F 14 Campaign scenario observations

[jonnymacbrown]

"I think the push for the hole is a very valid strategy, what I have always wondered is why both sides were so concerned with the inner flanks between armies, when in all prior wars the armies always fought with open flanks between them and their neighbors. Obviously, by this time most armies had decided that gaps were a big negative, so a test to see how effective it might be sounds excellent."

Good point and well said. Here is the tactical situation around Tournai as I gamed it out. It is afternoon on the 23rd, French 88th DIT is broken and disordered (highlighted) and German 1st Army will be able to move through Tournai beginning on the 24th.

"Best I can tell, the German infantry won't be across the river there until the very end of day 2, which then puts the British releasing in the morning and no real risk to their rear, and as he has mentioned a flank threat is historical, whether from the entire army or lesser forces. That is Ed's only concern, that the Brits not be cut off early on."

Yes that seems to be the case. But I'd surely rather approach this game with this movement and not attack Mons directly. This movement by 1st Army seems like the only logical approach, and why not? Elements from 2nd Army can still take the BEF in flank and cover any gap with 1st Army.

"I suggested taking out a rail hex or 2 around the right wing, to prevent a dash across the river at Tournai, as I did that I got a few units across before the French blocked the rail line, but that didn't help much."

I never thought about that: Moving German units bye RR movement to accomplish this strategy would seem to be beyond the pale and must be banned. :angry: Jonny

[Ricky B]

"I suggested taking out a rail hex or 2 around the right wing, to prevent a dash across the river at Tournai, as I did that I got a few units across before the French blocked the rail line, but that didn't help much."

I never thought about that: Moving German units bye RR movement to accomplish this strategy would seem to be beyond the pale and must be banned. :angry: Jonny

Agreed, I wouldn't continue a game with someone that tried the RR trick behind my front lines, but wanted to see the impact of it, and it was fairly minimal in this case.

Rick

[Mr Grumpy]

However.......although i agree that the use of RR to accomplish this would be in bad taste, can i play devils advocate and say we have to remember that there are/have been members of the community who believe that anything that is not cheating is acceptable and it is for the designer to prevent this type of play rather than them curbing their desire to win. :chin:

So in this case if this tactic could be prevented by just breaking a couple of vital rail lines then that should be done, then their is no temptation to try this move. ;)

[Ricky B]

Definitely, it isn't cheating or unfair - but I would probably let the other player win if it was that important to him, and move on to another game, myself - assuming something wasn't blocked ahead of time - or play it out without much effort if a short game. Not worth it to me to play a long game against the RR raiders for example :). Never had anyone try it behind the lines anyway, that I recall, and there is a lot of gray area too on where a front line might lie!

Rick

[Mr Grumpy]

Indeed, finding opponent(s) who like to play a PBEM game in the same spirit as yourself is an important part of enjoying these titles.

[Volcano Man]

Good point Rick, a game / match is only as fun as the opponent you play it with. The "win at all costs" personality is not exactly the most enjoyable person to wargame with. :(

Yes that seems to be the case. But I'd surely rather approach this game with this movement and not attack Mons directly. This movement by 1st Army seems like the only logical approach, and why not? Elements from 2nd Army can still take the BEF in flank and cover any gap with 1st Army.

With all due respect, I think you might be a little too timid of the BEF. Are they powerful? Certainly, without a doubt they are, yes. They aren't mythical though, and whether you engage them on the Canal du Centre or not, you will still run into them again along another canal or river between there and Paris. The sooner you engage them the better, you can't just keep avoiding them / running from them.

As I mentioned before too, the Germans (and French) - by design - are almost Borg like (pardon the Star Trek reference). The Germans can replace losses with relative ease, as long as they are well supplied and in good order. On the other hand, in the early campaign (not the late campaign) the BEF recovers no losses. What you kill is gone for good until the late (Race to the Sea) campaign when they start receiving recovery. If the Germans lose 20 men in a single shot of rifles, and the British unit loses only 5, well, you are chipping away at them slowly and at some point many of their units will become a non factor as their fire gets reduced with increasing losses. Press home an assault and even at 3:1 losses you are making your impression felt. The no replacement / recovery is a game abstraction sure, but it is a necessary abstraction to represent the historical truth: the BEF was a powerful yet finite resource of professional soldiers. So, you need to start chipping away at them as soon as possible or I think you will run into problems later (if you are playing a human). I can't imagine what a full strength BEF will be able to accomplish by the end of the campaign -- the allied player will just let you have their full weight at the end and all that avoiding and dancing around them will be for naught. :eek1:

So, my advice to German commanders is, do not totally subscribe to the mythical hype of the BEF, they are not invincible. Historically von Kluck kept after the BEF and never let up: he never game them more than a brief moment of respite and by the 1st Battle of the Marne, the BEF was chipped away and fatigued to the point that they weren't much of a factor (until they could rest again for the 1st Battle of the Aisne).

