Yugoslav Wars

[TeutonburgerW]

Well I agree with the divisions->brigades thing, it makes sense since most of the units were actually called brigades. However you must know that those "brigades" were smaller, regiment-sized formations actually. Also I strongly believe that if we go the brigades => regiments route, we will lose much diversity as well as accuracy, because at this level of detail units like artillery etc can and must be represented as independent units. I also kind of like the "brigades as equipment" idea. Maybe if there was an unlimited number of brigades for every unit, then this proposition would be fine. But a single brigade per infantry division is just not enough to represent the diversity of support units, as well as their aptitude to act independently.

So to sum up:
divisions => brigades/regiments: ok
brigades => regiments: no, rather brigades => equipement
corps => divisions: ok

What do you think of that?

single brigade per infantry

But that's not what I'm saying, I want:

HOI2 / YUG Wars

Division = Brigade/Regiment
Brigade = Battalion

So, let's say, a typical corps would consist of for ex.

1 Hq, 5 Inf Bde, 1 Art Bde, 1 AA Bde, and to that, we add some tanks battalion, reccon battalion, etc.

To portrait a mechanized division, we could make it up by:

1 hq, 2 Bde APC, 1 Bde Inf, add one MBT battalion, etc.

I really think that there is enough diversity with this method. And especially if we use your method that you proposed yesterday, with having for ex. infantry models 1-3 for "Soviet infantry", 4-6 "Croatian infantry", etc.

Another thing we could do, is to handle it like CORE does:

There they differ between a 3-brigade division (like Germany used in WW2) and a 2-brigade division (like Italy used) in the models.

So that means we could have two types of "divisions" (movable units) and still have the "brigade" to use as equipments even though I don't really see the advantages with this idea, as long as the limit is one "brigade" per "division", ex:

1 Infantry Bde (divisional unit) cost 25 MP (let's say 1 mp = 100 for the ease of it)

1 Infantry Battalion (divisional unit) cost 10 mp

and then we have the "brigade slot" to decide how to model and okey, we say that one "brigade model" could be tanks.

Okey, so then we limit what brigade models can be attached to which unit and use the same system as with the navy (where capital attachments can be added to capital ships and non-capital attachment can be added to non-capital boats).

An tank battalion could be added to an infantry single brigade per infantry and a tank company could be added to an infantry battalion. This way, I'm sure we could be able to handle all the units I've seen so far in the various OOB's I found concering the Yugoslav wars..

Thoughts?

EDIT: Maybe something like this:

"Division units" that can be built and moved, so everyone knows what I mean:

Infantry Bde
Infantry Bty

Militia Bde
Militia Bty

Mechanized Bde
Mechanixed Bty

Home Defence Bde
Home Defence Bty

AA Bde
AA Bty

Art Bde
Art Battalion

etc. etc.

To that, we have "brigades" that can be attached, like

AA Bty (that only can be attached to a Inf Bde for example)
AA Co (=company, that only can be attached to a Inf Bty for example)

Pioneer Bty
Pioneer Co

etc.

[Mesina2]

Can I download fake scenario map?
I'd like to check it out.

[Hax]

can you give the list witch military leaders we need pictures?

Next week, ok?

Was the naval OOB i posted sufficent? (And saved )

In 1991 (when scenario starts), it seems that almost everything falled into the hands of FR Yugoslavia anyway, but I can try to find another source to make sure that the list I posted was accurate.

Also, I think we should start discussing models. Even though we won't include a tech tree for the first version, models need to be done anyways if we don't want to use "infantry '36" as models.

And the navy will require a total rewrite: frigates, patrol boats, mine layers, etc instead of battleship, cruisers & etc.

I can lead/aid the model work (and stand for all the corresponding GFX) but there's gotta be a discussion so that we settle for one thing and only adjust it so we won't have to rewrite everything time and time again.

