F '14 Flanders campaign German reinforcements deployment issue

[ComradeP]

Aside from the reinforcement issue at the map edge, which seems to be limited to a handful of units, the 3000 point objective in La Bassee at the map edge is a problem for the Central Powers, as it's guarded by Fixed units that will withdraw in about a day and right next to a strong Entente force.

One of the issues that you'll always have with meeting engagement style campaigns is that players can create ahistorical situations through knowing where the enemy forces start and marching forward or backward at a timetable that makes it difficult for the opposing forces to deploy or follow the historical strategy. An example of the Grand Campaign A scenario would be moving V Armée into the Ardennes, which has its own advantages and drawbacks but which does allow you to move much further than IV Armée is likely to get as it will walk into advancing Germans.

In the case of the Flanders campaign and the scenarios derived from it, the Entente can stage a forward defense with relative ease. In the Ypres campaign, the division holding Menin withdraws at the end of the first day, leaving a large gap in the German line. Unlike in the Ypres campaign, the forward Entente cavalry units are not Fixed at the start of the Flanders campaign.

The cost on the long term might be high, but as you're likely to lose many of the men in the BEF, you might as well do it when they're holding objectives that initially start in the hands of the Central Powers. The situations this can create can lead to units arriving behind enemy lines or in positions where their use is limited due to the enemy being in a threatening position.

There's not a lot a scenario designer can do about it, as you can't cover every eventuality, but something like reshuffling some of the objective hexes to make an early push less strong an opening move for the Entente might help. A competent Entente player should be able to push the Germans back across the Canal de la Haute Deule south of Loos, which swings the point balance 4550 points in their favour.

[Volcano Man]

OK, done. I have improved the situation quite a bit here for the next update.

-Added a few German (lower) supply sources in La Bassee (makes sense if a unit is moving across the canal)
-Added text on the map about the unit arriving there
-Improved the overall situation of the German units that start in the town itself (these were weakened too much I think)

That should cover it.

Either way, despite this update or its current situation - I think the key here is that the Germans must be VERY aggressive flinging themselves back into the British here to the north of La Bassee, and should NOT be passive, otherwise La Bassee will get cut off. As the reinforcements arrive (XIII.RK), they should be sent towards Armentieres with all haste, while the VII.AK contracts towards La Bassee area (historically all of these things happened and 13.ID pulled back and moved over into La Bassee to defend it).

I suppose also the objective at La Bassee could get removed altogether, but the problem there is that it was indeed a focal point of the allied advance from the northwest so I am against that. Also, I have no doubt that the Germans could take it back if it is lost, later in the campaign at least as more reinforcements pile into the sector.

Thanks for the feedback. :)

[BigDuke66]

And thanks to you for your constant improvements!

[ComradeP]

Thanks for the continued improvements as always Volcano Man.

Would it be an option to split the La Bassée points up between the village (1500), Lorgies (1000) Fournes-en-Weppes (1000) and adding the 300 VP's from Le Pilly to the objective north of the word "Canal" southwest of Loos (which would also make the area less crowded in terms of VP's)? This would limit the "edge of the map gaming" and would hopefully entice the players to a more natural advance.

Technically, both sides are still trying to prevent stalemate and want to stay on the offensive at the start of the scenario, and a breadcrumb trail of objectives like on the ridge is perhaps more representative of a more static situation where small gains matter. We know how the battle went and that the operation would turn into a war of attrition, but at the start of the offensive both sides didn't or were hoping it wouldn't.

La Bassée being worth much more than the neighbouring objectives, as a village with no inherent strategic advantages of its own if the ridge overlooking it or the road leading through it are not held has little strategic use in the scenario due to the hexes south of it being illegal. It being located at the edge of the map makes it less likely that a historical (counter)attack will develop "naturally" in the way you describe because attacking into the area turns into "La Bassée or bust" as there's not much of a reward in terms of VP's unless you can (re)capture the village.

