Alan R. Arvold's Ode to Divided Ground

[Crossroads]

DESIGN NOTES FOR BATTLE OF JENIN 1967

By Alan R. Arvold


The battle of Jenin 1967 scenario was originally created by Abu Ben Kappely (alias of Wyatt Kappely who was the chief playtester for Divided Ground). The scenario itself was an combination of the first two scenarios of the 1967 Linked Campaign Game (both the Israeli and Jordanian versions) by Edwin Conmy. It was one of the large scenarios and it was not part of the original game. Instead it was an independent scenario that was posted on Games Depot. However there were errors in the scenario. There was an error in the map that was corrected in the Divided Ground 1.04 Patch. The orders of battles were based on the those in the Linked Campaign Game, modified by changes in both the Israeli and Jordanian unit organizations posted in the 1.02 Patch, but not those included in the 1.03, 1.04, and 2.0 Patches. Thus I resolved to update this scenario some years ago using the information from these later patches.


Mapsheet

The map sheet was a combination of the mapsheets of the first two scenarios of the Linked Campaign Game. This was not hard as there was considerable overlap between the two mapsheets. These mapsheets were based on the British War Office map series of 1960. The maps of the West Bank were made in the early 1950s. One notable item that was missing from them was the abandoned railroad that runs through the area. Because the railroad was largely useless both Kappely and Conmy never put it on the maps. But it is a viable terrain feature so I added it in. Note that the absence of bridges on the railroad, except in one spot, is deliberate. The Jordanians destroyed the bridges in their area to prevent the Israelis from using it as means to enter Samaria after the 1947-49 War for Independence.


Orders of Battles

The orders of battle for both sides were largely unchanged except for additions mandated by the order of battles in the later Divided Ground patches. I did make one important change. The Jordanian overall commander was Brigadier el Jaza. But he was also the commander of the 40th Armored Brigade. Upon his arrival in the Jenin area he was put in charge of all Jordanian forces in the area. Thus he had to put his deputy commander in charge of the brigade and he took part of the brigade headquarters to make an ad hoc divisional command structure. This is why the Jordanian division headquarters has a strength of one (1) and the 40th Armored Brigade's headquarter unit is of reduced strength of two (2).


Scenario

The scenario itself is largely unchanged from the original author's design. The only real difference is Israeli reinforcement schedule in the Divided Ground and Middle East versions. Players will find that some of the later arriving infantry units may arrive a turn earlier in the Middle East version than in the Divided Ground. This is because of the difference in the carrying capacity of transport units between the two game. (Divided Ground still has the old system where one strength point of transport carries one strength point of infantry whereas Middle East uses the newer system where a strength point of transport carries two strength points of infantry.) But this will only affect a few Israeli companies.


Conclusion

I hope that Middle East players enjoy this scenario. See if you can change history and stop the Israelis from conquering Jenin.

[Crossroads]

DESIGN NOTES FOR THE BATTLE OF RAFAH SOUTH

By Alan R. Arvold


Rafah South was one of the original scenarios that came with the Divided Ground game. Designed by Edwin (Mick) Comny, it depicted the part of the battle of Rafah, south of the Rafah road junction. Like most scenarios in the game, it was designed in a hurry to meet the accelerated release date for the game, and as such, was filled with errors. I largely ignored this scenario as I designed the larger Battle of Rafah 1967 scenario which depicts the whole battle, including the southern part as depicted in Rafah South. But as I am converting every Divided Ground scenario to Middle East, I had to deal with this scenario sooner or later. So here goes.


Mapsheet

The mapsheet, as with all other ones in the Divided Ground scenarios, are based on the 1960 British War Office series of the Middle East. As is well known, the maps of the Sinai Peninsula was made during World War II. It definitely shows in the Rafah South mapsheet. The Rafah-Nitzana Road is depicted on the map as an unpaved road. Yet it was well known that the road was paved in 1967. I did not change it as I wanted to keep as much as Comny's original design as possible. The area is far more sandy than on my map, but I guess it is a matter of how one interprets the terrain on the map.


Order of Battles

Comny's original order of battle for this scenario can be summed up in one word, crappy. While he did get the major units correct, their internal organization left much to be desired. The Egyptian infantry units had no support weapons what so ever, just plain infantry. The tank units had no headquarter platoons and he used the basic generic large size platoons for the individual tank and anti-tank gun units, he did not pare them down to their historical proper strength. He had a brigade's worth of artillery under one battalion headquarters. I had to create a brigade structure for the artillery, fortunately the Egyptian 49th Artillery Brigade was historically deployed in the area so I used its structure as my guide. The anti-tank guns I reduced from a strength of four each to two each. This gives the anti-tank battalion a total strength of 18 guns, not 36 as Comny gave them. The JS 3 tank and SU-100 tank destroyer units which were at five and four strength points I lowered to three strength points each and I gave the tank units their respective HQ tank units. Now one would think that I am robbing the Egyptians of some of their anti-tank potential but I made up for it by giving the Egyptian infantry their support weapons which include 85mm anti-tank guns, 107mm recoilless guns and 82mm recoilless guns.

The Israeli force was not much better. The infantry received their support weapons though in this case it meant just machine gun and mortar units. The tanks received their headquarter platoon units and the Baron Force which reorganized to its historical composition. I also corrected the units numerical designations to their historical ones.


