Strike North - Invasion of Norway April 8 - June 8 1940
Jan 26, 2018 17:06:36 GMT
firehouse and Col. Maczek like this
Post by SgtFury on Jan 26, 2018 17:06:36 GMT
For the last few years I've had this habit of selecting a WWII battle to recreate as an AAM scenario. For 2018 I've decided to design a scenario to depict the German invasion of Norway in 1940. Unlike previous AAM scenarios I’ve designed, this will be a campaign of several sea & land battles covering the two months of the historic campaign. The general idea is to stage multiple one hour games for several rounds. Time will be allowed in between rounds for each team to assess the situation and then allocate operational / strategic reserves to help in the next round of play. So in theory there would be a half hour to set up the first round of games (4 or 5 two person games which will act independently of each other) The round will be timed for 1 hour. Once concluded each side will receive new reinforcements and reuse any units that survived the first round. Then another half hour would be allowed for set up / preps followed by the second round of games. This would repeat for at least two more rounds making for a total of six hours. I’m still working all of this out, so this may change somewhat. I’m debating on adding a fifth & six round which would make the overall length longer (8 hours), but I would break the whole thing up into two 4 hour sessions. So play three rounds in the morning/early afternoon and then a second round in the evening. Players could come and go. Someone could participate in the first rounds of play and others in the second round. It’s just an idea for now.
The main issue is this (and you can give me your thoughts on it); how to keep things somewhat historic while allowing players to come up with a different outcome than what historically happened. How much should the results of one round affect the play of following rounds? How much should the strategic / operational level affect the tactical (miniatures) level of play?
As of now, I’m assuming each round would represent two weeks of actual time. (Perhaps 10 days if there are 6 rounds of play) Things such as weather and supply would be minimized or greatly abstracted for ease of play. Ground, air and sea assets would have great flexibility in movement between rounds since there would be plenty of time to shift things around. Placement of strategic/operational assets would be handled on a strategic map showing Norway and the sea area around it. Each team would have sheets of paper with labels like “Kampfgruppe Dieter”, “MauriceForce”, Task Force or Air Fleet. These would be used by each team to hold units within those groupings. On the strategic map a marker would be place to denote the location of a particular grouping. The map of Norway would have boxes or areas dividing up the land and sea areas. There would also be boxes to denote Scapa Flow to be the British “Home Box” and Denmark / Germany as the German “Home Box”.
At the end of each round, reinforcements would appear in the home boxes and then be moved into the land / sea boxes on the strategic map. The other side would only see markers on the strategic map (UK Maurice Force or German Kampfguppe) which would not say anything about what units are within those groupings. So each team can add or subtract from their groupings and keep it hidden until it’s revealed after the strategic movement / reinforcement phase.
Once this is done, the referee would check to see what is in each land / sea box on the map. Any land / sea boxes with minimal opposing units in them would have their battles resolved with die rolls. Any boxes that have a good amount of units in them would be designated as a battle to be played out with miniatures. The tactical maps would be laid out, players selected, units set up and then play begins. Each individual battle would be no more than 15 units or 150 build points and played out by two players within a one hour time limit. In a sense, each box on the map will have a stacking limit to avoid huge piles of units in any one location. If there aren’t enough miniatures battles to form a fourth or fifth battle, those extra players can be the ones who roll for the results of the minor battles and make decisions on the allocation of mid round reinforcements. (Commander-in-Chief role)
Mid-round reinforcements? Yes, the idea is: Lets say you have friendly units in an adjacent sea / land box that are not part of the initially laid out battle. Perhaps some ground units that could move by transport on the battle map. Or a naval unit in an adjacent sea area that could move closer to bombard the enemy. Or an air unit that was kept in reserve so that it could be scrambled to the aid of a friendly unit that was hard pressed. This would add an operational asset option to the game for both sides. Air power was a big factor in the Norwegian campaign and this will be reflected in the design. The Germans will have their Luftwaffe and the British will have carrier based aircraft along with land bases set up to hold extra squadrons. Each side will be allowed to interdict the others air bases and source of supply. Naval assets will be allowed to help adjacent land units either to bombard or to act as Anti Air cover.
