How to best model this situation in the OOB

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

How to best model this situation in the OOB

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> How to best model this situation in the OOB

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/22/2009 8:34:19 PM

feldgrau

Posts: 20
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

I am planning on creating a scenario involving a Soviet invasion of Sweden based on the Operation Garbo book series just as the scenario Nordic Light, but on 2.5 km/hex scale, and the map is all but done, so I'm focusing a bit more on the OOB now.

I'm going to use a modified equipment file to get everything as close to reality as possible, and this leads to my question which is based on this:

In many of the various types of frontline companies and platoons of the Swedish army, heavier weapons such as machine guns and the Carl Gustav recoilless rifle were not assigned to individual squads but were kept at the platoon or coy HQ. Of particular importance, a rifle platoon in an infantry brigade had three rifle squads (w/o heavy weapons), one recoilless rifle squad (w/ two Carl Gustav) and a HQ which had another two CG and two medium machine guns. As noted, the platoon is one MG and one CG short of giving each of the rifle squads an MG and CG.

How to best model it?
Three rifle squads, one AT+ squad (=two AT+ teams), two Medium MG and two AT+ teams?
Two rifle MG and AT+ squads, one rifle squad and one AT+ squad?
Or another combination?

/feldgrau

Post #: 1

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/22/2009 11:49:12 PM

L`zard

Posts: 362
Joined: 6/3/2005
From: Oregon, USA
Status: offline

I don't know if this will help, but the designer of 'Nordic Light' (pelle holmen) has a site: http://web.holmenonline.net/nothernbrigade1990 that would seem to have what he used....

Of course you probably knew this already, LOL!

_____________________________

"I have the brain of a genius, and the heart of a little child! I keep them in a jar under my bed."

(in reply to feldgrau)

Post #: 2

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/23/2009 1:36:42 AM

feldgrau

Posts: 20
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

Yeah, Pelle has been of great help to me, but I didn't know he had a new site after TDG went down, so thanks for the link! It won't help very much in this particular case though as I'm creating a new equipment database and won't be using the original one.

/feldgrau

(in reply to L`zard)

Post #: 3

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/23/2009 4:23:05 AM

L`zard

Posts: 362
Joined: 6/3/2005
From: Oregon, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: feldgrau

Yeah, Pelle has been of great help to me, but I didn't know he had a new site after TDG went down, so thanks for the link! It won't help very much in this particular case though as I'm creating a new equipment database and won't be using the original one. /feldgrau

Well, If I was going to vote re: hvyweaps distribution, I'd go from this viewpoint:

Hq's are only for support and command sqds etc...unless there are C3 type sqds or similar.

Spread the support weaps throughout the 'frontline' units, simply because the 'player' is at an 'Operational' level of cmd, and there-for doesn't have the ability to affect how lower 'Tactical' formations support units are deployed. By which I mean change which unit gets the goodies.

Not to mention that this allows units to 'break-down' with some sort of proportional allotment of support, eh? Something about 'support weap only units' being easy to eliminate comes to mind, but I've got no cites.

Of course, I may be entirely 'full of the stuff', but then it's just a pst, eh?

< Message edited by L`zard -- 8/23/2009 4:25:42 AM >

_____________________________

"I have the brain of a genius, and the heart of a little child! I keep them in a jar under my bed."

(in reply to feldgrau)

Post #: 4

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/23/2009 12:50:30 PM

feldgrau

Posts: 20
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

Spread the support weaps throughout the 'frontline' units, simply because the 'player' is at an 'Operational' level of cmd, and there-for doesn't have the ability to affect how lower 'Tactical' formations support units are deployed. By which I mean change which unit gets the goodies.

Well, there's what my question is all about, the support weapons aren't many enough to get evenly spread among the squads.

I've got three rifle squads, but only two MGs and two Carl Gustavs to equip them with. And if I make that two heavy rifle squads and one rifle squad, the replacement pool will be more complicated than it should be, as in reality, all three squads are the same.

/feldgrau

(in reply to L`zard)

Post #: 5

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/24/2009 11:05:10 PM

L`zard

Posts: 362
Joined: 6/3/2005
From: Oregon, USA
Status: offline

Am I correct here? Your planning to build the OB down to sqd size Units?? IE; you'll have sqd size units on-map at the start?

