WW2-1979 Graphics Showcase

[Case]

A little bit of history

Originally posted by Exile
While there were 2 or 3 divisions of Australians (2nd and 7th, IIRC)

6th, 7th and 9th Australian divisions served in North Africa, along with various corps level troops (though the planned Australian corps was never assembled - the divisions were used as 'fire brigades', and the 6th division and Corps HQ was almost destroyed in Greece and Crete). The Australian 1st Armoured Division and 1st Army Tank Brigade were scheduled to head out to North Africa in 1942, but these units stayed in Australia where they formed the core of Australia's anti-invasion strategy.

Along with the corps troops, the 6th and 7th divisions were rushed home shortly after the fall of Singapore but the 9th division remained in North Africa until after El Alemain (and not, as is often asserted, due to a continuing commitment to imperial defence, but becuase Roosevelt and Churchill offered to send two American divisions and a huge quantity of war material to Australia if the Australian government didn't insist on the return of the elite 9th Division).

[Case]

Incidently, if you're after a good book on the campaign, Barrie Pitt's two volume 'The Crucible of War' is a highly readable and generally well regared history of the campaign (though IMO it needs more maps). Corelli Barnett's 'The Desert Generals' is also an eye-opening look at the campaign, especially if you don't like Montgomery.

[Leonidas]

Re: Some suggestions . . . . .

Originally posted by Exile
Leonidas;

I spotted your units gif for an upcoming Afrika Korps campaign. Some general comments below, but here are some specific comments about units; The Afrika Korps uniform, as fairline has mentioned, was much lighter in shade AND so were all the DAK vehicles. Their paint scheme was much lighter than even the British desert paint schemes. Photos I've seen of Luftwaffe fighter and bomber units also were painted light colors and had a camo scheme as well. Your artillery units need to be completely reconsidered. Take a look at the German 150 or 105 mm howitzers--those should be the models you use. The British used the 25 pounder gun/howitzer and the 5.5 inch gun/howitzer. The American army in North Africa used primarily the tried-and-true 105 mm howitzer (we made a LOT of these, lol.) While there were 2 or 3 divisions of Australians (2nd and 7th, IIRC), there were more Indian infantry divisions in the desert than any other commonwealth troops. There were also at least 2 South African infantry divisions and two South African armored/mechanized reconaissance units. By FAR the bulk of transport, for both commonwealth and axis forces was the truck/lorry, and both sides used a rather motley collection of vehicles from both sides--lots of captured equipment. After the breakout battle by Rommel at El Ageila, ALL units, Italian included, were motorized/mechanized. The idea that foot infantry could operate successfully in the desert was abandoned after Graziani's utter rout in '40 south of Mersa Matruh; 150,000 foot troops were rounded up by a relatively paltry force of Brits; elements of the 7 Armored and 4th Indian divisions--probably less than 15,000 men and 300 total vehicles, not counting the trucks/lorries. (Historical note; rather surprisingly, this 10-1 ratio is almost exactly what Fuller had suggested during the interwar period when asked to comment on the effectiveness of mobile to foot troops.)

Now for some general comments; The Western desert campaign is actually a very good use of what the Civ2 program has to offer. While the mobile battles in Cyrenaica and Egypt were exemplary from a tactical point of view, the campaign was conditioned, if not governed, by what was happening in the Mediterranean Sea. The importance of Malta, the concentration of Luftwaffe resources in southern Italy and Sicily, and the sea battles fought between the Italian and British naval units had tremendous effect on who was winning in the desert. When the Royal Navy could fight a convoy through the Med, the commonwealth forces could go on the offensive. When the axis could suppress the RAF units on Malta, Rommel would have enough troops, equipment, and, most importantly, PETROL to go over to the offensive on his part. The campaign was fought on land, sea, and air--a great setup for a scenario designer.

I can suggest a few books; Panzer Battles by Von Mellenthin. Great stuff by a staff officer who was there and gives superb details on strategic information that only those overseeing the campaign could offer.

Ballantine Books' Africa Corps. Could be difficult to find nowadays, but I have a copy around here somewhere. Very nice maps of every important battle, and the writing is in a neat, summary form--you don't have to wade through a lot of extraneous material to get to the heart of it. A HUGE number of photos, though in black and white, sadly. Even so, the wealth of photos does provide a solid look at what kind of vehicles, artillery, aircraft, and uniforms were in use by the various participants.