First ex draft for the navy (model and model name / class):

Submarines:
Heroj class
Sava class
Una class

Frigates:
Koni class (SU)
Kotor class

Guided Missile Gunboats:
Končar class

Fast Missile Boats:
Osa class (SU)

Patrol boats:
C-80 Class
Mirna class

River minesweepers:
Neštin class
307 class

River patrol boats
21 class
25 class
302 class

Assault boats
101 class

I promise you, if we have this decided and done BEFORE we do the OOB (which will be pretty soon, since the map is closing to down to be finished, we'll save hell of a lot of time, so that we can only start coding the OOB and not THEN start working of models, etc)

Thoughts?

We will discuss about this on BoP.
As faster the better

But we also need powerful ships for the NATO. Aircraft carrier, and so on.

Yes

Hax do you have those sprites whitch Boki Smoki gave you?Or I can ask those person on FB to make for us new totaly reworked sprites? What do you think but that would be for next version.

Yes

The last version:

Awesome!
Great job!

Everybody in the crew MUST say this in same style:

Gukan, without you this mod would never been done.
Thank you!

Don't forget to do this!

Land draft:

Militia (as vanilla, but adjusted numbers)
Home defence (garrison, not movable)
infantry, mot. Infantry, mec. Infantry & mountain( as vanilla, but adjusted numbers)
Regular SOF (airborne)
Para-militar SOF (marine)
APC (light tank or mec)
MBT (medium tank)

re: naval

yes, aircraft carries Will stay..

Hax? Othets? Thoughts om this? Or more important, do i have green light?

Let's discus this on BoP

Well I'd see that otherwise. We can have small formations, at this scale the units are no longer polyvalent. An infantry division has some anti-tank weapons, artilery and so on, but an infantry battalion does not. So I think we should have separate and independent artillery, AA, anti-tank, etc formations. I think infantry formations should be about 1000 men, and specialized formations even less. For tanks I think a unit would represent about 10 tanks because thet were really a rare and powerful weapon. I'd really like to see tanks a precious weapon, that can be deadly but also very fragile, for instance in cities they should be almost immediately wiped out.

The current "brigade" slots could be used to represent better equipement instead. For instance a Home defense militia would be mostly equipped with hunter rifles and WWII era rifles. They can get a "brigade" - Kalashnikof assault guns, and become more effective. This approach allows to simulate arms smuggle by events easier: the event would just be to make appear some "brigades"(of Kalashnikof, RPG-7, and so on) in the force pool, and then you can dispatch the weapons to your units.

I like that with brigades, to upgrade with special weapons.
Let's discus this on BoP

Airforce OOB for SFR Yugoslavia (1991) with accurate numbers of airforce models, etc: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SFR_Yugoslav_Air_Force

I registred in BOP world today and awaiting confirmation mail and perhaps we could get a sub-forum called "unit, models and tech trees" where we can have a seperate discussion for this topic since this doesn't fit this kind of thread?

Could you make this like the others, not just a link

Adapten OOBs per 25th of June, 1991

SLOVENIA

Awesome!

How will you simulate paramilitary group like White Wolves and Arkan Tigers ?

They will be named that and have some extra experience and such things.

But that's not what I'm saying, I want:

HOI2 / YUG Wars

Division = Brigade/Regiment
Brigade = Battalion

So, let's say, a typical corps would consist of for ex.

1 Hq, 5 Inf Bde, 1 Art Bde, 1 AA Bde, and to that, we add some tanks battalion, reccon battalion, etc.

To portrait a mechanized division, we could make it up by:

1 hq, 2 Bde APC, 1 Bde Inf, add one MBT battalion, etc.

I really think that there is enough diversity with this method. And especially if we use your method that you proposed yesterday, with having for ex. infantry models 1-3 for "Soviet infantry", 4-6 "Croatian infantry", etc.

Another thing we could do, is to handle it like CORE does:

There they differ between a 3-brigade division (like Germany used in WW2) and a 2-brigade division (like Italy used) in the models.

So that means we could have two types of "divisions" (movable units) and still have the "brigade" to use as equipments even though I don't really see the advantages with this idea, as long as the limit is one "brigade" per "division", ex:

1 Infantry Bde (divisional unit) cost 25 MP (let's say 1 mp = 100 for the ease of it)

1 Infantry Battalion (divisional unit) cost 10 mp

and then we have the "brigade slot" to decide how to model and okey, we say that one "brigade model" could be tanks.

