NATO, WAPA and the indefensibility of LandJut in NGP and D85

[Narwan]

Just wondering, why is there a bridge across the Elbe at Bleckede (a bit south of Lauenburg) in the game? There weren't any bridges across the Elbe between Lauenburg and Dömitz (at the same hight as Dannenberg) much further south. That would have been one of the big challenges of the WP as all the supply lines for both the troops heading west onto the NGP and for those heading north towards Denmark would have to trace to the border crossings between Lauenburg and Lubeck. It's very doubtful if those could have supported so much traffic.
There is a ferry crossing at Bleckede; could that have been mistaken for a bridge?

Narwan

[JDR Dragoon]

After some more fidgeting here is my modification of the stock "AFNORTH-HTH" scenario from DF 85.

-Deleted the option of having the belgian Paracommando light infantry regiment jump in.
-Gave the polish 6th AB Div. the possibility of another dropzone.

-Added the missing parts of the danish Jutland Division and Landjut Corps.

-Removed most of the danish units from the map. They beging to appear as reinforcements (with variable chance) from noon on the 10th and the next 48 hours forward (thus taking from 24-72 hours from a given unit begins mobilization to it appears on the north edge of the map). They then have to spend up to 24 hours more moving to the front (of course depending on how far north WAPA has reached of course).

-Moved some of the setup points for some of the german units. Also consolidated those piddly little platoon speedbumps of "Jagdpanzer Rakete" into units that might actually survive first contact.

-Moved LandJut HQ to Rendsburg along with the german AA assets attached to LandJut (they were based at the Kaserne there, which also housed the german armys AA school).

-All WAPA units invading amphibiously starts the game as "Disrupted". This represents both attacks by german and danish Fast Attack Craft and subs against the invasion fleet and the resistance and delays imposed by german local defence units (unfortunately I managed to get too far into the scenario modification before I discovered, that any random "invasion loss" had to be set in the PDT file before building the scenario, and I didn´t have the patience to start all over. Oh well, perhaps next time).

-I also lenghtened the scenario by 3 turns (35 in all, or 5 days). The polish and east german plan complexes I have seen banked on WAPA forces being able to reach the danish border in 4 days, but that was with the massive use of nukes to help them along. We shall see if they can do that as well here with slightly less nasty WMDs to chuck around.

-No orders for the AI added whatsoever. I only have so much time on hand ;). This scenario is strictly HTH.

[JDR Dragoon]

Seems I forgot the file (or it failed to upload).

Now updated to V.2.0 (after I discovered how the "Air Availability dialog actually worked....)

And now 2.1 after I discovered that the expanded OOB file has to be included along with the scenario files in order for the scenario to run properly. Still learning, so have a little patience ;)

[Glenn Saunders]

-Moved some of the setup points for some of the german units. Also consolidated those piddly little platoon speedbumps of "Jagdpanzer Rakete" into units that might actually survive first contact.

Did you consider without those speed bumps, when played from the NATO side with FOW on, they will not have any idea where the Russians have come in force?

Anyway - you will accomplish one goal but create another issue unless you find new speed bump units - that is my point.

Glenn

[JDR Dragoon]

Did you consider without those speed bumps, when played from the NATO side with FOW on, they will not have any idea where the Russians have come in force?

Anyway - you will accomplish one goal but create another issue unless you find new speed bump units - that is my point.

Glenn

Very true. My posting of this scenario isn´t meant as any suggestion towards changing the german setup in the stock game btw. It was posted as a response to those people above who suggested I make my "own" vision of what tings might have looked like. The only thing I would like to see changed (and the only thing I have lobbied for and suggested you change) in the stock game would be the way the danish forces are represented. And as mentioned above you are of course free to accept all, some or none of the information I have provided, depending on what you see fit.

If you look at the scenario you will see that I did post other units as "screening" speedbumps after consolidating the RjPz´s into slightly bigger and more durable units. This will of course change the way the scenario "plays" in relation to the stock version, but adding 2 more brigades of danes will do this as well ;).

It is my first foray into using the editors btw. I think it shows. If anybody can think of a better way of doing things I am all ears. The main thing here is of course the mythical question of "balance" and whether the attacker stands any chance of fulfilling his victory conditions given a more beefed up NATO side. So far I have only given the attacker slightly more time to compensate. Other balancing measures might be to give WAPA some additional WMDs, even more time or to scale NATO back a bit (The Jutland Battlegroup was also a mobile reserve unit for the Jutland peninsula in general and might have been held back if there was a fear of large scale WAPA airlandings on vital areas (such as airlanding an air assault regiment on the BALTAP HQ in Karup in a decapitation strike).

