CFNA
Moderators: JAMiAM, ralphtricky
CFNA
I am about to start a game of CFNA with Marquo (Sep 1940 Start). This scenario looks superb.
However is there anything about this scenario either the Axis or Allied player should be extra wary of?
We are aware of the early game end rules, ceasefires etc.
I read some posts about RN lethality. Has this been addressed?
Bob, this is the best looking NA game I have ever seen [:)]
However is there anything about this scenario either the Axis or Allied player should be extra wary of?
We are aware of the early game end rules, ceasefires etc.
I read some posts about RN lethality. Has this been addressed?
Bob, this is the best looking NA game I have ever seen [:)]
- Curtis Lemay
- Posts: 13846
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
- Sensei.Tokugawa
- Posts: 341
- Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:06 pm
- Location: Wieluñ, Poland
RE: CFNA
Do not deploy your motorized battalions with their backs against the dunes and don't retreat towards Alexandria as CW to defend on the river Nile - it won't work. Do not put your hopes in the LRDG stay behind tactics to disrupt the Axis supply lines - it's a myth they don't get enough supplies to cross the Nile in force.
"-What if one doesn't make it?
-Then we know he was no good for SpetsNaz. ..."
V. Suvorov, "Spetsnaz;the Story behind the Soviet SAS"
...No escape from Passchendaele .../ God Dethroned, "Passiondale"
-Then we know he was no good for SpetsNaz. ..."
V. Suvorov, "Spetsnaz;the Story behind the Soviet SAS"
...No escape from Passchendaele .../ God Dethroned, "Passiondale"
- Curtis Lemay
- Posts: 13846
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
RE: CFNA
ORIGINAL: Marquo
Curtis -the article and analysis is great, thanks. Is there a list of which CW units return after being withdrawn?
Burroughs - what is LRDG?
Thanks
LRDG = Long Range Desert Group. Small commando units that can snipe on Axis rear areas.
I did make a list of reinforcement types in the scenario's associated document. Of course, the withdrawals and arrivals are listed in the Expected Reinforcement dialog.
- Curtis Lemay
- Posts: 13846
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
RE: CFNA
ORIGINAL: Marquo
The issue is that many withdrawing units do not return so disbanding doomed units to spawn as you suggest needs more Intel. Is there away to check this out in the editor or otherwise? Scrolling the list is a chore[:)]
No withdrawn units return - TOAW doesn't have that capability. What appear to "return" in some cases are duplicate units.
RE: CFNA
Bob, AFAIK the RN had no where near the influence on ground operations as it does in CFNA. I am curious why you have it in the scenario without some serious HR restrictions. It seems to be a rather large factor both players must take in to account. Yet historically the RN had very little co-operation with the ground forces in NA. I have read many books on naval warfare in the Med, and it would appear that the RN jealously guarded their independent command and there is just no way the RN commanders would have risked the loss of capital ships running bombardment missions up and down the coast on a regular basis.
They were terrified of possible U-Boat Attack and Air Attack anywhere near the coast where Axis observers (land, sea and air) may have detected them. The use of the RN in this scenario seems completely a-historical.
And if it turns out that the use of the RN in such a manner is deemed necessary for play balance I would argue would not it be better to find some other solution?
They were terrified of possible U-Boat Attack and Air Attack anywhere near the coast where Axis observers (land, sea and air) may have detected them. The use of the RN in this scenario seems completely a-historical.
And if it turns out that the use of the RN in such a manner is deemed necessary for play balance I would argue would not it be better to find some other solution?
RE: CFNA
They were terrified of possible U-Boat Attack and Air Attack anywhere near the coast
Justify that terror and base Luftwaffe AS as forward as reasonable so the Stukas don't get bounced as they make short work of the RN. RN units will reconstitute and tediously reappear to be sunk again.... It is very ahistorical but if you're Axis vs Commonwealth PO - Elmer could use the handicap. Cairo by turn 70 (2nd Scenario beginning with Rommel's arrival) is very doable.
