 |
|
P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Squad Battles (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=13) +--- Thread: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. (/showthread.php?tid=63940) |
RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - TheBigRedOne - 05-23-2013 (05-23-2013, 06:58 AM)Jeff Conner Wrote: Actually, the first team game I participated in was completed. The Germans surrendered with a couple of turns left as there was no point in playing any further. I am fairly confidant that the results were logged, although I am not positive. I see that you and Chad registered this game, but not sure who else was involved... The comment about a smaller scenario being suitable for a team game is very much true, it just hasn't been done a whole lot in my time here on the Blitz. I'd love to see more team style games, if for nothing but to do some new things with the series here... It's part of the reason I try to put unique scenarios in my tourneys. Give players a chance to play a game they might have simply skipped... RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - Outlaw Josey Wales - 05-24-2013 I understand what you are saying about some of the things involved. If they can have day/night turns in their other series, then they can do it with this series. However, I get what you are saying about the time, which is also why I also mention scenarios from SPs and CS, especially CS. Just go by the unit ID, if it calls for 1 bn 16th Rgt, then that is what you would add to the OOB. If you want to go back and make strength adjustments, that would be fine, but I'm thinking not necessary. A larger map would be created and the turn adjustment wouldn't be much at all. I think I checked it once and a scenario of 25 turns ended up 30-35 in SBs. CS scenarios are already made, so no research would be involved. OOB is there and I saw some files that could be copied into new scenario and edited to match the unit IDs, saw those in every title I checked so far, but the map would have to be created. Roughly one hex in CS would be about one center hex with 6 surrounding hexes, so there is no research for maps either. I'm not even so sure you have to be so exact with the map, since there would have to be some abstracts in there, but who is going to care if the scenario is a rocking success? As you mentioned about the others, the larger scenarios would probably be undoable unless they were all day or all night turns in that respect, but would really be so large since you are talking about some corps sized OOBs, even die hard teams might not make it through, but the smaller to medium sized scenarios would be doable, I figure as long as the OOB is not larger than a Div at the most. Still worth a look for at least to find one to start with and see how it goes. RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - TheBigRedOne - 05-24-2013 but the map would have to be created Without a map editor, that's the tricky part. RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - Marc Bellizzi - 06-23-2013 Everyone, I have been mulling over how to provide input into this playtest; my biggest concern has been to not step on toes or offend any of the participants. So please, take my comments as constructive and not critical. I won't critique the guys' tactics - I will provide some comments about the tactics I envisioned being successful (or that were actually used during the real battle), so that readers might get a better understanding of why I designed or added things the way I did. I'll start by saying thank you and congrats to the players; this was a massive scenario and it has a lot of nuances and elements to each side that take finesse and some forethought to utilize to their fullest - the smoke, NGF, tanks, spotters, Japanese snipers, airstrikes, engineer teams, etc. Those assets and elements can really make the difference in this scenario, and a few unlucky or misplaced actions can easily turn the tide against you. I played this scenario 9 times against Cpt Cav and another 9 times against the AI, trying to get the right 'feel' for the battle. You would be amazed how difficult it was to get the scenario to play remotely like the real fight. I provided a painfully long (removed for the final product) narrative that I pulled off the net, along with copies of the actual maps and other documents used for Tarawa. Every Japanese gun, pillbox, obstacle & trenchline was recreated; every hero, officer & NCO that I could find a name & unit for, was included on each side. I just really like providing that kind of detail. Historically the Marines landed a Regiment of 3 rifle battalions plus assets, simultaneously on 3 separate beaches. There were 5,000 defenders against 32,000 Marines - but the Marine's peace-meal landings resulted in only 5000 Marines landing the first day. That's 1:1 odds. About 2000 Marines became casualties the first day; the beachheads were so tenuous, by late