Umpire AAR for December 27th CPX
Map106c v101- A map I made depicting the Wake Island atoll (Peale,
Wilkes, and Wake islands)
Custom Scenario USMC this was played with WWII units
Plan: Well there was no plan per-say. I had decided that a static
defense would not be much fun for a player so I filled that roll. (more
on that later) Blue was to be those who showed up. Ended up we had
four Players from the get go and the division of forces worked well. The
plan as it was for Bluefor to assault across designated beaches (we
used Red One, Red Two, and Green Two.
Players:
Bonxa- USMC battalion
Rattler- had control of a pack howitzer battalion and the off map
artillery (ships providing fire support)
JohnfMonahan- USMC battalion who later dropped and Cheo stood up as
commander after observing for a while (not the usual course of action-more
on that later)
Bernard- USMC battalion
Major H dropped in to observe and chat a bit
How things went:
There were some coordination problems with one player not able to see
the place names via F6 nor having the overlays available. By using
coordinates this was overcome.
Initially players were commenting that contact was not made. I had
set the Redfor engagement ranges to 333m to let them get close. One the
landings were taking place or about to I started setting blocks of
units to maximum engagement ranges. The battle quickly escalated. Combat
times were a bit long once the LVTs started disembarking their marines
and the number of units in combat increased. The forces assaulted
three of the four objectives and in the end were moving towards the fourth
objective. One thing I tried to replicate was the difference between
captured and cleared/secured. As a historical example on Iwo Jima which
was declared secured on the 26th of March over 2400 Japanese were
captured or killed in April and May. The Pacific theatre featured many
examples of bypassed soldiers fighting on.
Cheo stepped in towards the end when JohnM had to leave. He had
previously been observing so he had complete situational awareness. I
added Red units in his area of operations to mix it up for him. This is
not always a good choice but it worked in this game.
Lessons learned:
Logistically I should have planned better. I should have had some
Redfor logpacks to sustain the artillery fires, or made other provisions
for re-supply. I also did not plan for rations for myself or think of
them during play and ended up feeling the effects an hour after the
EndEx. Hint a bag of chips by the computer would be a good thing :>)
The players used the LVTs more as modern APCs/IFVs than as they were
historically. In the future I would include more Redfor AT assets to
hinder this. The scale of TacOps was mentioned as a concern for a
primarily infantry action but this could be compensated for by changing turn
lengths during the game. I’ll have to get together with someone and do
some online play testing to see how altering turn length affects
infantry maneuver and game play.
Smoke use by off map artillery (ships) was allowed as an oversight on
my part. Right from the beginning players were requesting smoke.
Historically smoke was not used in amphibious assaults as it obscured the
landmarks that were used to guide in the landing craft/vehicles. I had
set the visibility to under 1000m to simulate the dust and smoke caused
by the pre-landing bombardment. I increased it during the game without
the players noticing that I had done so. In the future for this type
of game I will curtail smoke availability for off map support and only
make it available via the umpire menu by player request…..with a sneaky
umpire penalty applied :>).
Off map artillery include MRLs with HE only. I had used them in my
play-testing on the map to simulate a pre-landing bombardment quicker
than waiting on artillery strikes (very quick response times).
Discussion revealed the desirability to have them as tube artillery. Which I
agree is probably better. I would keep them in mind for their ability to
more closely simulate rocket fire from LCI’s carrying 4.5 inch rockets
as used in the later actions in the Pacific. We used MRL battery
instead of Battalion to minimize the footprint of fires.
Discussion on the pack howitzers revealed their fires footprint was
very small, much like the individual mortars are. I had broken them down
to 1 howitzer and prime mover + ammo vehicle per LCM, with the LCM
markers separate. In the future, joining the LCMs together to “guide†the
player to fire the howitzers as a group of six may be preferred to
result in a more effective “fires footprintâ€.
In the end my controlling Red and the umpire duties probably was not
the best idea and the players seemed to think my idea of the static
defense being boring would not be the case. One thing I did was drop Redfor
units in during the game via umpire controls. Players commented that I
had warned them too much. I was worried about angering players versus
increasing the challenge and surprise factors. Lesson learned-players
want to be abused….. just not in ridiculous ways. This umpire function
would add to the work and an active Red player would allow for more
“tricks†that I did not have time to do and frankly forgot to do in the
heat of the moment. I think umpire driven surprise can add to the
interest of the experience.
Even in the absence of a larger map where “planning†and “maneuverâ€
have larger roles, I should have put a better brief together for the
players. Including a bit on the historical actions/tactics as I don’t
think all TacOps players are very well versed in them. We are a group used
to TOW and Hellfire missiles and APDS rounds not LVTs and AT rifles.
Rattler’s presence was a very good thing with this being my first
attempt at multiplayer hosting. His expertise was much needed while I cut
my teeth. Things overall went pretty good I think and while it can be
stressful trying to do so much at one time I had a blast.
An umpire checklist would be a good thing. A couple of times my
actions or lack thereof cause player orders to be lost. Goes with a newbie
umpire I guess. Players are pretty good about rolling with such
things. Network connectivity was pretty good with only a couple of drops.
The only crash of the game was with mine at the very end when we were in
the debrief phase and I was trying to remove fog of war and show all
units to the players. Another mistep was I forgot to tell people the scenerio for the game when they popped in on IRC. Major H asked and logged on as an observer. Another new player did not know to ask this and with my not telling him he could not get logged on and gave up.
Contrary to my earlier statement on fun and leaving the learning to the
school house, I had fun and learned a lot.
Hopefully some or all of the players will add their impressions.