Find 'em, Fix 'em, & Kill 'em
RE: CFNA
Curtis,
I scrolled the entire list of reinforcements and withdrawals; there are many units marked as "+" for which there is no apparent unit withdrawn. In your AAR analysis you suggest disbanding the 22 gds because it will only get annihilated; but is scheduled to return with "+" and it does. But what happens if it does get destroyed? Will the "+" clone return no matter if it is disbanded or vaporized? I mean a scheduled reinforcement cannot blocked can it; unless withdrawal is needed to trigger the return? Please explain because I cannot seem to grasp this,
Thanks
I scrolled the entire list of reinforcements and withdrawals; there are many units marked as "+" for which there is no apparent unit withdrawn. In your AAR analysis you suggest disbanding the 22 gds because it will only get annihilated; but is scheduled to return with "+" and it does. But what happens if it does get destroyed? Will the "+" clone return no matter if it is disbanded or vaporized? I mean a scheduled reinforcement cannot blocked can it; unless withdrawal is needed to trigger the return? Please explain because I cannot seem to grasp this,
Thanks
- Curtis Lemay
- Posts: 13846
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
RE: CFNA
ORIGINAL: Michael T
Bob, AFAIK the RN had no where near the influence on ground operations as it does in CFNA. I am curious why you have it in the scenario without some serious HR restrictions. It seems to be a rather large factor both players must take in to account. Yet historically the RN had very little co-operation with the ground forces in NA. I have read many books on naval warfare in the Med, and it would appear that the RN jealously guarded their independent command and there is just no way the RN commanders would have risked the loss of capital ships running bombardment missions up and down the coast on a regular basis.
They were terrified of possible U-Boat Attack and Air Attack anywhere near the coast where Axis observers (land, sea and air) may have detected them. The use of the RN in this scenario seems completely a-historical.
And if it turns out that the use of the RN in such a manner is deemed necessary for play balance I would argue would not it be better to find some other solution?
Remember that there was no Axis attempt at the pyramids until after Gazala. By then, all the Capitol ships had been knocked out of action (and will have been withdrawn in the game). So, we don't really know what would have happened if such attempts had been made prior to that. Graziani stopped at Sidi Barrani. Rommel was stuck at Tobruk. But had they really made the attempt at those points it would have put Egypt in serious danger. The CW would have had to use all available means to stop it - including the RN.
Now, I would recommend that the CW player be judicious in his use of the RN and save it for just such an emergency. But, of course, some CW players use it more - IMO - recklessly. They tend to soon find it at the bottom of the Med. But, that's wargaming. The ships were there. The CW player is the supreme commander in the Med. He can do as he wishes.
- Curtis Lemay
- Posts: 13846
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
RE: CFNA
ORIGINAL: Marquo
Curtis,
I scrolled the entire list of reinforcements and withdrawals; there are many units marked as "+" for which there is no apparent unit withdrawn. In your AAR analysis you suggest disbanding the 22 gds because it will only get annihilated; but is scheduled to return with "+" and it does. But what happens if it does get destroyed? Will the "+" clone return no matter if it is disbanded or vaporized? I mean a scheduled reinforcement cannot blocked can it; unless withdrawal is needed to trigger the return? Please explain because I cannot seem to grasp this,
Thanks
The 22 Gds that begins on the map will rebuild if it is disbanded. Later, it will be withdrawn (I forget just when). The second 22 Gds that arrives is a completely different unit and will arrive regardless of what was done with the first incarnation. Historically, it was the same unit returning. But, again, TOAW does not have a "Return Unit" event (I wish it did, but it doesn't). So, to try to account for the unit's historical return, I have a duplicate unit arriving as a new reinforcement.
- Curtis Lemay
- Posts: 13846
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
RE: CFNA
ORIGINAL: Michael T
I would think, if the RN made a habit of running up and down the North African coast bombarding pretty soon the area would have a few U-Boats loitering...
The HMS Barham was indeed sunk by a U-boat. (And that's included in the game).
RE: CFNA
Thanks for your take on it Bob, however I do disagree. I think a HR is in order. But my first few games of this scenario will be without such a HR to examine the effects.
FWIW I doubt very much that the even the C in C Med could send what would amount to suicide missions by RN capitol ships. The Admiralty simply would not allow it. The RN was not under Army command.
Even during the defence of Tobruk (supply, support, reinforcement, evacuation) nothing larger than a destroyer ever escorted the troops and there was not a single IIRC ever a bombardment mission of serious size carried out by the RN in North Africa.
The ships in the Med were there to counter the Italian Fleet. I would suggest to have the RN used in such a manner is just as improbable as having the Italian Fleet arrive to bombard Tobruk in 1941.
