RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups

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] >> World in Flames >> RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 2:33:52 AM

Mziln

Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

Japanese Naval Landing Forces
Unit                              Size                  Comments
1st Kure SNLF            1401 men         Landing at Legaspi, (Philippines)
2nd Kure SNLF           1401 men         Landing at Jolo Island (Philippines)
1st Maizuru SNLF        746 men           At Hainan Naval District, 3rd China Fleet
2nd Maizuru SNLF      1069 men         Landing on Wake Island
1st Sasebo SNLF        1622 men         Landing on Menado, Celebes
2nd Sasebo SNLF       1473 men         Under 32 Special Base Force, 3rd Fleet
8th Sasebo SNLF        746 men           At Hainan Naval District, 3rd China Fleet
Shanghai SNLF            746 men           Operated from port of Shanghai, China
1st Yokosuka SNLF    849 men           Parachutes onto Menado airfield, Celebes (naval parachute unit)
2nd Yokosuka SNLF   746 men           Landings at Miri, Seria, and Lutong, Sarawak
3rd Yokosuka SNLF   849 men           Landing on Koepang, Timor Island (naval parachute unit)
4th Yokosuka SNLF    746 men           At Hainan Naval District, 3rd China Fleet

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 91

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 3:11:06 AM

hazpak

Posts: 8
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline

Ok LG seems to be a ficticious unit. Much like the Imperial Guard marine unit. In reality the imperial guard were brigade groups of infantry that fought in China and acted as guards of the Imperial Family

shock that... as Mziln the SNLF were the 'marines' for the japanese.

Do we want to make a general statement about militias eg raised in times of need when there was a direct threat to the nation?

haz.

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 92

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 3:19:59 AM

trees trees

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

Very interesting! I did not know that about the Russian army and that was good information to have before going to search for it. Where did you get this information?

However, I do feel that each unit need to, if at all possible, have it�s own feel. In my opinion we should try and avoid too much generic stuff, it is not so much fun and interesting to read and hence counterproductive.

When we get to the Russians we will have to see what we can do with them

As for the militia I will maybe see if I can find something about local Landwehr divisions. That could serve well for this rabble of a unit

That's just information I've absorbed over the years reading histories of the Eastern Front. I can't point to a specific volume.

A lot of units in WiF don't have a realistic historical designation. Perhaps a majority of them do have one, but plenty don't. In addition to explaining that there was no such unit as the "2nd Guards Garrison Army" (there were a scattering of "Fortress" units in WWII, but not very many officially designated static units), a land unit write-up will have to explain that the "MECH" units are another design innovation of WiF. Aside from German 'Panzergrenadier' regiments I don't think many of the WWII armies used 'armored infantry' units on a large scale, particularly at the corps level. The American army did somewhat with their flexible Combat Commands (Brigades) that could feature two tank+one infantry CC or two infantry+one tank CC in a division. Probably someone else out there would know more about the American OOB than I. But I am fairly sure that some of the German MECH units in WiF have numerical designations that correspond to Panzer corps, in actuality an ARMored corp, so I hope that is mentioned.

People have also pointed out that with the possible exception of the American portion of Operation Market-Garden, there were never any corps-level paradrops in WWII, nor corps level parachute units.

For Japan it won't be too easy to explain the "Kwantung" MOT army, which was neither of MOT type, appeared in the early 30s not the 40s, and as the Soviets proved in 1945, was not elite.

China has several historic unit designations, notably for the Communists, but I suspect many of their designations aren't accurate. Researching these is also exceptionally difficult, I've tried.

Not all of the MILitia are 'rabble'. Good WiF play is to build out the MIL, ship the worst of them off to garrison backwater areas, and then use the White-print ones as cheap losses that are quick to replace. But they are a generic unit, there is no way around that. Original WiF didn't have any unit designations at all, so it is chock full of hard to designate units.

(in reply to jesperpehrson)

Post #: 93

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 5:33:50 AM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan
Oops, I hope it did not look like I did them It was not my intention anyway ;)

I didn't see your statement as implying that you did do the HQ units. I think we're just working on better co-ordination to avoid duplication of work.

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to jesperpehrson)

Post #: 94

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 6:59:39 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

For Japan it won't be too easy to explain the "Kwantung" MOT army, which was neither of MOT type, appeared in the early 30s not the 40s, and as the Soviets proved in 1945, was not elite.

From memory it did contain a fairly high motorized component and was considered high quality before most of its transport and best units were bled off to other fronts, leaving it a shell in Aug 1945.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 95

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 8:15:55 AM

jesperpehrson

Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

Very interesting! I did not know that about the Russian army and that was good information to have before going to search for it. Where did you get this information?