If you have any other particular questions as to my OOB and scenario design considerations and sources you are of course welcome to ask :)

[Glenn Saunders]

[It is my first foray into using the editors btw. I think it shows. If anybody can think of a better way of doing things I am all ears. The main thing here is of course the mythical question of "balance" and whether the attacker stands any chance of fulfilling his victory conditions given a more beefed up NATO side.

No - I can't think of a better way.

One of the issues I struggled with was NATO Intel. I mean if the WP was suddenly coming down the road, you would figure someone with a phone or a radio would pass this info one.

Another thing I did in another sector was to put small Objectives at key road junctions or choke points so that the NATO Player would see these change hands as the WP columns went through. You have to pick these carefully so that they can't be bypassed easily or without significant delay.

However on the other hand, you can't have too many or it completely buggers up the AI. YOu see the AI , as far as I know - knows what an objective is, but it doesn't do well judging their value. Given two Objectives, one 10 points and one 100 Points, it is differicult to say for sure what the AI would do - hold both - pick the big one or cluster around the small one.

When I was building the stock scns I had to consider the game played from both sides against the AI, (with AI Orders) as well as in PBEM matches.

Anyway - sounds like your enjoying playing with the editors and fiddling with the OOB and in that sense you are clearly getting enjoyment from the game yourself and you work is giving a lot of other people additional enjoyments as well. So in that respects go on you.

Glenn

[JDR Dragoon]

One of the issues I struggled with was NATO Intel. I mean if the WP was suddenly coming down the road, you would figure someone with a phone or a radio would pass this info one.

Indeed. This was coincidentally one of the things that the "Deception" class units on both sides were supposed to accomplish as well. Unfortunately it is quite hard to replicate in an operational level game (I like the way that the CB and EW aspects work though; they give you an indication of where the enemy unit(s) is/are, but doesn´t tell you anything about strenght or type)

Anyway - sounds like your enjoying playing with the editors and fiddling with the OOB and in that sense you are clearly getting enjoyment from the game yourself and you work is giving a lot of other people additional enjoyments as well. So in that respects go on you.

Thanks. I still hope you will find at least some of it useful. Again, if you have any questions about information or sources you are welcome to ask.

(General Note: After some more fiddling my modification of the stock "Afnorth H2H" is now at V2.0). Time to try it out against somebody and see if it actually plays out "balanced" (and now 2.1 :))

[Hans Boersma]

One of the issues I struggled with was NATO Intel. I mean if the WP was suddenly coming down the road, you would figure someone with a phone or a radio would pass this info one.

Another thing I did in another sector was to put small Objectives at key road junctions or choke points so that the NATO Player would see these change hands as the WP columns went through. You have to pick these carefully so that they can't be bypassed easily or without significant delay.

I've been experimenting with the 'dust spotting' feature as to represent the exploits of recon helicopters, recon platoons not represented in the game, LRRP units and, indeed, someone picking up the phone and going "Listen, there's a bunch of Soviet tanks ravaging my back yard, what am I paying tax for anyway!"

The results seem promising; the AI's performance seems to benefit as well. There are some drawbacks though; dust spotting only occurs during daytime and normal weather conditions. Perhaps this function could be adapted to a new spotting feature some time, working in all circumstances (perhaps with variable percentages) and perhaps with a chance of showing not only 'unknown units'.

[JDR Dragoon]

First playtest finished:

A bit of a kerfuffle: NATO forces were virtually wiped out by the end, but they managed to claw a big chunk out of their WAPA opposites. Still, a comfortable "Major Victory" to WAPA with a margin af over 200 points (would have been more if I hadn´t asked the WAPA player to refrain from moving units off-board so I could assess damage after the battle).

-The theme of the scenario ended up being one of NATO forces being defeated in detail. WAPA spent the first 48 hours eating the german 6th PzG at odds warying starting at 3:1 and ending at 6:1 , then fights and wins a meeting engagement with the Jutland Division near the Kieler Canal and spends the rest of the scenario hunting the sorry remnants of both formations to the north. The arrival of the Jutland battlegroup and the UKMF allows NATO to hold out for a ½ day on a line running from Flensburg to the North Sea where the penisula is at its narrowest. After then it was game over.