You could use the same argument. As Axis supreme commnader I want my Italian Navy units, but where are they?
FWIW I doubt very much that the even the C in C Med could send what would amount to suicide missions by RN capitol ships. The Admiralty simply would not allow it. The RN was not under Army command.
Even during the defence of Tobruk (supply, support, reinforcement, evacuation) nothing larger than a destroyer ever escorted the troops and there was not a single IIRC ever a bombardment mission of serious size carried out by the RN in North Africa.
The ships in the Med were there to counter the Italian Fleet. I would suggest to have the RN used in such a manner is just as improbable as having the Italian Fleet arrive to bombard Tobruk in 1941.
You could use the same argument. As Axis supreme commnader I want my Italian Navy units, but where are they?
RE: CFNA
There is nothing in the game that represents the threat of U-Boats and/or mines.
Just throwing some ideas around but perhaps some events that have a random chance of a ship being sunk by U-Boat or mine everytime they sail. Say 5% or something.
But my preference would be simply to remove them (the RN) from the game. As is you have naval power for one side and not the other.
Anyway I have made my point. I will leave it at that.
Just throwing some ideas around but perhaps some events that have a random chance of a ship being sunk by U-Boat or mine everytime they sail. Say 5% or something.
But my preference would be simply to remove them (the RN) from the game. As is you have naval power for one side and not the other.
Anyway I have made my point. I will leave it at that.
- Curtis Lemay
- Posts: 13846
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
RE: CFNA
ORIGINAL: Michael T
Thanks for your take on it Bob, however I do disagree. I think a HR is in order. But my first few games of this scenario will be without such a HR to examine the effects.
FWIW I doubt very much that the even the C in C Med could send what would amount to suicide missions by RN capitol ships. The Admiralty simply would not allow it. The RN was not under Army command.
Again, since the Axis never attempted a drive on the Pyramids before the Capitol ships were all out of action, you don't have any basis for that belief. We just don't know. If Tobruk falls in Rommel's first offensive (and it usually does) the CW will face a much more serious threat to its control of Egypt than it did after Gazala. Regardless of the chain-of-command for the RN, they have to answer to Churchill. Even if the RN objected, I think he would overrule them in that circumstance. And bombardment missions conducted at night and not too far from Alexandria would not be suicidal.
Even during the defence of Tobruk (supply, support, reinforcement, evacuation) nothing larger than a destroyer ever escorted the troops and there was not a single IIRC ever a bombardment mission of serious size carried out by the RN in North Africa.
I consider Tobruk to be too far from Alexandria for safe use of the RN, and I think the game will usually confirm that.
The ships in the Med were there to counter the Italian Fleet. I would suggest to have the RN used in such a manner is just as improbable as having the Italian Fleet arrive to bombard Tobruk in 1941.
You could use the same argument. As Axis supreme commnader I want my Italian Navy units, but where are they
The RM is too far away. If the map went all the way to Tripoli I might have included them (with another barrier, like the one that starts at Derna).
Note that the SPI game the scenario is based upon included the RN but not the RM.
- Curtis Lemay
- Posts: 13846
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
RE: CFNA
ORIGINAL: Michael T
There is nothing in the game that represents the threat of U-Boats and/or mines.
Just throwing some ideas around but perhaps some events that have a random chance of a ship being sunk by U-Boat or mine everytime they sail. Say 5% or something.
But my preference would be simply to remove them (the RN) from the game. As is you have naval power for one side and not the other.
Anyway I have made my point. I will leave it at that.
Actually, one BB (the HMS Barham) is automatically lost to U-Boat at some point.
Note that TOAW doesn't have submarines modeled in it, so there's really no way to do what you suggest. But, note that the supply model allows the Axis to attempt a drive south of the Qattara Depression - probably not that realistic (but we're working on it for the next version). Perhaps that's some compensation.
RE: CFNA
And bombardment missions conducted at night and not too far from Alexandria would not be suicidal.
One raid every blue moon sure. But start making a habit of it and pretty soon those waters would have U-Boast lurking.
Another thing, which is beyond the control of the scenario designer (only a HR could sovle this problem) is that in 1940/41 shore bombardment was very much limited (if it were to have any accuracy at all) to firing at targets with a spotter (read along the coast). To suggest a Naval unit could hit a target 30km away at night without a spotter or rader is well, ludicrous.