Missing Weapons (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series



Message

Tentpeg -> Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 8:27:49 PM)

I have been hiding in the shadows for a long time. Enjoy the game and the support. I finally decided to come out of the closet (not that one) and post.

?1. The 1941 German rifle platoon had 4 X ten man squads. The Headquarters had a 5cm Grenade thrower with a team of three men. WITE does a good job of accounting for the previous weapons and troops. So where is the platoon headquarters element of six men armed with a SMG and five rifles (one w/a scope) ?

?2. The 1941 German infantry divionsion had around 527 (+/-) LMGs but WITE only shows 387 (+/-) LMG. Where did the others go?

?3. I assume support squads represent cooks, signal, supply, headquaters, mechanics, medical and what we used to call REAMF's. If that is true why are they unarmed? Even a REAMF should be able to defend themself.



2ndACR -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 8:43:07 PM)

Careful now, we German's are already hurting for armament points. LOL



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 9:05:14 PM)

- Thanks for the input.

- Understand the arms points shortage but not arming support troops defies logic. (Please no urban myths about two soviets and one rifle)

- BTW observe what happens to the CV if the missing LMGs and SMGs are added to the Division.

- Side Note: you are not the only one who gets irritated by what the Axixs minors steal from factories.





2ndACR -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 9:58:32 PM)

I am not going to fret my JU88 anymore, I am downgrading them either to HE111-3 or upgrade to HE111-4. They both have better bomb loads anyway.

But my JU87D's hurt like crazy.

I would bet that the CV jumps another 2-3 points.



karonagames -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 10:07:24 PM)

Support squads can be converted to rifle squads if rifle squad numbers fall below a certain threshold (can't remember what it is off hand) there is an experience penalty when they convert.

There was a long debate in the dev. forums about HQ squads, and this was the compromise.



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 10:53:57 PM)

- Adding the 100 (+) LMGs and thousands of rifles, pistols and SMGs to the 41 Division does add a +3 bump to the CV displayed. No telling what it really does. So many factors when it comes to deciding what a units true strength is... reminds me of the real world. Imagine what it would do to a Soviet unit.

- So the decision was made to only arm roughly 6800 soldiers in a division of 17000 (+). I would have loved to have been in on the that debate. [:)]



2ndACR -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 10:57:58 PM)

Bah the Russians only had 1 gun per 3 guys anyway.



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 11:14:57 PM)

So it was a mechanism to balance the game? [:D]



Great_Ajax -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 11:28:47 PM)

My educated guess would be that you don't count on your non-combat support units as combat power. If you are conducting an attack, would you really expect that your cooks are going to add any offensive firepower to the assault even if their squad was equipped with an LMG? That weaponry is purely defensive. You may have a point when it comes to defense even if its impact would be very marginal but if you're relying your cooks and clerks to prevent a retreat on defense, you got bigger problems in the bigger scheme of things.

Trey

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tentpeg

I have been hiding in the shadows for a long time. Enjoy the game and the support. I finally decided to come out of the closet (not that one) and post.

?1. The 1941 German rifle platoon had 4 X ten man squads. The Headquarters had a 5cm Grenade thrower with a team of three men. WITE does a good job of accounting for the previous weapons and troops. So where is the platoon headquarters element of six men armed with a SMG and five rifles (one w/a scope) ?

?2. The 1941 German infantry divionsion had around 527 (+/-) LMGs but WITE only shows 387 (+/-) LMG. Where did the others go?

?3. I assume support squads represent cooks, signal, supply, headquaters, mechanics, medical and what we used to call REAMF's. If that is true why are they unarmed? Even a REAMF should be able to defend themself.




randallw -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 11:29:15 PM)

Well, if you arm support squads does it mean they are getting into the battle every time ( including attack )?  Do you really want them to be taking casualties while inflicting casualties with just light weaponry?



marty_01 -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/6/2012 11:50:35 PM)

I don't care if my support squads have their appropriate numbers of lugers and such -- but I would like to have the combat elements of my German Infantry divisions fitted out with all of those missing LMGs.



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 12:02:18 AM)

EL Hefe;

Thanks for your input. Clerks and jerks being out of the offensive battle I can understand. However, the machine guns in the Artillery and AT battalions are a bit more difficult to understand, not to mention the rifle company and platoon headquarters. In real life, providing those weapons was for self defense. As such they will assist both sides in holding ground. In a game that rewaeds offense imagine what would happen if units suddenly held the ground they stood on.

A final thought, there are numerous examples of clerks and jerks in the rear having stopped breakthroughs and prevented disasters. And command groups make a differebce. I remember during the battle for the Falklands a para battalion command group making a difference in a battle. The Commander died but the objective was taken.

Anyway it was a decision made. I doubt it will be changed.