afternoon the Regt Cdr radioed to his higher, "Issue in doubt." Nearly all the Sherman tanks foundered in the surf; only 2 were left working at days end (but those 2 tanks did a lot of damage to the Japanese defenses in their vicinity). A battery of 75mm Pack Howitzers were carried to the beach and fired over open sights into the enemy lines, helping the center-battalion get a foothold. The Stuart tanks faired better, most getting ashore, but their light guns were not very effective. An attempt to land elements of a second Regiment resulted in 70% casualties in many rifle companies within minutes of dropping the ramps, so that further landings were called off. The Marines braced for a Japanese Banzai charge expected to occur that night, but it never materialized. Unbeknownst to the Marines, a lucky NGF barrage happened to catch the entire Japanese officer corps (from Company Commanders on up to the Admiral in change himself) as they broke up from a meeting planning their counter-attack, killing them all. Essentially leaderless, the Japanese fought as individual soldiers instead of coherent units. That one lucky incident likely saved the day for the USMC. Based on that info, I included 2 Japanese banzai charges as a sort of 'what if'; I would have never imagined (and never got lucky enough to have it happen during testing) that the banzai charge would be as devastating as it ended up being in the playtest. In retrospect, I would agree those probably should be removed; they are just too powerful. Given my narrative above, I still feel that the scenario balance itself is not as lop-sided against the US as you might think; historically the USMC attained a minor defeat that first day; none of the planned objectives were reached and none of the battalions linked up. At the far left and central beaches, the beachhead was the equivalent of 2 hexes deep, at best. The casualty rate is about right, maybe a bit heavy for the USMC, but not exorbitantly so. Unfortunately, the US player(s) have to keep their collective chin up and not think about the bloodbath they are suffering; once the Marines get a good foothold, the tide (historically & in my playtests) starts to turn. I would note, also, that the USMC didn't get his tanks into play - and they provide some serious 'umpf' to the US; Ozgur wrote me saying that while he liked how the battle was going for the Japanese, but he knew once the tanks arrived it would swing against him. I explained that was historically exactly what happened. The USMC has to push, push, push his men forward; he should be spread out, with as few of units in a hex as possible to mitigate the dreaded Japanese defensive fire that eviscerates over-stacked hexes. When possible, keep advancing your pinned and demoralized units at angles, sidestepping, etc (when possible) so that they are always plodding at least a little bit forward; I'd rather have a demoralized squad reach the beach than a gutted unit that had sat in the open water, trying to rally. Really, the Marines shouldn't waste time firing until they reach shore; they rarely hurt the Japanese until they are point blank anyway. Marine squad defensive fire is sufficient when the Marines are still in the water; instead rely on air-strikes and NGF to suppress the defenders. There is a lot of smoke available, and it is almost force of habit to want to screen the entire defense on turn 1 & 2; I found that allocating 1 salvo per beach per turn provided enough concealment to keep the Marines advancing, while also providing more turns of smoke. The Japanese suffer at-start from shell shock from the pre-landing bombardment; once that wears off (around turn 3), the Japanese guns become devastatingly accurate (coincidentally, right about the time the first Marines are almost ashore). It pays good dividends to really lay on the NGF when that happens and avoid the urge to use it all up on turn 1. The USMC engineer & demo units are crucial to get forward as fast as possible; the wire barriers cannot be negotiated easily by the rifleman without the dreaded 'pinning', so race them forward and dump them out at the wire - and provide overwatch and 'targets' for the Japanese with your rifle squads until those obstacles are breached. I found myself 'dropping' flamethrowers and demo charges so that follow-on units (and even leaders) could pick them up and spread around the capability; otherwise a prudent defender will shoot up your engineers first and leave your men stuck outside the perimeter. The Japanese player has to really keep track of his guns; by turn 9 or 10 they will be so worn out that they will hardly get any hits if he fires them non-stop in the offensive & defensive fire phases - he will find his guns at 25%-40% capability just as the USMC gets ashore, when he will need it most. I found myself 'turning off' every 4th gun or so, so that I had some guns with the capability to do damage, while the other guns rested. Also watch what type of ammo