Scenario

I kept the scenario largely as is. It did make some adjustments in certain unit locations for the Egyptians, mostly to accommodate the support and headquarter units I brought in in my OB adjustments. One change that I did not make was the deletion of the 33rd National Guard Battalion. Historically this battalion was defending the city of El Arish during the battle so its presence in the scenario is an aberration. For that reason I gave this scenario an HISB rating as the scenario type in Middle East. But this scenario is Comny's, not mine, and I want to keep his essence to make it different from my Rafah 1967 scenario. I feel that it would have been a better scenario if Comny had more time to complete it. Even with all the correction that I made, the scenario still has a strongly Pro-Arab flavor. The main problem is that Comny only gave the Israelis two battalions instead of a brigade plus worth of troops and weak artillery support. Its only saving feature is that it is shorter in length than my Rafah 1967 scenario, so players who do not have time for my scenario could consider this one to be a suitable alternative.

[Crossroads]

Three new 1948 scenarios added to the Scenario Pack! Thank you Alan [&o]

26 March, 1948
[Gush Etzion, West Bank]: [H2H] [HIS] [GD]:
Under the November 29, 1947 United Nations partition plan, the Etzion bloc of settlements were to be included in the new Palestinian Arab state. Its settlers however, were determined to keep the Arabs from obtaining their land before the May 15, 1948 expiration of the British Mandate. In this they were fully backed by the Jewish national leadership. If the Etzion settlements, deep in Arab territory, were successfuly defended it would provide a psychological boost to other Jewish communities, themselves outnumbered by hostile forces and facing similar dangers. Accordingly, a large armored convoy was sent from Jerusalem bringing reinforcements and supplies. It met only minor resistance on the road south to Etzion. Upon reaching its destination, inevitable delays were encountered in unloading and preparing for the trip back. Among these were difficulties in loading the settlement's prize stud bull, Zimri, being sent away for safe keeping. By the time the convoy started north again, the local Arab militia was alerted and mobilizing. The return journey to Jerusalem would face much greater hazards. This is a revision of the original scenario by Edwin "Mick" Conmy. [1.02]

19 May, 1948
[Jerusalem, West Bank]: [H2H] [HIS] [GD]:
With the end of the British Mandate and the immediate declaration of the State of Israel. Jerusalem become the focal point of the War for Independence. The cultural and religious significance of the city toboth sides was enormous. The Old City of Jerusalem, the ancient capital of the first Jewish nation, was the site of their most sacred temple. A remnant of the temple's outer structure, the Western or Wailing Wall, was still an object of deep religious devotion. At one time, Jerusalem had also been the holiest of Islamic places. The early Moslems prayed in the direction of the ancient city in which was built, on the ruines of the Jewish Temple, a beautiful shrine known as the Dome of the Rock. In the middle of May 1948, the situation for the Jewish Quarter of the Old City was grim. Cut off from the Jewish stronghold in the New City to the west, their positions were being slowly reduced by Arab irregular forces. Worse, the British-led Arab Legion had crossed the Jordan River and was fast approaching the city. Desperate circumstances called for a desperate plan. The Palmach's Harel Brigade, which had been fighting in the Jerusalem corridor for weeks and was severely depleted, would make a secondary attack on Mount Zion. The Irgun and Stern Gang, radical Zionist splinter groups, reluctantly agreed to create a diversion at Herod's Gate. An engineer team was to use demolitions to smach through the Jaffa Gate at the foot of the Citadel, then the main assault by an Etzioni Brigade company would break through to relieve the embattled Jewish Quarter. The thick walls of the Old City, as they had many times in history, would once again be stormed in battle. This is a revision of the original scenario by Edwin "Mick" Conmy. [1.02]


18 October, 1948
[Faluga, Israel]: [H2H] [HIS] [GD]:
The goal of Operation Yoav - The Ten Plagues - was to open a supply route south to the Negev. To do this the Israelis planned to break through the right flank of the Egyptian Army which extended from the Egyptian base on the coast eastwards tthrough Faluga. Operation Yoav would see the largest concentration of Israeli forces to date, elements of four different brigades backed by the weak armored formations of the 8th "Old Man's" Brigade, would participate in the attack. Supporting them would an unprecidented barrage of artillery, both 65mm and 75mm field pieces along with light, medium, and heavy mortars. In defense was the Egyptian 1st Infantry Brigade, headquartered in Faluga, with its battalions dug in on important objectives. Among these were the crossroads known as "the Junction" in the north, the Huleikat Hills to the south, and commanding the Negev Road, the police fortress at Iraq Suedan. Previous failed attempts to assault this fort caused the Israelis to refer to it as "The Monster on the Hill". Among the Egyptian officers in the Faluga "pocket" was Major Gamel Nasser, future leader of the United Arab Republic. This is a revision of the original scenario by Edwin Conmy. [1.02]

[demyansk]

Hi, I have the map pack but which download do I do again for the new scenarios? THanks

[Crossroads]

There is a download link in the Opening Post, for the (so far) complete scenario pack. I keep adding to the zip archive, so just download the whole thing again as new scenarios become available.

