Updated Public Beta BftB v4.4.262 Now Available!

[Phoenix100]

IMO, there should to be a scripted orders delay for the Axis -- for about 24 hours -- to simulate the shock of the operation and to give the Brit paras a better chance of getting into Arnhem.
Very easy to script those delays into the scenario with the scenmaker, Joe D. You know that, and know how? If not then say and I can tell you.

[Tophat1815]

The Germans had until Model finished his soup before SS were springing into action on day one.

[Arjuna]

Kraft Bn was moving within the first hour. Other SS elements within the first two hours. It is very difficult because it was very difficult. If you drop 12km from your objective and are on foot, it's going to take you 6 hours to get to the objective. If the enemy is 12km from the objective as is motorised it's going to take him at the most 1 hour. Even with a four hour delay, he's usually going to beat you to the objective.

The post mortem conducted by the Brits after the battle probably hit the nail on the head "too little, too far".

[Phoenix100]

Plus many of the Axis units had just done drills dealing with just this eventuality - a para drop. So, yes, they were quick off the mark, especially in Arnhem.

[jimcarravall]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

. , ,

Well, I tried favor Allies; it helped to a small extent, but the improved Axis AI makes any headway almost impossible.

IMO, there should to be a scripted orders delay for the Axis -- for about 24 hours -- to simulate the shock of the operation and to give the Brit paras a better chance of getting into Arnhem.

BTW, the two ferries near Pannenden on the lower East end of the map allow units to cross as if they were superhighways!

A sampling of the scenario unit data for both command and line units indicates the Allied units were better quality troops, entered the battle with higher morale, but had slightly lower leadership qualities compared with available Axis units. Those unit attributes would translate into more responsive reaction to human orders and slightly less responsive downstream command and control AI reaction within the Allied on ground units than would be possible using AI on the Axis side. Basically, Axis AI C2 decisions are made slightly quicker but the troops are slower to react once those decisions are communicated as orders.

Historically, the issues the Allies faced were poorer intelligence on the Axis ground forces available to react to Arnheim's defense, a lack of flexibility in addressing changes to the plan at the higher headquarters level once the attack was initiated (radio communication was poor, resulting in issues with supply and potential reinforcement schedule changes), and an overly optimistic plan for the XXXth's progress toward relieving the airborne forces once landed with only air transport supplies available until the ground units could provide relief to fatigued troops and open a more stable supply line.

I don't necessarily disagree with a scripted orders delay, but believe it's a more artificial means of addressing the issues of morale, training, troop status, personnel / equipment fill status, unit cohesion, command quality, and the like to reflect unit / side capabilities and responsiveness that makes the game so rich in terms of realistic response.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

Kraft Bn was moving within the first hour. Other SS elements within the first two hours. It is very difficult because it was very difficult ...

Would giving non-SS units an orders delay be worth the trouble?

As I posted, the scenario is by no means ahistorical, but IMO, there should be enough play balance for the possibility of at least some limited success, which was certainly the case for the Red Devil's scenario in the original release (that I still own, BTW).

After all, didn't Monty say Market Garden was 90% successful, but has any Beta player even obtained a "draw"? If so, I'd love to see the ARR.

I've always compared Op Market Garden to an old Christmas tree light series circuit: one bulb (bridge) goes out and the entire operation goes dark.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah

A sampling of the scenario unit data for both command and line units indicates the Allied units were better quality troops, entered the battle with higher morale, but had slightly lower leadership qualities compared with available Axis units ...

I wonder why since the bios of many of the Brit commanders in the scenario was very favorable.

[jimcarravall]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah

A sampling of the scenario unit data for both command and line units indicates the Allied units were better quality troops, entered the battle with higher morale, but had slightly lower leadership qualities compared with available Axis units ...

I wonder why since the bios of many of the Brit commanders in the scenario was very favorable.

The quality of the Brit commanders might depend on who wrote their biographies , or to whom their status is compared.

