Thermo #2*
*
Anzac Delay vs German Advance (beach landing action)*

*
24 April 1941 *

*
Scenario Design: Pyros Lambert*
Map Design: Pyros Lambert*
*
Primary Objectives:*
You should deploy in the East edge of the map and you must assist to the defense of the area.*
*
Secondary Objectives:*
You should try to stop the enemy flanking (beach landing action) maneuver from the North.*
You should be very cautious with the casualty rate of your Core Force because you might face total destruction during this battle!*
*
*
INTEL:*
You will face one Infantry Bn advancing from the West, two Brandenburg Coys landing to the North of the village and two Pz Coy advancing from the West.*
The village will be target of a multi-directional attack, and the enemy patrols will try to infiltrate your lines.*
I suggest you to deploy your artillery assets somewhere to the East edge of the map.* 
You should try to protect your flanks from the North (Brandenburg assault) and the South (tank force).*
Be cautious with the enemy ON-Map artillery units and try to counter-strike them at any occasion (look for smoke traces).*
The enemy will receive as reinforcements several ammo unit (resupply) next to each on map artillery after turn 50.*
You should always consider to retreat and create a new defensive perimeter backward (to the East) from your current positions.*
Whenever possible try to take advantage of the tall buildings.*
The enemy is controlling the West edge of the map.*
The beach landing task force will have the support of several naval vessels.*
You should make use of any forward deployed 25 pdr gun for direct fire missions rather than indirect artillery missions.*
It may be rewarding if you can redeploy your AUX artillery to the rear of your lines.*
Expect heavy artillery barrage during the first turns of the battle and be very careful with your artillery tactics because the AI will probably plan several counter-artillery mission during the battle.*
*
*
Historical Background (semi historical battle)*
*
*
Action at Ay Trias  *
(text from www.nzetc.org)*
*
In the morning artillery positions were divided into forward and rear zones, with the accent in both on anti-tank defence. The anti-tank defence of the forward zone was to be co-ordinated by Lieutenant-Colonel Duff of the 7th Anti-Tank, and of the rear zone by Lieutenant-Colonel Waller of 102 Anti-Tank Regiment, NH. Duff had to site his own 2-pounders and twenty 25-pounders of the 5th Field, all of them well forward. Waller had C Troop of the 5th Field and B Battery of his own regiment in front of Ay Trias. He found it hard to persuade infantry commanders to place their men in the open ground in front of the village and therefore had to site some of his guns in front of the infantry. Carrier patrols were consequently provided to screen the guns, especially by night.*
A final series of rearguards operating between Molos and Stilis during the 20th included two field guns and four anti-tank guns. They saw no action and the field guns retired to Imir Bei and the rest to Molos. Next day 6 Brigade took over the right of the line in front of Ay Trias. On the 21st, too, the ground between the two arms of the Sperkhios proved on closer inspection to be less of a tank obstacle than had been assumed, causing a revision of defence plans. This, in turn, caused friction between artillery and infantry officers. The latter had not, at this early stage of the war, come to realise the critical importance of a sound anti-tank layout and were reluctant to dispose their troops in the light of any other considerations than those imposed by the weapons the infantry possessed. The artillery, in their view, would simply have to conform by supporting these positions as best they could. Infantry struck water two inches below the surface in front of Ay Trias and could not dig in as they wished.*
But guns simply had to go into action there in anti-tank roles, and it seemed to many infantry officers that it was putting the cart before the horse to plan infantry defences to fit artillery arrangements. Even so, gunner officers complained of inadequate infantry protection. It was a matter on which experience would draw the two closer together.*
*