Matrix Games Forums

I have set up a version that can be played as the Germans vs. Elmer controlled US VI Corps.

Anyone interested in playing/testing this? Preferably people who are familiar with the human vs. human version of the scenario though this is not a must.

A bit more information on this is available in this PDF or here: http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com/2 ... allied-po/

ORIGINAL: Telumar

I have set up a version that can be played as the Germans vs. Elmer controlled US VI Corps.

Anyone interested in playing/testing this? Preferably people who are familiar with the human vs. human version of the scenario though this is not a must.

A bit more information on this is available in this PDF or here: http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com/2 ... allied-po/

I'm interested. Send it along.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Telumar

I have set up a version that can be played as the Germans vs. Elmer controlled US VI Corps.

Anyone interested in playing/testing this? Preferably people who are familiar with the human vs. human version of the scenario though this is not a must.

A bit more information on this is available in this PDF or here: http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com/2 ... allied-po/

I'm interested. Send it along.

E-mail sent.[:)]

I'd like a copy as well, Stefan.....

Might as well keep my volumes up to date, eh?

ORIGINAL: 1_Lzard

I'd like a copy as well, Stefan.....

Might as well keep my volumes up to date, eh?

It's not so much about keeping things up to date.. rather about adding new things. It's not an update of the latest version. It's a stand-alone version. Based on the latest version, 2.36, certainly.

Anyway, check your mail!

done. thanks.....

From the expanded briefing:

"...In the first test runs Elmer always used his
engineers for repairing the damaged bridges in
the beach supply units' hexes first instead of using
them for crossing the Mussolini Canal where the
German player usually would blow all bridges.
Thus these bridges are no more damaged. The
German player however can attempt to destroy
these by air attacks..."

I take it this means that the German may not destroy the bridges over the Mussolini Canal except by air attack.

Is that the case? Can he destroy other bridges? In any event, something so important should be clearly stated.

Other notes (at first glance).

I hate 1 km/hex scenarios. However, that's obviously a matter of choice. I'll skip the objections. Try not to listen to Norwegians named Erik in the future.

Some poor English here and there. Most egregiously, the quote from Churchill is off. 'I had hoped that we are...' has to be wrong. 'Wildcat' was probably also one word.

Presumably you don't want the German to run around digging in everyone he can on turn 1. Perhaps simply have the units appear on turn 2 -- or have them in garrison and add a 'form'n orders' event to have them activated on turn 2?

The house rule about 'five first-line units' needing to guard the southeast map edge could be more clearly stated. Non-subdivided infantry or armor, I take it. How exactly would this edge be defined prior to withdrawing to the road heads? Perhaps specify to the right and below defined rows of hexes?

Here we go. This sounds more like it:

"I had hoped (that) we were hurling a wildcat onto the shore, but all we (had) got was a stranded whale"

'That' and 'had' aren't in all versions, but they sound more Churchillian, and are in the more trustworthy of the hits I scanned.

Hi!

I too would like to test your PO (and be tested by Elmer [:D]) So if you still want someone to play it, just send me at c_coriolanathotmaildotcom.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

From the expanded briefing:

"...In the first test runs Elmer always used his
engineers for repairing the damaged bridges in
the beach supply units' hexes first instead of using
them for crossing the Mussolini Canal where the
German player usually would blow all bridges.
Thus these bridges are no more damaged. The
German player however can attempt to destroy
these by air attacks..."

I take it this means that the German may not destroy the bridges over the Mussolini Canal except by air attack.

Is that the case? Can he destroy other bridges? In any event, something so important should be clearly stated.

Uh.. i should have known. Ok, it's misunderstanding. The sentence "Thus these bridges are no more damaged" refers to the previously damaged bridges over which the beach supply units traced supply to the beaches. These bridges at the beaches are no more 'destroyed'. Elmer always tried to repair them instead of using his engineers at the Mussolini Canal. You are allowed to destroy the Mussolini Canal bridges the good old way with demolitions. And you're allowed to destroy the bridges at the beaches by air attacks. I'll have to rephrase this part. Suggestions?

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
Other notes (at first glance).

I hate 1 km/hex scenarios. However, that's obviously a matter of choice. I'll skip the objections. Try not to listen to Norwegians named Erik in the future.

[:D] Hey, i didn't force you to play this one. I know about the issues btw.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
Some poor English here and there. Most egregiously, the quote from Churchill is off. 'I had hoped that we are...' has to be wrong. 'Wildcat' was probably also one word.

