Thanks to Craig for the write up! 
Please make an amendments highlighted in Red so we can see what has changed
Premise
The Battle takes place in an area of hilly woodland of the edge of the main battles revolving around operation Dragoon. Two roughly equal forces are contesting control of the minor roads leading through the area – the German forces so they can route re-enforcements to the beach head, the US forces so they can prevent this.
Dissection and Overview
The game is split into three parts, with the majority of play taking place in the dynamic second part. The first and final parts serve as a warm up/introduction and a finale. The parts are:
1.The Downed Pilot
A US pilot's Reconnaissance plane has come down in the area and the pilot has landed in an unknown location. The German forces want to secure the pilot so he cannot report back on their fortification efforts. The American forces are patrolling the area in a more general manner, attempting to locate the German forces and recover the pilot. The mission has both sides patrolling out into the site with the primary objective being not to engage.
2.The Conquest
A series of objective points are either defended or attacked by each side. The objective points run in a circle around the site. One side attacks a point and one defends, once either the attacker has taken the point, or the defender has held it, the next point is contested. If the attacker was victorious the defender now must defend the site behind the one they just lost. If the defender is victorious then they are now the attacker and must attack the position the previous attackers launched their attack from. This part will involve most of the day's fighting, with a break for lunch in the field.
3.The Final Assault
The final part is a continuous US assault on the fortified base of the German forces. The Fort will be further fortified by barbed wire, minefields, tank turrets etc. There will be certain advantages offered to either side depending on their performance during the second part of the day, ranging from extra ammunition to the availability of mortars. The Game should last approximately an hour. In the event of the US forces performing so well that they over-run the base early then an additional mission involving the German retreat may be used.
Downed Pilot
The U.S. and German Forces start at their respective points on the map. The Downed Pilot (portrayed by Webby) will position himself anywhere on the site. He will have limited pistol ammo and 'very limited mobility due to harsh landing' with which to attempt to evade the Germans and a smoke grenade to signal the U.S. Forces.
Props Required: White sheet/Parachute, Parachord, Splint, Sections of US plane wing P38, canopy section with Webby's name on it and some luftwaffe "kills" symbols, smoke grenade etc
Length
This scenario should run for One Hour
Objectives
U.S.
Recon the area, attempting to locate the two German OPs that have been created, and the fort
Retrieve their downed pilot
German
Construct fortifications around 'the Fort' in preparation of the "impending assault" (Final assualt to game orgs)
Stop the U.S. Forces from recovering their downed pilot, recon-ing their positions or interfering with the construction.
Points of note
•The pilot can not be 'killed', only wounded by shooting, Webby will give up if overwealmed rather than fighting it out
The German forces will require a reasonable amount of time for setting up the fortifications. US forces should be held 'on the leash' and not attack 'the fort'. covered effectively if Us are to 'march' to their start location from the Northern edge of the safe zone
The German commander must allocate groups to FORTIFY, GUARD and PATROL
at the moment the 'recon the area' is nothing more than words, as the US have nothing to recon moreover it could be "to establish the strength of the german force in this region". A simple solution would be similar signposts from Cassino they have to get close enough to read, but something in addition to the pilot would be nice. covered if the German forces create 2 'OP's out from their main base. Each OP and the base has a signpost that must be read by the US forces and reported back
The Conquest
The US and German Forces will start in their respective positions. If the US Retrieved their pilot then they will be the 'attackers', if they did not then the Germans will be the attackers.
The series works upon the changing possession of the title 'attacker', representing the eb and flow of initiative during battle. The principles applied during the first mission are applied to every other mission as the battle progresses around the circle of objectives.
Example
In the first mission the US recovered their pilot, thus they are the attackers.
The US start point is located at -1 (see map on next page)
The commander remains at -1 and this is where the killed players from the US side go to await the next mission.
The German Start Point is located at +1
As they are defending the commander is located at +2 and this is where the killed players go to await the next mission.