I still say the best strategy is to do what was historical: attack through Tournai with HKK.2 and II.AK, and attack the BEF at the Canal du Centre to bloody both the Germans and the British. HKK.2 and II.AK continues to push around the flank, forcing the BEF to withdraw or get trapped at Maubeuges (if they stay on their position on the canal). So, either way the move to the west to Tournai, which was historical with the HKK.2 and II.AK) will force them to withdraw -- that part is inevitable. The difference is, you are not engaging them where, you can at least destroy (or at least badly maul) three or four British infantry battalions in the Mons bend alone (Nimy). But that opportunity is lost if you avoid them. Oh well, I just want to offer up "the other side of the coin". Still bypassing them is a good and valid strategy to be sure, but I just want to offer up why you would do the alternative (attack the BEF).

Speaking of which, if you are at Tournai on the 24th, the BEF gets released in full on that day so it looks like there are no issues here and that my initial concern of getting behind they BEF before they are released is not valid. So other than a few broken rail lines here and there to prevent "rail blitz", I don't think I need to do anything to that area. That is good to know -- and we can all breathe a sigh of relief! ;)

:soap:

[Mr Grumpy]

Some great posts and information in this thread, just the kind of mature and detailed discussion we love a this forum, thank you to everyone who has thrown their ideas into the hat about how the German player might handle his forces at the start of the CG.

However i think we have flogged this subject to the bone, it appears that Ed will need to break a couple of vital rail lines to prevent a "rail blitz" strategy and that was an important find, what we need to do now is play the CG in a PBEM game much further on to see what may or may not happen if a German player plays the historical attack on the BEF or a alternate swing to the west round the BEF flank, ONLY then will we have a better idea if one or both strategies will work or not and even then the multiple variations of luck and player skill still might not give us the definitive answer and that is what makes these games so enjoyable.

[Mike Bowen]

I never cease to be amazed at the knowledge and ability to share said knowledge that the Blitz members have. Also I think it is true that all these games are excellent historical tools with the best information as to OOB available and you can learn so much from them.

The notes in this game are beyond excellent.

Thank you for this game now hurry up and do the Austrians in 1914

[Dog Soldier]

With all due respect, I think you might be a little too timid of the BEF. Are they powerful? Certainly, without a doubt they are, yes. They aren't mythical though, and whether you engage them on the Canal du Centre or not, you will still run into them again along another canal or river between there and Paris. The sooner you engage them the better, you can't just keep avoiding them / running from them.

IIRC from reading about this campaign, it was a combination of good British marksmanship, fire discipline so to speak, and the German use of large blocks (literally!) of men when attacking. The blocks were left over tactics from the attack column formations of the Napoleonic wars. The British rifles were .303 caliber IIRC from memory and had a high muzzle velocity. Thus it was remarked by British soldiers at the Mons that "each bullet found two or more billets", a phrase that sends chills when you think on it's true meaning.

I suppose that casualty rates should be attributed to the difference in quality between the BEF and German 1st Army units to simulate this issue at Mons. The BEF quality will degrade from prolonged contact as Ed suggests. It was the lesson from the assault on the canal that caused the German 1st Army to then make the successful flanking moves that forced the BEF back to the Battle of the Marne positions. Sounds like the game has this quite correct.

After Mons the Germans did not attack again in "large blocks of men". At least I do not recall reading that they did. I am not certain of the formations used by the Germans in the Slaughter of the Innocents later that year. That disaster has been ascribed to a lack of training for the young German college recruits. Easily modeled by the quality of the units.

Dog Soldier

[Volcano Man]

After Mons the Germans did not attack again in "large blocks of men".

Just something to add (you reminded me of it):

Right, the Germans can attack at any moment in F14 in dense formations of men as is described in the historical texts, in the game this is represented by a stack of three infantry battalions in a single hex. When a single infantry battalion is in a hex then it is understood to be the skirmish tactic. There are times when both are useful, but when fighting against the BEF it is always better for the Germans to use the skirmish behavior of one battalion forward and two behind (keep the regiment aligned like this). The one battalion up front is the skirmish battalion that will "draw fire" and two to the rear to press home the assault at the right moment.

I think during testing we had an initial habit of cramming everything up front and adjacent, thus creating these huge dense blocks of men, with horrific casualties occurring from British rifle fire because of it. "Stop doing that. Go to open skirmish order!" was the cry. ;) I think the good thing represented is, how you fight against the French is not necessarily how you want to fight against the British, so you have to work on two specific sets of tactics to be successful.