Ok, thanks. Feel free to correct all poor english you may encounter. I always asked for someone to correct my english in the scenario documents. If you're interested drop me a mail. Your perfectionistic attitude is welcome here. And needed. [:)]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
Presumably you don't want the German to run around digging in everyone he can on turn 1. Perhaps simply have the units appear on turn 2 -- or have them in garrison and add a 'form'n orders' event to have them activated on turn 2?

Given a shortage of event slots and as "fixed" doesn't work anymore turn 2 arrivals would be the choice. Though the effects of digging in on turn 1 should be not too serious with a reduced entrenchment rate of 70 or units digging in at rather remote places.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
The house rule about 'five first-line units' needing to guard the southeast map edge could be more clearly stated. Non-subdivided infantry or armor, I take it. How exactly would this edge be defined prior to withdrawing to the road heads? Perhaps specify to the right and below defined rows of hexes?

The Pontine Marshes.

All hexes east of the north-south arm of the Mussolini Canal and south of a line running from the bridge at 42/37 to 48/37 (Norma), including the hexes on that line.
You could also define the minor river roughly follwing this line in that area as the northern border. Use common sense for defining the northern border, i kept this a bit blurry intentionally.

ORIGINAL: Cfant2

Hi!

I too would like to test your PO (and be tested by Elmer [:D]) So if you still want someone to play it, just send me at c_coriolanathotmaildotcom.

Ihr habt Post.

ORIGINAL: Telumar


You are allowed to destroy the Mussolini Canal bridges the good old way with demolitions. And you're allowed to destroy the bridges at the beaches by air attacks. I'll have to rephrase this part. Suggestions?

Well, what you just said works. How about 'The German player may not destroy the bridges at the beaches except by air attack'? At least, that's what I now understand the situation to be.

Ok, thanks. Feel free to correct all poor english you may encounter. I always asked for someone to correct my english in the scenario documents. If you're interested drop me a mail. Your perfectionistic attitude is welcome here. And needed. [:)]

Good. Sometimes I get the impression that people think I am expecting them to implement everything I suggest. On the contrary -- somewhat unnerving if they do. I'm just throwing it out there. Hopefully, they'll consider what I just said -- but their response is entirely up to them.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Telumar


You are allowed to destroy the Mussolini Canal bridges the good old way with demolitions. And you're allowed to destroy the bridges at the beaches by air attacks. I'll have to rephrase this part. Suggestions?

Well, what you just said works. How about 'The German player may not destroy the bridges at the beaches except by air attack'? At least, that's what I now understand the situation to be.

Err. not quite. But yes, you're not allowed to destroy the beach supply bridges with land units. But, if you've pushed that far into the Allied beachhead you might no more be worried about Allied supply anymore.

This whole paragraph is about a change from the human to human version. Not about what the German player is or is not allowed to do. It's about why i didn't implement the trace supply over a superriver/destroyed bridge combination. (see chapter 3.2.3 in the Anzio 1944 v.2.36.pdf)

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Telumar
Ok, thanks. Feel free to correct all poor english you may encounter. I always asked for someone to correct my english in the scenario documents. If you're interested drop me a mail. Your perfectionistic attitude is welcome here. And needed. [:)]

Good. Sometimes I get the impression that people think I am expecting them to implement everything I suggest. On the contrary -- somewhat unnerving if they do. I'm just throwing it out there. Hopefully, they'll consider what I just said -- but their response is entirely up to them.

Is that now a yes i can take a look into this or is this an attempt to slip away from such a lector's/corrector's task..?[:D]

ORIGINAL: Telumar

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Telumar


You are allowed to destroy the Mussolini Canal bridges the good old way with demolitions. And you're allowed to destroy the bridges at the beaches by air attacks. I'll have to rephrase this part. Suggestions?

Well, what you just said works. How about 'The German player may not destroy the bridges at the beaches except by air attack'? At least, that's what I now understand the situation to be.

Err. not quite. But yes, you're not allowed to destroy the beach supply bridges with land units. But, if you've pushed that far into the Allied beachhead you might no more be worried about Allied supply anymore.

Your 'err not quite' is continuing to confuse me. Are there any bridges other than the beach supply ones that I shouldn't blow up even if it seems like a good idea?

I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that there are too many units.  I'd say go with battalion/company rather than company/platoon.

It's a pain to move them all, of course, but that's not what moved me to comment.  What brought it on was that I now have nine units holding 'the factory' -- and there isn't even a density light.  So...AT batteries and such out -- we only take infantry companies in this location.