-Another theme was a WAPA supply crunch during the last 48 hours, stemming from the fact that about 1/3rd of the supply trucks they receive arrive so late and so far away that they have no influence on the scenario. This will of course also have to be rectified.

I can see 4 possible ways to balance this scenario out:

-One variant would look pretty close to the one we are playing now (essentially the stock DF 85 AFNORTH scenario with some more danes thrown in). It should only be played on the premasis that the optional rules for "Explicit Supply" and "Artillery Setup" is in effect. The belgians make a return (mostly to provide NATO with "Deception" capable units and because it is a part of the DF85 timeline). WAPA supply trucks arriving as reinforcements will be spawned at the on-map supply depots instead of at the eastern map edge and their arrival schedule will be sped up a notch

-Variant two is like variant one but also features the german Territorial forces in the area (2 weak infantry brigades and a semi-armoured infantry brigade plus some extra engineers and artillery). This one should be playable without "Artillery Setup" and "Explicit Supply" as madndatory optional rules

-Variant three will be like variant one, but with less WAPA forces (Strike one polish Mech Division, one polish artillery Brigade, the polish airborne and Marine units, one East German Motorrifle Regiment plus sundry army level troops from the WAPA OOB. These forces would have gone to invade the danish isles east of the Great Belt). The area of Hamburg will be greyed out of the playing map as well (it is not the players responsibility as LandJut commander to defend the city). This one should also be playable without "Artillery Setup" and "Explicit Supply" as mandatory

-Variant four will be exactly like variant one, only with NATO forces being given 72-96 hours of warning instead of less than 24 (a "prepared" variant if you will). This will allow more forces to have reached the area of operations before the war breaks out. This one should also be playable without Explicit supply or artillery setup.

I am also toying with the idea of making another scenario that is not based on the DF 85 timeline:

-"LandJut: The likely reality 1985". This one would feature slightly longer warning time for NATO (72-96 hours instead of the less than 24 that the stock DF 85 scenarios are based on). This would mean that more troops will be able to reach their planned defensive positions before war breaks out. On the flip side the Warsaw Pact also gets stronger (WAPA forces and their planned uses will be based on the plan complex used in the two Warsaw Pact exercises "Val 1977" and "Soyuz 1983" found in the former East German archives) and the scenario will be heavy on Nukes which both players will be able to use at will (whether they actually do so is of course up to the players). This scenario is meant to reflect the likely reality of a 1985 conflict to as large a degree as the game allows. I am not sure it will be very fun to play since it is mostly meant as a "recreation" of history (albeit a history that never happened), but I suppose there will be some players to whom the idea of a nuclear fuelled slugfest will be appealing ;).

[JDR Dragoon]

Som minor additional suggested changes to the LandJut OOB[/u]:

-An exception to the above allocation of Morale values (about a 50/50 split between C and D value units in the Jutland Division) is the III. Armoured Battalion/JDR. This unit was the armys "showcase" battalion and also serviced the armys Tank and Infantry Training School which was co-located in the same garrison. It also served as OPFOR battalion for the rest of the army battalions in Jutland, which would periodically go to the Oksbøl training area in order to spar with III/JDR. It was thus the only armoured battalion in the Jutland division that was consciously kept near its TO&E strenght in enlisted personnel all the time. Its two Tank companies and the armoured infantry company is thus rated at "B" (its roundout unit of motorized infantry was still manned with 9 month conscripts and thus retains its "D").

-The parts of the RDAF (Flyvertaktisk Kommando) present in the game has been moved from OPCON of the Jutland Division to LandJut (which should mean that other units under the command of LandJut can also use the RDAF planes without penalty).

-LandJut has also gotten a single 25 man A quality, Deception capable, Heliborne danish SF unit (Jægerkorpset) in OPCON. This follows the logic behind the OOBs of other nations in the stock DF 85 game, where genuine Special Forces/Commando type units are represented, but LLRP type units are not.

-I am still unsure whether or not the Jutland BattleGroup had a single company of old 20 pdr. armed Centurions (some sources says it did, others doesn´t mention it. On the other hand, the sources who doesn´t mention it, doesn´t say anything about the other Battlegroups having old Centurions either, when I know for a Fact that they did. So hmm....). I have tentatively chosen to add it to the OOB for now, mostly to see how it plays in the game.

-So this is about it. This OOB will thus provide the basis for four of the scenario variants outlined above. Have fun.