So there is a lot to work out for this scenario campaign design. Right now I'm in the research stage. I'm reading several books on the topic and combing through the old & new Forumini for anything related to Norway and the April-June 1940 period. I've found quite a few custom cards for Norway, United Kingdom, France and Germany which will be very helpful. These will be discussed in the custom cards thread.
I will be posting more and asking for help with unit card designs, scenario rule ideas, etc. I encourage all of you to add your voice and opinion to the discussion.
The main issue is this (and you can give me your thoughts on it); how to keep things somewhat historic while allowing players to come up with a different outcome than what historically happened. How much should the results of one round affect the play of following rounds? How much should the strategic / operational level affect the tactical (miniatures) level of play?
As of now, I’m assuming each round would represent two weeks of actual time. (Perhaps 10 days if there are 6 rounds of play) Things such as weather and supply would be minimized or greatly abstracted for ease of play. Ground, air and sea assets would have great flexibility in movement between rounds since there would be plenty of time to shift things around. Placement of strategic/operational assets would be handled on a strategic map showing Norway and the sea area around it. Each team would have sheets of paper with labels like “Kampfgruppe Dieter”, “MauriceForce”, Task Force or Air Fleet. These would be used by each team to hold units within those groupings. On the strategic map a marker would be place to denote the location of a particular grouping. The map of Norway would have boxes or areas dividing up the land and sea areas. There would also be boxes to denote Scapa Flow to be the British “Home Box” and Denmark / Germany as the German “Home Box”.
At the end of each round, reinforcements would appear in the home boxes and then be moved into the land / sea boxes on the strategic map. The other side would only see markers on the strategic map (UK Maurice Force or German Kampfguppe) which would not say anything about what units are within those groupings. So each team can add or subtract from their groupings and keep it hidden until it’s revealed after the strategic movement / reinforcement phase.
Once this is done, the referee would check to see what is in each land / sea box on the map. Any land / sea boxes with minimal opposing units in them would have their battles resolved with die rolls. Any boxes that have a good amount of units in them would be designated as a battle to be played out with miniatures. The tactical maps would be laid out, players selected, units set up and then play begins. Each individual battle would be no more than 15 units or 150 build points and played out by two players within a one hour time limit. In a sense, each box on the map will have a stacking limit to avoid huge piles of units in any one location. If there aren’t enough miniatures battles to form a fourth or fifth battle, those extra players can be the ones who roll for the results of the minor battles and make decisions on the allocation of mid round reinforcements. (Commander-in-Chief role)
Mid-round reinforcements? Yes, the idea is: Lets say you have friendly units in an adjacent sea / land box that are not part of the initially laid out battle. Perhaps some ground units that could move by transport on the battle map. Or a naval unit in an adjacent sea area that could move closer to bombard the enemy. Or an air unit that was kept in reserve so that it could be scrambled to the aid of a friendly unit that was hard pressed. This would add an operational asset option to the game for both sides. Air power was a big factor in the Norwegian campaign and this will be reflected in the design. The Germans will have their Luftwaffe and the British will have carrier based aircraft along with land bases set up to hold extra squadrons. Each side will be allowed to interdict the others air bases and source of supply. Naval assets will be allowed to help adjacent land units either to bombard or to act as Anti Air cover.
So there is a lot to work out for this scenario campaign design. Right now I'm in the research stage. I'm reading several books on the topic and combing through the old & new Forumini for anything related to Norway and the April-June 1940 period. I've found quite a few custom cards for Norway, United Kingdom, France and Germany which will be very helpful. These will be discussed in the custom cards thread.
I will be posting more and asking for help with unit card designs, scenario rule ideas, etc. I encourage all of you to add your voice and opinion to the discussion.