However, I do feel that each unit need to, if at all possible, have it�s own feel. In my opinion we should try and avoid too much generic stuff, it is not so much fun and interesting to read and hence counterproductive.

When we get to the Russians we will have to see what we can do with them

As for the militia I will maybe see if I can find something about local Landwehr divisions. That could serve well for this rabble of a unit

That's just information I've absorbed over the years reading histories of the Eastern Front. I can't point to a specific volume.

A lot of units in WiF don't have a realistic historical designation. Perhaps a majority of them do have one, but plenty don't. In addition to explaining that there was no such unit as the "2nd Guards Garrison Army" (there were a scattering of "Fortress" units in WWII, but not very many officially designated static units), a land unit write-up will have to explain that the "MECH" units are another design innovation of WiF. Aside from German 'Panzergrenadier' regiments I don't think many of the WWII armies used 'armored infantry' units on a large scale, particularly at the corps level. The American army did somewhat with their flexible Combat Commands (Brigades) that could feature two tank+one infantry CC or two infantry+one tank CC in a division. Probably someone else out there would know more about the American OOB than I. But I am fairly sure that some of the German MECH units in WiF have numerical designations that correspond to Panzer corps, in actuality an ARMored corp, so I hope that is mentioned.

People have also pointed out that with the possible exception of the American portion of Operation Market-Garden, there were never any corps-level paradrops in WWII, nor corps level parachute units.

For Japan it won't be too easy to explain the "Kwantung" MOT army, which was neither of MOT type, appeared in the early 30s not the 40s, and as the Soviets proved in 1945, was not elite.

China has several historic unit designations, notably for the Communists, but I suspect many of their designations aren't accurate. Researching these is also exceptionally difficult, I've tried.

Not all of the MILitia are 'rabble'. Good WiF play is to build out the MIL, ship the worst of them off to garrison backwater areas, and then use the White-print ones as cheap losses that are quick to replace. But they are a generic unit, there is no way around that. Original WiF didn't have any unit designations at all, so it is chock full of hard to designate units.

Please stay tuned, we will need to tap into your pool of historic knowledge from time to time I am sure.

MECH corps will probably end in a terrible mess but we will try and find a good solution. First we have to get there.

The militia might be a generic construct but I think I will see if there is any interesting counterpart that we can find and use, like Landwehr.

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 96

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 8:54:51 AM

trees trees

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster

quote:

For Japan it won't be too easy to explain the "Kwantung" MOT army, which was neither of MOT type, appeared in the early 30s not the 40s, and as the Soviets proved in 1945, was not elite.

From memory it did contain a fairly high motorized component and was considered high quality before most of its transport and best units were bled off to other fronts, leaving it a shell in Aug 1945.

cool. in the 1930's it probably was a 7-4 White Print. I was really surprised when the Final Edition units came out that the Kwantung name was used on a 1943 unit, that muddies the waters a bit.

it won't be hard to explain the GARR and MECH and other somewhat 'theoretical' units, I would just write something saying that WiF is a game, not a completely detailed simulation of the actual military units of WWII.

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 97

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 9:28:45 AM

hazpak

Posts: 8
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline

Well the kwantung army (probably better referred to as kwantung area army) was also made up of other units represented in the game already namely the 3rd, 4th and 6th armies. they did have a large motorised component. Interestly 2 armoured divisions were also present in this area army.

haz

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 98

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 10:26:57 AM

CBoehm

Posts: 113
Joined: 10/31/2005
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan
MECH corps will probably end in a terrible mess but we will try and find a good solution. First we have to get there.

without having researched it ...I always assumed that the german mechs represented something along the lines of their light-divisions ...eg. the division commanded by Rommel during the French campaign.

Basically in WIF its my impression that many of the non-wif corps (atleast in the early period) in reality represents div-sized-units NOT corps ...ei. marines, paratroopers, armor divs etc.

(in reply to jesperpehrson)

Post #: 99

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 10:35:20 AM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

-mechanized units: In WW2 the USSR did field 9 Guards Mechanized Corps (No. 1-9) and 30 Line Mechanized Corps (No. 1-28, 30, 39). 4 of the latter were redesigned as Guards Mechanized Corps. Like the USSR Tank Corps they just were bigger Divisions built up around brigades not regiments: A 1944 Mech Unit had around 15k men and 176 tanks.
John Ellis, World War 2: A Statistical Survey, New York 1995, p. 118-119, , 223.

