Fall Grau Command & Control

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Fall Grau Command & Control

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> Mods and Scenarios >> Fall Grau Command & Control

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Fall Grau Command & Control - 6/26/2021 9:47:45 PM

Mark Breed

Posts: 342
Joined: 9/4/2003
From: Orange County, CA
Status: offline

Why do Allied forces start so far from their chain of command? Divisions from two different corps will start near each other, but their sister divisions start on the other side of the continent. This makes no sense and messes with my OCD.

What was the designer's goal in doing this?

Regards,
cptcav

< Message edited by Mark Breed -- 6/26/2021 10:38:07 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Fall Grau Command & Control - 6/27/2021 5:06:40 PM

golden delicious

Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Breed

Why do Allied forces start so far from their chain of command? Divisions from two different corps will start near each other, but their sister divisions start on the other side of the continent. This makes no sense and messes with my OCD.

What was the designer's goal in doing this?

Regards,
cptcav

Are you talking about units on the map at the start or the ones which arrive later in the scenario?

The turn 1 unit locations are inherited from Jeremy's original design (though from memory they're mostly grouped geographically). However, the reinforcements are supposed to be spread more or less evenly across the map throughout the scenario, so that overrunning any particular area doesn't cause a specific gap to appear in the Allied OOB.

As an aside, all US corps are fully co-operative with one another, and with all the other problems the Allies face in the scenario, I wouldn't make it a priority to keep the corps together: it won't make any difference.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to Mark Breed)

Post #: 2

RE: Fall Grau Command & Control - 6/27/2021 11:02:19 PM

Mark Breed

Posts: 342
Joined: 9/4/2003
From: Orange County, CA
Status: offline

How do you explain the deployment of the Canadian and British forces? They do not cooperate with each other. Sloppy scenario design.

(in reply to golden delicious)

Post #: 3

RE: Fall Grau Command & Control - 6/28/2021 2:43:27 PM

golden delicious

Posts: 5575
Joined: 9/5/2000
From: London, Surrey, United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Breed

How do you explain the deployment of the Canadian and British forces? They do not cooperate with each other. Sloppy scenario design.

Wow OK.

Again this initial deployment is inherited from Jeremy's original design, but the "Free" units are spread over the country so will be mixed in with the Canadian units. As far as I'm aware the Canadian corps themselves are groups geographically, but again I'm not certain of this.

_____________________________

"What did you read at university?"
"War Studies"
"War? Huh. What is it good for?"
"Absolutely nothing."

(in reply to Mark Breed)

Post #: 4

RE: Fall Grau Command & Control - 7/22/2021 12:21:44 PM

tellhimhowitis

Posts: 2
Joined: 7/22/2021
Status: offline

Very polite Ben.

I'd of called him a rude idiot. He obviously doesn't know how many hours/months and years went into designing that scenario. But then I'm stating the obvious. Ignorance is indeed bliss.

(in reply to golden delicious)

Post #: 5

RE: Fall Grau Command & Control - 7/25/2021 2:10:31 AM

Jeremy Mac Donald

Posts: 765
Joined: 11/7/2000
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

Why do Allied forces start so far from their chain of command? Divisions from two different corps will start near each other, but their sister divisions start on the other side of the continent. This makes no sense and messes with my OCD.

What was the designer's goal in doing this?

The Allies are caught flat footed at the start of the invasion. They are currently raising their armies and countries raise armies using forces from often widely scattered geographic locations. Here we are primarily seeing units being raised in urban environments, because, of course that is both where the people are but also where transportation logistics are generally focused.

Beyond this, the reality of play is that there is little real requirement to keep a formation together. HQs from any formation can help supply any other formation of their own country for example.

TOAW more of less requires that a fixed command and control system be implemented at the beginning of a scenario and does not allow for the transferring of a unit from one formation to another. However we are dealing with a fast developing situation on a continental scale. Units would be given (and are in practice) new priorities as the situation develops but TOAW does not allow for the transfer of a Division from one formation to another.

To deal with this the co-operation levels etc. have been set so that generally most units of one nationality are fully co-operative with each other irrespective of which Formation they are technically a part of. There are exceptions to this but not to the point where a unit is uncooperative, just semi-cooperative. When this crops up it will be because there are differences in the way the different units fight. Think, as an example of this, Marines versus Regular Army in the Pacific War.

As Ben notes - don't even try to keep the units together by formation. By all means build Army Groups but do so based on the situation on the map not on the starting formations. Most obviously you will want to concentrate Armoured Divisions together though where and in what numbers will be dictated by the situation in your particular match.

< Message edited by Jeremy Mac Donald -- 7/25/2021 2:56:50 AM >

_____________________________

Necesse est multos timeat quem multi timent

"He whom many fear, fears many"

(in reply to Mark Breed)

Post #: 6

RE: Fall Grau Command & Control - 7/25/2021 2:26:56 AM

Jeremy Mac Donald

Posts: 765
Joined: 11/7/2000
From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Breed

How do you explain the deployment of the Canadian and British forces? They do not cooperate with each other. Sloppy scenario design.

The Canadians start the scenario rapidly raising an army. The Commonwealth forces represent forces that escaped either Europe or other parts of the Empire with the fall of the UK. They to are being reformed in the face of fleeing across the oceans. However they, at least, generally represent older military units. You should note that they have the highest Proficiency rating in the initial Allied Order of Battle and start with the veteran tag. This is because they represent actual soldiers while the rest of the armies being raised have never seen combat before the start of the scenario (any units the Americans or Canadians sent across the Oceans prior to the start of this scenario never came back).

They are not uncooperative - they are semi cooperative. The newly raised Canadian forces are a substantially different breed then these units even if they are under Canadian high command. Notice, for example that the Commonwealth units are often using different equipment then the newly raised Canadian Units. Much of that equipment is what they took with them when they sailed to Canada while the newly raised Canadian units tend to use either equipment that was actually manufactured in Canada in World War II or American Equipment (either given to them or produced under license).

_____________________________

Necesse est multos timeat quem multi timent

"He whom many fear, fears many"

(in reply to Mark Breed)

Post #: 7