Battle for Normandy AAR Group


Battle for Normandy AAR Group

To discuss both sides during the ongoing AAR between Mike Gentile and Dave Long See:

Members: 31
Latest Activity: Mar 9, 2019

Discussion Forum

General Comments 5 Replies

Post General Comments Here

Started by Dave Long. Last reply by Dave Long Feb 4, 2010.

Allied Strategy Discussion 7 Replies

To discuss how to liberate what Germany rightfully stole in 1940.

Started by Dave Long. Last reply by Dave Long Feb 1, 2010.

Axis Strategy 4 Replies

Axis Strategy Discussion - I'll let Mike make his own clever comment.

Started by Dave Long. Last reply by michael gentile Feb 1, 2010.

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Battle for Normandy AAR Group to add comments!

Comment by Dan Holte on March 8, 2010 at 8:03pm
There is the CSW board too, David.
Comment by David Lubin on March 8, 2010 at 7:56pm
O.K. Dan Thanks again. I don't want bother the rest of the group with my own inane questions on hows and whys of this game design - though if you don't mind continuing this conversations drop me a note off discussion.

Thanks again

Comment by Dan Holte on March 8, 2010 at 9:19am
Thanks, David.

There's nothing to send, actually. I chose not to include the bombardments from the very start for the reasons listed. I didn't want to include anything that would require little input or decision making from one player, and none from the other, that would likely result in an ahistorical game opening.

I did, however, take into account what effect there was from the bombardments in the total strength of the Strongpoint markers, which represent the defenses at and around the beaches. The Allied player is also allowed to bring in naval support in the late phase of the invasion if necessary, but there is a cost.
Comment by David Lubin on March 8, 2010 at 12:09am

First thank you very much for designing and getting out a great game. I fo believe that this is one of the monster games that will spend little time on the book-shelve. I don't want to be a pest so bear with me.

I guess I should have tried to get into the play testing of this games because I am very interested in your desing considerations beyond the Playability vs. Realism. I was not aware that the low cloud cover and wind were such a great factor in the Paradrops, thank you for that enlightenment.

I believe I get the basic Idea for the pre-invasion air and navel bombardment. I would like to see some iterations of the pre-invasion bombardments that you tried prior to publication, that is if you have any and they are not to much trouble to send them.

Comment by Dan Holte on March 7, 2010 at 8:31pm
There was a heavier flak presence in the Cotentin as there were troops throughout the peninsula. With a few areas as exceptions - and the 6th Para landing area was not one of them - once past the Gold-Juno-Sword beaches, there was precious little behind and flak guns were mostly situated around troop/gun concentrations.

The primary reason that the pre-invasion air & naval bombardments were left out was that it would either a) have the possiblity or even probability of radically adjusting the game start, or b) be attenuated and therefore have a minimal affect.

If B, then it would be a bit of a waste of time, at a time when players really want to just get down to landing troops and rolling for hits.

If A, then it might be something that at best, could ahistorically cause a shift in early results, therefore affecting the rest of the game and victory conditions. Or, at worst, force a reset due to extreme luck on the Allied side of things.

This is also why there are no activation rolls for divisions that historically did not enter the battlefield early. I figured that if players want to try either of these types of options, it is very easy to just set up the game and do it. They could roll all of 12ss onto the map on 6 June PM, or give the Allied player X number of Armed Recon attacks to make on the beaches.

Does that help?
Comment by Eric Walters on March 7, 2010 at 6:10pm
David, if memory serves, the American paradrops suffered from low clouds that obscured the landing zones from the ambient light, so the drops there were not as accurate.
Comment by David Lubin on March 7, 2010 at 3:36pm
hey guys I am hoping I am missing something here like a more in-depth Designer notes. But I have played Longest Day for most of my life time and Atlantic Wall for about halve that time and I am a bit confused with a couple of items that I am trying to find a design reason.

First let me say I do know that each of these great D-day game designers took different design considerations but there are two items that I would like to understand why.

The first to come up was the pre-invasion Aerial and Navel Bombardment. Both Longest Day and Atlantic Wall both have this, but it seems The Battle for Normandy seems to have left out. I know historically they landed well behind the beach and did not affect the battle much - the thing is that is was done and it could have really done some damage to the beach obsticles.

The other is something I Just came across, as I am playing a solo game of The Battle for Normandy, when the my pain levels allows, I am up to the Airborne Landings and came a cross a rule that has British only 1 to 3 hexes away from the pathfinders, where the American Are anywhere from 1 hex to 12 hexes. Now I do agree that the Glider units were a hell of a lot more accurate then their Parachute partners, and if my memory is not too off the British used a lot of Glider units then the American. But the Glider units are treated separately. So why are the British so much more accurate then the American in the Para-drops? I checked both Longest Day and Atlantic Wall and neither make this distinction between the British and the American Para-Drops

So if anyone can help or point me the right direction I would be thankful

Comment by David Lubin on March 1, 2010 at 10:15pm
My apologies for the delays - but it seems that the gaming G-ds have been against me this year - I have the Germans set up and hope to have a post on my set-up thoughts soon.

Comment by David Lubin on February 15, 2010 at 8:02pm
Hello all,

I am a old grognard gamer, started way back in 1977 when my older brother brought home a copy of Panzer Blitz, and I have been hooked ever since. The first game I owned though was SPI's War of the Ring in 1978 (actually was looking for D&D, but got WotR by mistake) and never looked back and was double hooked on War/Board games.

That is my background - I got my edition of BfN and kind compared it with Atlantic Wall and Longest Day, but I am setting up a solo campaign when I start I hope to have a few post with pictures so people can follow.

Comment by Dave Long on February 5, 2010 at 3:49pm
Well, not surprisingly, with 13 VPs secured, Mike and I are restarting, and switching sides. Now I get to see what it's like trying to live through a torrent of 14"-16" shells.

Members (31)


Help Center

Latest Activity

Peter Loop updated their profile
9 hours ago
John Kranz posted a discussion

Site outage

We are working to fix several of our web sites that are offline due to DNS errors. We are working…See More
Joseph replied to Chuang Shyue Chou's discussion What are you reading?
"Read: "Before & After Alexander: The Legend and Legacy of Alexander the Great" by…"
Steve K commented on Steve K's blog post Games I'm Playing 2020
"Tiny Battles' Okinawa! after one month: US 10th Army pushing against the Shuri Line."
Feb 22
Joseph replied to John Kranz's discussion What are you playing?
"Played: "Sword of Rome" by GMT. Did not finish but all had lots of fun. Playing the new…"
Feb 20
Profile IconGilles and PabloM joined ConsimWorld
Feb 20
John Kranz posted a blog post
Feb 20
Steve K commented on Steve K's blog post Games I'm Playing 2020
"The Saturday Group played GMT's "Sword of Rome".  Only made it through 2 turns…"
Feb 18




CSW Related Links

© 2020   Created by John Kranz.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service