-LG: Good question. A 1942 (5-3) Marine Corps?? It's no Japanese name (because of the "L"). And "Luzon group" was a 1944-45 Army dominated unit. Perhaps it was thought to be an amalgation of Landing Groups (SNLF), as someone said before.

-Perhaps I can help with the Chinese Units?

(in reply to hazpak)

Post #: 100

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 4:00:52 PM

Mziln

Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

The term "Japanese marines" is not quite correct as a description for these naval personnel who were actually ground soldiers.

The Imperial Japanese Army also raised amphibious units called Sea Landing Brigades. These 3,500-strong brigades were used to assault and then garrison islands.

Therefore I belive the LG stands for Landing Groups. If the game had several division sized units to represent the Army amphibious Brigades this would give the Japanese more mobility than they actualy had.

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 101

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 6:01:49 PM

trees trees

Posts: 125
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: Manistee, MI
Status: offline

thank you Wosung! I always seem to see references to 'tank' this and 'tank' that with Russian forces, specifically 'tank armies' which are the WiF scale counters.

the MECH units are historical, I'm just saying they weren't always named that way. Rommel's division was a 'Panzer' division.

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 102

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 6:20:48 PM

CBoehm

Posts: 113
Joined: 10/31/2005
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

Rommel's division was a 'Panzer' division.

hmmm maybe ...but I seem to remember from Rommels own book that he desribed it as a "light" panzer division ...AND a quick check on Wikipedia shows that:

2nd Light Division
7th Panzer Division Gespenster-Division

The 2nd Light Division (sometimes described as Light Mechanized or Light Panzer to distinguish it from the later Light infantry divisions) was created in November 1938. In 1939 it fought in the Invasion of Poland. Due to shortcomings that the campaign revealed in the organization of the Light divisions it was reorganized as the 7th Panzer Division afterward, in October 1939.

As the 7th Panzer Division it participated in the 1940 Battle of France under the command of the soon-to-be-famous Erwin Rommel, earning its nickname Gespenster-Division ("Ghost Division") when it advanced so rapidly into and beyond the breach in the French front line that higher headquarters lost track of where it was. It then remained in France on occupation duty until early 1941.

...so I guess we are both sort of correct eh?? it was ligth ...but was then reorganized ...newertheless Rommel himself described that it was a bit "light" on tanks ...speaking from memory now: I seem to remember he states in his book that he almost had significantly less Panzer III & IV than the other more "normal" panzer divisions....

< Message edited by CBoehm -- 10/26/2006 6:25:32 PM >

(in reply to trees trees)

Post #: 103

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 9:07:06 PM

Norden_slith

Posts: 166
Joined: 8/27/2003
From: expatriate german
Status: offline

At Fall Gelb, the German 1st - 5th & 10th PzDiv had 2 Pz regiments each, the 6th - 9th had only 1 PzReg.
The 6th, 7th and 8th had Tcech tanks 35t and 38t (both weaker than the maintank, Pz-III). On top of that the 7th and 9th had some 30 Pz-I in their ranks (These were also in all 2 Rgt Divisions btw).
Given the numbers and types of tanks alone, the 9th Div is by far the weakest, followed by the 7th.

_____________________________

Norden
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hexagonally challenged

(in reply to CBoehm)

Post #: 104

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/26/2006 9:15:29 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Norden
At Fall Gelb, the German 1st - 5th & 10th PzDiv had 2 Pz regiments each, the 6th - 9th had only 1 PzReg.
The 6th, 7th and 8th had Tcech tanks 35t and 38t (both weaker than the maintank, Pz-III). On top of that the 7th and 9th had some 30 Pz-I in their ranks (These were also in all 2 Rgt Divisions btw).
Given the numbers and types of tanks alone, the 9th Div is by far the weakest, followed by the 7th.

This task is not easy, partly because we are doing 1 writeup for a unit that will last the entire war. Some comments could be made for the armor units about them receiving new equipement at different points in the war. Though too much of that could get boring very fast.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Norden_slith)

Post #: 105

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/27/2006 2:50:11 AM

hazpak

Posts: 8
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

The term "Japanese marines" is not quite correct as a description for these naval personnel who were actually ground soldiers.

The Imperial Japanese Army also raised amphibious units called Sea Landing Brigades. These 3,500-strong brigades were used to assault and then garrison islands.

Therefore I belive the LG stands for Landing Groups. If the game had several division sized units to represent the Army amphibious Brigades this would give the Japanese more mobility than they actualy had.