Discussing the attributes of different commanders in isolation of some form of common experience is what makes it historically irritating that Patton never faced against Rommel or that Montgomery didn't battle Rommel with similar supply, force size, and troop quality constraints.

What I saw made sense to me based on the history leading to the battle.

I checked at the division level, and brigade level, and at one or two unit levels. In general the British brigade commander numbers were better than the division numbers and the division numbers on the Axis side matched those of the British brigade commanders.

You'd tend to get better operational AI decisions from the Axis forces than AI would make for British forces.

My guess is though both forces essentially fought for the same number of years, the SS Panzer divisions had seen almost constant action on both fronts in the war (other than transport and retrofit) while the airborne division tended to be pulled out of action relatively soon after it achieved its operational goals and spent as time in retrofitting and training as the Axis forces were in combat operations.

Real time combat participation tends to improve soldier, staff, and commander quality, as long as the "training" doesn't end up in that a commander's / soldier's death.

The the German army had been fighting a long term delay strategy in Russia by the time HttR took place, so I'd expect an Axis commander to be a little more skilled at reacting to the attack on Arnhem at that time.

As far as individual unit quality, the British line units tended to have higher response and morale attributes. Makes sense because the retrofit of the Panzer divisions included putting new conscripts or reassigning veterans from disbanded / downsized units into existing units.

Strategic operations causing production shortfalls, and the meatgrinder combat on the Russian front trading Soviet lives for German lives, the Axis was shrinking the size and organization of "Panzer" divisions to define a standard structure with less equipment and fewer personnel to maintain a similar unit quantity which masked decreases in individual unit strength.

Personnel showing up at the retrofit site may not have had combat experience or possess the same morale as those who had already be lost to combat. There are soldiers who are content to live out their conscription / career out of the combat zone). Makes sense that the overall troop quality in the retrofitted units was lower.

All that said, keep in mind I didn't create the scenario. The designer may have assigned the attributes to the involved forces "just because" .

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: jimcarravallah

The the German army had been fighting a long term delay strategy in Russia by the time HttR took place, so I'd expect an Axis commander to be a little more skilled at reacting to the attack on Arnhem at that time ...

That may apply to battle-hardened Panzer elite SS units, but the German forces at Arnhem were a mixed bag of trainees, garrison and prison camp guards and even naval units.

There just has to be a way to make this scenario more playable for the Allied opponent without altering historical reality.

[Arjuna]

IMO the Allies could have achieved success at Arnhem and the whole Market Garden operation if they had changed just a few things.

First they should have dropped closer and accepted the risk of higher casualties on drop/landing. Second they should have conducted a second lift on the first day - ie one in the early morning and a second late in the afternoon. This was possible. They had considered it but decided not to overtax the air crew. There are others but I must go.

[Bazza042]

First they should have dropped closer and accepted the risk of higher casualties on drop/landing. Second they should have conducted a second lift on the first day - ie one in the early morning and a second late in the afternoon. This was possible. They had considered it but decided not to overtax the air crew. There are others but I must go.

You've hit the nail on the head there.

Quite why Garden didn't begin until 13.30 remains a mystery to this day. The air commanders ran their part of the
operation to meet their own needs: the client's ('army') needs came a poor second. Paul William's decsion not
to 'allow' a second 'drop on 17th, although 38 Group were willing to do so, didn't help, whilst Browning decsion to'commandeer' 38 precious gliders to take his, completely ineffectual, Corps HQ into the Nijmegen area was beyond idiotic. He then proceeded to compound the issue by ordering Gavin to secure the Grosbeek heights before assaulting the bridges, so the 82nd, as with the British, initially assaulted the objective with a single battalion. Although not often referenced you can see that Gavin's 'drop' area was some 6Km from his main objective as compared with Urquhart's 8Km, so neither were exacly close..... And you can go on.