you are shooting, or the AI will be shooting in the defensive fire phase; HE is great against the grunts in the surf, but not so good against the AMTRACs. The defense is actually very 'brittle'; at first, Japanese units suffer from the pre-game bombardment,, then recover with devastating effect, then get worn down by the NGF, only to wear down even more from continuous firing, so that by the time the USMC starts to really build up on the beaches, the defender is on the verge of crumbling. Looking at the scenario just played, the Japanese banzai/counter-attack was really a smoke & mirrors move; while the Marines are certainly hurting, the defender is actually on the verge of collapsing in a few places. The tanks & follow-on rifle companies are about to land on each flank, adding fresh power to the crippled Marines. In the middle the USMC battalion is very bunched up in-depth; if he were to maneuver those squads stuck behind his front line to his left and right, he could really lay a lot of firepower into the defender - especially to the left. The defender has no reserves nor any reinforcements available; he has to fight on with what he has. So really, I'm hesitant to make sweeping changes without seeing how an actual full play through turns out. As I said, I've played it something like 18 times, so while I do know all the facets of the scenario, I also know the game is actually far from over. Unfortunately these are things that you can really only learn by playing the scenario through at least once - this makes the learning curve very steep and the scenario can seem very unforgiving. I certainly intend to re-look at the banzai charges; I'd be interested to either play on against myself or the AI with where the battle is right now, or Borroughs, if you are going to play through, let me know how it goes. Again, thanks so much for your comments, it helps me to fine tune this battle - ultimately I want something people like to play, not look at as drudgery. Marc RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - Richie61 - 06-23-2013 I just played this a week or so ago with Dan as the USMC. He pulled out a Minor Victory and he fought for it. After reading what you said about the Japanese, I see now what I should have done. I wouldn't change a thing with this great scenario. It's hard, but the real battle was a meat grinder too! I thank you for designing this scenario and I like it! RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - Outlaw Josey Wales - 06-24-2013 I think another scenario that would be pretty good, but would be longer, would be St. Mere Eglise. Maybe even a couple other locations in the airborne part of Normandy, as well as some in Market-Garden. RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - Jeff Conner - 06-24-2013 Marc If this was my scenario, and its not, I would remove the Banzai charges. Their value in the game system far exceeds that in history. I can't recall a single historical Banzai charge that could be considered successful. Modern firepower is just too powerful. Several Japanese commanders eventually figured this out and forbade them. As Bill mentioned, the Japanese attacks in our game not only took back objective hexes that we have still not recaptured, but more importantly seized protective terrain (bunkers and trenches) that we needed to regroup in. The second thing I would change is to add a pair of leaders with decent, but not A grade morale (maybe a B and a C) and a setup radio. This would represent the ability of the US forces to direct support fires to any portion of the island with some accuracy (aerial observation by floatplanes for example). I was continually frustrated by a lack of radios to call in support fires and when I had them, a lack of lines of sight to use them effectively. I am loathe to call in fire without a line of sight due to the inaccuracy that results. I did some of this regardless, but I don't think it was overly effective at preventing the Japanese from reinforcing the landing beaches. In fact, I would not be surprised to learn that we caused more friendly casualties than we did enemy ones with support fires. The setup radio would at least allow the support fires to land somewhere near where the player intended them to. When you review the results of a playtest, you have to take into consideration the ability of the players involved. Not all players are equal. Ozgur and Bill are probably the two best players I have ever challenged. I don't think I have ever beaten Bill (although we have only played a few games) and I have only bested Ozgur once that I can remember. I have no doubt that the Marines can win this scenario, but maybe not against against players like Oz and Bill. RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - Marc Bellizzi - 06-26-2013 Jeff, Banzai charges will come out. I had tried to address the issue of fire support by providing the static small craft with the ANGLICO teams on turn 1, which gets withdrawn