CFNA Again......Arrrrrgh

[TOCarroll]

Looking back at the CFNA40-43 scenario. At the time I worte the original posts, I was able to Take Tobruk (during Rommel's First Offensive), but suffering crippling losses. The advice I received was helpful, but one point puzzles me. The "Window of Opportunity" that if you miss it, you had best wait till 1942. Well and good, but when is the window?

Specifically, I started the game at the Rommel entry 41 point. (Somewhere around Feb. March, 1941). Rommel hit Tobruk the first or second week in April. Are you saying he was too slow? That sounds like it means that in order to take Tobruk in 1941 it has to be done with Italian troops (they have armour arrive 1 or 2 turns before Rommel) backed by the Luftwaffe! [X(] Please tell me I am misunderstang the post and you mean that an ORGANIZED assault on an isolated Tobruk must be mounted in April or May. (Before the Battleaxe troops reached Suez).

Not worthy.......but eager. It is a hell of a good campaign.[&o][:'(]

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll

Looking back at the CFNA40-43 scenario. At the time I worte the original posts, I was able to Take Tobruk (during Rommel's First Offensive), but suffering crippling losses. The advice I received was helpful, but one point puzzles me. The "Window of Opportunity" that if you miss it, you had best wait till 1942. Well and good, but when is the window?

Specifically, I started the game at the Rommel entry 41 point. (Somewhere around Feb. March, 1941). Rommel hit Tobruk the first or second week in April. Are you saying he was too slow? That sounds like it means that in order to take Tobruk in 1941 it has to be done with Italian troops (they have armour arrive 1 or 2 turns before Rommel) backed by the Luftwaffe! [X(] Please tell me I am misunderstang the post and you mean that an ORGANIZED assault on an isolated Tobruk must be mounted in April or May. (Before the Battleaxe troops reached Suez).

Not worthy.......but eager. It is a hell of a good campaign.[&o][:'(]

There is no specific numerical time limit. It is entirely situation dependent. But it should be obvious that Rommel starts with a sizeable force advantage and similarly obvious that that advantage is going to steadily deteriorate. Eventually, depending on combat results, things are going to just be too hairy to be able to focus sufficiently on Tobruk to be able to succeed. The earlier you get started in force the better.

And there is no reason for the DAK to take longer to get there than the Italians. It sounds to me like you've squandered them traipsing through the Jebel Akdar area. That's a common beginner error. That area is doomed. Leave it for a bit of Italian infantry. Most experienced players have learned to drive hell-bent-for-leather for Tobruk with everything they're going to need to take it.

No more advice! I've got to leave some problems for players to solve themselves. Sorting it out yourself is where the fun of wargaming resides. (Fortunately, that scenario has loads more of them).

[TOCarroll]

'Preciate it. (Sounds like your the designer, from the scuttlebutt. Hell of a job). Actually I was not AS interested in advice, as your design philosophy. There are are a number of reasons. 1) I probably solo on this campaign more than all others combigned. 2) I was not specific about which 40-43 scenario I used. I the article in TAOW Design Group, Bob Cross (you?) won because (partly) he managed to avoid giving up as much ground to O'Connors Offensive as occurred historicaly (as well as poor placement of aircraft ant artillery by his opponent). Obviously, THAT gave you a BIG head start. 3) I dont sent the AK down the coast road, I send the Italians that way, simply because the Germans can go faster through the desert, and that is what Rommel did (with the exception of some small detachments to help the Italians stay away from "reverse" on the transmissions).

Mainly, because I am trying to understand the design concepts behind TAOW, and CFNA has the best campaign PO.

I appreciate your help, and will not grub for advice on tactics[&o]. HOWEVER, as a private project, to understand the PO programming, I am considering putting together a regimental/brigade scenario with PO. Not planning on stealing your map, TO&E, OOB or anything, just some of you moxie on what made things tick.[:'(] THAT is why I keep asking the same hard questions the Rommel probably asked himself. [&:]

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll

'Preciate it. (Sounds like your the designer, from the scuttlebutt. Hell of a job). Actually I was not AS interested in advice, as your design philosophy. There are are a number of reasons. 1) I probably solo on this campaign more than all others combigned. 2) I was not specific about which 40-43 scenario I used. I the article in TAOW Design Group, Bob Cross (you?) won because (partly) he managed to avoid giving up as much ground to O'Connors Offensive as occurred historicaly (as well as poor placement of aircraft ant artillery by his opponent). Obviously, THAT gave you a BIG head start. 3) I dont sent the AK down the coast road, I send the Italians that way, simply because the Germans can go faster through the desert, and that is what Rommel did (with the exception of some small detachments to help the Italians stay away from "reverse" on the transmissions).

Mainly, because I am trying to understand the design concepts behind TAOW, and CFNA has the best campaign PO.

I appreciate your help, and will not grub for advice on tactics[&o]. HOWEVER, as a private project, to understand the PO programming, I am considering putting together a regimental/brigade scenario with PO. Not planning on stealing your map, TO&E, OOB or anything, just some of you moxie on what made things tick.[:'(] THAT is why I keep asking the same hard questions the Rommel probably asked himself. [&:]

Real name: Bob Cross

I'm using a suedoname here because I have an ancient account still here that uses my real name that I can no longer access or inactivate. On the good side, it allows me to pay homage to my favorite general.

My article at SZO specifically concerned the Full Campaign version (and an earlier revision at that), although much of it will apply to the Desert Fox version as well. But I can assure you that I've played the Desert Fox version copiously as well, and my advice was based upon that scenario. The Desert Fox version is actually the oldest of the six, being designed first. It should be the most popular, too. It starts off easy and fun, letting players grow into it. This is in contrast to the Full Campaign, which is so difficult for both sides right off the bat. That's why I just about had to write that article.

I freely offer design advice (often whether desired or not!) as do many other designers on this and other boards. Ask away. But game playing advice is different. I'd like to limit depriving players of the rewards of figuring out on their own the optimum S&T for my scenarios, other than the occasional helpful initial push. CFNA is so radically different from any other scenario that it warrants more advice than others, but I don't want to go so far as to remove all mystery from it. General (non-scenario-specific) tactical advice, is fair, however, if you need that. Although others can do as well or better than me at that.

[TOCarroll]

[&o]Honoured to meet you. I have played CFNA more than all the others combined (or close). It is fun, and the only desert campaign scenario that really works. That is why I was interested in doing a Brigade/Regiment campaign scenario with a Programmed Opponent. Your PO is Awesome. Rommel in North Africa is the right scale, but has no PO, and Tobruk is a LOT easier to grab if you play by E-mail or hot seat. I like the way that you have worked the ebb & flow via the supply chain and shock effects, withdrawls, the list goes on......Main thing is there are not a Zillion TO's to mess with. While I certainly wouldn't want to copy your work (that would be a sacrilige), I am very impressed with the though behind it. Thank you again. [&o][&o][&o]
 
Tom OC
 
PS   My father was AF, and served under LeMay for part of WW2. He had a high opinion of the big boss too. [:)]

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll
PS   My father was AF, and served under LeMay for part of WW2. He had a high opinion of the big boss too. [:)]

My father was AF as well in WW2 (4th Fighter Group - Debden, England).

Where is LeMay now, when we need him most?