Contested Lands (1948 Arab Israeli) module

[GeorgeBates]

...but the extended flight time and potential small arms interdiction of the aiming unit would not be that simple to emulate.

Perhaps this could be managed similarly to DC attacks by resolving the attack in a later phase.

The aiming unit would declare an attack against a target in the PFPh and be marked with a PF counter. The TH and TK resolution could occur in the AdvFPh.

Defensive fire would be more difficult, but likely a similar mechanic could be found.

 

[footsteps]

Perhaps this could be managed similarly to DC attacks by resolving the attack in a later phase.

The aiming unit would declare an attack against a target in the PFPh and be marked with a PF counter. The TH and TK resolution could occur in the AdvFPh.

Defensive fire would be more difficult, but likely a similar mechanic could be found.

I've been saying this as well. At least up to the wire-guided missiles used by the Egyptian infantry in '73.

 

[David Goodwin]

Wire guided missiles had their own problems. I f you fired them over power line you were fried. If you fired them over water the lines would short circuit and fly off to oblivion. If you fired them in a city they would hit rubble and break. SS-10/-11 and AT-3 has their own problems, they worked well in the desert but not so well in the cities. That get you past 1973, but not beyond it.

 

[laurent closier]

All,

Please back to the topic. Thanks.

 

[PresterJohn]

All,

Please back to the topic. Thanks.

And that would be ...... Arab-Israeli wars?
Not ideal subject matter for ASL once you get beyond the early '50s if you ask me.
Or were you thinking of something else?

 

[DVexile]

And that would be ...... Arab-Israeli wars?

Well, the title of the thread is about a specific module set in 1948, not any others.

Not ideal subject matter for ASL once you get beyond the early '50s if you ask me.

Which again, fortunately the intended topic of this thread is set in 1948.

Or were you thinking of something else?

I don’t know what he was thinking, but I’m thinking it is annoying to have a thread dedicated to information about a specific upcoming module cluttered with hypothetical discussions about weapon systems not remotely present in said module.

EDIT: Just to add, as someone who has worked in anti-armor weapons development the discussion is interesting, but it would be nice to have it in a different thread so that actual information about Contested Lands doesn’t get lost in unrelated ATGM discussion.

 

[David Goodwin]

Point well taken. We are talking about a civilian army with WW2 weapons as well as homemade items. C-47s, T-6, piper cub, F-51, ME-109s (the Czech version) against Arab Spitfires and C-47s (bombers). German, American, British and Russian tanks. The Israelis had a co-ed army. What's not to like. The Spanish civil war with better weapons. Multiple fighting forces, multiple terrain, both open and Urban. I know I will be buying, hope they extend to 1956 and 1967.

 

[ibncalb]

Are there any new terrain types? Whilst the units and afvs are interesting it's the new core rules that excite me.

 

[Steve H]

Personally, having served there and knowing the terrain, the new arid boards from LFT 15 would work excellent with this module. I do hope that the Israeli squads are not going to have their values over-rated (like Finnish supermen squads), and the Arabs are not under-rated. Otherwise it is like SS vs Partisan squads.

 

[David Goodwin]

I agree, I think the issue for the Arabs are as the same for the Russians now. Poor logistics and graft and corruption by the leadership. In the 1973 war, the Egyptian generals were moving units around the board that only existed on paper.

 

[klasmalmstrom]

...I do hope that the Israeli squads are not going to have their values over-rated (like Finnish supermen squads), and the Arabs are not under-rated. Otherwise it is like SS vs Partisan squads.

Any ideas on what values would be appropriate? Asking out of curiosity...

 

[Steve H]

Well, the Jordanian troops were pretty good, British trained and equipped. I can see them being 457s. Egyptians were not too shabby back in 48 either and should likely be 447s. Lebanese were French trained and equipped and could easily be 447s. Arab militias are likely the Partisan types at 337s or even 336s. In 48, Israelis had a brand new army, had quite a few veterans of WWII as volunteers and were fighting for their very existence. I don't think their firepower or range should be better, but certainly morale wise they should be 458s, 448s and even 438s. I don't think they should self rally like the Finns, but maybe have their same broken morale level while the Arabs rally on one less their normal morale like minors do in ASL. But just my thoughts. I didn't see them in action in 1948!

 

[DVexile]

An interesting question is how should the various Arab armies' tactical leadership and performance be represented. I've only read a handful of books, quite some time ago at that, on conflicts in this region but they all touch on the under performance of the various Arab armies. What is left in the air a bit is what is the root cause of that under performance and how much of it is relevant at the scenario level in ASL?

For example, various "leadership" issues are often cited but is that at the tactical level or higher? There seems to be some debate (or perhaps it differs from conflict to conflict) whether the generals were inept or if instead there was a structural issue with lower level leadership not accurately reporting setbacks and thus guaranteeing that the decisions made by generals would fail since they were based on false information. Such issues seem above the level of ASL either way, but still that's a pretty big open question.

On the other hand, there are also comments about tactical level forces performing quite differently in different situations. For instance, tenacious defense when surrounded and good execution in "set piece" attacks, reasonably structured fall-backs when not under pressure, but difficulty adapting to unforeseen tactical situations and completely unstructured retreats when pursued and pressed (i.e. no ability to reconstitute forces under pressure). This sort of dual personality might be hard to represent just by squad FP/range/morale numbers. Perhaps depending on the overall situation being represented in a given scenario the very same unit might be represented by a different counter (e.g. 1st vs 2nd line) in the OoB or perhaps certain SSR provisions would be made.