[Crossroads]

More 1948 scenarios added to the scenario pack

A Cruel Khamsin Wind

25 May, 1948 [Latrun, West Bank]: [H2H] [HIS] [GD]:

The Arab Legion was making slow but steady advances towards the Old City. Supplies and reinforcements were urgently needed but the road to Jersulaem was blocked by Arab Legion positions around Latrun. The Israeli General Staff, knowing that the fall of the Old City would have untold effects on the morale of the fledgling nation, formed a new brigade to attack the Latrun stronghold from the west and open the corridor to Jerusalem. The 7th Mechanized Brigade, like many other Israeli units, was an ad-hoc formation and was based on a small mechanized battalion (the 73rd) equipped with halftracks which were recently arrived in the country, and a motly collection of armored cars captured from the enemy. A second battalion (the 71st) was scraped together from various training cadres while a third (the 72nd) was formed using recently arrived immigrants from various European countries. The 7th Mechanized Brigade was given a bare minimum of time to organize and plan Operation Ben-Nun and faced a daunting frontal assault against a solidly entrenched, well led, 4th Arab Legion which was supported by the 3rd Arab Legion Brigade artillery assets and various Jordanian and Palestinian irregulat units.

The 32nd Infantry Battalion, from the Israeli 3rd Alexandroni Infantry Brigade, was attached and tasked to make the main assault against the Latrun fortress. What few vehicles from the 73rd Mechanized Battalion that could be made ready in time wee to provide support from the rear. The 72nd Infantry Battalion was to move south of Latrun and then wheel north to clear the heights overlooking the Jerusalem road for the supply column waiting near Hulda to make the journey to Jerusalem. The Israeli operation was already risky enoungh with a planned night attack and became even riskier when zero hour was delayed and the attack had to begin at dawn. The day would see an agonizing heat borne from a cruel Khamsin Wind from Arabia and with it, clouds of biting black mosquitoes. This is a revision of the original scenario by Edwin "Mick" Conmy. [1.02]


Fatih Allah

10 June, 1948 [Mishmar, Hayardan, Israel]: [H2H] [HIS] [GD]:

The Israeli settlement at Mishmar Hayardan controlled a vital entry into Palestine, the Bridge of Jacob's Daughters. These since antiquity, the Via Maris, a thoroughfare from Egypt to Damascus that was built by the Romans, crossed the Jordan River. Despite its strategic location, Mishmar Hayardan was unprepared for the Syrian attacks which began on the morning of June 6th, 1948. While it and other settlements in the Finger of Galilee were extensively pounded with artillery, Syrian units forced the Jordan River and advanced west towards the north-south road connecting the Finger of Galilee to Tiberias and other points south. The Syrians failed in crossing their armor to the west bank and their attack was repulsed. The Syrians pulled back across the Jordan River to reorganize and reinforce.

Two brigades were assembled for the renewed attack. The lead brigade (the 2nd Infantry) would ford the Jordan River again, acting as the spearhead, while the follow up brigade (the 4th Infantry) would exploit the breakthrough. The Syrian objective was to drive a wedge across the Finger, cutting it off from the rest of Israel, before the anticipated truce froze the opposing forces in place.

The Israeli 9th Oded Infantry Brigade was defending the area and though supported by the various militias from the local settements, was short of arms, ammunition, and men. Reinforcements from the Israeli 2nd Carmeli Infantry Brigade were sent to bolster the 9th Brigade's defense, but before they could arrive and have a chance to strengthen the positions, the decisive Syrian thrust was launched early on the morning of June 10th. This is a revision
of the original scenario by Edwin "Mick" Conmy. [1.02]


Never Go Far

10 July, 1948 [Lydda, West Bank]: [H2H] [HIS] [GD]:

When it became apparent that the truce would not be extended, the fate of Jerusalem was uppermost on the minds of the Israeli leaders. Their plan, Operation Dani, called for the envelopment of the strategic towns of Lydda and Ramle which were located between the southern flank of the Iraqi force at Majdal Yaba and the Arab Legion strongholds around Latrun. Success would give the Israelis control of the Lydda air and rail facilities and establish better positions from which to continue the offensive in the vital Latrun-Jerusalem corridor. Lydda and Ramle were defended by local Arab forces, well fortified and bolstered by small independent Arab Legion detachments, but the defenses were oriented against an attack from Tel Aviv to the northwest. Operation Dani designated the Israeli 8th Armored Brigade to penetrate in the north while the 11th Yiftach Infantry Brigade would assault from the south. This pincers were to meet at the village of Ben Shemen before jointly attacking Lydda-Ramle from the east. The 11th Infantry Brigade, beginning its movement first, fought its way to Ben Shemen the following afternoon.

The commander of the lead unit, the 3rd Infantry Battalion, decided to attack Lydda alone rather then wait for the 8th Armored Brigade, which was being delayed by Arab Legion mechanized forces in the Beir Naballa area to the norrtheast. After encountering stiff resistance on the outskirts of the town, the 3rd Battalion sent a signal to the 8th Armored for armor reinforcements. In the confusion of the battle this call was not received by the 8th
Brigade's headquarters, but instead by its light 89th Mechanized Battalion.The 89th's one-eyed commander, Lt Col Moshe Dayan, abandoned his unit's supporting position at Deir Tarif to race his jeeps and halftracks to the assistance of the 3rd Infantry Battalion. Led by a lone armored car nick-named "The Terrible Tiger", the 89th ripped through Lydda in a flying column, firing in all directions, then continued west to Ramle where its suprise appearance stunned the defenders. Learning that an Arab Legion armored reinforcements were being sent from Latrun, the 89th retraced its route, fighting its way through Lydda again. The shock of these audacious attacks allowed the 3rd Infantry Battalion
to subdue the Lydda defenses. Ranle, now surrounded, surrendered without a fight the next day. Historical note: The 8th Armored Brigade's commander, commenting on the 89th's unauthorized attack which allowed the Arab Legion to gain temperary control of Dier Tarif, said that such disobedience to orders indicated that the 89th's commander would "never go far" in the Israeli Army. Moshe Dayan's subsequent career proved that prediction to be way off the mark. This is a revision of the original scenario by Edwin "Mick" Conmy. [1.02]