If the US forces capture the German position (+1) then the US commander brings up the players killed in the last mission as 're-enforcements' and they precede to attack the next position (+2)
The German players who had not been killed (or had chance to move back to their commander) move to their next position back (+2), where they will join the rest of their earlier dead and prepare another defence, their commander moving back to position +3.
If the Germans are successful in their defence then the German commander brings up the players killed in the last mission (at +2) to the position they had just defended (+1). From here they launch an attack on the US position (-1) with their casualties now returning to position +1.
The US forces still out from the attack return to position -1 and mount a defence of it, the US commander moves back to position -2 to await his casualties.
Length
This is continued throughout most of the day. Approx 11am through to 2-3pm
Objectives
Attacker
Attack and secure the enemy positioned
Defender
Hold of the enemy attack and keep possession of the position.
Points of note
•the German forces have the ability to fortify the position behind them. 'Dead' Germans may do this and the commander may also detach groups from the fighting to do so, this makes the Germans more on 'the defensive' if they so choose.
It may prove difficult to make the fortifications 're-useable' – especially the barbed wire – as Cassino proved it can be tricky to 're-do' it once deployed – Plus collecting the fortifications between engagements adds to the time in-between them, thus loosing some of the 'continuous fighting' appeal of the system.
How it is determined that each position is taken, and whether there should be a time limit on each mission need to still be addressed. Hoisting a flag is one of the standard ways of saying 'this is ours'. To be done by commanders only, to prevent lone wolfing
Props Required: Flags, fortification items if possible
The Final Assault
The US and German Forces start in their respective positions. The German position should be heavily fortified. The US forces have One hour to take the position.
Length
This scenario should run for One Hour
The US forces have regen and are able to throw wave after wave in, in a simple climax.
Depending on how each side performs in the earlier games they will have some advantages to their position in this game.
Points
•If the US forces have a regen, then it should move forward along the road when they first advance– so players do not have to trudge for miles to regen
The advantages remain unknown, but possibilities are
possession of mortar (s)
additional bandages per player
additional ammunition
a dedicated medic to revive the dead
additional grenades
Props Required: Fortification items if possible, Panzer turret, mortar, mortar rounds
oky dokey, the 'points' bit was areas which I thought needed further thought/discussion/clarification, so I shall begin with the first mission.
OK, the German forces have plenty to do, fortifying the fort, guards/pickets and patrolling out.
The US forces on the other hand have relatively little to do.
If we keep this then it becomes a 'US walk out to find the pilot mob handed' which is a little dull.
We have said the US are 'reconing', now for this they need something to actually recon - another objective(s) for them besides the pilot
So what are people's thoughts?
Agreed... something like the stuff at Cassino for recon is good.
"Flags" not needed and a little "ghey" in my opinion... Holding a position would be when there are no enemy present in it and when you have 2 or more men there...
Another option would be to use the Cassino rules and have a runner have to be sent to get the C.O. to confirm the objective as taken. That worked very well.
Hubert had some ideas on regen... Hubert?
I have ammended the text recently, however, the Pilot can be the side mission, the main mission of the US team, and probably more akin to what their task would have been, is to recon in force.... to establish the strength of the enemy team.... look at sign posts, observe what the germans are doing... why are they making barbed wire defences in this location.... allows for small skirmishes which dont have to ammount to much.
I still have the posts from Cassino which can be repainted with something else more appropriate. I agree they are a good way to 'simulate' recon.
Yes, calling forward a 'co' to declare the position taken is a good idea. Works well, means they need more than one person and allows us to decide if they have taken it or not.
I've got a few points I'd like to work through but I'll start on the pilot mission since thats where we're at.