Equally seriously, what will happen is that I'll be able to execute 'stacking encirclements.'  Jam up the available hexes for retreat with often-subdivided junk -- then smash the stack thus 'cut off.'  Never mind that the nine units 'blocking' its retreat might only total thirty squads, a dozen mortars, and seven trucks -- no room to squeeze in. 

The scenario will be better if some units are combined. 

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

There are definitely too many units.  I'd say go with battalion/company rather than company/platoon.

It's a pain to move them all, of course, but that's not what moved me to comment.  What brought it on was that I now have nine units holding 'the factory' -- and there isn't even a density light.  So...AT batteries and such out -- we only take infantry companies in this location.

Equally seriously, what will happen is that I'll be able to execute 'stacking encirclements.'  Jam up the available hexes for retreat with often-subdivided junk -- then smash the stack thus 'cut off.'  Never mind that the nine units 'blocking' its retreat might only total thirty squads, a dozen mortars, and seven trucks -- no room to squeeze in. 

The scenario will be better if some units are combined.  I promise.

I see. This has not been a problem in human vs human. With battalions i won't go, the map is too big to cover all the ground.

What can be done is to distribute the ATk platoon equipment among the companies of the British battalions. The Br.Brigades' and US regimental supply units could be dissolved. US regimental cannon companies could be merged with Regt HQ. The recon platoons dissolved. But i am hesistant in distributing regimental AT companies' equipment among the infantry companies (1 57mm piece each).

Elmer's artillery could be combined into battalions. At least some of it.

I also observed that Elmer is obsessed with dividing all the commando and airborne units. I will make them section sized with a modded numbers.bmp/.png.

I have set Combat Density Penalty to 200, it seems the engine doesn't reflect that visually with density markers.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright


Your 'err not quite' is continuing to confuse me. Are there any bridges other than the beach supply ones that I shouldn't blow up even if it seems like a good idea?

You may blow all you can and wish. Except the Beach Supply bridges.

Here are a couple of more comments. These are definitely things I'm throwing out there as opposed to actual recommendations.

The MRPB or whatever it is set to three -- and Allied force proficiency is 80%. This ensures against early turn ending -- and perhaps allows the Allies to stage exactly the kind of swift exploitation they so conspicuously failed to carry out.

There's nothing wrong with early turn ending. It's supposed to happen. Without knowing too much about Anzio, I'd be inclined to set the MRPB to 99 and Allied force proficiency to 40 while leaving German force proficiency high. That should produce Allied attacks that frequently stumble -- and create openings for those sudden, vicious counterattacks the Germans seem to have specialized in.

Road/railroads ala Operation Exporter. This scenario looks like a natural for this. Between the modest rail capacity and the generous supply radius, it's not too important that the only rails be real rails -- and I suspect that while they have trucks in the scenario, all those Fallschirmjager weren't motorized so much as they were able to call up rides when they needed them.

On the other hand, being 'motorized,' they can't operate in the badland hexes. Not many German units can.

To what extent the Allies actually rode while in battle is also something that I'm suspicious about. Therefore, the device of roadrails and a 'rail' capacity could perhaps also be applied to them with profit. That the turn length is only half a day is a further argument, as I doubt if it was usual for units to embuss, move, debuss, and fight, all before lunch. Perhaps Panzergrenadiers, but not, as a rule, ordinary line infantry companies.

Gotta admit: the P.O. here is pretty tough. In fact, at the moment it's kicking my butt. I've been playing pretty sloppily, but normally, the P.O. is what's for dinner.

A couple of additional thoughts.

Did the US actually use its flak in an offensive, ground combat role? I noticed some US flak units leading the way in the advance down in the southwest.

On the Mussolini Canal bridges, maybe you could get the Allies to repair them if the relevant units received a new formation track that sent them to those bridges and only those bridges once the Allies had advanced far enough. That'd take some events, but...

Colin,

I've only played the earlier versions of Anzio 1KM, but re 'too many units' - I suggest you wait a few turns. By then, paraphrasing Roy Schneider, "you're gonna need a lot more units".

And watch those replacement cycles -- both sides run out of eqp sooner than they would want.

Good to see someone as experienced and detailed as you, digging in on this, and I think your suggestion about motorizing supply ala OPEX is very good. Because supply (in 3.4...) becomes a problem for both sides.

Oh, and if you need any stumbling Allied attacks, let me know -- I have a few hundred failed assaults from earlier games against Telumar available for borrowing.