---

Bootcamp Missions + Bootcamp Manual

Available both with a Mediterranean and Desert maps:

Bootcamp Mission 1 / Bootcamp Mission 1a

15 October, 1948 [Fictional Terrain]: [Side A] [FIC] [GD]:

Brigade Intel has determined that the area around Emanual Aldam is the weak point in the Egyptian lines. Take "Gimel" Company and clear out the road leading toward the town of Sinat. Your imediate objective is the hamlet of Barot.
Reports indicate that it is weakly held. Hopefully you will be able to secure your objective with little loss. This is a revision of the original scenario by Matthew Kreager.[1.02]


Bootcamp Mission 2 / Bootcamp Mission 2a

17 October, 1948 [Fictional Terrain]: [Side A] [FIC] [GD]:

After you captured Sinat, Intellignece has learned of a major effort to reinforce Chanting. In light of this situation, you are ordered to attack with "Aleph" Company and capture the town before enemy reinforcements have arrived. By the way, some "heavy Weapons" units are on the way, and will probably arrive witthin the hour. Keep your losses light, we do not want to be sending too many letters home. Move out! This is a revision of the original scenario by Matthew Kreager. [1.02]


Bootcamp Mission 3 / Bootcamp Mission 3a

19 October, 1948 [Fictional Terrain]: [Side A] [FIC] [GD]:

Driving the Egyptians out of Chanting and that village was no easy task. Luckily the night passed without incident. Your men should be well rested. We do not believe that you will be blessed with quiet for much longer, however. Reconnaissance reports that Egyptians are approaching your position from the north. It is imperative that your and yur men hold onto the village. The old man is already on the radio trying to round up some reinforcements to send your way. Look for "Beth" Company to arrive, but it will be a half hour until they can move out. In the meantime, give "em hell'! We have confidence that you will be able to hold out. This is a revision of the original scenario by Matthew Kreager. [1.02]

---

Please re-download the scenario pack from the Opening Post for some top new gaming enjoyment! Thank you Alan [:)]

[Big Ivan]

Crossroads,

You and Mr. Arvold are like 24-7, 365 Santa Clauses!!![&o][&o][&o]

Thanks loads for your hard work and sharing!

Big Ivan[:D]

[Crossroads]

Gotta keep them coming [:)]

Thanks Big Ivan!

[berto]

By my reckoning, at latest count, CSME now has 227 scenarios. [X(] 121 of them by Alan! [&o]

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: Crossroads

More 1948 scenarios added to the scenario pack

I had missed adding the Design Notes for another 1948 scenario that was added at the time, so here goes:

DESIGN NOTES FOR BLOODY EPIPHANY By Alan R. Arvold

Bloody Epiphany was originally a scenario created by Peter Hickman for Divided Ground. It was not part of the original game nor was part of the official updates or patches. It was instead an original scenario that was posted on the now-defunct Games Depot website. Now at first it looked like a great scenario, especially in its hypothetical concept. But as I studied it further I found several errors in its execution. For one thing both sides had a shortage of leaders. For another thing was a poor command and control structure in the order of battle for both sides. There were also errors in the set up of both sides on the board. Various level headquarters were located in the same hex, something that would not happen in real life. A lot of battalion headquarters were holding a place in the front line. There were gaps in the front of both sides. Within several battalion set up areas there were company subordinate units that were mixed up with each other in the set up hexes, so you have examples like a company that has one platoon set up seven hexes away in another company's area or and isolated company size force that has three platoons, each from a different company and still under control of their original units. (Yes, situations like this do happen in real combat, but the platoons would be under control of the companies that they are attached to, not still under control of their parent unit.) If that was not bad enough, he was also using units from the 1956 War in the order of battle for this scenario which would occur in 1949, before they were historically introduced to the using army in question. The fact was, this scenario needed some serious revision in order to make more relevant to the times which were being portrayed.


The Mapboard

The mapboard was really the best part of the scenario. It really looked like what area would look in the immediate post World-War-Two years. Players will note that the area looks a lot greener than the maps for Rafah 1956 and most especially for Rafah 1967. This is because over the decades the desert had been slowly encroaching into the area. Blowing sands were gradually filling in the depressions and gulleys, making them disappear from view. The sand also gradually covered some of the fertile farm land, making them wastelands. So there is nothing wrong with the map board, its just reflecting what the area looked like in the late 1940s.