I didn't pick that out of your original post, so I'm sort of at a loss, eh?

Methinx I'm missing something,

< Message edited by L`zard -- 8/24/2009 11:13:43 PM >

_____________________________

"I have the brain of a genius, and the heart of a little child! I keep them in a jar under my bed."

(in reply to feldgrau)

Post #: 6

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/25/2009 8:20:15 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: feldgrau

Yeah, Pelle has been of great help to me, but I didn't know he had a new site after TDG went down, so thanks for the link! It won't help very much in this particular case though as I'm creating a new equipment database and won't be using the original one.

/feldgrau

Note that all (well, most anyway) sites that ever existed can always be brought up using the Wayback Machine. http://www.archive.org/index.php . I routinely use this to pull up stuff I want from the old TDG site.

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to feldgrau)

Post #: 7

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/25/2009 6:07:26 PM

feldgrau

Posts: 20
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: L`zard

Am I correct here? Your planning to build the OB down to sqd size Units?? IE; you'll have sqd size units on-map at the start?

I didn't pick that out of your original post, so I'm sort of at a loss, eh?

Methinx I'm missing something,

You're probably misunderstanding me completely.

The OOB is going to be in company/battalion/regiment scale.

I'm creating a new equipment list to include equipment missing and I'm also going to redo most squads in the equipment list.

And the problem is then, for example, a Swedish rifle battalion of a Swedish infantry brigade has four rifle companies, each company has three rifle platoons, and each platoon has three rifle squads (no MG och Carl Gustav) and two MGs and two Carl Gustavs in the platoon HQ.

How to model this? Two heavy rifle squads (rifle squad+MG+CG) and one rifle squad, or three rifle squads, two MGs and two AT teams? Or something else?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Note that all (well, most anyway) sites that ever existed can always be brought up using the Wayback Machine. http://www.archive.org/index.php . I routinely use this to pull up stuff I want from the old TDG site.

Yes, I've been doing that as well. Just good to see that Pelle has put some of his stuff up online again. :)

/feldgrau

(in reply to L`zard)

Post #: 8

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/25/2009 11:14:29 PM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: feldgrau

quote:

ORIGINAL: L`zard

Am I correct here? Your planning to build the OB down to sqd size Units?? IE; you'll have sqd size units on-map at the start?

I didn't pick that out of your original post, so I'm sort of at a loss, eh?

Methinx I'm missing something,

You're probably misunderstanding me completely.

And the problem is then, for example, a Swedish rifle battalion of a Swedish infantry brigade has four rifle companies, each company has three rifle platoons, and each platoon has three rifle squads (no MG och Carl Gustav) and two MGs and two Carl Gustavs in the platoon HQ.

How to model this? Two heavy rifle squads (rifle squad+MG+CG) and one rifle squad, or three rifle squads, two MGs and two AT teams? Or something else?

Either way, I would say. Two considerations: is the manpower more or less than the average squad? If they are twelve man squads to start with, for example, you might want to go with the latter of the two alternatives you've mentioned. Then what do you think of the offensive prowess of Swedes? If you think that basically their inner Viking is going to come out as soon as someone shoots at them, why then heavy rifle squads become more appropriate. Maybe tend more towards the rifle/light rifle end of things if you think that they're going to tend to hunker down and wait for orders.

< Message edited by ColinWright -- 8/25/2009 11:20:16 PM >

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to feldgrau)

Post #: 9

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/27/2009 5:22:00 PM

feldgrau

Posts: 20
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Either way, I would say. Two considerations: is the manpower more or less than the average squad? If they are twelve man squads to start with, for example, you might want to go with the latter of the two alternatives you've mentioned. Then what do you think of the offensive prowess of Swedes? If you think that basically their inner Viking is going to come out as soon as someone shoots at them, why then heavy rifle squads become more appropriate. Maybe tend more towards the rifle/light rifle end of things if you think that they're going to tend to hunker down and wait for orders.