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 12:18:37 AM)

I hope that I have not created a misperception. None of the combat squads are missing anything. The Headquarters that command those elements are represented by support squads. The support squads have no weapons. That means the 81 rifle platoons do not have the SMG and five rifles (one with a scope). The 140 LMG's are spread across the Infantry Division, some in combat units, some in support units and the rest in headquarters above Battalion.

Could they be put back in, sure. Is this a game breaker, I do not see how.



randallw -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 2:32:01 AM)

It's possible that your document, whatever it is, is different from the ones the designers have used to create the TOEs ( creating the different amount of weapons for the time period in question ).



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 3:13:36 AM)

Randallw;

I have no idea what the Designers used. I wish I did. My information came from three sources George Nafziger, Victo Madej and the German Infantry Handbook ( a US Army translation of German "TO&E's... I forget the German term.)

The Designers did a great job. They had to make some hard decisions. I mean I could start a thread on why the horses in the vehicle pool cannot provide supplies for isolated units. The moment I did someone would claim it favored one side or another. Others would want it as an option and add that the horse pool if not used should increase beyond factory caps because horses can procreate and trucks can't. [:)]



2ndACR -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 3:53:30 AM)

Hey, I like that idea, might need to start a new thread on that.



Helpless -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 8:34:12 AM)

I think Jim W would answer it better.

Game doesn't model combat unit's OB on the level of pistols and machine-guns (devices) - it deals with ground elements, which are 2 dimensional objects with basic CV values (depending on the ground type) and internal composition. There is no goal to have exact number of pistols and hand grenades in unit, main goal is to create units with historical fighting capabilities within existing combat model.

In this example you can add even werfers to Support squads, but it won't add any CV for them (which is non-zero), but would lead to ahistorical usage of them in offensive. From other point of view CV of Support squads is non-zero, which represents limited ground hold capabilities.



Cavalry Corp -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 10:59:07 AM)

May I ask where you got the name tent peg? Are you in the sport of tentpegging?




MechFO -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 11:51:07 AM)

Infantry Squad allotments on the German side range from ok until 43 and a bit generous thereafter.

Bigger problem is that the Germans Inf Divs are missing a quarter of their Artillery from 42 onward, this despite the fact that the original reason, guns being produced too quickly, was fixed quite a few patches ago.

..and the combat model of course



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/7/2012 3:53:02 PM)

Cavalry:

Joe Tentpeg was a term used by brother officers when discussing a troop who was not very bright.

Helpless:

I appreciate your efforts to clarify the situation. For those who are too paranoid to believe him, he is right. It is easy to test. Arming a support element is like putting a scope on a bayonet. Doing so only ruins its primary function.

To the remaining readers;

Let us imagine the the following;.

General Tentpeg inspects his Division prior to the invasion and discovers that every single rifle platoon Headquarters element is playing cards with Rear Area MF's. He orders them back to duty and is told that would violate the 2 by 3 treaty. He asks what treaty. The Hitler + Stalin =2 + Hungary + Finland + Rumania = 3 treaty. If the 2 by 3 treaty is broken the only person he can go to war against is General A. I. Challenging. General Tentpeg can live with that. He has his adjutant, Major Editor, make the adustments to the Tables of organization and equipment adding in the 81 rifle platoon Headquarters (using the rifle squad template). Each HQ consists of one SMG, one sniper, four riflemen. He then adjusts the personnel strength of the Support elements to balance the books. He decides the best way to do this is reducing the support element from twenty to nineteen.

Major Editor informs him he needs to do this for all future TO&E change and it must be done for all other units... including that silly battalion of bicycle riders. The execution of this plan takes longer than the war would. General Tentpeg is retired before his reorganization is ever completed or his unit ever fires a shot.



jaw -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/8/2012 3:32:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tentpeg

I have been hiding in the shadows for a long time. Enjoy the game and the support. I finally decided to come out of the closet (not that one) and post.

?1. The 1941 German rifle platoon had 4 X ten man squads. The Headquarters had a 5cm Grenade thrower with a team of three men. WITE does a good job of accounting for the previous weapons and troops. So where is the platoon headquarters element of six men armed with a SMG and five rifles (one w/a scope) ?

?2. The 1941 German infantry divionsion had around 527 (+/-) LMGs but WITE only shows 387 (+/-) LMG. Where did the others go?

?3. I assume support squads represent cooks, signal, supply, headquaters, mechanics, medical and what we used to call REAMF's. If that is true why are they unarmed? Even a REAMF should be able to defend themself.


1. The 50mm mortars are represented if that is what you are referring to.

2. Missing MGs are in headquarters and other non-combat elements lumped into Support.

3. Support is equal to the total manpower of a unit minus the manpower comprising the combat elements represented in the unit.