The Orders of Battle

It was the orders of battle for both sides that certainly needed work. While the general size and composition of each force was pretty good, the organizational status was poor. There were battalion and brigade headquarters controlling the forces, yet there was a definite shortage of leaders. I remedied that problem. Then there was not an overall commander and headquarters for the Israeli side. Again I gave them a divisional one as the Israelis would have learned their lesson by now after the debacle at Faluga a few months before where each brigade operated on its own, loosely controlled by a distant headquarters in Tel Aviv. (Sadly they would make this mistake again at Abu Aghiela in 1956.) On the Egyptian side the force was controlled by a division headquarters which controlled four brigades. Yet its name, the Rafah Counter Attack Force was misleading as the two infantry brigades were clearly defensive in nature and the other two brigades (the 1st and 2nd Motorized Groups) were each really an armored battalion with a lot of supporting units attached, not worth being given a brigade command. So I relabeled the Egyptian force as the Egyptian Defense Force, made the two motorized groups as regimental commands, and put both of them under a brigade headquarters labeled the Egyptian Counter Attack Force, which itself is another brigade under the Defense Force headquarters. Now both sides have a more streamlined command and control structure. Next came dealing with individual units. On the Egyptian side we had an sIG II in their 2nd Motorized Group. In the Order of Battle Editor for Divided Ground there is indeed an sIG II for the Egyptians in the Israeli War for Independence although it is totally missing out of Middle East. I did some checking on this assault gun and found that the Egyptian Army did indeed have them, the only problem was that they were non-operational. (They were captured by the British from the Afrika Korps in 1942 and after shipping a few back to Britain for evaluation, left the rest in Egypt for the Egyptians. By 1949 they were being stored in a motor pool as there was no ammunition for the guns and no spare parts for the vehicles.) So I replaced the unit with a 25 Pdr howitzer troop and accompanying truck unit. There was also the numerous BTR-ZPU 14.5mm vehicles in the Egyptian order of battle. This vehicle was not available until the early 1950s. However I found that they were being used in Divided Ground to represent the self-propelled 20mm AA gun that was mounted on a truck. So I left them in the Divided Ground version and used the self-propelled 20mm in Middle East. On the Israelis side I saw that they had self-propelled 120mm mortars and 20mm AA guns. As it turns out, the self-propelled 20mm was available in the late 1940s, even if it is not in the Divided Ground Order of Battle Editor for the Israeli War of Independence, so I left them in both versions. However, the self-propelled 120mm mortar was definitely not available, so I replaced it with a ground mounted version of the 120mm mortar and a halftrack unit for transport. Also in the original scenario the author had different types of rifle units in some of the infantry units, in some cases they were rifle units from the 1956 War, in other cases they were militia units. I corrected both of these to the standard rifle unit for the Israeli War for Independence. (By this time in the war, the militia units were left behind to defend the settlements. As for the 1956 rifle units, they were used to create a fictional commando unit that the Israelis never had.)

I also re-labeled several units in the orders of battles, giving them the appropriate numerical designations. Perhaps the most bizarre unit was the Israeli 7th Mechanized Commando Battalion in the original scenario. Such a unit never existed in 1949. (This was the unit that had the 1956 rifle units.) I made it into a regular infantry battalion that just happens to have halftracks as transport. One will notice that most of the units are understrength and missing subordinate units. This is deliberate. At this stage of the war most brigades on both sides had many of their subordinate units scattered all over the place fulfilling various missions. Also the Egyptians are still using the old British T.O.&E. Organizations for most of their units. Again this deliberate as the Egyptian Army at this time still had a strong British influence.


The Scenario

The scenario set up followed the general set up that Peter Hickman had in his original scenario. However, I had to switch some units around to cover gaps in his set up. Not just that, I had to move back some battalion headquarter units from the front lines to positions where they could cover all units under their control for command and supply purposes. Unfortunately, I could not always position the brigade and the divisional headquarters to cover all of their subordinate battalions and brigades. This was especially true for the Israelis who are set up in a wide outside arc on the map. The Egyptian set up is also in an arc but is in a smaller area and and command and control is total. Also with all of the changes that I made in this scenario I no longer classify it as a Hypothetical scenario for Middle East, instead I classify it as a What If.


Conclusion

Peter Hickman had a great idea for this scenario, but his execution was poor. I only strove to make this a better scenario worthy of both Divided Ground and Middle East.

---

Again, my sincere thanks to Alan for his continues preservation of military history with these fine scenarios! [&o]

[Crossroads]

1956 has arrived! The 1956 scenarios added to the scenario pack now stand at:

[*] Operation Kadesh
[*] Khan Yunis 1956
[*] Kusseima 1956
[*] Mitla Pass 1956
[*] Rafah 1956

---

DESIGN NOTES FOR OPERATION KADESH (REVISED) By Alan R. Arvold

Operation Kadesh is one of the regular scenarios that is in the game Divided Ground. It was designed by Kurt Miller and it shows. Kurt was part of the Divided Ground design team and was largely responsible for the artwork. As it is usual for his scenarios, his order of battle files and make ups for both sides are inaccurate. However they are not as chaotic as are those for his other scenarios. Thus it was an easier scenario to revise.


The Mapboard

Miller used a larger scale than 250 meters per hex on his mapsheet. My guess is 500 meters per hex. Thus all units now have twice their normal range for movement and ranges. The original map is very good, but a lot of the terrain features one is used to seeing on the other Rafah maps in the game are either very compressed or missing entirely, again due to the increased scale. The big error on the map was the height of each elevation level. Kurt put the height of each level at 20 meters. But looking at the various elevation levels on the mapboard I could see that Kurt was basing them on the contour levels on a topographic map of the Rafah area. However he forgot that the height between each contour line on a topographic map is 20 feet, not 20 meters. All the terrain on the mapboard is too high. So I changed the height on each elevation level to 6 meters, which is approximately 20 feet. Now all the terrain more or less fits those on the topographic maps. One good thing is that the resulting smaller map will cause the game to reach a faster conclusion.


The Orders of Battle

The original orders of battle were generally accurate in force size for both sides, but Miller, as his wont, tends to add additional units to the companies and battalions and he does not assign an overall headquarters and commander for each side. So I scrapped the order of battle for both sides and started fresh using the historical composition of each side’s forces.