I was thinking it might be better to have the US forces move into the area rather than just start at their HQ. They have to move forward from their start carrying out recce work as they go until they reach a suitable position to set up their HQ (ie the point we choose). This will give the impression of adancing into enemy terrain and keep things slow to start with, giving the Germans time to get their HQ set up and start work on their defences. Now in terms of where to start the US forces the 'leg' that sticks out of the SW of the site looks like a good option to me. Its out of the way and the US forces can advance up the stream into the valley. they can turn off left where the wood widens (thus avoiding the German main position and loop around the edge to their HQ. There they can drop their kit and start patrolling and looking for the pilot. It would be even better if we could drop them off there by vehicle but that may be too ambitious.
In terms of recce objectives for the US I was thinking the Germans could build a forward OP (maybe even 2) that they must locate. We have 1 squad of Germans at the fort, guarding it and building defences whilst the 2nd moves into the woods and finds a good spot for an OP. Some of the squad then occupy and fortify this position whislt the rest proceed to patrol the area and look for the pilot. The US then have to locate both the forward positons and the main line and report back with their loactions, eneemy strength etc as well as find the pilot.
Now about the Conquest section I have a couple of points/questions.
Firstly, are the CPs in what you might term logical postions? Ie are they something that logically, in reality, you would fight over to give your side an advantage? I get very wound up about points being seeming picked at random on a map when they offer no tactical advantage in terms of position. I can see that some clearly are but I'm not sure about a couple as I don't know the site all that well.
Secondly some of the CPs look quite close together, namely the 3 near the tunnel. This wouldn't leave much room to manoeuvre and could cause problems. The question is do we really need 7 CPs or could we eliminate one of them?
Third what about secondary objectives during this part of the day? The COs will obviously do their best to keep things interesting by varying their tactics but a bit of something extra thrown in can't hurt. What about making use of the 'road' by having a mining mission? The Germans have to plant some mines on the road nead the bridge to delay US supply vehicles and prevent the US troops from clearing them. If the Germans succeed them the US experence tighter ammo rules for a period or during the final assault. If the US succeed they get an extra grenade or ammo in the final assault.
I agree with Yith about the flags, I think its better to keep the CP concealed so if its one the enemy hasn't encounted before they have to do some recce work to find and asses it first before they can consider attacking. I also agree the CO determining that the position is taken is a good way to do it.
For the places that dont have a tactical advantage from a terrain point of view, we can make an objective by perhaps putting some crates down and call it a munitions point.
All fair points on the rest though, A flag was an idea I believe before we agreed on the Casino style.
Distance between objectives, the shortest one is from the valley to the alamo, there is more gorund/obstacles to cover than you think, if the US were assaulting from the Valley to the Alamo, that would mean that the Germans are getting really bummed. In which case we could use the closeness as an advantage for turning the tide, so that one side isnt always walking over the other.
For the places that dont have a tactical advantage from a terrain point of view, we can make an objective by perhaps putting some crates down and call it a munitions point.
Yes true, but even then I think it should be chosen as logically as possible.
if the US were assaulting from the Valley to the Alamo, that would mean that the Germans are getting really bummed. In which case we could use the closeness as an advantage for turning the tide, so that one side isnt always walking over the other.
Thats raises a point I am perhaps most concerned about actually. We're making all these positions but will be get the opportunity to use them? We could end up fighting all day over the same 2 points which is omething we clearly want to avoid. What contingencies do we have/can we put in place to prevent this? Similarly if one side is getting screwed time after time people will get fed up with constantly retreating. What should we do if this occurs?
Another thing I did wonder about was the 'overlook'. It almost seems like its wasted with the positions the way they are as no one will attack up it. The US will attack it from above whilst the Germans will have to win 6 in a row to attack it. However its just a minor point and probably isn't worth thinking about.
The Problem with starting down 'the leg' and moving forward to set up a CP is it is exactly what the allies did at Ariel, and we don't want them to have to repeat the experience. The US start point is on a 'road' at the entrance to the site, so in effect they are arriving at the site and moving forward.
There is the option of them starting to the north of the safe zone and marching around the north and east edges of the site (a reverse of the escape route from Ariel if you will). This would give the Germans the chance to move out to establish their CPs and begin fortifications.