Yes i can see that might be the case. I'll have a look into these Sea Landing brigades and see what information i can find on them.

Haz

(in reply to Mziln)

Post #: 106

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/27/2006 12:44:08 PM

wosung

Posts: 692
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

German Panzer-, Light divisions: Generally German mobile and even Infantry divisions had quite different quality, microstruktures and equipment. From pre-war time to 1945 they were formed in 33 mobilization waves ("Wellen"), from standing army units to reinforcement battalions to Landwehr units.

Panzer-, Light- and Motorized divisions formed quite a distinct entity, but every one of this three types in it self was not uniform. Plus their organization changed through the war.

The 6 Panzer Divisions in 1939 (the 10 Panzer Divisions in 1940) consisted each of 1 Panzer Brigade of 2 Panzer regiments of 2 battalions ("Abteilungen") each with altogether theoretically 561 Panzer (servicable average around 320 Pz I, II, 35t, 38t, and a few III and IV) plus 2 motorized Infantry regiments of 2-3 battalions each and other troops.

The 20+ Panzer Divisions in 1941 consisted each of only 1 Panzer regiment (11 with 2 battalions, 9 with 3 batallions) each with around 150 Panzer (altogether 3.671 on Eastern Front in June 1941, same types as before, but now around 1.000 Pz III and 479 Pz IV spread in between all Panzer Divisions) 4-6 battalions of motorized infantry (sometimes the first battalion was armoured, gepanzert, with SdKFZ 251 personnell carriers). Equipment was heterogenuous: In 1941 one of the Panzer Divisions had 96 typs of personnel carriers, , 111 typs of trucks, and 37 different motorcycles, all robbed in all of Western Europe. In October 1942 10 of the Panzer Divisions consisted only of one Panzer battalion plus supporting units. In March 1942 Eastern Front Panzer Divisions consisted of 1.503 Panzer altogether (140!! servicable altogether).

The Panzer Division 1943 theoretically consisted of 1 Panzerregiment of 2 battalions (altogether theoretically around 160 Panzer).

The Panzer Division 1945 theoretically consisted of only 1 Panzerbattalion (Pz. IV, V) plus 1 armoured anti-tank battalion (StuG, Jagdpanzer). In 1944-45 Panzer strenghts were around 4-5.000 at the Eastern Front and perhaps 500-1.000 in France and Italy. In practice most Panzer Divisions had around 20-60 serviceable Panzer.

Motorized Divisions and later on Panzergrenadier Divisions consisted of 1 Panzer or assault gun battallion, and 2 motorized Infantry regiments with altogether 6 battalions. SS Panzer Divisions were organized pretty much on the lines of ordinary Panzer Divisions. Additionally the often had 2 extra Panzer Grenadier battallions, a whole battallion of assault guns, and around 25% more men and equipment.

The 4 light divisions (1.-4.) were formed in 1937-8 as motorized cavalery divisions with varying organization, usually a light tank regiment or battallion, 1-2 cavalry regiments and supporting troops. After the Polish campaign they were upgraded. In October 1939 the 7. Panzer Division was formed from the 3. light division. In February 1940, when Rommel took over, it consisted of 3 Panzer and 6 mot. rifle battalions plus support troops and 218 Panzer (more than 50% 35t., 38 t., the rest Pz. III-IV). In late 1940 4 Infantry Divisions were redesigned as light Divisions (5.-?), although their org first was still basically that of an Infantry division. In 1941/42 the 90. and 164 light (Africa) division was formed from units already in Africa. In March 1943 the Motorized were renamed to Panzergrenadier Divisionen.

Altogether Germany formed 38 Panzerdivisionen (1.-27., 116., Panzer-Lehr, Gro�deutschland, Hermann G�ring, 1.-3. SS, 5. SS, 9.-10. SS, 12. SS.)
plus 12 rump Panzer Divisions in regimental strength (232.-233., Norwegen, Kurmark, Holstein, J�terborg, M�nchenberg, Clausewitz, Donau, Schlesien, Th�ringen, Westfalen),

29 Motorized/Panzergrenadier-Divisonen (2.-3.mot., 10. mot., 13.16. mot., 18.mot. 20. mot., 25. mot., 29. mot., 36. mot., 60. mot., Brandenburg, 1.-5. SS, 9.-12. SS, 16.-18. SS, 23. SS, 34. SS.)
plus 7 Panzer Grenadier Divisionen in regimental strength (26.-28., 32., 38. SS, F�hrer Grenadier)

A short last note to the Japanese SNLF forces: Some? of them were named after naval stations ("Kobe" Yokosaka...). Some of them had more in common with USMC defense battalions then with Marine divisions.