Then I think three regular rifle squads and the heavy weapons in separate slots is the best way to do it, as the Swedes rarely will have a chance to attack in this particular scenario, and as almost every man in the army is a conscript without that much battle experience. This also makes the force replacement pool more "realistic" as all squads are the same, which they were in reality, only with a few extra weapons added from the HQ now and then.

Thanks for the answer!

If anyone else has got anything to add, I'm all ears!

/feldgrau

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 10

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/28/2009 9:32:30 AM

ColinWright

Posts: 2604
Joined: 10/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: feldgrau

quote:

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Either way, I would say. Two considerations: is the manpower more or less than the average squad? If they are twelve man squads to start with, for example, you might want to go with the latter of the two alternatives you've mentioned. Then what do you think of the offensive prowess of Swedes? If you think that basically their inner Viking is going to come out as soon as someone shoots at them, why then heavy rifle squads become more appropriate. Maybe tend more towards the rifle/light rifle end of things if you think that they're going to tend to hunker down and wait for orders.

Then I think three regular rifle squads and the heavy weapons in separate slots is the best way to do it, as the Swedes rarely will have a chance to attack in this particular scenario, and as almost every man in the army is a conscript without that much battle experience. This also makes the force replacement pool more "realistic" as all squads are the same, which they were in reality, only with a few extra weapons added from the HQ now and then.

Thanks for the answer!

If anyone else has got anything to add, I'm all ears!

/feldgrau

You might want to go with light rifle -- just going by the performance of the Dutch in 1940. They were also 'conscripts without much battle experience,' and while they were often able to hold their ground, they usually proved unable to mount much of a counterattack.

Of course, here you need to consider that the 'attack' rating as well as the 'defense' rating plays into the outcome of all combats -- regardless of the whether the unit as a whole is attacking or defending. Still, if the Swedes fight more or less like the Dutch did, they're going to be okay at resisting getting pushed out of the way but pretty deficient when it comes to doing much to recover ground once it is lost. A unit with light rifles rather than rifles is going to still be hard to move -- but less able to inflict losses on the enemy.

What might also be worth looking at would be the behavior -- and the abilities and disabilities -- of the Norwegians in 1940. Different era and a different enemy, of course, but culturally, you've got about as good a match as you could ask for. It should give some leads as to how Swedish units would respond upon entering combat for the first time.

...in case you haven't already guessed, I'm inclined to weight 'soft' factors at least as heavily as how many MG's there were in each platoon, etc. A squad of raw recruits led by a sergeant who has never actually been under live fire are going to be less able to respond aggressively and effectively in combat than a more experienced formation -- even if the former have an MG 42 and the latter are stuck with a Lewis Gun.

< Message edited by ColinWright -- 8/28/2009 9:39:40 AM >

_____________________________

I am not Charlie Hebdo

(in reply to feldgrau)

Post #: 11

RE: How to best model this situation in the OOB - 8/28/2009 1:31:19 PM

feldgrau

Posts: 20
Joined: 8/9/2006
Status: offline

Thanks for the tips!

As I am redoing the equipment db the Swedes will be using Assault Rifle Squads, but then again I can change the ratings to take into account the "soft" factors.

The main difference between the Swedish Army in ~1990 and the Red Army at the same time wouldn't be so much in the abilities of the soldiers, Swedish soldiers had ~one year of military service (Red Army soldiers had two years), but I would say that the Swedish training was very effective and had a high tactical standard. The morale was good and the infantry was well equipped. The biggest difference would have been the support. Swedish soldiers generally lacked armoured transport, the same with the artillery, anti-tank and anti-air forces.

So in terms of TOAW, the differences are more in the support equipment than in the infantry. While practically every Soviet unit was trained and equipped for offensive actions, only the Swedish armoured brigades had that capacity, and the infantry and northern brigades as well as the local defence forces were deployed to defend and delay, lacking the punching power to attack.

EDIT: Random note, Swedish peace keeping troops have always had a very high reputation abroad, and a majority of these troops have only done their standard one year military service and a few months of extra preparatory service.

/feldgrau

< Message edited by feldgrau -- 8/28/2009 1:40:33 PM >

(in reply to ColinWright)

Post #: 12

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Scenario Design >> How to best model this situation in the OOB

Page: [1]