = 8 / Allied Loss Rate =24 / Spread = 16
Houston: 81%
Charlotte: 73%

Question: what hard numbers are the loss rates and percentages describing and how are they computed?

Regards

[Jeremy Mac Donald]

Turn 5
Axis Loss Rate = 8 / Allied Loss Rate =24 / Spread = 16
Houston: 81%
Charlotte: 73%

Question: what hard numbers are the loss rates and percentages describing and how are they computed?

Regards

Good Question - I am so familiar with the scenario that I just make assumptions (I also track these numbers because I have opinions about what they indicate).

Anyway, as you are aware, TOAW pretty much always has a loss VP for both sides that is calculated based on how much men and equipment has been lost. Its based on a percentage of the VPs in the scenario. Default is if the scenario had 100 VP and you lose every last unit your loss VP would be 50. However in Fall Grau the Loss Rating has been doubled from the default and there are exactly 1000 VPs on the map. So if your Loss Rating is 10 you have lost 1% of all the equipment you could ever get in the scenario and if it is 100 then you have lost 10% of all the equipment you can get in the scenario.

The Spread is just the difference between the Axis Loss VP and the Allied Loss VP. In the unusual (and probably fatal for the Axis) situation that the Axis Loss VP is higher then the Allies I would write a negative number but that only happens when I am playing the Axis and some one like Matt McComb is kicking my ass.

Because it is such a large scenario even the loss of 20% or 30% of all the forces you will ever get is actually a big deal - especially early on since the loss of 20% of your forces when you have only seen 40% so far is horrendous losses.

The city name with the percentage beside it is all about the Allied Players replacement rate with 100% being the replacement rate the Allies start the scenario with. So here I lost both Houston and Charlotte and on turn 5 my replacement rate fell to 73% from the loss of both these cities. An Allied replacement rate below 50% is bad, while 70% is pretty good, anything above 100% is fantastic. Every 10 turns the Allied replacement rate increases by 50%. So the Axis player must constantly be beating down North America's (primarily the US but Canada and Mexico get in there a little as well) industrial capacity or they will soon face overwhelming numbers.

As an example at 100% (that is the rate set at the start of the scenario) the Allied Player gets 250 M4/75 Sherman Tanks a turn (a week) which is 13,000 a year. That is pretty much enough to make an entire Armoured Division a turn needless to say the Axis player wants to get that number down.

[Jeremy Mac Donald]

I will note that at this stage of the game and despite their importance, the only Industrial City I am even bothering to defend is Montreal and that mainly because it is a good place to make a defense against an Axis player that has opened the scenario by storming Quebec City.

The German portion of the Axis OOB that is coming ashore is phenomenally good and trying to keep them away from the Industrial cities early on often just results in the Allied Player losing the army that is trying to make that fight right along with the Industrial City. In the early part of the scenario the Allied Player is looking for some kind of an advantage in any fight. So Charlotte is indefensible and I don't even contest it when Ben goes for it but I fight back in the Appalachian Mountain Passes because they have great defensive terrain - and Ben probably can't just sweep in behind me with Panzertruppen.

[rhinobones]

Anyway, as you are aware, TOAW pretty much always has a loss . . .

Excellent, thank you.

Regards, RhinoBones

[golden delicious]

Anyway, as you are aware, TOAW pretty much always has a loss VP for both sides that is calculated based on how much men and equipment has been lost. Its based on a percentage of the VPs in the scenario. Default is if the scenario had 100 VP and you lose every last unit your loss VP would be 50. However in Fall Grau the Loss Rating has been doubled from the default and there are exactly 1000 VPs on the map. So if your Loss Rating is 10 you have lost 1% of all the equipment you could ever get in the scenario and if it is 100 then you have lost 10% of all the equipment you can get in the scenario.

I think you're mistaken and the behaviour in Fall Grau is actually the default

It's worth noting that the figure is computed based on the aggregate AP strength of all your equipment. So if your force consisted of 10 Rifle Squads and one 150mm Howitzer (or something like that), losing the Howitzer would be worth as much as losing all of the squads.

As an example at 100% (that is the rate set at the start of the scenario) the Allied Player gets 250 M4/75 Sherman Tanks a turn (a week) which is 13,000 a year. That is pretty much enough to make an entire Armoured Division a turn needless to say the Axis player wants to get that number down.

The replacement rate is (loosely) based on historic production levels. This is an arbitrary baseline and a level which obviously the US could have vastly exceeded given 1) a total war economy and 2) no need to transport it all half way around the world.

The * 90% replacements effect really represents the temporary disruption of having the Axis tear chunks out of the Allied supply chain, as clearly losing half a dozen cities (there are nearly forty on the map as I recall) would not have crippled war production in the long run. The +50% growth then represents both increased output and recovering from that disruption. In theory Allied replacements could balloon to many, many times the baseline over the course of the scenario but such a case could only arise if the Axis had been stopped dead and if that's so then the scenario is normally over well before the replacement rate enters the stratosphere.

...of course as I note in the briefing this scenario isn't really supposed to be realistic so you can take all of that with a pinch of salt.

