"D-Day Beaches" Topic

There were five D-Day beaches — code-named Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword. Which would you rather wargame on the miniature tabletop?

The bloody one.

Omaha, some of the GJS was a walk-on. (I know, not all of it)

None of the above. I've found that none of the landing games I've played are particularly fun. They play like WWII versions of Over The Top trench warfare attacks in WWI.

Cheers!

Yes its a cool looking game layout, but a horrible meat grinder of a game.

Things seemed to go remarkably close to plan on the British and Canadian beaches, while Utah may have been the wrong beach, it turned out well for the Americans.

That said, I have always been curious to know how Omaha might have gone if either the DD tanks had made it ashore, or if they had been landed via landing craft.

So, for me, it would be Omaha.

I enjoy playing with the full range of British 'funnies' so it would have to be parts of Gold, Juno and Sword with strongpoints to overcome and 21st Panzer trying to interfere.

That said, pitting British forces against Omaha opposition and terrain makes for an interesting comparison – would specialised armour have actually helped?

The trouble is, D-Day landing games tend to be deeply unsatisfactory. Either the Allies do it right, in which case, its a bit of a walk-over, or the defenders blow them them off the beaches.
Add in the fact that there is so much information on practically a minute by minute basis, there will always be the player who focuses on the one tiny detail which isn't included, or over emphasises one which has.
I've played 2 week long D-Day campaigns. Both of which included playing out the landings. It begged the question: Why bother? It HAD to be a success for the Allies – otherwise there was no game for the rest of the week. – The first day was pretty pointless.
I played in another mini-campaign which was MUCH cleverer. It kicked off at D-Day + 12 hours, playing out advances inland after the initial beach assaults had been done

Kieth Talent has it. When first creating our rules we used a landing to assess the model. If the landing did not go vaugely to plan then there was obviously issues with the rules. Interestingly it did throw up some lack of understanding of the German terrain and defensive layout which when corrected meant we achiever a plausible reproduction.

However repeating it would be no fun, like Ancient warfare siges there is limited tactical flexibility in the actual combat so no real interest as a game.

I can't agree with the above two posters. We've played several D-Day landing games. Give some thought to your scenario construction and it can be a lot of fun for both sides.

As to which beach to play? It would have to be a Canadian or British one. Just have to use those Funnies.

Anybody who believes that an opposed amphibious landing does not have strategic depth and tactical intricacy has never conducted one.

The above "Allies have to win" syndrome is a sign of a poorly designed campaign, not an uninteresting battle at the outset. Any campaign of connected battles will have dependencies that need to be managed well in order to not end the game in the first event. It's a parallel to good scenario design where you don't want the outcome to be decided after the first couple of turns.

Depends on your game scale. I've found Skirmish Level D-Day games quite boring. At the Company Level perhaps a well designed scenario might be fun. But since I mostly play in those scales there are many more interesting battles to choose.

Now IF you are talking about an entire beachhead then Omaha for sure. But the most fun I've had is with operational level and above board games covering the entire campaign.

Including Avalon Hills Longest Day at Battalion level. Covered my entire living room floor for weeks with that game. Fascinating! Cheers!

Side note … one way I've gamed many times is to play a board campaign game and give either player the option to Take It To The Table instead on rolling on the CRT. Usually end up gaming the 1-1 and 2-1 battles where players feel they can do better than the CRT outcomes/odds provide.

Omaha, but truly any would be a fantastic game.
Always fascinated by the game write ups, how much detail goes into them is only my guess.

I've played Normandy at a number of levels with board games. I find them all interesting if for nothing more than historical knowledge.

As a sidebar, a friend who was an M4A3E8 TC after the war in Germany. Had a number of crewmen in his Bn that fought in WWII. Just gave me a great book. "OMAHA D-DAY BEACH". By Joseph Balkoski, published in 2006. Very informative, worth a read.

Amphibious landings can be challengeing if its in the operational sence in that it covers the preparation of defences and the allocation of resources both on the beach and inland. Just fighting a pre-determined landing be it Omahar or the Brits is not challengeing all the parameters are set by then.

Never played one but would like Juno

Ran an early landings on Omaha Beach game years ago, after a lot of careful research.

I thought it went quite well, and was challenging to the attackers involved. They all each commanded an American platoon of figures, at 1:1 ratio, while I, as GM, ran the German defenders.

It was certainly bloody and daunting for the attackers, having to move a long way through the open to get to the safety of the sea wall, and then to breach the wire defenses there while taking heavy fire.

They had very poor chances to hit, take out the German troops firing from high above.

I think it worked quite well as a good example of what the troops were up against on D-Day.

Just fighting a pre-determined landing be it Omahar or the Brits is not challengeing all the parameters are set by then.

link

If you'd like, I can try to get you a seat next time so you can show people how easy it is.

The enjoyability of the game can definitely be made or broken in the "how do I get my troops ashore" decision.

The Flames of War amphibious assaults are a single die roll to get ashore. If you cannot get the roll required, you're going to get shot off the beach. If you cannot get enough troops ashore on any given turn, you're going to get shot off the beach.

The Battlegroup Overlord amphibious assaults have the landing craft rolling distance dice as they work towards the beach. This means you need a lot more 'ocean' than Flames of War, but it is a lot easier to get your forces onto the beach in a reasonable manner.

I've just finished a mini campaign covering Sword Beach. The main focus was on the battles behind the actual beach landing (Morris, Hillman) etc culminating in 21st Panzer Divs counterattack on Periers Ridge.

That worked quite well as the Germans didn't have to just sit there getting pounded.

I ran a game for a local convention for several years that was Omaha beach Dog Green sector in 15mm using the Battle Grounds system. The beach was 12 feet long 4 feet wide and 1 foot high. In total there were 1500 miniatures that would be on the beach at different times. If the figure was killed or received a heavy wound then it would be replaced by a wounded figure model. Visually stunning when you see several hundred dead where they fell on the beach. We had to add a random arrival aspect to the game because once the players found how deadly the draw area was they would purposely land farther away which skewed the outcome drastically. The random location would throw things into chaos from the start. Eventually they would amass enough people to make a push and tack the cliffs. Our beach was created off of enlarged maps of the beach from the invasion and even with enlarging that section I know we missed emplacements. Still even with it taking the better half of a day to run through I never heard any complaint. Everyone that played knew what they were getting into and had a good time. Our version of this area closely matched historical numbers of how many died. It is a very bloody beach. It also amused those of us playing the game by seeing how many people that were not playing the game come by throughout the day to see how things have changed. Lots of interest in the game from everyone at the convention. This is the best photo that I could find.

If you'd like, I can try to get you a seat next time so you can show people how easy it is.

I think UshCha was referring to a game where the GM sets everything such as location, waves, make up of the waves and the like. Doesnt leave the player any real decisions. I dont think he was referring to how challenging an actual operation is for those carrying out a plan.

Oh that looks like a great board and game !

a game where the GM sets everything such as location, waves, make up of the waves and the like. Doesnt leave the player any real decisions.

Which is not a function of being an amphibious assault game or focus on D-Day operations. The cited lack of strategic depth and tactical challenge comes from a crappy implementation.

Juno, the most successful beach for breakout and reaching inland objectives.

We created firestorm overlord (based on the battlefront system) that allowed 14 players per side for the Normandy Invasion on a day by day campaign basis.

The Beach Landings were played as round 1. If the Allied players won a beach then they could exploit an extra area inland, if they didn't win a beach, they still landed but no exploitation, and that beach wasn't available to land additional supplies for a turn. Either way they gained the beach, as each player was effectively only 1 company area assault, and the assumption was that the overall mission reached a minimum level of success