References:
John Ellis, World war 2: a statistical survey, p. 129-30, 204-6, 230-1.
Andrew Mollow, The armed forces of World War 2, p. 6-12, 107-8, 185-6.
The Oxford companion to the Second World War, p.469-472.
David Fraser, Rommel, p. 160.
Karl Walde, Guderian, p. 178-9, 187-8.
James Lucas, Handbuch der Wehrmacht, p. 91-118.

(in reply to hazpak)

Post #: 107

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/27/2006 1:36:31 PM

jesperpehrson

Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung
-Perhaps I can help with the Chinese Units?

Help is always appreciated, considering the scope of the work ahead of us. PM me and lets discuss it. Tell me how you would like to participate.

(in reply to wosung)

Post #: 108

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 10/27/2006 1:38:27 PM

jesperpehrson

Posts: 1052
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hazpak

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

The term "Japanese marines" is not quite correct as a description for these naval personnel who were actually ground soldiers.

The Imperial Japanese Army also raised amphibious units called Sea Landing Brigades. These 3,500-strong brigades were used to assault and then garrison islands.

Therefore I belive the LG stands for Landing Groups. If the game had several division sized units to represent the Army amphibious Brigades this would give the Japanese more mobility than they actualy had.

Yes i can see that might be the case. I'll have a look into these Sea Landing brigades and see what information i can find on them.

Haz

Haz,

since our collective brains cannot come up with anything else I think you should just stick with Landing Groups. It ain�t worth dwelling on any more I think.

(in reply to hazpak)

Post #: 109

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 1/3/2007 5:32:09 PM

HenrytheSecond

Posts: 12
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees trees

I also think you may have problems trying to do a counter-by-counter writeup of the Russian units. The MECH and ARM units are just numbered sequentially; the first one to appear in the force pool as a white-print becomes the first one designated a 'Guards' unit. I think in real life those designations were earned in combat for a unit that performed well ... it would keep it's original number with the Guards label appended to it. In WiF there are also no "Shock" armies that became the biggest and best Soviet units by the end of the war. The GBA designations are also simply sequential. The initial black-print INF units (and GARR units, requiring another explanation of the WiF design for this type of unit) do use historical designations, so the 62nd Army that initially held the core of Stalingrad is a WiF counter. Another example is the 23rd Army, which held the front northwest of Leningrad. In WiF that is a 3-1 GARR.

I'm not so sure this is an issue. It's unlikely many units in the game will follow their actual historical path, so the write-ups are only 'thematic detail' to enhance our gaming experience.

As such, the write-up should surely reflect the unit the counter depicts, regardless of it's use in the game?

_____________________________

"Every man thinks meanly of himself for not having been a soldier."
(Samuel Johnson, letter to James Boswell, 1778)

(in reply to jesperpehrson)

Post #: 110

RE: Ideas for Land Unit writeups - 1/3/2007 7:44:18 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HenrytheSecond

I'm not so sure this is an issue. It's unlikely many units in the game will follow their actual historical path, so the write-ups are only 'thematic detail' to enhance our gaming experience.

As such, the write-up should surely reflect the unit the counter depicts, regardless of it's use in the game?

Yes.

The basic premise for each unit can be different though.

HQ units, named after individual commanders, and named naval units, refer to a specific person/ship. Clearly their writeups describe their history. The air units represent 250 to 500 planes and the name given to a unit is the plane type in the majority, since they often are a mixed group of plane types. So, their writeups describe the creation and use of the plane type, with performance characteristics and common weaponry. For the land units, the artillery, AA and AT are similar to the air units, in that the type is described rather than a specific combat unit.

Many of the units in WIF are hypothetical, which gives the players the option of going in a non-historical direction as to production emphasis. Indeed, a fundamental WIF rule is the ability to "build ahead", where a unit type that historically appeared in year Y enters the game in year Y - 1. The neutral countries are other examples of where some units have been added to reflect how the country would have responded if their active participation in the war had gone on longer than it did historically.

And lastly there are generic unit types, such as convoys, amphibious units, submarines, etcetera. There is only so much we can do with those. In some cases we can describe operational characteristics and give historical anecdotes. There are land units that fall into this category: garrison unit #1, #2, #3, ...

In summary, the writeups are not restricted to a rigid style, but rather reflect some facts of historical interest related to the unit. The more spcific the writeup can be to the counter, the better - but the degree of historical detail available varies widely.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to HenrytheSecond)

Post #: 111