This response is kind of late, but . . . better late than never.

To Exile and everyone:

Thanks for the input and ideas.

This Afrika Korps scenario is going to be a major up-date and revision of J. Petroskis's old "Afrika Korps" scenario.

Sadly, I had to choose the grey German armour scheme because at the moment there are no current desert units.

Perhaps some kind soul could create a complete set of desert camo German armour.

Although I do graphics, I am currently using MS paint, which is slow and can be difficult to do units properly.

I will look into other arty, but I basically chose arty that would stand out - it is after all a Civ2 scenario, and things will need to be abstracted. But I want to be as historical as possible.

As to gameplay. This scenario will only be playable as the Axis. This way, I will tweak the scenario to give the player a real run for his money. Rommel didn't have it easy, and neither will the player.

There will be a lot to do in this scenario. It will cover ALL of the Middle East, Southern Italy, Malta, and Greece.

There are a variety of things the Axis commander (you) can do. Here are just some of the strategies to consider:

1) Malta - it will be a thorn in your side. As long as Malta exists, Axis supplies will be curtailed and supplies from the UK will get through to Alexandria.

If the Axis takes Malta, then Allied supply efforts will be cut, and they will have to rely on convoy through the Suez, which will be at the mercy of U-boats.

But taking Malta will not be easy. Is the Italian Navy up to the challenge? Do you risk your surface fleet in a risky gamble to take Malta?

While Malta holds out, the Allies will receive 6-8 reinforcements (of armour and infantry) PER TURN. Compare this to the Axis reinforcements of just two armoured units per turn.

2) North Africa - Will the Italians be strong enough to take the offensive early in North Africa? Should they attack quickly, or wait for the Afrika Korps to show up in Tunisia? You are the overall theatre commander, so the decision is up to you

3) The Afrika Korps - this is the elite German formation led by Field Marshal Erwin Rommel. They are all veterans and will consist of infantry, Panzer Grenadiers, as well as armoured formations. Utilize their offensive abilities well. They will arrive as reinforcements in Tunisia. They will serve as the major backbone in your offensive.

4) Greece - this area could open up an opportunity for the Italians and German units to score some territory and experience. Plus, it allows you more cities with which to build units. Without Malta, the ONLY way German and Italian air units can make it to North Africa, will be to secure some Greek territory, which will place Axis airfields in North Africa within flying distance. Plus, the German units left over from the Yugoslavia and Greece invasions may be of some assistance to you if you can get them to North Africa to help in the offensive.

The question is: How tough will it be to conquer Greece? Is the territory you gain worth the time, trouble and forces you will devote to this "sideshow"?

5) The Italians start with a substantial navy and ground forces. Plus ALL southern Italy can churn out units. However, these ground units are generally inferior to the British units, and to be of any use, they must be transported across the Mediterranean, subject to British Navy interference.

6) A victory for the Axis means taking Alexandria and the Suez. But it will be a long road to travel. Every turn that passes, means the British only get stronger

Well, this should give you some idea of what I have been up to

Thanks again for everyone's individual interest and comments.

Cheers!

[curtsibling]

Thanks to Fairline and many other CIV2 kingpins,
There has not been such an explosion of graphical coolness since the good old days of the late 1990's!

We are living in great times, gentlemen, enjoy it!

[curtsibling]

Holy vodka!

I Just noticed them!
Those are totally killer commies, Fairline!

[Eivind IV]

Really awesome Russians, Fairline!

Originally posted by curtsibling
Thanks to Fairline and many other CIV2 kingpins,
There has not been such an explosion of graphical coolness since the good old days of the late 1990's!

We are living in great times, gentlemen, enjoy it!

Don't forget youself there, Curt! The civ community would not be the same without you!

[curtsibling]

LOL!

Enough of that!
I am just a small illumination in the bigger picture.

[Cifer Almasy]

King Curt Sibling!

[Exile]

Gareth,

About the Italian formations;

As I understand it, the Italian infantry divisions that were operating in the Western desert after Rommel's arrival actually were motorized units. IIRC, Trento, Pavia, Brescia, Bologna, and maybe 1 or 2 more.

However . . .