[burroughs]

Yes, thanks Ed; I was only - and still am a bit - puzzled (but not surprised as a matter of fact) with your numerous attempts to discredit certain details and circumstances of my approach yet at the same time admitting to refuse to read what I had written. I think I'll also skip further comments here then in a likewise manner.

Nevertheless, I couldn't restrain myself:

" ... town of Ypres. Once sufficient forces could be brought up, Sir John French had a plan to use this bridgehead position to launch an offensive towards Menin and then, perhaps, on to Lille ..." - an excerpt from the situational description of the 1st Ypres scenario, "The Salient is Formed".

So let me ask a rhetoric question: again - what was wrong with my BEF offensive towards Lille?

[ComradeP]

burroughs, I don't think there was anything wrong by itself with the way you advanced, but I believe what Volcano Man was trying to say is that as reinforcements don't have dynamic placement locations and stick to a roughly historical timetable, not all strategies can be countered through changing reinforcement arrival locations or times.

As units only have a single arrival location unless he makes a strategy option purely for those units, the only thing that can be done is make the arrival hex protected which has its own problems as it would mean that if the fighting hasn't moved on, the Entente forces suddenly end up being Broken. A strategy option purely for the Fusilier regiment is possible of course (with a second option of having it arrive on the road east of Douvrin near the unnamed village), but the need for implenting it depends on how common your strategy is.

As an aside: though reaching the canal is not that difficult, taking Lille doesn't seem likely. The Entente has "siege guns" but either no or very limited (in case I overlooked them) artillery units actually of the siege gun type that could deal with the forts around Lille.

The Central Powers player can always choose not to deploy the Fusilier Regiment until he launches a counterattack and clears the area, or not at all.

[Volcano Man]

Yes, thanks Ed; I was only - and still am a bit - puzzled (but not surprised as a matter of fact) with your numerous attempts to discredit certain details and circumstances of my approach yet at the same time admitting to refuse to read what I had written. I think I'll also skip further comments here then in a likewise manner.

Wow. Not sure what to say to that - this is a first. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder and you need to see someone about getting it removed.

I think you are mistaking skimming with not reading the post at all.

I thought I implied clearly that:

a) I didn't fully understand the issue, as in, ***what exact units you were referring to (the ones that were arriving in your rear areas)***.
b) All I want is a clear definition of the "problem" so I can look at it and hopefully improve the issue - but I have to avoid lengthy discussions, due to lack of time.

...and perhaps not so clearly (in other threads) that...

c) I don't have a lot of time lately due to personal issues (my job is keeping me very busy), but at the same time I am trying to work on the next title in the series but would still like to listen to the community, and as such I have to skim through posts in the forum out of necessity, otherwise I cannot read anything here at all. Sorry, but this is a fact, and its not just your posts.

As for this perceived discrediting I did to you, if you are referring to my question about whether your two opponents quit because of this attack to the south, I was only asking if the attack towards the south puts the campaign out of reach (overruns too many objective points? overruns German reinforcement zones?) and if that was why they quit. The question and the answer helps me discover if the campaign has a major flaw in this area or not, it has nothing to do with discrediting you, nor was I suggesting what you were doing was gamey. The allies were on the attack in the sector.

[DaveMic]

Volcano Man said "... I am trying to work on the next title .."
That's excellent news !!!
Volcano a little question.
I send you a few weeks ago an email via the blitz forum
to date no reply ..; (
Is it possible to add the names of French and German divisions commanders ??


Burroughs I wait your turn to crush your Teutonic offensive. ;)

[burroughs]

A chip then. Thanks Volcano dad.

Apparently your skimming has failed to locate in my post what you still seem to keep asking me to provide. Making me rewriting what is already in there is a sign of neglect at best if not patronizing with the lack of respect for my time and patience while I am trying to provide feedback and yet still you want the same thing from me for yourself like I hadn't offered any. Do I really demand to much? The two first posts were lengthy because I did provide all the details I thought might be necessary (including the tactics adopted in the first attempt you keep asking me about).
You really intend to make the fact that a guy lost the will to carry on and vanished on me without a word into a meaningful opinion on the conduct of operations? Come on. If that will make you happy I came to the conclusion he was broken by the French attack in the north? Could I? Should I? Dunno for sure - l say again: he vanished.