This is not to say that the land commanders were perfect but the fundamental problem was that the Allies totally underestimated the German's ability to recover. On the Tuesday, and probably, the Wednesday the operation was 'do-able' (although - of course - the operation couldn't have been planned within this timescale) By Sunday it almost certainly, wasn't. Throw in bits of bad 'luck': Model's immediate presence on the scene; two, although very depleted, SS armoured divisions; Krafft's battalions being in exactly the right (wrong?) place having been ejected from Oosterbeck to make way for Model's HQ a few days before and you've got a disaster in the making.
Balanced it certainly wasn't!

The problem with all, including board, games of 'Arnhem/MG' is that it is difficult (impossible?) to devise a system that will allow the British to get just the historical amount of strength into Arnhem. Either they don't get there at all or almost the whole division arrives! Probably a scenario that starts with Frost's battalion with the odds and ends, already present at the bridge is about the only solution but that means that some of the 'drops' and the initial moves by the Germans, have already taken place which removes a lot of the interest.....

It's probably impossible to game - you can adjust the 'objectives' to an extent but if fundamentally you are getting hammered throughout (as Allies) or marching inexorably forward, its probably not going to be that enjoyable.

[Phoenix100]

I have tampered with From the Meuse to the Rhine to create a scenario that fulfills one of Dave's ideas above - namely drops closer to the targets (I've weaked some forces to account for the higher losses possibility). I've stuck to the historical drop schedule. Historically, they used all their planes, more or less, and the logistics of putting in two huge armadas in one day are not to be shrugged off, I believe. But from playing the scenario altered to represent a really strong coup de main on each of Nijmegan and Arnhem bridges (and, crucially, with SEPs moved to supply the coup de main forces) I think it's definitely winnable against the AI (maybe not in MP - [;)]). It's interesting to play through. I've also stuck to the dogma they had of not landing gliders on polder on day 1 (until they could physically scout the polder would take gliders). I could post it, post patch 4 final, maybe, if anyone was interested in playing it through. You can have great fun in the scenmaker messing with things like this. It's very easy. Great tool, Dave.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Bazza042

The problem with all, including board, games of 'Arnhem/MG' is that it is difficult (impossible?) to devise a system that will allow the British to get just the historical amount of strength into Arnhem. Either they don't get there at all or almost the whole division arrives! Probably a scenario that starts with Frost's battalion with the odds and ends, already present at the bridge is about the only solution but that means that some of the 'drops' and the initial moves by the Germans, have already taken place which removes a lot of the interest.....

IMO, having Frost's Bn already in place and seeing how long the Allied player keep them in Arnhem before reinforcements arrive, if ever, should compensate for any lost interest.

[Andrew Loveridge]

This has been updated for v4.4.262 with the file also available here, on the FTP.

[Phoenix100]

Thanks Andrew - but I thought it was going to be the final? Not so?

[captskillet]

they public beta all the patches even the ones that are the final build...........great stuff Dave, cant wait for the COTA stuff!

[vj531]

Just downloaded from members v4.4.262

Got this error

[BigDuke66]

Well well I thought there were no more betas coming and that the latest changes would go into a final patch?
Anyhow I'm glad that it didn't go like that, we simply have to have a beta that is OK and this one can than be turned into a final patch.

@sharper
Do it manually if you really need it(check in the game folder the folder "redist"), but I think once it is installed you don't have to reinstall again.

[vj531]

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Well well I thought there were no more betas coming and that the latest changes would go into a final patch?
Anyhow I'm glad that it didn't go like that, we simply have to have a beta that is OK and this one can than be turned into a final patch.

@sharper
Do it manually if you really need it(check in the game folder the folder "redist"), but I think once it is installed you don't have to reinstall again.

What is "redist" BD66?

It all looks present and correct.

[BigDuke66]

I mean vcredist_x86_2010.exe is in the "redist" folder in your game folder, just in case you want to start it manually.