|
Malevolence -> RE: Eliminate or modify the Assault Infantry Formation (6/21/2020 4:06:26 AM)
|
What's in a Name?
A tangent--the choice of the word "Assault" in the name of formations. The use of the word is inconsistent. I assumed Assault meant infantry-heavy formation with combined arms. However, Light Armor Assault (earlier image) is tank-heavy with combined arms. Very few infantry.
As with other formations, Siege implies artillery, and uses the term Heavy as a modifier to imply even more artillery.
If it were me, I would simply use--
"Motorized Assault BDE/CORPS/DIV" --infantry-heavy, with supporting trucks, tanks and artillery.
"Mechanized Assault BDE/CORPS/DIV" --infantry-heavy, with supporting APC, tanks and artillery.
"(Light/Medium/Heavy) Shock BDE/CORPS/DIV" --tank-heavy formations, with supporting mechanized infantry and artillery.
It gives the player the hint of the system--what to expect.
Is there Medium or Heavy Infantry? If not, why keep using the word Light? Was it to differentiate with RPG and MG? Motorized Light Infantry and Mechanized Light Infantry are used as formation names. Light infantry usually implies just the troops. Like mountain troops, airborne, etc. Leg infantry.
"Light Infantry BDE/CORPS/DIV" --leg infantry only.
"Motorized Infantry BDE/CORPS/DIV" --infantry with supporting trucks.
"Mechanized Infantry BDE/CORPS/DIV" --infantry with supporting APCs.
"MG Infantry BDE/CORPS/DIV" --leg MG infantry only.
"Motorized MG BDE/CORPS/DIV" --MG infantry with supporting trucks.
"Mechanized MG BDE/CORPS/DIV" --MG infantry with supporting APCs.
etc.
The above is the way most independent units are named already.
It does get somewhat strange, because MG's and RPG's are just supporting weapons. They don't constitute the core of Regiments, let alone Corps and Armies. Every infantry formation should have some of both once they are re-discovered.
DISCLAIMER: I only have a limited view of OOB's. I'm not sure how walkers, etc. are handled.
|
|
|
|
