This is the Greyhound Dash tactical awareness map, as it will be viewed in the UI.
The darker area is the outline that the games scenario map covers.
Please feel free to comment on anything you feel is incorrect in the use of the tactical symbols, and if you think it is giving to much information to the player, that would spoil the fog of war for them.
The darker area is the outline that the games scenario map covers.
Please feel free to comment on anything you feel is incorrect in the use of the tactical symbols, and if you think it is giving to much information to the player, that would spoil the fog of war for them.
Last edited:
SSG D
Member
Is there a reason you can't put the unit identifying info on the counter?
Renato
Member
Beautiful!
kipanderson
Member
Hi,
Hugely impressive stuff..
I learnt long ago, when wargames first really went digital, that the best wargames attract the best talent to help work on them...
This is a classic example.. Congratulations..
.
Command Ops 2.0 is going to be stunner in every way!
All the best,
Kip.
Hugely impressive stuff..
I learnt long ago, when wargames first really went digital, that the best wargames attract the best talent to help work on them...
This is a classic example.. Congratulations..
.Command Ops 2.0 is going to be stunner in every way!
All the best,
Kip.
pekische
Member
Daz, I agree with SSG - the units´ ID could be on the counter. FoW: I guess your situation maps should illustrate what initial intel says. Neither less nor more. And would you have any other variants of the arrows? I can´t decide if I like the used ones. Thx for your effort!
Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor
Panther Games Designer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2014
- Messages
- 3,416
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
- Website
- www.panthergames.com
The style Daz is using for the units icons is classic NATO standard where the unit ID is on the left and its parent ID on the right.
SSG D
Member
Daz and Dave,
The more I look at your map, the better I like it. Especially the arrows. Go for it!!!
The more I look at your map, the better I like it. Especially the arrows. Go for it!!!
Thanks for the feedback guys, I really appreciate it, as it helps to decide on the next step forward, and gives me a chance to explain why things have been done the way they have.
In my opinion this game is more an operational simulator than a game, so I have decided to use the correct symbol terminology as is depicted in FM 1-02 Operational Terms and Graphics, distributed for public release in 2004, by the Headquarters Department of the Army, for my maps.
At least as correct as the uniqueness of this situation allows and my limited knowledge of it permits.
The publication can be found here for download:
army.rotc.umich.edu/public/resources/FM1-02OperationalTerms.pdf
The arrows that I used in the Greyhound Dash map to indicate the Allied units entering from the north of the map, are the ones that indicate units in convoy.
This is because the Allied units in this scenario are racing their reserves through friendly territory to occupy key locations, especially those with bridges, in order to contain the breakthrough of the Axis armoured spearhead.
The Axis formations have just encountered some Allied rear echelon units, on their advance through enemy held territory, and have an axis of advance due north at this time.
It is entirely up to the player to decide the axis of advance from this point on.
The unit information is outside the symbol as Dave has already mentioned because that is the correct method as is detailed below:
In my opinion this game is more an operational simulator than a game, so I have decided to use the correct symbol terminology as is depicted in FM 1-02 Operational Terms and Graphics, distributed for public release in 2004, by the Headquarters Department of the Army, for my maps.
At least as correct as the uniqueness of this situation allows and my limited knowledge of it permits.
The publication can be found here for download:
army.rotc.umich.edu/public/resources/FM1-02OperationalTerms.pdf
The arrows that I used in the Greyhound Dash map to indicate the Allied units entering from the north of the map, are the ones that indicate units in convoy.
This is because the Allied units in this scenario are racing their reserves through friendly territory to occupy key locations, especially those with bridges, in order to contain the breakthrough of the Axis armoured spearhead.
The Axis formations have just encountered some Allied rear echelon units, on their advance through enemy held territory, and have an axis of advance due north at this time.
It is entirely up to the player to decide the axis of advance from this point on.
The unit information is outside the symbol as Dave has already mentioned because that is the correct method as is detailed below:
Last edited:
By the way if anyone is interested in getting started on the Greyhound Dash Scenario playing as Axis, I did quite a detailed AAR on it here:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3588883
Unfortunately I never finished it as I read a book on the Market Garden operation while on holiday, and couldn't wait to get started on the epic, From the Meuse to the Rhine scenario when I got back.