The Israelis have two brigades, the 1st “Golani” Infantry and the 27th Armored. The 1st Brigade had four infantry battalions instead of the usual three, the four one being attached from the 12th Infantry Brigade. The 27th Brigade had three combined arms teams and one pure armored company. One team was attached to the 1st Brigade and the armored company was held back from the brigade for attachment to another but only ended up joining its parent unit a few days after the offensive began. Both brigades were supported by a battalion of artillery and a battalion of mortars each (the 27th Brigade’s artillery was split up among its three combined arms teams). In addition, there was an engineer battalion assigned to this force as well. All of this was under control of the 77th Ugdah, the Israeli version of the division. However, the ugdah was more of an administrative units then an actual command level at this time and each brigade maneuvered as it saw fit.

The Egyptians had two different commands in the area. One was the 5th Infantry Brigade, of the 3rd Infantry Division. The other was the 8th “Palestinian” Infantry Division which had elements of two of its brigades present at Rafah. The 5th Infantry Brigade was complete and was reinforced by a tank company. The 8th “Palestinian” Division had the 26th National Guard Brigade (minus one of its line battalions which was up in the Gaza Strip) and the 259th Frontier Infantry Battalion (of the 87th Brigade) present. Because the units present were under two overall commands, coordination between the battalions of different commands was almost non-existent. All of the units were equipped with British WWII vehicles and guns. This is in contrast to other scenarios which show the Egyptians equipped partially, if not totally, with Soviet equipment. While the Egyptian Army was indeed undergoing a transition from the British to the Soviet military systems at the time, the units of the 3rd and 8th Divisions had yet to go through it. One thing that I did was to give each branch of the Egyptian force a different morale level, the regular Army at 60%, the National Guard at 40% and the Palestinians at 20%. Each branch also had its own artillery battery, each consisting of two four-gun 25 pounder howitzer troops.


The Scenario

I largely kept the scenario exactly as Miller created it. All defensive positions and minefields are present and in the same position where Miller placed them as well as all of the objective hexes, which includes the Israeli exit hex in 0,21. I did have to change the victory point levels to reflect the new composition of forces. I also had to change the Egyptians AI level to 40% to reflect their defensive status. The air strikes remain the same in both games with one exception. The Israeli Mystere IV in Divided Ground was replaced by a Mosquito Mk VI in Middle East as the Mystere IV apparently does not exist in 1956. The Israeli reinforcements were changed to reflect the newer order of battle, but the Egyptian reinforcements were eliminated as all Egyptian units start the game set up on the board. I had a hard time deciding how to classify this scenario in Middle East, but finally after much thought I decided on HISB. Overall, the new version of the scenario plays the same as the original. Enjoy the scenario.

---

Rafah 1956

Actually there is only one real note. In the original scenario Conmy put Level 1 Minefields in most of the Egyptian defensive positions, not in front, but on them. This was to simulate the historical fact that the Egyptians heavily booby-trapped the immediate area around the trenches, improved positions, bunkers and pillboxes as a way to slow down the Israelis because of the relative weakness of the Egyptian forces in the Rafah area. In the Divided Ground version I kept the Level 1 Minefields but in the Middle East version I used the EODs instead because I felt that the Level 1 Minefields were a bit too much. The reason that the Egyptians never used this tactic in later wars, at least with the intensity seen at Rafah in 1956 was because they caused just about as many Egyptians casualties as they were withdrawing from their positions in the dark as they did to the Israelis attacking in.

---

[Crossroads]

Bootcamp4 added to scenario pack. Thanks again, Alan! [:)]

---

Boot Camp Scenario Four

Welcome to Bootcamp Scenario 4. In this scenario we will explore the complexities of a paratroop drop and attack.. Here you are given a paratroop battalion whose mission is to capture the town of Chanting and clear the road going off to the south edge of the map. The town and surrounding area is defended by an Egyptian infantry battalion.

The forces in this scenario are about equal in strength, with the Israelis having a slight edge in machine guns and the Egyptians a slight edge in mortars. But you are the attacker and must attack quickly before the Egyptians rally and bring their full force to bear.

Several new features are introduced in this scenario. First is that it is a night scenario. Visibility is much reduced cutting down the effectiveness of direct fire. The Egyptians have a small supply of star shells that they can fire with their mortars which can light up hexes for a turn as if they are in daylight. This can make the final approach to enemy positions dangerous if the star shells are properly coordinated with defensive fire.

Another new feature is improved positions. These improve the defense of those units occupying them. While only the Egyptians have them in the beginning of the game, both sides may construct them during the course of the game. Still another new feature is frozen units. These are units that are frozen in place in the hex that they are in and can not move out of the hex until either they are fired upon or are released during the course of the game. Only the Egyptians are frozen in place at the beginning of the game and this simulates the effect that surprise has on them.

But the best feature is the paratroop drop. Here the Israelis arrive by parachuting onto the map. There is a chance of scattering occurring which means that some Israeli units could land in the trees, causing some early casualties and disruption. Because of the short time that you have before the Egyptians start to be released you should gather up your good units and move out fast and bring up the stragglers when you can.

Basics covered in Bootcamp 4

● Improved Positions
● Frozen Units
● Night Conditions
● Star Shells
● Paratroop Drops

Congratulations. You have dealt with some of the more advance features of the game. Practice a few times with this scenario before going to the next one..