on turn 2 iirc. My thinking was that by turn 2 or 3 the USMC has so many leaders arriving w/ radios or radio-bearing teams around that they can take over the calls for fire. But maybe you're right, a more dedicated & set-up NGF team would be better. Historically the fire support stopped about 5-10 minutes prior to the landings; this allowed the defenders to recover a bit and inflict a heavy toll on the Marines. NGF didn't resume until 20 minutes after H Hour (2 destroyers swept in close to cover Green Beach during that time, but otherwise nothing - this is why the Marines on Green Beach were able to advance further than the other battalions). An aerial observer unit would be perfect, I believe a Kingfisher or two were tasked to rotate back and forth from the carriers in that role during the Day 1 landings, but I don't recall anything in the SB series that would fit the bill to reflect that plane ( I don't want to edit the vehicles, loads or weapons files). I found that the static team I added had limitations too; unfortunately where-ever I placed the static unit, there would be blind spots - if I put them too close, the Japanese clobbered them. I had considered adding an 'island' way out on the map-edge and making it a sort of 'permanent vessel' to place NGF teams on, but the dang AI kept shooting at it. Visibility is limited to like, 19 hexes in the scenario to reflect the dust and haze. When I made visibility unlimited so the NGF could see the island, the Japanese were massacring the Marines way, way out; that was the wrong direction to try and go, unfortunately. Still, that might be a viable option, keep visibility as is and put the teams in a Pillbox on a 1 hex island set at max visibility, and if the AI or player wants to waste rounds, they can fire away. You still cannot see the entire island from that pillbox, though. It's more an issue of visibility. I could make the guns & NGF leaders A quality, which would lower the scatter error; that might work. I'll fiddle with it some more. Marc RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - TheBigRedOne - 06-26-2013 I feel the need to applaud Marc for taking on a fairly enormous and complex project, and for individuals for stepping up to play it and try to improve on the design. After getting to know him, this type of detailed filled adventure is right up his alley! Nice job by everyone. RE: P&F Bloody Tarawa team game - calling all participants. - Jeff Conner - 06-27-2013 My thought on the NGO team was not that they could see the whole island, but that if they tried to use interdiction fires, they would be able to keep the rounds somewhere close to where they were intended. You can't really do that currently, as it is almost impossible to see into the interior of the island with the visibility limit and terrain. With a scatter range of six hexes to the target hex and then additional scatter from there, it can be kind of risky, especially with weapons that have a two or three hex radius (plus the Japanese are usually in bunkers and trenches while the Marines are out in the open. One of the problems with the boat NGO team is the limited visibility. I am not suggesting you change this, I agree with your rational and if anything, it might be too large. The NGO team's main purpose is to call in smoke on the first turn. This is tough to do well as the leaders can only see a portion of the beach hexes (none on the Parrot's Beak) and only in a few areas can they see more than one hex inland. The options are to fire blind and risk scatter (keeping in mind that any smoke round that lands in the water is lost) or to only fire smoke onto those areas they can see and accept that about half of the rounds are going to land in the lagoon. A setup radio (it could be in the boat for that matter, although the Japanese would probably shoot at it if they could see it) would help quite a bit here. The only way to simulate a Kingfisher that I can think of would be to create a helicopter unit, something you mentioned you didn't want to do. It might be something to think about the next time the game is updated though. It would be tough to keep it from getting shot down though, given the number of AA units on the Island. I don't think that the altitude set in the pdt file for helicopters affects the range, but I have another project where I might tinker with that a bit. I think your idea of a pillbox on an island is the best solution. I did something similar in one of the Falklands scenarios to represent FO officers on a distant mountain. It does/did attract some AI fire, but never with any effect. If you want to allow the Marine player to see the whole island, but keep your visibility limit, you could suggest that the scenario be played with fog-of-war turned off. I am not sure I would recommend this, but it is another possibility. It's a good scenario, one of the best large ones that I have seen. I would recommend it, especially for team games. Jeff |
){kind=link}