Map scale - taking Carentan and the Orne

[Adam Parker]

Two things that seem almost "impossible" for the Allies to accomplish (in play against the AI), is for the 6th Para to create a feasible bridgehead over the Orne through which forces at Sword may then reinforce on Turn 1-2 and for the 101st and 82nd AB to make a show of strength at Carentan against a depleted enemy as historically occurred between 11-12 June.

The German AI will usually make a massive show of force at Carentan and particularly to the south and west of Utah. Equally, any airborne presence east of the Orne and especially at Pegasus bridge, will garner AI attention sufficient to overwhelm any stand the Red Devils may try to make.

What we do know, is that the forces at Sword did make a bridgehead across the Orne at Pegasus of roughly 4km square. Could it be that if the Allies take hex 62,28 at Ranville, this task is actually being accomplished? It would appear that this toehold would only be expanded 1 further hex south-southeast towards Troarn by June 12. But the thing is, this toehold would not under normal circumstances be lost! BiN really makes it a resources gamble for the Allies to attempt containment of the same feat.

At Carentan by the same token, history appears to differ by the multi-divisional attention the AI gives the zone. Again, is it just the hex scale that makes this concentration of Axis effort appear so challenging? Was the game ever tested with Carentan not being a Victory Hex? Could that be the key for the German’s attention?

These are two very engrossing issues that always touch my play. I’ve learned that early aggression at Carentan can at times pay big dividends – especially if the 101 AB can land a regiment capable of movement adjacent to or south of the town on Turn 1.

I’ve yet however, to really learn how to make the east bank of the Orne a viable basis for operations. That said, in retrospect, it would seem that Monty faced the same dilemma and never truly overcame it; as would be evidenced by Epsom, Charnwood, Odon and Goodwood all to the west of Caen.

The Orne might therefore be both a blessing an a curse. A natural barrier providing a left flank for the besieged Commonwealth armies. Yet, at the same time, an obstacle to the desired breakout that should have commenced on D-Day itself. It was the next river along to the east, the Dives after all that should have become the entire invasion’s left buffer, with a broad killing field of the Caen plain in between.

So to the designers, my thoughts especially with Italy brewing, go to hex dimensions, quality effects on combat, nationality/quality based stacking limits and movement rates. Are any of these subjects being investigated with regard to future projects? They can all make a big difference to play of course and may plausibly affect fighting in the ruggedness of Italy as equally the tangled bocage of Normandy.

Thanks for the fun to date again,
Adam.

[Gregor_SSG]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker


So to the designers, my thoughts especially with Italy brewing, go to hex dimensions, quality effects on combat, nationality/quality based stacking limits and movement rates. Are any of these subjects being investigated with regard to future projects? They can all make a big difference to play of course and may plausibly affect fighting in the ruggedness of Italy as equally the tangled bocage of Normandy.

Thanks for the fun to date again,
Adam.

We have definitely thought about these issues. The map scale in Italy will be 4km/hex as we think this is the best fit for the unit and time scales we are using.

There are already numerous ways in which a scenario designer can reflect his estimate of the quality of various troops, apart from the obvious one of the unit quality parameter already in the game.

Stacking limits are already (in the BIN system) adjustable by country. Less capable countries could find themselves restricted to 3 units per hex, a considerable handicap. Also adjustable per country (as seen in BIN) is the number of steps needed to avoid an overrun, which could be considerably higher for some countries to reflect their relative lack of battlefield cohesion.

Also editable right now, by country, are limits on the number of artillery units that can be used per combat, and refit values, both of which can have a considerable effect on the overall combat performance of a side.

Sicily, Salerno , Anzio will have new rules introduced to account for the intermingling of German and Italian units in combat, and also to reflect differences in some nationalities commitment to the cause.

We are also paying special attention to the terrain in Italy, especially on the mainland, most of which was horribly unsuited to offensive action and posed severe logistical challenges.

It is also worth noting that in 1943 the Luftwaffe in Italy was much stronger relative to its Allied opposition than it it had become by 1944 in Normandy, so the Allied player should not expect the almost unchallenged air superiority that they have in BIN.

Gregor

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: Gregor_SSG

We have definitely thought about these issues.

Gregor

[:)] It's rare for the public to think of something that the designers haven't tried and contemplated already!

Everything you've written about the effects that can possibly balance the game/provide historical chrome sounds superb, especially the stacking limits. That would definitely have a huge effect. I wonder what its impact would have been in Normandy - in its large cities and the extremes of the bocage?

Look I trust you guys [8D] There's always a level of abstraction needed. I still wonder about the fluidity of the Germans in BiN but the final effect is historical.

Btw what texts are you recommending for Italy? I just bought the new book "Hitler's Mediterranean Gamble" and another simpler text called "Anzio".

Overall, I'm very impressed that Italy will be given its own feel, in its own right.

Adam.

[PresbyterJohn]

I'm wondering if there was a bit of a slip with BiN and the hex size. For a while there we thought the hexes were four km across. Was the unit density planned for four km hexes but we ended up getting much greater unit density and maybe this put a few things out of wack compared to the planned simulation?