Salerno - September 1943

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe, DCRBrown

Post Reply
T13A
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Salerno - September 1943

Post by T13A »

Hi

I'm putting together a scenario based on the German counter attack on the allied bridgehead at Salerno in September 1943. I'm thinking that vineyards should be treated exactly the same as orchards are in the rules. I'm also thinking that the defenders in this case (i.e. British or Americans) should get 3 artillery missions (rather than the defenders normal 2 missions) based on their general artillery dominance including the off shore naval support, but not sure if this should affect the points available as per page 85 of the rulebook.

Grateful for any thoughts.

Cheers Paul
nikjen66
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:20 pm
Location: Cambridge UK

Re: Salerno - September 1943

Post by nikjen66 »

Hi T13A

If you’re doing a scenario I wouldn’t worry about points. Just make the game playable for both sides.
User avatar
IanKH
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:38 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Salerno - September 1943

Post by IanKH »

T13A - I Agree with N66. The points system is for friendly make up games. If you're making a scenario don't worry about points, think of historical balance and playability instead.
micstri
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 10:46 am

Re: Salerno - September 1943

Post by micstri »

Hi Paul,

I have made up a four scenarios for O Group recently based on an excellent book about Operation Epsom in Normandy ('Over the Battlefield Operation Epsom, Ian Daglish, 2007). It has topographical maps matched with aerial reconnaissance photos from the period. These make an excellent resource for creating table layouts. It also has good information about the orders of battle.

After doing the points calculations for the historical orders of battle, it was clear to me that using them would mostly result in highly one-sided scenarios. This is not surprising as commanders try to ensure that they have the forces necessary for certain victory. Highly one-sided scenarios are interesting in the context of a campaign, as multiple Chain of Command campaigns show, but we don't yet have a campaign system for O Group.

Consequently I have done the following steps to create an playable O Group scenario from a historical encounter:

1. Identify the side with the most detailed historical orders of battle for the forces, which in most cases appears to be the US and British because of greater documentation available from the period and the many histories written. For example, in the Operation Epsom break in attacks, which were made by 4 battalions, each battalion had its full complement of support. Each infantry battalion should have had a supporting squadron of Churchill VI tanks with 75mm guns, though for 3 of the 4 attacking battalions the rain, traffic jams and mines prevented the tanks reaching the infantry to provide support. Thus of the two scenarios that I created for the break-in attacks, one had some Churchills in support and one had none.

2. Calculate the points for this side, which in the above examples gives 22 points for the core battalion with carrier platoon, support platoon and D company. This is not the full battalion support available, but I wanted smaller games that us newbies could play in about 4 hours (though that support list results in a large battalion). For the attacking battalion that got tanks, I added just 1 troop (platoon), which is another 11 points, again to keep the game size doable.

3. Using the points guidance in section 18 pg 85 I then set the points total for the opponent forces, which in the two example scenarios were German defenders with 12 to 17 points and 17 to 22 points respectively.

4. Then using the historical orders of battle for guidance, I create an opponent's force list within those point ranges. The German defenders of Operation Epsom were SS panzer grenadiers. This gives 10 points for the core battalion with no material support (except a platoon of halftracks). In Operation Epsom the Germans didn't have tanks available to defend the break in attacks. They only had battalion AT weapons, so I completed the German army list for the first scenario with Pak 40 section (4 pts) and 2 panzerschreck sections (2 pts).

For the second scenario I added more battalion support to create an army list with 2 MMG sections (3 pts), 2 PaK 40 sections (6 pts), 2 panzerschreck sections (2 pts), 1 platoon leader's halftrack (1 pts).

I have played each scenario 3 times against different opponents and solitaire. My learnings are that: a) the steps above did result in playable scenarios with a historical basis; b) one has to play to panzer grenadier strengths to get value from the extra 5 pt cost (doh) and; c) based on game outcome statistics it appears that the combination of points system and deployment rules make it harder to defend, but not overwhelmingly so - good tactics will generally pay off.

Regards and thanks,
Michael
Peter
Posts: 1604
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:41 pm

Re: Salerno - September 1943

Post by Peter »

Good information, thanks.
Post Reply