Their transports were often mobilized to conduct resupply operations. When the front advanced hundreds of miles/kilometers in very short periods of time, it was discovered that the necessary supply apparatus was insufficient. The Italian infantry units would then be stripped of their intrinsic transport. Because they were often utilized as holding-the-front troops, Rommel felt that they could spare their transport rather than pull trucks/lorries away from the more potent armored/Panzer formations. Also, the SAS was constantly raiding the over-stretched supply lines, the RAF was also hitting it whenever possible with interdiction missions, the destruction of transport units in transit from Europe was a constant condition, and finally, the maintenance problems created by the desert envionment all placed limits on the number of vehicles available for moving supplies from the available ports to the front. THIS was why Tobruk was so damn important--when the axis units could use it as their primary port, the Italians could have their transport back. On paper the Italian formations were motorized. In practice, they often found themselves on foot. When you stop and really examine the distances involved in some of the advances and retreats, it becomes apparent that ONLY motorized transport could get these troops from one battlefield to the next.

Try marching from Tripoli to Alexandria.

[Case]

...of course, the Italians did have the standard dictatoral habit of misnaming units to make them sound more impressive. Aside from Italian 'divisions' generally being large brigades, the 'motorised' designation was liberally sprinkled around to make the units look more impressive to a certain fat bald guy in Rome. But yeah, by 1942 the Italian Army at the front lines in Africa was generally motorised, it just recieved a lot lower priority then the Germans.

The actual extent of the motorisation or lack thereof is impossible to determine - in real world situations, most units don't look much like their 'offical' strength after they've been in combat. They're either understrength due to losses/break downs or are unoffically overstrenght due to the common habit of 'borrowing' equipment and not reporting the full extent of captures in order to prevent them being taken by other units (the classic example of this is the NZ Maori Battalion which captured, and kept, so much German weaponry that they took to making raids on German positions for spare parts and ammo. When the 8th Army command discovered what was going on, the Battalion's commanding officer resigned in protest at being ordered to give up the Battalion's impressive collection of German weaponry and transport!).

[Cyrion]

Originally posted by Case
the classic example of this is the NZ Maori Battalion which captured, and kept, so much German weaponry that they took to making raids on German positions for spare parts and ammo. When the 8th Army command discovered what was going on, the Battalion's commanding officer resigned in protest at being ordered to give up the Battalion's impressive collection of German weaponry and transport!.

That's an excellent one, Case!

I had never heard of it!

[fairline]

This happened on both sides. Elements of 7th Armoured re-equiped with Italian tanks (!) despite their questionable usefulness after Operation Compass, such was the paucity of British cruiser tanks early on in the campaign. The green 2nd Armoured division which replaced the veteran 7th Armoured (the famous 'Desert Rats') after operation Compass was decimated by the newly-arrived DAK and all manner of British vehicles were pressed into German service. The most prized captured vehicles were Matilda infantry tanks, which were pretty much impervious to both Axis and Allied AT guns until the arrival of the German 88mm Flak.

[fairline]

Originally posted by Exile
Gareth,

About the Italian formations;

As I understand it, the Italian infantry divisions that were operating in the Western desert after Rommel's arrival actually were motorized units. IIRC, Trento, Pavia, Brescia, Bologna, and maybe 1 or 2 more.

....and the Folgore Division (paras), which had no motor vehicles at all. I think you're pretty much right Phenix, but they were certainly less well equipped than the DAK.

Try marching from Tripoli to Alexandria.

good point!

[Case]

Originally posted by fairline
This happened on both sides. Elements of 7th Armoured re-equiped with Italian tanks (!) despite their questionable usefulness after Operation Compass, such was the paucity of British cruiser tanks early on in the campaign.

The Australian Army had proved that using Italian Tanks was a dumb idea well before that - before the attack on Tobruk in early 1941, the 6th Division's cavalry regiment replaced it's British light tanks with Italian mediums (with big Kangaroos painted on the sides). However, when the regiment went into action every one of the tanks broke down shortly after leaving the start line!

Not that British tanks were necessarily more reliable - in Barrie Pitt's The Crucible of War Volume 1 he writes about the comander of a British regiment equiped with Crusader tanks who, with the enthusisatic approval of his crew, traded in his Crusader for a three ton truck on the grounds that the truck was more reliable, could go everywhere a Crusader could and it's lack of armour meant that AT rounds would simply pass through it, and not cause it to catch on fire as usually happened when Crusaders where hit!

Cyrion, I got the story from the Battalion's offical history, which is available online at: www.nzetc.org/corpora/WH2.html

[fairline]

British cruiser tanks prior to the Cromwell were notoriously unreliable.

My last unit post: