Editor in Chief Bill | 19 Jul 2019 8:47 p.m. PST |
You were asked – TMP link There were five D-Day beaches — code-named Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword. Which would you rather wargame on the miniature tabletop? 35% said "Omaha" 13% (tie) said "Sword" OR "Juno" |
Blackhorse MP | 20 Jul 2019 7:47 a.m. PST |
Was there really any other answer? Kinda like asking which of the five Earp brothers should you make a movie about. Let the disagreement begin… |
deadhead | 20 Jul 2019 8:58 a.m. PST |
British/Canadian beaches you get to use the Funnies from 79th Armoured. Half the fun is bridge layers, fascines, flails etc, not to mention that more DDs got ashore. Combined arms assault Omaha is just sending men against MGs, as in WWI all over again. Not entirely sure how you could "game" it at all. Like Tarawa, just very brave men placed in an awful situation, out of sheer stupidity or intelligence failure. Choice? Lie there and be picked off, advance and be riddled. Pray for the naval close support and that is it! |
epturner | 20 Jul 2019 2:40 p.m. PST |
I'd rather run a game on Juno Beach. Eric |
Tommy20 | 20 Jul 2019 3:10 p.m. PST |
I'm with Deadhead. Omaha would be my last choice. |
langobard | 21 Jul 2019 1:16 a.m. PST |
Yep, I voted for Juno as well, Canadians (who always seem to be overlooked) and allied funnies vs 21st Panzer 'funnies' (for want of a better term for them… |
UshCha | 21 Jul 2019 2:13 a.m. PST |
The Americands Landed on two beaches. Why is it that folk always remebber the Most mishaddled one. Utah got the landing wrong by a mile but went ahaead and use it and did well, a capable commander. Omaha was a failure due to the poor tarining of the DD Crew who were not taught to avoid turning broadside to a steep sea. Plus in certain folk considerd that it was cowardice, dumping the DD's out that far. Elesewher the commandres did what thwey should had done and brought them in cloese. Fortunately the Navy's record failure was saved by some in their ranks who went in againt orders and helped out. Why rthen model that one where it was at least done with flare and competence at all levels, insead of blood and guts at the bottom level despite the commaning incompetence. I'm a Brit so neither would be my choice but that not the same reaswon. |
Marc33594 | 21 Jul 2019 5:42 a.m. PST |
First dont think one can classify Omaha as a "failure". That having been said NONE of the initial landings really qualifies, in my opinion, as a good two sided game. On all 5 beaches the Germans are primarily in static positions with little decisions required other than which group to shoot at. Now the counter attacks later in the day a different kettle of fish. I do think all 5 make excellent battle problems (with the GM/s running the Germans in a pre-programmed way) especially if you allow some latitude on things like making up the composition of the invasion waves. |
UshCha | 21 Jul 2019 5:59 a.m. PST |
Marc33594, we have done several landings to test our rules but to be honest you are correct, they are never great tactical games. Like many river crossings, the art is in design of the defense and then letting the game unfold, particularly on the defending side. BUT if you wanted one as has been pointed out for those more interested in the visual aspects than the tactical, then the Brits with the funnies would be offer more in the way of unique vehicles to paint and use. |
Walking Sailor | 21 Jul 2019 9:17 a.m. PST |
deadhead is correct.
Omaha… Not entirely sure how you could "game" it at all. Pray for the naval close support and that is it! You need Destroyers! |