'establishing the strength of German forces in this region' is likewise a sentence that doesn't translate to anything tangible. What do we want them to do? Count the Germans? How do we know that they are right? Vague recon missions of 'find out what is happening' are boring. The is a lack of direction and clarity to the players. Enemy strength is fine, but only as padding to give character around the objective in the game.
What the US need to recon needs to be something that can be simply put to the teams. In this instance it is needs to be contrived as there is no recourse to it later in the day.
Using the 'moving out to construct CPs' is good - given the numbers there should be 3 or even 4 'squads' per side. If the German commanders are deciding where to put these CPs then 2 of them, coupled with the Fort is a good variety.
Dean: "At the end of the Day all airsoft scenarios are the same. There are two elephants over the horizon! You must escort these zeplins..."
Lardy is right that one problem could be that it is just the first two objectives that are fought over again and again, but that is the point of the system as I understand it. The same with someone getting consistently creamed, to alter this and make everyone walk around the site removes what I saw as the point of the system.
The system is totally free, if that means the US forces are over run around the site twice in a series of debacalls, then so be it.
Another thing I did wonder about was the 'overlook'. It almost seems like its wasted with the positions the way they are as no one will attack up it. The US will attack it from above whilst the Germans will have to win 6 in a row to attack it. However its just a minor point and probably isn't worth thinking about.
We could put a mine field across the top of the hill, to force the US to come up and attack the overlook from a disadvantage height wise. You're right, defending team would never position themselves downhill from a likely line of attack.
The idea of having lots of points isnt really to get people to have a turn at doing X, but just so that it's actually people's skill which dictates the line of battle. If they fight is getting stale, then I could suggest we say, right, germans move to +2 and US move to -3 and attack along that vector, that way the road comes into play, and its not that far from real military... of attepting to open up a flank when you're banging your head against the enemy. I think the idea of the ring was so that we had multiple places in which to launch attacks and defence from, where we wouldnt have to "script" any sequences that happened in a certain area. This way the effort that goes into point +/-4 (which realistically may not get used in a linear fashion if one team is getting battered) can be used to liven it up a bit.
The idea of having lots of points isnt really to get people to have a turn at doing X, but just so that it's actually people's skill which dictates the line of battle. If they fight is getting stale, then I could suggest we say, right, germans move to +2 and US move to -3 and attack along that vector, that way the road comes into play, and its not that far from real military... of attepting to open up a flank when you're banging your head against the enemy. I think the idea of the ring was so that we had multiple places in which to launch attacks and defence from, where we wouldnt have to "script" any sequences that happened in a certain area. This way the effort that goes into point +/-4 (which realistically may not get used in a linear fashion if one team is getting battered) can be used to liven it up a bit.
The point of the ring is in case one side is getting creamed.
If you have 4 points in a line then one can only loose 2 games from the start and you are out of line.
In the ring you can loose 6 in a row, which covers the day and makes sure 'ring a ring o roses' isn't happening.
So yes, it is about a clash of skills on different levels - not 're-enacting' events in staged foppery. If you can't break out of your rut attacking point 3 then up your game.
We decided we were not scripting these series of engagements and I am going to put my 'chair' foot down. We have areas that need further discussion, we are not going back to that which has already been decided.
Nor should we be discussing the second section, when not everyone has signed off on the first yet.
Yes Sergeant! 
Another thing I did wonder about was the 'overlook'. It almost seems like its wasted with the positions the way they are as no one will attack up it. The US will attack it from above whilst the Germans will have to win 6 in a row to attack it. However its just a minor point and probably isn't worth thinking about.
Yes, this was a worry, but it's not true that the Germans would have to win 6 in a row to attack it. They would only have to win the defence of the next point in the loop (the valley), which could have been after just 2 defeats by the US side.
All the points on the map are locations with important terrain features or places where Alex has built bases.
