hueglin
Posts: 297
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Kingston, ON, Canada
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mr. Smith
This thread is proceeding just as I had hoped.
I would suggest that as we move forward we create new threads dealing with specific time periods or better yet conflicts. Such as a "World War II TO&E" thread or a "Eastern Front 1941 To&E" thread.
Brad, thanks for the suggested U.S. tank battalion! Interesting idea on the 81mm mortars. . .
Please keep the links coming and if you have printed reference material like Dr. Foo let the community know if you are willing to provide data.
Many interesting issues have already been raised. I would like to hear more on how the non-combant personel of a unit are modeled. I have considered using irregular squads to reflect those soldiers who are armed, but do not function as trained combat team. So, a signal company might have 9 to 12 irregular squads for example. I prefer these over the light squad designation since light squads model an infantry unit with offensive and defensive abilities whereas support troops have purely defensive cabilities and are limited at that.
This raises an obvious question: Should a TOAW unit include only the combat elements or all components? As a game designed to model the "operational" realm of warfare as opposed to merely the "tactical", the "tail" of unit becomes as important as the "teeth". However, the desire to keep the game manageable means that support units are specifically limited to supply and repair functions with some defensive ability. I agree with this approach. Can anyone imagine how tedious the game would be if you had to employ units to establish communication networks for example? Select "Lay Phone lines" under the Unit Orders Menu . . .
Accordingly, I tend to group all those units not organic to the combat formations respective of scale in the HQ unit as irregular squads if not specifically support, MP or engineering. For example, a 1944-45 U.S. Infantry division as a TOAW formation would consist of a HQ unit, 3 Infantry regiments, a Recon troop, an engineering battalion, 3 light artillery battalions and 1 medium artillery battalion (or just a divisional artillery unit). I would use this setup in a scenario where the player is in the role of the Army or Corps commander.
BTW,
After five years of working as a historian, I didn't know it was actually possible to have an income! 
If you are going to model service support troops, I agree with your idea of grouping them with the HQ. That way the player is only inclined to use them in an emergency, because of the risk of losing the HQ. The least favourable option would be to create specific unit counters for them (e.g. a signal company unit), because then players would be likely to use them as just another combat unit. In reality, if the signal company, or the transport, or the maintenance battalion of a div got engaged and destroyed, the operational effect would be more than just losing an infantry battalion.
I am modeling fomrations at the modern brigade level and use the HQ as a non combat type of unit. Generally, I put only combat vehicles, spt wpns and infantry in the bns and coys, and the HQ consists of the command squads, support squads, 2-3 APCs and 500 trucks. The 500 trucks reperesent all of the `B` echelon vehicles from the bde (including those that would be organic to bns. This models some of the traffic congestion of modern warfare as well as the transport asset sharing. A bde would in fact have much more than 500 soft skinned vehicles.
It seems to me that the way to model service support troops is to use the support squads - they have a very limited offensive capability, some defensive capability, and their loss affects the formation.
Dave
< Message edited by hueglin -- 7/6/2006 10:34:23 PM >
|
Printable Version
OOB & TO&E Database - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread