Edition of sub-units (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design



Message


Legun -> Edition of sub-units (1/15/2009 3:06:11 AM)

As the F4/F5 option allows edition of sub-units of a divided unit, some new ossibilities have occured. Colour, size, type and TO&E of sub-units can be changed. This open a way to simulate some types of reorganization, rearment etc. Some examples:
1) The is a fixed artillery brigade as sub-unit and its transport company entering the game some turns later. When both sub-units (re)combine a mobile artillery brigade is created.
2) You have 2 tank brigades as subunits. You can add a motorized infantry brigade to create a tank corps.
3) Regular soviet tank/mechanized/cavalry corps is a sub-unit and it can get fit section-size subit "Glorious Name", allowing to turn it into Guards Tank/Mech/Cav Corps. The "Glorius Name" subunit modifies TO&E (negative numbers could be used), but only authorized equipent - f.e. changing slot for T-60 from "54" to "0" but slot for T-70 from "0" to "54".
4) German 1st Cavalry Division can be reorganized to 24th Panzer.
5) Irregular sub-units can be turned to regular unit.




ColinWright -> RE: Edition of sub-units (1/15/2009 4:41:21 AM)

The two problems I see are first, that the 10% addition/subtraction in proficiency will still occur, and second, that while you can reassemble your unit from its differentiated components, you can't take it apart again except to get undifferentiated sub-units.

However, what you mention might be of some use -- for example, one could simulate later motorization of initially foot-bound infantry units. Of course, the units would also jump in proficiency when they got their trucks. One use I can see immediately is for a 'Barbarossa' scenario. Many Soviet artillery units literally had no transportation on 22 June. If only the cannon unit was in play at the start, one would get a much more accurate simulation of the Red Army's problems than the usual. There are lots of guns -- they just won't get their transportation component for a while.

Really though, what is needed is something more like your original 'composite units' idea. The more military history I read, the more I think this is needed, since in fact armies fight at least as often with composite forces of various arms as they do with nicely differentiated units from the parade ground. At least as often as one has the artillery regiment there, and the infantry regiments here, and the reconnaissance battalion there, one has the three infantry regiments heading off, each supported by a battery of artillery and led by a squadron of scout cars.

However, pending a full implementation of your idea, there might be a fairly easily obtained way-point. Specifically, an option to disable the proficiency increase/decrease and some record of the sub-division originally specified in the original order of battle. That would accomplish some of what is needed. Units would break up and reassemble as they do now -- unless some other division had been specified in the original OOB.

For example, in a North Africa scenario, the British usually fought in Brigade Groups: tanks or infantry with attached artillery, engineers, etc. Under those circumstances, one might generally be happy with the AT guns and such sticking with the infantry/tanks -- but one would frequently want to concentrate one's artillery. So one could have an infantry brigade group appear as two sub-units: the infantry et al, and the artillery and some trucks. Reassemble them to give the unit maximum power as an individual unit. Specify you want to break it back down to two units and you get back the artillery and some trucks in one unit and everything else in the other.




Telumar -> RE: Edition of sub-units (1/15/2009 7:57:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Legun

As the F4/F5 option allows edition of sub-units of a divided unit, some new ossibilities have occured. Colour, size, type and TO&E of sub-units can be changed. This open a way to simulate some types of reorganization, rearment etc. Some examples:
1) The is a fixed artillery brigade as sub-unit and its transport company entering the game some turns later. When both sub-units (re)combine a mobile artillery brigade is created.
2) You have 2 tank brigades as subunits. You can add a motorized infantry brigade to create a tank corps.
3) Regular soviet tank/mechanized/cavalry corps is a sub-unit and it can get fit section-size subit "Glorious Name", allowing to turn it into Guards Tank/Mech/Cav Corps. The "Glorius Name" subunit modifies TO&E (negative numbers could be used), but only authorized equipent - f.e. changing slot for T-60 from "54" to "0" but slot for T-70 from "0" to "54".
4) German 1st Cavalry Division can be reorganized to 24th Panzer.
5) Irregular sub-units can be turned to regular unit.


Nice, nice. If there only wasn't the proficiency Addition/subtraction.

Have you tried what happens if you change the unit icons of the divided unit parts in the xml file, say let one subunit have the mech inf and the other one the tank icon?

quote:


ORIGINAL: Colin Wright

Really though, what is needed is something more like your original 'composite units' idea. The more military history I read, the more I think this is needed, since in fact armies fight at least as often with composite forces of various arms as they do with nicely differentiated units from the parade ground


I can second that.




ColinWright -> RE: Edition of sub-units (1/15/2009 8:05:31 AM)

quote:


quote:


ORIGINAL: Colin Wright

Really though, what is needed is something more like your original 'composite units' idea. The more military history I read, the more I think this is needed, since in fact armies fight at least as often with composite forces of various arms as they do with nicely differentiated units from the parade ground


I can second that.


When I think about this, what's intriguing is that it would allow players to engage in the kind of experimentation that real commanders did -- the 'jock columns' the British created in the desert and the French use of 75 mm artillery pieces in the anti-tank role in the latter part of the 1940 campaign come to mind.




Telumar -> RE: Edition of sub-units (1/15/2009 8:11:29 AM)


quote:


Have you tried what happens if you change the unit icons of the divided unit parts in the xml file, say let one subunit have the mech inf and the other one the tank icon?


Have just tried it. It seems to work, they recombine with the original icon - tried tank and infantry.

Hmm, if there could be done something with naval units...?




Legun -> RE: Edition of sub-units (1/15/2009 11:48:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
The two problems I see are first, that the 10% addition/subtraction in proficiency will still occur, and second, that while you can reassemble your unit from its differentiated components, you can't take it apart again except to get undifferentiated sub-units.


To solve the first problem you can edit proficiency of the "attached" sub-unit (transport assets f.e.) and lower it this way, that the final unit gets proficiency similar to basic sub-unit. The second problem isn't important in the most of the examples above - 24.PzD. shouldn't be turned into cavalry division again nor mobile artillery brigade can't be de-motorized. A Spanish regular Natonalist division can't be divided again to falangist columns it was created from, but can be divided into regular regiments.

The only problem is, that 1st Cavalry Division or the infantry division from your example (motorized during campaign), can't be divided as it's already a sub-unit. However, it seems to be rational in some cases - f.e. regular Soviet tank corps must operate as a whole unit, when guards corps gets the possibility to be divided.




Legun -> RE: Edition of sub-units (1/15/2009 11:56:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
Really though, what is needed is something more like your original 'composite units' idea. The more military history I read, the more I think this is needed, since in fact armies fight at least as often with composite forces of various arms as they do with nicely differentiated units from the parade ground. At least as often as one has the artillery regiment there, and the infantry regiments here, and the reconnaissance battalion there, one has the three infantry regiments heading off, each supported by a battery of artillery and led by a squadron of scout cars.


This idea doesn't cancel my great dream of the composite units. Thanks for your support to the second. However, I've lost a hope that I see them one day [:(].




Legun -> RE: Edition of sub-units (1/15/2009 12:04:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Telumar


quote:


Have you tried what happens if you change the unit icons of the divided unit parts in the xml file, say let one subunit have the mech inf and the other one the tank icon?


Have just tried it. It seems to work, they recombine with the original icon - tried tank and infantry.

Hmm, if there could be done something with naval units...?



Yeah, unit's types of subunits have no relation to original unit's type. You can combine naval unit and air unit to get tank unit. The problem with naval units is that they can't be divided and you can change original unit type when it's divided.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.984375