Most people think of the Western Allies’ offensives of 1944 in two phases: the D-Day landings and the Dash through France. Oh sure, they realize that a period existed between the two when things were not going as planned for Ike and the fellas but things worked out as soon as a sergeant wielded a plow onto a Sherman to get through the hedgerows. Such simplification is wrong and does not do justice to the critical battles of June and early July 1944. The rhythm of combat in the West was defined during this period in terms of German defense and Allied answers to it. The first computer wargame to examine this period was HPS/John Tiller’s Normandy ‘44. That game is fine as long as players accept its scale and system. However, the knocks against it in terms of unit density and map size caused this product to be overlooked. However, SSG’s Battles in Normandy, published by Matrix, cannot be dismissed by any serious gamer.
Battles in Normandy is a regimental/battalion scale game with hexes representing 2.5 kilometers and turns of one day. Sound like a port of a board wargame? Similarities exist but the system basically raises the old “monster” board game paradigms to heights only a computer can give. The opportunity to micromanage a large number of factors is present but doesn’t take the hours of hand calculation the old board games did. Players can make intuitive clicks and moves if they choose to forego making sure every possible factor is thrown into a battle although their chances of victory may suffer for such cavalier methods.
This operational map shows the scope of the D-Day landings.
A regiment of the US 29th Inf lands on Omaha under watchful naval eyes.
It’s All in the Screens Redmond Simonson, pioneer of SPI’s graphic designs, had the dictum “Put everything on the map”. The problem with this was that, as games grew more complex, tables almost crowded out the play area. SSG takes care of this by using “nested” screens. Right clicking on a hex brings up a screen with units present shown on a vertical axis and terrain properties on the horizontal. Moving a cursor onto a unit at this screen brings up another screen displaying the values of either the unit or the terrain. This system works for interdiction, transport, weather, reinforcements and other aspects of the game. The combat screen is a graphic representation of the old Combat Results Tables where tapping on units and assets changes the odds column automatically and allows players to call off high-risk, low-gain attacks. This myriad of detailed screens is explained in detail with a nine-lesson, 59-page PDF tutorial. Usually a fan of PDF material, I admit that the detail in the tutorial examples required too much alt-tabbing, especially when a tutorial cannot be saved in progress. The 59-page manual is clear and offers enlightenment on these screens. More than any other computer game I’ve played, Battles in Normandy demands understanding of the information format before understanding the game mechanics. Players cannot simply start playing by clicking units on the board.
This unit screen details information of all units in one hex.
By using nested charts, players can check out terrain detaillls along with combat odds.
Reliance on screens is further made necessary by the graphics. The map covers all of Normandy, the Cherbourg peninsula and some area south. Even with scrolling, this area is so large that graphic representation ends up small. An undocumented feature, holding down ALT, magnifies the cursor area but unit characteristics and terrain features can be difficult to see on the map. Divisional insignia aid in concentrating forces and giving a period feel to the map. However, the unit screen alongside the map is the place that shows the many different elements of units. Pictures of soldiers indicate strength and casualties. Numbers and graphics indicate ammunition and supply states, different bonus and penalties, abilities for special functions such as mine and bridging operations and the most important indicators of all, the two little action dots. Each unit can perform two actions per turn; for example, a unit can move and attack, attack twice if movement isn’t necessary or move farther using extended movement. Other actions include getting reinforcements and digging in.
Using these actions is simple point and click with the cursor letting players know when an action is valid. Clicking on an adjacent enemy brings up the incredible combat screen, Here players can see the old fashioned odds table, a miniature of the combat hex showing the sides from which attacks can com and the efficacy of such attacks and the number of artillery, air and leaders available to increase the odds. Players can micromanage these assets within the limits of terrain, supply and morale considerations to optimize possible results or they can just hit the MAX button and let the computer do that for them at the risk of depleting attacks in other areas. Combat results are measured in the time-honored step-loss, retreat and elimination methods. One or two graphic dice show how the randomizer god smiled.
So far, combat sounds like a version of a late 1970s board game. This view leaves out the important half of Battles in Normandy’s strategy. This game, despite the details in combat, remains an operational exercise. Before fighting, players should consider supply and interdiction. When not in supply, a unit is very inefficient. Simply put, supply is determined by the number of movement points between a depot and destinations. A chain of supply units can extend this supply net while air, artillery and partisan interdiction increase the number of movement points that must be expended to have munitions reach frontline units. Some combat units must be told off to protect supply units. The number of movement points per hex can be shown with a map overlay as can the supply net itself.
The supply net and movement points are shown around the Falaise Gap.
Allied aircraft interdict German movement near Cherborg.
Another option for aid is the combat advisor. This on-map function shows on the map the odds of possible battles. However, players may find themselves hard put to match these odds and the adviser doesn’t take overall strategy into account, so using resources on a juicy 10-1 walkover may not advance the player’s position. The advisor also doesn’t indicate a key factor in Battles in Normandy, the overrun attack. With enough combat strength, units attacking into specific terrain types can conduct overruns. The difference between an overrun and a normal overwhelming attack is that overruns do not cost action points. Hence, some units may attack several times in a turn. With a situation where the name of the game is “breakthrough”, continuous attacks in a day are vital to victory.
Not only must players think in terms of position, they must think in terms of time. Clicking on the turn indicator brings up another nested screen showing weather, replacements, reinforcement and the waxing and waning of off-board assets. What may seem like logical attacks may possibly be delayed so that replacements are readily at hand to fill slots created by casualties. Advances should wait for the arrival of transport assets while bad weather can stall a drive. This game requires multi-dimensional thinking.
The immensity of the Cobra breakout is shown here clearly.
Battles in Normandy has its share of chrome. Airborne units can be dropped and carpet-bombing can greatly aid an attack at the risk of friendly casualties. Artificial harbors enhance Allied supply. Naval gunfire silences coastal positions. A gold background marks elite forces. However, the heart of the game resides in ordinary, slow, gritty planning and bloody fighting. With this, the game hits a benchmark for wargames, verisimilitude. The fighting in Normandy was slow and tedious, reminiscent of World War I without the trenches. No great moves can save the Allies from having to grind through perfect defensive terrain. No slashing panzer attacks can let the Germans negate the Allied superiority in almost every aspect of military matters. Players must scrutinize each hex and unit in order to achieve objectives within the time limit. The AI makes and allows no mistakes in either the full campaign game or the eight smaller scenarios. If this game can be criticized, the criticism can be the seemingly overwhelming amount of information and factors as well as the rugged AI. Even when they master the AI, PBEM and tournaments will provide continuing challenges.
Players may use the editor to make play easier but they miss the point of the game in doing so. Players who only play those wargames that merely require superficial thought and quick turns should give Battles in Normandy a wide berth. Players who use wargames to attempt to understand the intricacies of that vicious fighting in a small area during the summer of 1944 and who put effort into their hobby will see the game as the intricate, precision masterpiece it is.
Recommended Reading: Overlord, Max Hastings
Six Armies in Normandy John Keegan
Clash of Arms Russell A. Hart
Decision in Normandy Carlo D’Este
)
)
)
)
)
)
)