Map106c v101- A map I made depicting the Wake Island atoll (Peale,
Wilkes, and Wake islands)
Custom Scenario USMC this was played with WWII units
Plan: Well there was no plan per-say. I had decided that a static
defense would not be much fun for a player so I filled that roll. (more
on that later) Blue was to be those who showed up. Ended up we had
four Players from the get go and the division of forces worked well. The
plan as it was for Bluefor to assault across designated beaches (we
used Red One, Red Two, and Green Two.
Players:
Bonxa- USMC battalion
Rattler- had control of a pack howitzer battalion and the off map
artillery (ships providing fire support)
JohnfMonahan- USMC battalion who later dropped and Cheo stood up as
commander after observing for a while (not the usual course of action-more
on that later)
Bernard- USMC battalion
Major H dropped in to observe and chat a bit
How things went:
There were some coordination problems with one player not able to see
the place names via F6 nor having the overlays available. By using
coordinates this was overcome.
Initially players were commenting that contact was not made. I had
set the Redfor engagement ranges to 333m to let them get close. One the
landings were taking place or about to I started setting blocks of
units to maximum engagement ranges. The battle quickly escalated. Combat
times were a bit long once the LVTs started disembarking their marines
and the number of units in combat increased. The forces assaulted
three of the four objectives and in the end were moving towards the fourth
objective. One thing I tried to replicate was the difference between
captured and cleared/secured. As a historical example on Iwo Jima which
was declared secured on the 26th of March over 2400 Japanese were
captured or killed in April and May. The Pacific theatre featured many
examples of bypassed soldiers fighting on.
Cheo stepped in towards the end when JohnM had to leave. He had
previously been observing so he had complete situational awareness. I
added Red units in his area of operations to mix it up for him. This is
not always a good choice but it worked in this game.
Lessons learned:
Logistically I should have planned better. I should have had some
Redfor logpacks to sustain the artillery fires, or made other provisions
for re-supply. I also did not plan for rations for myself or think of
them during play and ended up feeling the effects an hour after the
EndEx. Hint a bag of chips by the computer would be a good thing :>)
The players used the LVTs more as modern APCs/IFVs than as they were
historically. In the future I would include more Redfor AT assets to
hinder this. The scale of TacOps was mentioned as a concern for a
primarily infantry action but this could be compensated for by changing turn
lengths during the game. I’ll have to get together with someone and do
some online play testing to see how altering turn length affects
infantry maneuver and game play.
Smoke use by off map artillery (ships) was allowed as an oversight on
my part. Right from the beginning players were requesting smoke.
Historically smoke was not used in amphibious assaults as it obscured the
landmarks that were used to guide in the landing craft/vehicles. I had
set the visibility to under 1000m to simulate the dust and smoke caused
by the pre-landing bombardment. I increased it during the game without
the players noticing that I had done so. In the future for this type
of game I will curtail smoke availability for off map support and only
make it available via the umpire menu by player request…..with a sneaky
umpire penalty applied :>).
Off map artillery include MRLs with HE only. I had used them in my
play-testing on the map to simulate a pre-landing bombardment quicker
than waiting on artillery strikes (very quick response times).
Discussion revealed the desirability to have them as tube artillery. Which I
agree is probably better. I would keep them in mind for their ability to
more closely simulate rocket fire from LCI’s carrying 4.5 inch rockets
as used in the later actions in the Pacific. We used MRL battery
instead of Battalion to minimize the footprint of fires.
Discussion on the pack howitzers revealed their fires footprint was
very small, much like the individual mortars are. I had broken them down
to 1 howitzer and prime mover + ammo vehicle per LCM, with the LCM
markers separate. In the future, joining the LCMs together to “guide†the
player to fire the howitzers as a group of six may be preferred to
result in a more effective “fires footprintâ€.
In the end my controlling Red and the umpire duties probably was not
the best idea and the players seemed to think my idea of the static
defense being boring would not be the case. One thing I did was drop Redfor
units in during the game via umpire controls. Players commented that I
had warned them too much. I was worried about angering players versus
increasing the challenge and surprise factors. Lesson learned-players
want to be abused….. just not in ridiculous ways. This umpire function
would add to the work and an active Red player would allow for more
“tricks†that I did not have time to do and frankly forgot to do in the
heat of the moment. I think umpire driven surprise can add to the
interest of the experience.
Even in the absence of a larger map where “planning†and “maneuverâ€
have larger roles, I should have put a better brief together for the
players. Including a bit on the historical actions/tactics as I don’t
think all TacOps players are very well versed in them. We are a group used
to TOW and Hellfire missiles and APDS rounds not LVTs and AT rifles.
Rattler’s presence was a very good thing with this being my first
attempt at multiplayer hosting. His expertise was much needed while I cut
my teeth. Things overall went pretty good I think and while it can be
stressful trying to do so much at one time I had a blast.
An umpire checklist would be a good thing. A couple of times my
actions or lack thereof cause player orders to be lost. Goes with a newbie
umpire I guess. Players are pretty good about rolling with such
things. Network connectivity was pretty good with only a couple of drops.
The only crash of the game was with mine at the very end when we were in
the debrief phase and I was trying to remove fog of war and show all
units to the players. Another mistep was I forgot to tell people the scenerio for the game when they popped in on IRC. Major H asked and logged on as an observer. Another new player did not know to ask this and with my not telling him he could not get logged on and gave up.
Contrary to my earlier statement on fun and leaving the learning to the
school house, I had fun and learned a lot.
Hopefully some or all of the players will add their impressions.