But for anyone that is a bit stumped on how to get started on the scenario playing as Axis, maybe this will help.
It will inevitably contain spoilers if you want to play as Allies, so be warned.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3588883
Unfortunately I never finished it as I read a book on the Market Garden operation while on holiday, and couldn't wait to get started on the epic, From the Meuse to the Rhine scenario when I got back.
But for anyone that is a bit stumped on how to get started on the scenario playing as Axis, maybe this will help.
It will inevitably contain spoilers if you want to play as Allies, so be warned.
Onto the next:
Manhay Crossroads
Historical scenario.
Type: Axis offensive operation. Allies defensive, then counter attack.
Scale: Division
Complexity: Low (133 units)
Start: 24 Dec 1944 21:00
End: 27 Dec 1944 04:00
Duration: 02:07:01 (DD,HH,MM)
Preferred as: Axis (this is a subjective opinion, feel free to speak up if you feel differently)
About a week after the Germans had started operation "Herbstnebel" it became clear that the 6th Panzer Army had failed to break through the American lines on the right flank. 5th Panzer Army in the center had done far better, and the German generals decided to reinforce success in this sector. One of the divisions moved south to widen the breakthrough area was the 2nd SS Panzer Division "Das Reich".
Although hampered by lack of fuel, on December 23th the division captured Baraque du Fraiture. It then moved northwest, with orders to capture Manhay crossroads, and then to swing left to Erezee.
On the Allied side, Field Marshall Montgomery had taken over command of all Allied units on the northern flank of the ‘bulge’. He ordered the American troops to pull back and shorten their defensive line. One of the units ordered to do so was Combat Command A of the 7th Armored Division (which had just arrived from St Vith).
At about 9 pm on December 24 3rd SS Panzergrenadier Regiment supported by tanks of 2nd SS Panzer Regiment started their attack. The timing couldn’t have been worse. The headquarters column of CCA/7th had just lined up inside Manhay when the German Panthers, after brushing aside two American roadblocks, moved in. Retreat turned into a rout.
However, the Americans were determined to push the Germans back. Units from five different divisions (3rd Armored, 7th Armored, 75th Infantry, 106th Infantry and 82nd Airborne) were moved up to stop the SS and recapture Manhay.
The Historical reinforcement schedules for both sides reflect the historical arrival times and locations of units in the battle. Standard reinforcement schedules provide alternative entry locations for some units without favouring one side or the other. The Favour Allies and Favour Axis settings provide alternatives favouring one side or the other.
Manhay Crossroads
Historical scenario.
Type: Axis offensive operation. Allies defensive, then counter attack.
Scale: Division
Complexity: Low (133 units)
Start: 24 Dec 1944 21:00
End: 27 Dec 1944 04:00
Duration: 02:07:01 (DD,HH,MM)
Preferred as: Axis (this is a subjective opinion, feel free to speak up if you feel differently)
About a week after the Germans had started operation "Herbstnebel" it became clear that the 6th Panzer Army had failed to break through the American lines on the right flank. 5th Panzer Army in the center had done far better, and the German generals decided to reinforce success in this sector. One of the divisions moved south to widen the breakthrough area was the 2nd SS Panzer Division "Das Reich".
Although hampered by lack of fuel, on December 23th the division captured Baraque du Fraiture. It then moved northwest, with orders to capture Manhay crossroads, and then to swing left to Erezee.
On the Allied side, Field Marshall Montgomery had taken over command of all Allied units on the northern flank of the ‘bulge’. He ordered the American troops to pull back and shorten their defensive line. One of the units ordered to do so was Combat Command A of the 7th Armored Division (which had just arrived from St Vith).
At about 9 pm on December 24 3rd SS Panzergrenadier Regiment supported by tanks of 2nd SS Panzer Regiment started their attack. The timing couldn’t have been worse. The headquarters column of CCA/7th had just lined up inside Manhay when the German Panthers, after brushing aside two American roadblocks, moved in. Retreat turned into a rout.
