"On table engineering and choke points." Topic

In our now long running game it is incresingly obvious that we are really only fighting at choke points. The attacker (me) is meant to get to the end of the complex board. The defender in this scenario has limited resources. Threfore he only defends choke points. Typicaly these are wooded areas or river bridges.

These are protected by defences and in one case so far, by a minefield. In this fighting I have needed a large amount of engineering. To fill for example craterd roads. We decided not to fight this a the defender elected not to shoot at them as he would give me his position for little gain, similarly the engineers clearing gaps/filling ditches in preparation for the assult. However a bridge layer or two is not an optional extra but a vital item as is at least general engineering vehicle to clear some of the mess/obsticles in the way under fire.

How may players design a serious scenario where the choke point is credible and things like an AVLB and tanks with mine rolers (3 percompany) in my cold war German army are a neccessity.

Choke points are a natural defensive position, especially when severely outnumbered. Obstacles are a great force multiplier. The campaign in Italy was one big series of choke point battles with the occasional attempt to go over the mountain or up the coast to get around the guys holding the next choke point.

I haven't used any AVLBs yet, but that is because I am still scratch building my 10 mm M60 AVLB.

WWII battles fought in the Normandy bocage country in France counted victory in seizing a farm field of 50 to 100 yards. Then it was on to the very next bocage lined field. After D-Day, it took the allies months to fight through to more open territory.

It took the Allies what, June to August to finally grind their way out of the bocage (which is maybe 100 miles inland), and crossed the rest of France by the end of September?

I think some of these posts miss the poiunt. A good general in defence only fights where he can use the force multiplier of terrain. The point is do your battles at home ot the club reflect this or are they just on abstract terrain?

I generally try an base both WW2 and Cold War battles on real terrain based on maps. What constitutes a 'choke point' depends on the level of the game.

There was an interesting battle in "Tigers in the Mud" where the Germans had to cross a levee surrounded by marsh with their formation. There was a spot where the levee dipped into the marsh and they placed an engineering SdKfz forward in their order of march to ensure they could bridge the gap. The Sov's worked some SU's into flanking positions on high ground so it was a lively battle. Can't remember anything else from it.

I think some of these posts miss the poiunt. A good general in defence only fights where he can use the force multiplier of terrain. The point is do your battles at home ot the club reflect this or are they just on abstract terrain?

Yes, we all remember Leonides and the 300. But generally as a "good general", depending on the situation. Unless I was on the defensive, would avoid terrain that would limit manuever. So in many cases, when I set up terrain for gaming, I'd avoid placing too many choke points, any large towns, etc., that would limit manuever too much. However, I do place woods, small hamlets/vills, etc. here and there to provide cover, etc. … And note, when we decide to play. We'd roll off to see who would be on the offense or defense [high 1d6 chooses], AFTER all the terrain was placed … As much as I like the great looking terrain of large towns on the board. I'd attempt to avoid being dragged into a Stalingrad type situation … if at all possible.