The problem isn't so much that one side will get chased around the site as I don't see that happening, more that it won't go anywhere at all. The attackers will be bound to run out of steam at some point and once they're on the back foot the otherside gets a chance to push forward. However if we get stuck in a see saw between 2 point we do need to step in to stop people getting fed up. They are paying to play after all. So if we spend the whole morning fighting over 2 points we move the battle to a new start point after lunch and continue from there. Then at least people get new terrain to fight over.
The Problem with starting down 'the leg' and moving forward to set up a CP is it is exactly what the allies did at Ariel, and we don't want them to have to repeat the experience. The US start point is on a 'road' at the entrance to the site, so in effect they are arriving at the site and moving forward.
I didn't know that, I always assumed they started over the otherside since thats where they first appeared to us Germans. If the game starts before the US reach their CP it will give the Germans time to get organised before the US reach their destination. Moving around the North might be the best way to go. Maybe webby could loacte himself somewhere near the leg to make use of that area a little.
'establishing the strength of German forces in this region' is likewise a sentence that doesn't translate to anything tangible. What do we want them to do? Count the Germans? How do we know that they are right? Vague recon missions of 'find out what is happening' are boring. The is a lack of direction and clarity to the players. Enemy strength is fine, but only as padding to give character around the objective in the game.
Actually I think they're one of the most interesting. Any attendee of one of Heides training days will agree. Trying to get close enough to read the insignia and hear what the enemy are saying without getting spotted is very tense and extremely rewarding when successful. A name on a post you can read from 50m away 9or more with binos) isn't. We can have obvious objectives like major positions and then tough ones for those more stealthy in nature (you DO have the Dunns on you side). 
Squad wise I hoped to keep it realistic for the Germans. So 2 understrength Zugs, each split into an MG and an assualt team. But these are easily broken down and rearranged as required.
es, this was a worry, but it's not true that the Germans would have to win 6 in a row to attack it. They would only have to win the defence of the next point in the loop (the valley), which could have been after just 2 defeats by the US side.
All the points on the map are locations with important terrain features or places where Alex has built bases.
Ah yes, didn't think about likt that! 
Cheers for clearing that up
The problem isn't so much that one side will get chased around the site as I don't see that happening, more that it won't go anywhere at all. The attackers will be bound to run out of steam at some point and once they're on the back foot the otherside gets a chance to push forward. However if we get stuck in a see saw between 2 point we do need to step in to stop people getting fed up. They are paying to play after all. So if we spend the whole morning fighting over 2 points we move the battle to a new start point after lunch and continue from there. Then at least people get new terrain to fight over.
Yes, if it really does go tits up we will have to rethink it. But I doubt it will. We can rethink it on the day if needed and yes lunchtime should give us chance to do this. We will have radios on each organiser in a net so we can discuss things if needed.
The Problem with starting down 'the leg' and moving forward to set up a CP is it is exactly what the allies did at Ariel, and we don't want them to have to repeat the experience. The US start point is on a 'road' at the entrance to the site, so in effect they are arriving at the site and moving forward.
I didn't know that, I always assumed they started over the otherside since thats where they first appeared to us Germans. If the game starts before the US reach their CP it will give the Germans time to get organised before the US reach their destination. Moving around the North might be the best way to go. Maybe webby could loacte himself somewhere near the leg to make use of that area a little.
Which is more or less what we planned... but I didn't want to know where Webby would be so thought we should leave that to him to decide!
Oh, that reminds me... we should have one person who decides all things on the day. We don't want to get stuck in committees during the event... I have vivid memories at Arnhem of an extended discussion on the radios about what we should do... It was a bit shit.
Yeah it would seem sensible for me to decide on the day where to go, so that it's actual SAR for the US, rather than Yith and Craig trying not to encourage the punters to where I am
OK, possible problems with the clarifications to the first section.
Firstly the US forces will be moving around one large area of the site to begin with, and the Germans will be fanning out for their CPs from another meaning that if it could be hard for Webby to place himself in a suitably area before hand, limiting the number of possible hiding places (especially if the parachute is used as an indicator as this has to be put out before hand).