However, the Americans were determined to push the Germans back. Units from five different divisions (3rd Armored, 7th Armored, 75th Infantry, 106th Infantry and 82nd Airborne) were moved up to stop the SS and recapture Manhay.
The Historical reinforcement schedules for both sides reflect the historical arrival times and locations of units in the battle. Standard reinforcement schedules provide alternative entry locations for some units without favouring one side or the other. The Favour Allies and Favour Axis settings provide alternatives favouring one side or the other.
Iconoclast
Member
love your new maps Daz!
I wanted to wait until I am back from holidays to comment, but since you movedon to the next project, I will type this on phone ( and I hate touch screens...), thus will not be able to attach files, since i can't download big pdfs, such as the proper FMs.
I think your supply unit in Greyhound Dash looks a little off. What you drew there, is basically a "Supply Division", not a "Division Supply Point", as it probably should be. if you ctrl+f "Supply Poiny" in the FM, you will probably get a hit on the right symbol. should look like a box with a downpointing arrow.
It is posible though that i am completly wrong, can't doublecheck at the moment what I am suggesting.
Regards,
A
I wanted to wait until I am back from holidays to comment, but since you movedon to the next project, I will type this on phone ( and I hate touch screens...), thus will not be able to attach files, since i can't download big pdfs, such as the proper FMs.
I think your supply unit in Greyhound Dash looks a little off. What you drew there, is basically a "Supply Division", not a "Division Supply Point", as it probably should be. if you ctrl+f "Supply Poiny" in the FM, you will probably get a hit on the right symbol. should look like a box with a downpointing arrow.
It is posible though that i am completly wrong, can't doublecheck at the moment what I am suggesting.
Regards,
A
It's a bit of a tricky one this "A".
Dave has indicated in the past that the supply bases are not just supply dumps, but an abstraction of the logistics required to keep a Corp's, Division, or Regiment in the field.
This would include medical aid stations mechanical workshops, specialists, transport, Padres etc, as well as the necessary supplies to keep the combat units in the field.
In this instance 7th Armoured Supply Train is probably best described as a logistics Battalion, of 7th Armoured Division, so I should probably replace the XX with II over the symbol to indicate it is a Battalion strength supply unit.
The Regiment bases would be Coy strength supply units I assume?
Last edited:
It's funny how a lot of us ex forces guys go into the Tree Surgery business.Fantastic work Daz!!!!!
I too am ex forces and have been a tree surgeon since i left in 1997 ! Keep up the good work comrade
I guess its the outdoor life, and the danger that attracts us
If I had stayed in the forces however, I would have retired 10 years ago on a full pension
Hi Daz,
You are correct on supply trains being logistics units. Today, in the US, these are called Sustainment Brigades for the Division and higher echelons and Brigade Support Battalions for the Brigade / Regiment echelon. So the 7th Arm Div Train would be an X for representing a brigade size support unit and any line brigades and regiments would have a Battalion support unit attached.
Looking at old OOB from http://www.history.army.mil/documents/ETO-OB , Here is an example from the 2nd Arm Div:
2d Armored Division Trains
2d Ordnance Maintenance Battalion
Supply Battalion
48th Armored Medical Battalion
Military Police Platoon
You are correct on supply trains being logistics units. Today, in the US, these are called Sustainment Brigades for the Division and higher echelons and Brigade Support Battalions for the Brigade / Regiment echelon. So the 7th Arm Div Train would be an X for representing a brigade size support unit and any line brigades and regiments would have a Battalion support unit attached.
Looking at old OOB from http://www.history.army.mil/documents/ETO-OB , Here is an example from the 2nd Arm Div:
2d Armored Division Trains
2d Ordnance Maintenance Battalion
Supply Battalion
48th Armored Medical Battalion
Military Police Platoon
john connor
Member
All looking good, Daz. Happy New year, mate!
Wish I was a tree surgeon. Or a brain surgeon. One or the other.
If I had stayed in the forces however, I would have retired 10 years ago on a full pension
Or you might have gotten killed....
Peter
Wish I was a tree surgeon. Or a brain surgeon. One or the other.
If I had stayed in the forces however, I would have retired 10 years ago on a full pension
Or you might have gotten killed....
Peter