[golden delicious]

Turn 6:
Still very passive from Jeremy. The only noticeable attack was again back-and-forth outside Montreal. I follow up on the St. Lawrence east bank and here find a fortified line of Allied units running along the cardinal TOAW axis, blocking the gap between the river and Lake Champlain. Further east, I find part of a second line which appears to block the route between Champlain and the Atlantic- although I'm only in contact with three divisions of it. Breaking into New England is not really an objective of this landing, so I'm not terribly dismayed, but I need Jeremy to keep feeling threatened here or half of this force will rail out from about turn 15. I can start with the easternmost hex of the line east of Montreal; here I line up three divisions and will probe it this turn. My focus for now though remains to the west of the city, and I bring down an engineer to test whether he has forces on the south bank of the Ottawa. I add two more divisions here as I'm starting to feel thin on the ground, plus a panzer division to give me some fast power west of Montreal, and to make me look busy here (to be fair this means 50% of this turn's sealift is dedicated here). A probe on the eastern end of the Montreal line is unexpectedly successful, but I'm in no position to follow up and Jeremy will seal this next turn.

No counterattack in Georgia makes me tempted to lunge forward with my most eastward Panzergrenadier division- well in range of intact bridges over the Tennessee- but I see a US armoured division that gives me pause here. However this unit isn't in good condition and would only be good for one attack round, so I go for it, taking the bridge at Huntsville. I have another three mechanised divisions at or near Atlanta, and infantry close behind- plus an airborne division available that maybe I should have dropped this turn. I still need more engineers here, but failing to plan my sealift properly means I land none this turn. I do however get Atlanta unexpectedly easily, which gives me a forward supply point just as things may be heating up- not to mention opening up the road ahead. To interfere a bit with Jeremy's response, I use the last round to blow another of his key bridges over the Tennessee, that stands between his reserves and where I've crossed it. Four more infantry divisions are added at Savannah this turn to immediately press into the Georgian interior.

Texas remains completely vacated, which is fine. I grab a bridge over the Red River, while my panzertruppen storm Dallas. I land three Italian divisions which will form the main force for possibly storming San Antonio, if Jeremy doesn't wish to defend that either. Dallas taken, I move my whole force up to the Red River, but Jeremy has his armoured reserve in Oklahoma so an immediate advance here isn't necessarily advisable as I only have four mechanised divisions and nothing else here for the moment- we'll see how this looks next turn.

18. Panzergrenadier seizes the Tennessee bridge by Huntsville, AL

FG6.png (2.66 MiB) Viewed 2487 times

[Jeremy Mac Donald]

Turn 6
I went back through the news reports and was surprised to note that Ben has not taken any of the Theatre Options that effect seas lift. So, a slow Axis landing but the Axis army is very robust. Seems almost counter intuitive for Ben. He is such an aggressive player that you would expect him to want to blitz me so hard I have no idea what hit me.

This explains the lack of a drive to the North out of North Carolina. Ben just does not have the forces.

Speaking of Charleston’s beachhead, Ben continues to drive hard to the West looking for a way through the tough terrain and I am surprised to find he has already arrived at the Huntsville bridge crossing. Fortunately, I think he just got here so I have forces arriving in the area as well.

There is heavy fighting around Montreal, and it looks like Ben plans to just fight it out here. Can’t blame him – what else could he do?

The defenses in the North

Fall Grau JB 06.jpg (910.99 KiB) Viewed 2480 times

[golden delicious]

Turn 7:
No counterattack on the Tennessee: Jeremy contented himself with blocking further advance with two (rather battered) armoured divisions. I think that these, in their poor condition and not dug in at all, can easily be shifted if I bring up some extra power, especially bombers. I seize the nearest airfield and stack it with fighters, bring up two more panzergrenadier divisions (for a later round) and assign nine bomber and fighter-bomber units to the assault. Everything else follows up or blocks key roads which might be used by the Allied armour I know is still at large in Alabama. I throw two more infantry divisions this way plus land two in North Carolina to probe towards Norfolk, VA. This city isn't on my list but there are no Allied units in evidence here at all so I can at least have a look.

Operations in Quebec are decidedly limited due to my main infantry formation being in reorganisation, but I follow up last turn's success on the eastern flank of the Montreal line, while also probing over the Ottawa with my engineers- there's another Canadian division here though I'm unsure of its condition. I decide then to hit the hex southwest of Montreal; all the bridges around the city are now blown so if I can knock out the engineers here then the garrison may go out of supply (or there may be in another engineer in the hex immediately south of the city that I can't see. I also have a division pushing into Maine to see if there's a gap around the eastern end of the Allied line here. I add the first Italian airborne division here in case there's an opportunity to cut stuff off this way, though I'm uneasy about this as there are a lot of Allied units up here. I get into the hex southwest of Montreal but it looks like a bit of a trap as I can be hit by the Allies from several sides here.

In Texas, my Colombians advance to put San Antonio out of supply; the Italians will roll up next turn for a potential assault. This is sort of the end of the good news as I'm confident that Jeremy has considerable strength in Oklahoma- let's say 4-6 divisions of which half will be armour. My plan, however, doesn't actually require me to go in this direction, and I could instead opt to fight my way foward into Arkansas, which is the direct path to the planned junction of the two southern armies in southern Illinois. It also gives me a secure eastern flank, since Jeremy has diligently demolished all the bridges over the Mississippi. I opt to hold my four mechanised divisions in position just north of Dallas this turn, where'll they'll recover from the nearby Dallas supply point, meanwhile my infantry (what little I have here) is advanced into the same area. Next turn everyone will jump off in the direction of Little Rock and Jeremy will doubtless be extremely confused as this is not in his version of the script. I decide to beef up this front with two more infantry divisions and two panzergrenadier divisions.

Not bad. I get firmly through Huntsville, wrecking the two American armoured divisions in the process. I expect a furious reaction from Jeremy, but his reserve here was already committed. There's another armoured force at Birmingham, AL, but I parked one of my Panzergrenadier divisions next to it to pin it in place.

Six mechanised divisions in Texas poised to lunge for the Arkansas river

FG7.png (1.89 MiB) Viewed 2459 times