[Crossroads]

1973 Golan Scenarios are now completed by Alan:

---

DESIGN NOTES FOR THE GOLAN SERIES SCENARIOS

By Alan R. Arvold


The Golan Series scenarios are revisions of existing scenarios in the Divided Ground game as well as a new one. All of these scenarios are from the Israeli/Syrian 1973 Linked Campaign Games. Though these scenarios were initially presented as part of these linked campaign games in the original game, in subsequent patches they were presented as stand alone scenarios in their own right. However they were mostly based on their linked campaign versions, with little or no changes to their order of battles or the scenarios. Thus they were no more fun to play than the Linked Campaign Games themselves. Now I have taken the effort to make these stand alone scenarios more historical.


List of Scenarios

The Golan Series includes the following scenarios:

[*] The Valley of Tears
[*] Rafid
[*] The TAP Oil Road
[*] Bnot Yaackov Bridge
[*] Across the Purple Line
[*] A New Enemy
[*] High Water Mark

Note that the Valley of Tears was covered in another scenario set and is only mentioned here briefly.


History

Back when Divided Ground was originally being developed, scenario design and development was the responsibility of .Edwin “Mick” Conmey. He had originally planned to use six of the above scenarios as stand alone scenarios only as they were historical actions in the 1973 War. The Bnot Yaackov Bridge scenario was not planned as a 1973 scenario, instead it was another scenario entitled Fatih Allah, based on a battle during the 1948-49 War for Independence. (In that scenario the map was different in that there was a big lake in the Hulah Valley, which the Israelis drained after the war in order to create more farmland for their fledgling nation.) Conmey had prepared all of the mapboards for the planned scenarios in the original game first before embarking on the scenarios themselves and their respective Orders of Battles. (This does not include those scenarios that were offered by other members of the team.) When the word came down from Talonsoft's management that the development team only had one more week to get Divided Ground ready for production, Comney only had completed about half of the planned scenarios and one Linked Campaign game (the Jordanian campaign of 1967). These were mostly from the earlier wars. With only a week left Conmey made a few mini-scenarios using portions of the bigger mapboards which were for scenarios which would never get done. As the deadline drew near he found he still had a lot of unused mapboards. Noting that six of them occurred in the Syrian Front in the 1973, he conceived of the 1973 Golan Heights/Syria Linked Campaign game. He devised a quick Order of Battle for the Campaign game with only minor variations for the Israeli and the Syrian versions respectively. He then quickly devised the scenarios (which did not go through the usual playtesting).

The scenarios, and the Linked Campaign game in general, have acquired the reputation of that the Israelis can not lose in them and the Syrians can not win. Conmey obviously favored the Israeli. Yet, he did include an extra scenario in the bunch in case the Syrians won. This was the Bnot Yaackov Bridge scenario which was hypothetical, but represented a real fear that the Israelis had if the Syrians won in the Golan Heights. For this he used the Fatih Allah mapboard (he eliminated the lake on the mapboard as it was not there in 1973). In the Israeli version of the Campaign game the scenario descriptions were pretty straight forward and rather innovative, but the ones of the Syrian version were down right silly. Anyway the Campaign game was the only format that these scenarios were in in the original game of Divided Ground.

Later patches introduce stand alone versions of the Valley of Tears, Rafid, The TAP Oil Road, Bnot Yaackov Bridge, and A New Enemy, but these were just minor variations of the Campaign game versions. The only thing historical about them was that they happened (with the exception of the Bnot Yaackov Bridge scenario), although not in the way that the scenarios presented. However Al Sandrick did his own version of the Across the Purple Line, which was the Mazraat Bein Jan scenario in the Campaign game, giving it a more historical flavor. (I later modified it, correcting the mistakes that Al made in it.) Later on I redid the Valley of Tears scenario, making it into an historical seven scenario set. But the rest were left alone until recently when I decided to make them historical plus make an historical version of the High Water Mark scenario from the Campaign game.


The Scenarios

The following are brief descriptions of the five scenarios presented. As I had said before, Valley of Tears will not be listed here as it were already covered in other scenario set.

[*] Rafid: This scenario presents the initial Syrian attack on the Israeli positions around Rafid on the afternoon of 6 October, 1973. Historically the attack was driven off because the Syrians had to breach the anti-tank ditch in front of the Israeli positions, allowing the Israelis the opportunity to shoot up the engineering vehicles attempting to breach the ditch. However a second attack that night was successful as the Israelis no longer had their visibility and range advantage.

[*] The TAP Oil Road: This scenario presents the Syrian flanking attack on the Israeli 36th Mechanized Division Headquarters at Nafakh on 7 October, 1973. Historically the attack caught the Israelis by surprise but they quickly rallied and beat off the lead elements of the Syrian 91st Armored Brigade. However the main body was fast approaching and the headquarters would have been destroyed if it hadn't of been for the arrival of the lead elements of the Israeli 79th Armored Brigade which stopped the 91st Armored cold and precipitated a several hour long meeting engagement, which allowed the headquarters to escape. By the way, the Israeli Armor School Battalion which is in this scenario, has no numerical designation. Some Israeli sources list it has having the numerical designation of the 71st. However, other Israeli sources listed the Armor School Armored Battalion and the 71st Armored Battalion as being two separate battalions. I chose to designate the Armor School Battalion as being separate from the 71st Battalion.

