This one was very interesting, not from a play perspective, but rather from the perspective that sometimes men give up. The mechanic for this particular scenario (which is NOT the same as in another scenario in which surrender is an option) makes it easier for the "Germans" to surrender if they have better leaders. Initially I thought this was very weird and not at all appropriate, but the more I thought about it, the smarter it seemed.

The situation of the German troops is hopeless. They are sandwiched between the Americans on the beaches and the airborne troops that are attacking in this scenario. A good leader will understand that they are going to be destroyed and will seek to cause the maximum delay on the attackers while experiencing the least loss of life on their part. In essence, they will uphold their honor without killing their men to do so. This is actually beautifully simulated with the surrender rule.

As a "game" however, this scenario is stunningly one sided. The Germans will surrender, the only question is when. They are unlikely to cause sufficient losses to the Americans (6 steps) before they quit to win, and they are unlikely to hold out. I would suggest a staggered set of victory conditions for your play. For example, surrender before Turn 4 is a major US victory, surrender before turn 7 is a minor US victory, etc. The US losses could also be used to reduce the level of the victory (e.g. 2 losses drops the level of victory by 1, 5 losses by 2, etc.) This will result in some caution on each player's part.

The situation and the surrender rules deserve victory conditions that reward a careful play. I can see some definite improvements resulting in an improved rating to 3 or on a generous day a 4. The forces involved are too small and the terrain too fussy to generate much better.