Support units are "unarmed" because fighting is not their primary function. To arm them even with just pistols would drastically overstate their combat potential.


Jim W.



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/8/2012 8:05:17 PM)

jaw;

Would you consider the Regimental Anti-tank company's and the Divisional Anti-tank battalion a combat or support element? Every Anti-tank gun platoon had a light machine gun. The decision was made to include only the individual gun teams in the Infantry Division OOB. Those 36 LMG's Teams are a combat multiplier. They are not in the rear area.

Is an Infantry Patoon Headqurters the same as a Signal Platoon Headquarters? The game seems treats them the same. The 5cm Grenade throwers are provided but the six man Headquaters is playing cards in the rear. The additional 81 SMG's, 81 scoped rifles and 324 rifles are a combat multiplier. (I would personally prefer them to the 5cm Grenade thrower teams.)

BigAnorak stated this was debated among the deision makers. A decision was made. It is not going to be changed.



jaw -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/9/2012 1:17:02 PM)

If you really believe those extra weapons would matter, then modify the TOE and test it yourself. Just increase rifle squads by 36 and reduce support by 18. Experimentation is why the game comes with an editor.



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/10/2012 2:26:18 AM)

jaw;

I already have. Step one was using the 5cm grenade thrower element as a base and adding the rifle headquaters element. Step two was using the machine gun element as a base and creating a new LMG element of two 7.92mm LMG+ 2 Rfl. I created 18 of them to cover the ones found in the Anti-tank platoons. The othe LMG's would not be found on the forward edge of the battle area. Step Three I adjusted support element levels so there was no change in the manpower of the Division. The result was an increase of 1 supply point, 7 ammunition pointsand a 4% increase in the overall support of the Modified Division. Step four the unit morale was compared between the unmodified and modified divisions from 75 to 90 and it changed for the better in the modified about once every four increases. Both Divisions used a base of 100% for its TO&E and supply, fuel, ammo and vehicle level.

Note: Witout making similiar changes in a Soviet Rifle Division this is of little use. My data on the Soviets is to vague and incomplete.

Note: With the Axis minors I am having beeter luck.

Do the extra weapons matter? From a gaming perscpective; no.

Again I am not saying the designers are wrong. I having a feeling the black box of a combat engine takes all of this into account. The designers made a decision and I have no issue with that.

I am simply bothered that 10880 out of my 17000 men in every Infantry division are unarmed.



Wuffer -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/10/2012 3:20:57 PM)

http://niehorster.orbat.com/012_ussr/41_organ/41_rd_inf-co.html




Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/10/2012 3:58:30 PM)

Wuffer;

Thank you. A very helpful link.



Richrd -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/10/2012 11:05:07 PM)

Maybe I misunderstood you tentpeg, but you can do just as you like very easily. You only have to modify the division, say infantry, once in the generic screen. Then go down the scenario OOB and you can update each division with a single click. It gets tedious for each type of division, Pz, Mot, Mtn, Light, etc, etc. And then again for each nationality. For me the force multiplier I was after was officers and NCO's. But I did it, half blind and wholly stupid.



Tentpeg -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/11/2012 4:26:10 AM)

Richrd;

I understand the mechanics of creating/modifying the ground elements and placing them into each OOB of the type of Division I wish to alter. Being careful with manpower ceilings, ground device updates and retirement is enough to drive one to drink. Is it tedious... yes. Will it make a difference... I do not know. My limited testing shows it benefits the Soviets more than the Germans and the Minors more than the Soviets.

What I did discover and Helpless pointed it out is arming 'support" type ground elements is a drain on resources with no return in combat value.

I also did a little experiment with officers and NCOs be pulled out of the support pool and being placed in the Division as "HQ" element troops. All I am going to say is Troops classified as a Headquarters elements have some strange characteristics.

I agree the editor is a great tool. I disagree that you are stupid. I suspect you are just humble.

BTW what do you think of the idea of isolated units being able to consume their virtual horses as a source of supply? [8|]






marty_01 -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/11/2012 3:30:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tentpeg

Do the extra weapons matter? From a gaming perscpective; no.


I’m not tracking on this bit.

I keep reading from ComradeP how – within the current combat resolution model -- Russian SMG combat elements tear stuff up. I assumed this meant that automatic weapons in general are uber potent within the current combat model. But it sounds like from what you are saying the addition of a bunch more MG34s and/or MG42s combat elements doesn’t really do much for the combat power of a German Infantry Division.



karonagames -> RE: Missing Weapons (1/11/2012 4:19:42 PM)

SMGs tear up at 50metre range. The LMGs and MGs should tear up at the 100m -300m range but this is not being reflected in the combat routines atm.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.96875