Chief Rudiger -> RE: Afwaterings Canal Mini Scenario (5/23/2011 8:19:12 PM)
I note that you use "Highway" supply type, but be aware this cannot be cut to the top level Base (even if "sat on" by an entire armoured division ;) )
I routinely (and currently - it may have been fixed already?) use/replace these with a 'higher echelon HQ/Base' and an Airlanding SEP - which is a dump/arrival point requiring collection. This means that poor routeing or good manoeuvre from your opponent can cut you completely from off map supply. *You might want to nudge the SEP from the map-edge to an objective where the forces are smallish and limited, and the defender can overrun the edges to preserve the SEP..., or you could leave it so the supply can be cut, or use a road type where this doesn't apply at all...
I'd be tempted to give the Germans a 'formal' (if scratch) HQ for their counter-attack/support units, giving them a total of 2 Bn level HQs. It will give the AI more flexibility in planning, and will still allow a 'decent' coordinated defence and a local counter-attack.
With only a single 'forward HQ' it might tend to favour one or the other... penny packeting the other forces.
On the subject of supply: I also have added (for the Germans), a set of Bn Bases - which allow a bit more flexibility in deployment of a single regiment over a wide area - without it the AI feeds supply through the middle (enemy bit) of a bulge you are pinching out, leading to no supply and killed supply runs... with it, each Bn grouping can support a different flank of the same bulge (eg Pz supporting PzGren or vice versa) and still receive supplies from their 'rear' because of the attached Bn Supply column.
Doesn't so often apply to the Allies, as they have more of most stuff, and sometimes can commit a whole Rgt/Bde where the Germans would be delighted to see an entire Bn.
Thanks for all the feedback.
Re: SEP - so the "Highway" trucks are invinsible from the SEP to the top level base? I used the airdrop/landing type on my Merdjayoun Scenario, i think, as i was going to introduce the intermediate Bn base (yet abother link/bottleneck in the chain) with manpack/mule transport (i.e. trucks with very small transport capability) to stress the logistic aspects of fighting a campaign on a shoe string in a mountain range! This is one of the things i liked most about the third party Narvik scenarios - you had a limited number of troops to begin with and a big task at hand. In perpetual daylight attacks were something not to be undertaken lighty!
Still, in this scenario, considering its short length, i didn't pay any attention to the supply aspect. Also, the Axis aren't supposed to come south of the Canal and the Allies should be pushed to get anywhere near the North table edge in time to bother about starving the Germans out.
Fairly simple as the Axis. Even with a 'major D1 attack' obtained by pushing the armour to arrive a bit later from the scn editor, the defenders had no trouble routing the attacks as they came. Losses at D3:
Axis 15/0/0, Allies 1071/0/14, with 0/8/1 units lost to fire/surrender/disbandment.
The Allies hadn't in fact attempted to build any bridges at all - all their armour was on the south bank. This might be better if the engineers and armour arrive a bit later, but together, alternatively, give bridges at start on D1, but delay the arrival of tanks till the bridge should be complete.
This might work a bit better already with the changes made but not released - the continuous routing was noticeable due to limited cover, and the retreat direction was frequently 'towards the guns'. Both of which make the attacker excessively vulnerable here.
Will try as attacker tomorrow, bit late here now to start over.
Have you ever actually seen the AI build a bridge.... i don't think i have...!
I will play about with the stats as you say.
Have a look at www.kiltsrock.com/forum,there is a write up of the op there.
Also have you seen the book The Spirit of Angus by John McGregor.
Will have a look at both - thanks!
Looking at your maps on the 1st post I see some problems that you may want to check out. I assume it is a recompiled HTTR map. However, things have changed since HTTR with mixed-mode movement and the rivers and water elements will wipe out your road movement rates if the two elements are close together. You will either have to pull the roads away from the rivers (minor and major) and/or put some crossings in. You can check by using the pathing tools.
Reworking and checking and rechecking the HTTR maps for the BFTB expansion was a major time-consuming effort to get this accomplished.
This is a scratch built map, using the map series you gave me a link to recently. Didn't realise HTTR maps could be played in BFTB. I don't have that title - is this operation coverred?
Re: overlap - hadn't though about this but i supposed i'm asking for it with all the detail i've tried to cram into the map.