Anyway, at the equipment level it is clearly an entertaining hodge-podge of WWII weapons on both sides. More interesting will be to read about the choices made in unit representation. There seems to be an awful lot written about these conflicts but not necessarily a lot of agreement on where the root causes lie. I'm going to be interested in the footnotes for these rule pages!

And as @Steve H said some of the photos of the area look exactly like some of the LFT15 boards! Bring on some hill top arid terrain villages!

 

[Steve H]

An interesting question is how should the various Arab armies' tactical leadership and performance be represented. I've only read a handful of books, quite some time ago at that, on conflicts in this region but they all touch on the under performance of the various Arab armies. What is left in the air a bit is what is the root cause of that under performance and how much of it is relevant at the scenario level in ASL?

For example, various "leadership" issues are often cited but is that at the tactical level or higher? There seems to be some debate (or perhaps it differs from conflict to conflict) whether the generals were inept or if instead there was a structural issue with lower level leadership not accurately reporting setbacks and thus guaranteeing that the decisions made by generals would fail since they were based on false information. Such issues seem above the level of ASL either way, but still that's a pretty big open question.

On the other hand, there are also comments about tactical level forces performing quite differently in different situations. For instance, tenacious defense when surrounded and good execution in "set piece" attacks, reasonably structured fall-backs when not under pressure, but difficulty adapting to unforeseen tactical situations and completely unstructured retreats when pursued and pressed (i.e. no ability to reconstitute forces under pressure). This sort of dual personality might be hard to represent just by squad FP/range/morale numbers. Perhaps depending on the overall situation being represented in a given scenario the very same unit might be represented by a different counter (e.g. 1st vs 2nd line) in the OoB or perhaps certain SSR provisions would be made.

Anyway, at the equipment level it is clearly an entertaining hodge-podge of WWII weapons on both sides. More interesting will be to read about the choices made in unit representation. There seems to be an awful lot written about these conflicts but not necessarily a lot of agreement on where the root causes lie. I'm going to be interested in the footnotes for these rule pages!

And as @Steve H said some of the photos of the area look exactly like some of the LFT15 boards! Bring on some hill top arid terrain villages!

Very well written. I agree about the dubious quality of senior leadership in the Arab armies (too much nepotism which still exists today) but the tactical level leadership at platoon and comany level was not poor. I would agree that 1948 scenarios should have only a few Arab leaders, and more 8-0, 8-1 led while the Israelis should have more 9-1 and 9-0 leaders. Neither had highly developed junior officer or senior NCO training academies at this stage. I wouldn't think we would see a 10-3 leader at all...unless someone wanted a scenario with Moshe Dayan!

 

[David Goodwin]

The best book on the subject is ARABS AT WAR Military Effectiveness, 1948 - 1991 by Kenneth Pollack. Another good book is Numbers, Predictions & War by Colonel T. N. Dupuy. I think that leadership in the Arab units were lacking. Drivers in T-55 tanks died from heat strokes. Good leaders don't let that happen. Maybe that goes with a stratified society.

 

[Count Belisarius]

Second Arabs at War. Good read.

 

[PresterJohn]

Well, the title of the thread is about a specific module set in 1948, not any others.



Which again, fortunately the intended topic of this thread is set in 1948.



I don’t know what he was thinking, but I’m thinking it is annoying to have a thread dedicated to information about a specific upcoming module cluttered with hypothetical discussions about weapon systems not remotely present in said module.

EDIT: Just to add, as someone who has worked in anti-armor weapons development the discussion is interesting, but it would be nice to have it in a different thread so that actual information about Contested Lands doesn’t get lost in unrelated ATGM discussion.

And as long as this module is the end of it, then I think that will be fine. But unfortunately now that the project of "Partisan II" has been raised as a happening, you're going to see people asking for "more".
I would hardly think somebody who has invested in ASL asking for "more" is surprising or alarming. I would say "harden up". Just because it's not a good idea doesn't mean people are not going to think they want it. I'd say let them get it out of their system now.

 

[JRKrejsa]

Well, the Jordanian troops were pretty good, British trained and equipped. I can see them being 457s. Egyptians were not too shabby back in 48 either and should likely be 447s. Lebanese were French trained and equipped and could easily be 447s. Arab militias are likely the Partisan types at 337s or even 336s. In 48, Israelis had a brand new army, had quite a few veterans of WWII as volunteers and were fighting for their very existence. I don't think their firepower or range should be better, but certainly morale wise they should be 458s, 448s and even 438s. I don't think they should self rally like the Finns, but maybe have their same broken morale level while the Arabs rally on one less their normal morale like minors do in ASL. But just my thoughts. I didn't see them in action in 1948!

Did any combatants have enough, or the skill with SMGs, or semi automatic rifles, to justify 5 or 6 firepower? Or was this a war fought with early WW2 surplus weapons?

 

[JRKrejsa]

Personally, having served there and knowing the terrain, the new arid boards from LFT 15 would work excellent with this module. I do hope that the Israeli squads are not going to have their values over-rated (like Finnish supermen squads), and the Arabs are not under-rated. Otherwise it is like SS vs Partisan squads.

Plus one on the LFT 15 boards being excellent. I hope to see more of them!

 

[Futbol]

we need drone rules and counters