I won't get into editor during my game still on as it is unfair towards my opponent; don't think a loyalty is something out of place here. I may provide a save game file and I think you can see it yourself if you want, but you require that from me what I cannot offer due to the reason above. So whether those were fusiliers from Hannover or Bavarians is up to you or whoever cares about.

Now, it's autumn 1914, WWI in the west - do I really need to explain that the German formations appearing behind the Entente lines when the Race to the Sea is over in the area where " the Allies were on the attack in this sector" is a flaw?

I am also a human being and have commitments other than PBEMs, but I have also paid for that so please do not turn me into an irate client treated as a nuisance.

Chill out Dawid, the doom is coming. Can't you see am fully embattled here?

[Volcano Man]

Well, I am sorry you feel insulted, that was never my intent at the start of the thread. I was also trying to explain why I couldn't devote time to getting into a lengthy rhetorical discussion about the scenario. I appreciate the time you took to explain what you did in the first several posts, and the effort is not lost because you made those comments on a public forum that can be discussed by others.

I read the posts again, just now, and essentially I see nothing there about what I originally asked for: which units were arriving in your rear? This is a critical element I must know to look into fixing the problem, before going off on a wild goose chase. Many units arrive in that scenario. You said you didn't want to open the editor and look because it was unfair to your opponent. Fair enough, then he could tell me (I assume that was him who did). I figured out one of them after searching for some quite some time and tried to improve the situation with it.

Other than that, I cannot take everything that a player does into account in these longer, and often very complicated scenarios, especially when it comes to the overall strategic situation and what played out historically. I could create Strategy/Operations that try to account for a-historical allied advances, but then it leads down a path of a variables that can be difficult to predict and impossible to accommodate for all possibilities. That said, the basic lack of objective hexes to the southeast should be what limits the allied side from advancing past the Canal de la Haute Deule which is considered an attack into the German reinforcement areas.  If it does not, then to me the allied player has no other intent than to try to overrun German reinforcements and that cannot be allowed (hence the protected areas).  All you can really do in a situation like this is reference the Protected Hexes feature. If you see shaded areas then stay out of them as they are "off limits". Other than this, if the allies advance into them then they are fair game to be broken and pushed back with all sorts of possibly strange results like broken units everywhere, units in behind you, etc.

That said, if I have reinforcements arriving unprotected away from the map edge then this would certainly be a mistake on my part *and I want to know which units that arrive on what date to fix it*. So far, I couldn't find anything other than the unit I improved; all others seem to be protected. But did I miss something? Should I spend hours going through the reinforcements line by line? Or is it reasonable to be able to ask the person reporting the "issue" to help me narrow down the search and/or expect that person to do a little investigative work and single out the unit?

I am also a human being and have commitments other than PBEMs, but I have also paid for that so please do not turn me into an irate client treated as a nuisance.

Right, but with all your commitments, are you also designing and creating the next title in the FWWC series that people are waiting patiently for, in your spare time? Are you also trying to read multiple threads from the community to go back and revisit old works while doing that? These games take a massive amount of time and effort to research and create, and this is on top of all the other commitments that someone may have. I am not complaining nor asking for sympathy here, I was simply trying to have you be understandable and reasonable, and I was attempting to explain that I am balancing both real life job commitments, playing my own PBEM games (I love to do it just as everyone else does, why shouldn't I be able to play too?), and the time sink of designing the next title. Apparently I am failing miserably at balancing it all, as I have created an irate customer who demands that I stop everything to lend an ear to something he subjectively feels is a major flaw. Then when I try to do something to help, I get it all thrown back into my face.

This is one of those times that makes me wonder why I bother TRYING to listen to feedback and going back and revisiting something that, by all accounts, is a 'finished work'. Your subsequent irate posts here certainly make me question that. At this point, after all of this, I see you as unreasonable and ill tempered. You could convince me otherwise, or confirm it.