Author Topic: GV scenario (Read 1110 times)

Bannor · « **on:** October 15, 2007, 06:30:07 PM »

I was just curious if the CM's might be planning a GV scenario in one or three frames in a future FSO night. Christmas is around the corner and that seems like a good time for a Battle of the Bulge type of scenario?

Just a thought!

humble · « **Reply #1 on:** October 15, 2007, 06:41:24 PM »

You know I'd actually love to see a GV FSO one time. Actually having a chance to use real tactics etc...

Even better would be a combined arms type setup with limited jabo capabilities...using our normal 140 players a side to have 120GV's and 1 tac air squad a side with a real target to attack/defend. Do P47s and F8's or similiar or stukas and IL-2s...or lend lease havocs (hehe:aok )

pez · « **Reply #2 on:** October 15, 2007, 09:45:41 PM »

wouldn't be to hard and there and there are always Ju87s and il2s for kurst type engagement.

say 50/50 air/ground

50/50 divebombers/fighters

60/40 russian/german

haven't check to see if there is a map though.

Virage · « **Reply #3 on:** October 15, 2007, 11:05:27 PM »

I'd like to see gvs in an FSO too. The question is how do you add them? I don't think it should be all gvs and they should not be a turkey shoot for the flyboys.

MWL · « **Reply #4 on:** October 15, 2007, 11:32:56 PM »

Greetings,

Hey, great idea! Take any SPI / Avalon Hill / GHQ scenario! Up the numbers appropriately (I am thinking we ain't got riflemen) so an RCT / Kampgruppe x2 level should work.

Regards,

SuBWaYCH · « **Reply #5 on:** October 16, 2007, 03:43:36 PM »

Tank fighting would be a great idea. Lets say you get 50-70 gv's per each side and You get 1 tactical supply squadron appiece. The rest of the field would be air support / ground attack.

REP0MAN · « **Reply #6 on:** October 16, 2007, 05:24:27 PM »

My opinion is split here. On one hand, I love to GV and think it would be a lot of fun.

...BUT....

Adding air support/defense will just make for easy GV kills. One life events would be quick due to the ease of killing a GV in the game with other GVs. One shot, one kill most of the time. It would be a jousting match with lifespans cut very short.

I thought about allowing only a small amount of fuel and ammo for GVs then enabling a C-47 squad to deliver supplies to the front line. These supply planes could be guarded by a fighter squadron and attacked by another fighter squadron. The drive of the attacking GV force would be metered by the success of the supply squadron and escorts getting their jobs done. Maybe a three life event for C-47s, two lives for GVs and single life for fighters.

This, of course, is my personal opinion and does not reflect the opinions or future plans of the Aces High CM Team or Events staff.

Still, very much a worthwhile discussion.

Bannor · « **Reply #7 on:** October 16, 2007, 07:38:17 PM »

Interesting concept Repoman. I like the C47 air train. One thing about the begining of the Bulge battle, was the weather was too poor to allow any real air cover so ground attackers would be out of the question. The use of the C47 adds a little flavor to the campaign.

And then there's the Eastern Front with the T34, Panzer/Tiger Battle. I'm not sure exactly what objectives could be made with gvs, but to satisfy the non-gver, an air campaign can be used as a seperate attack on the map.

And lastly, I think it would be nice in the MA and in FSO if we could have some bridges to blow up.

humble · « **Reply #8 on:** October 16, 2007, 08:17:44 PM »

How about a timed respawn to reflect a unit being "rearmed"....

Example the usmc/71 is tasked with a meeting engagment with FATE scheduled to passthru at T+10 minutes. USMC's goal is to locate and establish contact and identify/create an axis of advance toward the designated objective. Fate's job is to engage and attrite at the designated point of attack and in turn will be passed thru at T+20 by a third unit. USMC survivors would "rally" to the 'inward shoulder of the advance to screen for a counterprobe and at T+20 would "respawn" to full strength and be replaced by the surviving members of FATE in the reserve roll as USMC moved forward to be passed thru.

Real life armored combat involves alot of "handoffs" as units become combat ineffective...the reality is that attrition was very high for all but the toughest tanks (tigers etc). In one chapter of deathtraps the author talks about a colume of 17 shermans that had just been refitted and rolled out at 10PM to join an attack in progress. By 3PM the same day 15 had been destroyed in combat.

REP0MAN · « **Reply #9 on:** October 16, 2007, 10:23:26 PM »

All very good ideas gentlemen.

Bannor makes a great point too; Not everyone likes the GV game. I believe if the event is based solely in GVs, the attendance would suffer. The battle would need a good split, or even a little more aerial battle. It's tough to gauge how a GV event would fair with the our faithful attenders. We will be bringing this discussion into the CM forums though, don't you worry

sgt203 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 17, 2007, 02:18:19 AM »

Interesting ideas...

I actually like the GV component idea..

Yes they could be easy kills for JABO's but you could always give the fighters, bombers and JABO's differing targets and they are not to engage the GV's.. Give the a more tactical assignment, such as attacking supply depots and defending same from the air.

I also like the idea of a full "respawn" for GV'ers at a certain time within the scenario to replicate the unit being reinforced for combat operations..

It would also be intersting to add limited M-3's right into the operation to roll with the ground force as their supply unit in the field.. ( then again who would like the idea of driving an M-3 or C-47 for that matter in an FSO)..

Could really add another dimension to the FSO adding all sorts possibilities for scenarios, field captures, CV's spawning in LVT's to simulate attack landings to complete an objective.....

Nice idea!!!

<>

Newman · « **Reply #11 on:** October 17, 2007, 03:03:38 AM »

Watch for Operation Husky Mk2!

Mistakes were made in MK1, and lessons learned.

SALUTE!

Newman

Bannor · « **Reply #12 on:** October 17, 2007, 06:20:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by sgt203
Interesting ideas...

It would also be intersting to add limited M-3's right into the operation to roll with the ground force as their supply unit in the field.. ( then again who would like the idea of driving an M-3 or C-47 for that matter in an FSO)..

Could really add another dimension to the FSO adding all sorts possibilities for scenarios, field captures, CV's spawning in LVT's to simulate attack landings to complete an objective.....

Nice idea!!!

<>

Perhaps the gv's having more than 1 life would solve that dilema if squad co's tasked their members at random with supply duty with one of their lives.

Thanks for the interest in this.

REP0MAN · « **Reply #13 on:** October 18, 2007, 01:14:57 PM »

or, the squad that gets M3 duty first life, gets fighter second lives.

Great ideas guys.

humble · « **Reply #14 on:** October 18, 2007, 05:29:03 PM »

During regular FSO we all pull "duty" we dont like. I think the rank and file would give it a try IF the various squad CO's were OK with the idea. I also think "slit squad would work. Lets say for every 10 guys you have 7 ground and 3 air. So you might have a squad that elects a M3 supply guy and 3 jabo. Another might use a jeep for supply/scout and 3 fighter/jabo.

In a way I think the ability to actually use "your" airpower might be appealing. Having your own squaddies stacked overhead a 12k while you feel around for the right pressure point and then roll your ords in....in effect you've got your own armor, FAC & TAC air. Smaller squads would have to band together for enough #'s of course.