GeoNL
Member
Does anyone know the ideal way to represent a line embankment? On the map I have areas with dykes, but also areas with lines across the coast with an embankment of just below 1 meter. I know it's possible to have an embankment while placing a road, but the embankments here do not have a road.
ioncore
Member
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2015
- Messages
- 680
- Points
- 43
- Location
- Germany, Lower Saxony
- Website
- ioncore.livejournal.com
Could you please show the original topo map piece showing both dykes and non-dykes together?
GeoNL
Member
jimcarravallah
Member
Is the Topo map you're using from the time of the battle you're replicating?
I ask because it's my understanding the Dutch landscape was reshaped during the World War II era by deliberate floods or busted dams and dykes from the combat. The embankments appear to be the means to control the overflow of the river, and may actually have resulted in the territory shown today as clear land becoming a bog or swamp because the river had been flooded at some time before the combat took place.
Depending on the height of the embankment compared to the bed, it could be replicated by two contours placed in close proximity to each other to replicate a steep slope. In theory, if you set your contour interval at 5-meter increments, two of them placed almost on top of each other would replicate a 10-meter embankment. You'd have to be fussy to avoid overlapping the lines, but it would replicate a sharp rise.
I used this technique to replicate deep river cuts / ravines in the mountains of a scenario I designed.
GeoNL
Member
Yes, this map is made in 1942. 2 years of occupation at that point.
That specific area had none or barely any fighting as far as I know during the German invasion in 1940. This part of that screenshot is in Groningen, in north of the Netherlands. This area was a complete walkover for Germans in 1940. It was more an afterthought for the Germans. By the time the few real battles way more south were over, the Netherlands were already close to surrendering. Germans were just walking casually through these areas with barely any resistance in this province and the one south of it.
That's the WW2 Dutch bicycle and "museum" army for ya ... Absolute crap. Bad leadership, "WW1" material and no organisation. Thankfully we redeemed ourselves in Korea under the US second "indianhead" division.
I'm gonna try what you suggested. See if it works as I'd prefer it.
Last edited:
jimcarravallah
Member
OK. What I was referring to was reading about flooding east of Amsterdam. Groningen was farther north and slightly west.
I'll be interested to see how your scenario turns out. High fidelity urban combat appears difficult to model with the 100-meter terrain map and the larger standard unit sizes in the Estabs.
You might review some of the discussion on Pegasus Bridge where Bie used a 25-meter grid and smaller units to replicate that battle.
GeoNL
Member
Ah, I see what you mean.
Yes that's true about the high fidelity urban combat, however it's still going to be a relatively big map. I am experimenting with the middle option, not 100, not 25. But 50 instead. See how that goes. Will turn it up if neccesary.
The general idea is to include the whole map, as the Canadians pushed north via Drenthe to reach Groningen. Generally I am planning to stay Semi-Accurate and make it a solely Canadian affair but might include a small Polish segment too, since Polish troops liberated almost everything east of the city of Groningen deep inside the province. However, the Germans will be far less accurate in what I have planned. I will considerably strengthen the defence to make it more fun for that side, since in reality the fact it took several days to take the city of Groningen was more due the fact that the city being very easy to defend than due to the strength of German forces. Morale was low, no cohesion, and only small parts of some SS divisions, Luftwaffe and Wehrmacht were present. Mindset was on survival and retreat. If I would be dead on accurate, the scenario would be almost completely in favour of the Canadians.
The first part of the map I was working on I have finished (see screenshot below, it is 19000 x 15000 meters). That's a bit more than half of what I planned to do. The one I am currently doing (predominantly province of Groningen) will merge/integrate on top of it, since it has the biggest city in the area and the main target for the Allies at the time (is 19000 x 13000). Both combined will mean 19000 width and 28000 height. Which is more or less the size of the Nijmegen map alone.
Here is the finished version of the first part of the map:
As is evident, this part is not so flat as one would expect from most of the Netherlands. Southern part is more "hilly" in comparison to the north. The scale is 1 til 15 meters. Highest point on the map is I believe 14 meters. The map I am planting on top will be a lot flatter, it is in fact mostly below sea level. The city itself is almost completely under sea level too. But as it is not possible (and not very relevant I think) to put something under sea level, it will stay at 0.
For anyone interested in the historic battle of Groningen:
https://www.canadiansoldiers.com/history/battlehonours/northwesteurope/groningen.htm
Last edited:
jimcarravallah
Member
If you're dealing with the maneuver to contact and to end with a confrontation in the urban area, you won't face as many problems modeling the battle.
That's a good catch. You aren't replicating a topographical map as much as using a topographical map to model the terrain issues associated with the battle. From the combat standpoint, the "0" level is the lowest part of terrain where the combat took place -- in some scenarios it's at a mountain pass, and in others, such as yours, it can be below sea level.
If this was what you were trying to replicate in CO2, it would be more difficult to model. High fidelity urban combat involves small cadres of troops (squads and below) fighting building to building along narrow streets -- not easily replicated with even a 25-meter grid, particularly in older cities built on lots of 10-meters width and below.
GeoNL
Member
It is considered the main objective, but it isn't the only objective. I will try to build Groningen in a similar way as Nijmegen and Arnhem are shown ingame.High fidelity urban combat building to building isn't feasible for me in that regard. There's going to be far more objectives I have planned than just that one, such as the Eelde airstrip being another strategic place.