[*] Bnot Yaackov Bridge: This scenario presents a hypothetical Syrian assault across the Jordan River into the Hulah Valley. Historically this attack never happened but could have if the Syrians were successful in breaching the Israeli defense of the northern sector of the Golan Heights. However this comes at a cost as all of the Syrian assault divisions are largely spent and units from the Syrian strategic reserve are required to pull it off. While some members of the Syrian senior leadership would have gone all out for an offensive into Israel, the top leadership knew the limitations of the Syrian forces and would have gone for a more limited offensive to force the Israelis to the peace table.

[*] A New Enemy: This scenario presents the Jordanian attack on the Israeli flank in their advance into Syria. Historically the Israelis saw the attack coming and deployed their 17th Armored Brigade to give the Jordanian 40th Armored Brigade a very warm reception. But the Jordanians were not fanatical like the Syrians or incompetent like the Iraqis in their attacks, but were very professional in their attacks. Although the Israelis did beat back the Jordanian attack, they soon acquired a healthy respect for their new enemy's military competence.

[*] High Water Mark: This scenario presents the first Israeli attack in the Saasa area of Syria. Historically the attack failed with the loss of twenty Israeli tanks. The Israeli force was tank heavy with little infantry (namely engineers and recon troops) and had little chance against what turned out to be a very strong Syrian defense with fresh troops from the 3rd Armored Division. The Israelis attack several more times over the next two days, finally taking the Tel Shams hilltop on the second night with a paratroop battalion supported by tanks. But they could not crack the defense on Saasa Ridge and so ceased further attacks into Syria for the rest of the war.

[*] Across the Purple Line: This scenario represents the main Israeli attack on the Mazraat Bein Jan area. This was originally done by Edwin “Mick” Conmy as part of the linked campaign game for the Golan Front. As a scenario it was not very good. As it was the last of the campaign scenarios the Israeli force would be pretty much weakened from losses in the previous scenarios and it would look like that the Syrians finally had a chance to win. But alas it was not to be. Conmy gave the Syrian force a Morale rating of 10% which meant that any Syrian that got disrupted would usually be destroyed before it could recover. Al Sandrick took this scenario and made it into a stand alone scenario and posted it on Games Depot. His version was certainly much better than the original scenario but it still had its faults. First he was using the Syrian order of battle from the original game, before any patches had come out correcting the errors in them. Second he gave the Israelis all dismounted leaders and then mounted them on existing vehicles in the Israeli order of battle. This is not so bad for the mechanized infantry as they were riding in APCs, but for the tank units it was a disaster. Any tank platoon that was carrying a leader could not fire as long as the leader was mounted on it. This meant that about a third of the Israeli tanks were rendered impotent as long as the leaders were being carried. Third, his arrival of Israeli reinforcements was strange. They would just appear along the the length of road coming from the southwest corner of the map. Not just one unit as a time as it they are moving in column along the road. No, they would all appear along a seven or eight hex length of road as if the Israelis had acquired transporter technology out of Star Trek. Fourth, he tended to overrate the Israelis leaders. Still I liked the scenario so I endeavored to correct the mistakes that Al made. I corrected the Syrian order of battle, made all Israeli leaders mobile instead of dismounted, had the Israelis entering along the road as if they are in column, and lowered the morale ratings of most of the Israeli leaders. Finally that scenario became what it meant to be. Historically the Israelis did capture Mazraat Bein Jan on the 12th of October but did not advance much further north than that before a general halt was ordered for all Israeli forces in Syria.



Conclusion

This completes the fixing of these scenarios from Divided Ground. I hope that players find them more enjoyable than the original versions from the game.

---

This completes the fixing of these scenarios from Divided Ground. I hope that players find them more enjoyable than the original versions from the game.

We sure do Alan, we sure do!

[Big Ivan]

Crossroads,

Seems to be a problem with "Tears 5" scenario. After downloading the update on 1st page, extracting it and then introducing
with JSGME, all scenarios look to be intact. But when I try to open Tears 5 I get a scenario error attached.

[budd]

Big Ivan,

Don't know if this is helpful, but i downloaded the new file and had it overwrite my previous install in my mod folder and i'm able to open Tears 5 without issue. I attached a zip with my tears 5 .scn and.org files maybe these will help.

[Crossroads]

Hope I did not mess up between DG and CSME files, in putting this togehter. Let me look at this as well...

EDIT: Works for me as well. Wanna download the zip archive again, and see if that helps?

[Big Ivan]

Budd & Crossroads thanks for trying to help but unfortunately no joy.[&:]

The tears5 org file doesn't appear to have any Syrians in it only Israelis when I look at it through the game so I'm not sure what is going on??

Budd I downloaded what you attached, unzipped it in scenario subfolder and same issue.

Then:
Crossroads did the same again with what was in drop box and same issue.

The weird thing is all the other scenarios that were in the drop box work, no issues, just this one.

[Crossroads]

OK, let me have a look at this again. I'll maybe not have the time for it today, if so: tomorrow!

[budd]

Sorry it didnt help, that is odd that its the only one that has an issue.

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: Big Ivan

The weird thing is all the other scenarios that were in the drop box work, no issues, just this one.

Good catch John, there actually was an error with the tears5.org file, with an erroneus line break at sixth to last row!

Before:

[font="Courier New"]B2611214 1096 4 178
th MRL Battalion[/font]

After:

[font="Courier New"]B2611214 1096 4 178th MRL Battalion[/font]

It showed up when opening the scenario with Scenario Editor, or OoB with Org Editor. Why it showed on your game I have no idea.

It is fixed now.

Everyone, please re-download the scenario pack from the opening post.

Edit: erroneous line in Tears5 of course, not Tears6