Great_Ajax
Posts: 4774
Joined: 10/28/2002 From: Alabama, USA Status: offline
|
Iron Duke, I don't disagree with many of your principles as I feel that Kampfgruppes would be a neat aspect to have in the game if done properly. I certainly don't disagree about the effectiveness of these fighting groups. The kampfgruppes would have to bring something significant to the table far beyond what an understrength division can currently do. Respectfully, I just don't see a unit getting a magical exp/morale bonus from forming into a kampfgruppe. According to OKH situation maps, divisions under 50% strength were automatically classified as kampfgruppes and assumed to be fighting in ad hoc groups. Maybe instead of a new process, we could just add a rule that German units with a certain morale/experience are immune (totally or partially) from becoming unready so quality German divisions that would normally be 'unready' due to losses could still fight at their current strength. They could also be less of a command burden. Whenever a unit triggers this rule, the name could be slightly changed from 'division' to 'kampfgruppe' so the new name in the game would be something like '6th Panzer Kampfgruppe'. Trey quote:
ORIGINAL: IronDuke quote:
ORIGINAL: el hefe I like the idea of Kampfgruppes but I just don't see any usefulness at this scale. I did include some rule suggestions to reflect their battlefield usefulness. quote:
Kampfgruppes are just a task organized force used for specific mission purposes and not used just because divisions were low on strength. I'd argue this was true up to a point tactically, but that most of the ones you read about in operational histories were badly beaten Divisions. Task organised forces by nature tended to disappear once the mission was over, that doesn't need to be shown at this level. Re-organising shattered divisions, however, is an OOB and TOE amendment and as such, I'd argue, should be. You've done excellent Market Garden scenarions for other titles. How many of those German units that contain and then reduce the British position were adhoc formations thrown together as little more than Alarm units. This was Wehrmacht SOP, they were perfectly comfortable with it. quote:
Maneuver regiments would often get mixed up with divisional artillery battalions, pioneer battalions, GHQ units, etc. and there is no way to do this in the game. Reconsolidating units into a regiment from different units would not give that unit any kind of bonus. In fact, mixing units has the opposite affect as there is always a lack of cohesion and a dip in morale. Allow a KG to add two support units and you get something close. As below, if organising a KG caused affected personnel to suffer a dip in morale and a loss of combat effectiveness, why did the Germans do it so often? The German experience was surely the opposite, that taking men in 3 man platoons and 100 man battalions and putting them into composite units at full strength improved cohesion and morale. Not least because what was generally left was combat experienced and well seasoned. Putting a large number of veterans together in a new formation was unlikely to produce a poor unit. The Germans trained and fought along these lines, this was all but second nature to them. quote:
Believe me, I was an artillery Battery Commander deploying to Iraq and we got 50% of our personnel from various different units to become a task organized, non-TO&E Unit and it took months for the unit to function at the level that I was comfortable with. With the greatest of respect, I'd argue the modern American Army has a different method and ethos from the Wehrmacht and the fact that it didn't benefit you doesn't mean it wouldn't have benefitted them. Given they were clearly a learning organisation, the fact they did it so often speaks volumes about how they perceived its effectiveness. Besides, the point is they are improving effectiveness of shattered units, not improving the effectiveness of full strength units. The Germans trained for this kind of thing, were well used to combined arms method and I can't overemphasise that they wouldn;t have done it so often if they didn't see a point to it. quote:
In short, I think this would be a huge programming undertaking with little to gain. To me, it's a flag and a couple of rule changes, but this isn't my field so I am happy to stand corrected. Regards, ID
_____________________________
"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!" WiTE Scenario Designer WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead WitE 2.0 Scenario Designer
|