Okey, so then we limit what brigade models can be attached to which unit and use the same system as with the navy (where capital attachments can be added to capital ships and non-capital attachment can be added to non-capital boats).

An tank battalion could be added to an infantry single brigade per infantry and a tank company could be added to an infantry battalion. This way, I'm sure we could be able to handle all the units I've seen so far in the various OOB's I found concering the Yugoslav wars..

Thoughts?

EDIT: Maybe something like this:

"Division units" that can be built and moved, so everyone knows what I mean:

Infantry Bde
Infantry Bty

Militia Bde
Militia Bty

Mechanized Bde
Mechanixed Bty

Home Defence Bde
Home Defence Bty

AA Bde
AA Bty

Art Bde
Art Battalion

etc. etc.

To that, we have "brigades" that can be attached, like

AA Bty (that only can be attached to a Inf Bde for example)
AA Co (=company, that only can be attached to a Inf Bty for example)

Pioneer Bty
Pioneer Co

etc.

But would Company, Battalions, and brigades all be models?

P.S. Amallric I decided to let you free from the military prison.
P.P.S. Updated first post

[Amallric]

But why shouldn't we allow tanks to be used as an independent unit? I'd keep it simple, let's say that units that are batallion-sized or bigger are represented as separate units for instance. So all units that are of that size will be independent. Smaller units(compagnies, batteries) can be represented as brigades indeed as they are too small to operate independently. I don't think we need to have e.g. tank battalion as separate unit AND tank battalion as attachement for infantry brigades. If you want to "attach" the tank battalion to an infantry brigade, just put it in the same formation. Same for other examples. And the tank company can be an attachement indeed, I don't think we should prevent the player from ataching it to an infantry brigade. The more flexibility the better.

But I still think at least some "brigade" slots should be kept to represent better equipement. Are you really against this? I think we have enough slots to represent both small unit attachements and equipement.

[Hax]

But why shouldn't we allow tanks to be used as an independent unit?

I would like to have just tank model, not upgrade thing for infantry.

[Amallric]

Gukan, without you this mod would never been done.
Thank you!

That is true.

Can I download fake scenario map?

Here you are:
http://www.mediafire.com/?dqiojkmjzw0

P.S. Amallric I decided to let you free from the military prison.

Freedom! Yay!

[Mesina2]

Gukan, without you this mod would never been done!
Thank you!!!!!!!!!!

[Hax]

Gukan, without you this mod would never been done.
Thank you!

Everybody do this! NOW!

[TeutonburgerW]

But why shouldn't we allow tanks to be used as an independent unit? I'd keep it simple, let's say that units that are batallion-sized or bigger are represented as separate units for instance. So all units that are of that size will be independent. Smaller units(compagnies, batteries) can be represented as brigades indeed as they are too small to operate independently. I don't think we need to have e.g. tank battalion as separate unit AND tank battalion as attachement for infantry brigades. If you want to "attach" the tank battalion to an infantry brigade, just put it in the same formation. Same for other examples. And the tank company can be an attachement indeed, I don't think we should prevent the player from ataching it to an infantry brigade. The more flexibility the better.

But I still think at least some "brigade" slots should be kept to represent better equipement. Are you really against this? I think we have enough slots to represent both small unit attachements and equipement.

Okey, last post here until I can login to BopWorld.

Okey, Hax first,

Brigades and battalions can be "divisional" (movable)
Battalions (can also be) and companies can be attached as "brigades"

Okey, sure, we could have a companie attached to a brigade, even though I doubt that is common, but okey, why not. It's easy to mod that to one and his own liking, but still, it seems that I've been unclear or that you've misunderstod.

why shouldn't we allow tanks to be used as an independent unit

OFC there will be tanks as independent unit, both at brigade and battalion level. But tanks will also be available to attach to an already existing brigade or battalion, as a battalion or a company.

So all units that are of that size will be independent.

Yes, but then we'll have huge problems trying to model the OOBs since there were so many battalions, companies, batteries, detachments etc and rather few brigades and even fewer divisions and please keep in mind, we have a HUGE map (with more than 1500 provinces) and a stupid AI that WILL attack undefended provinces, thus we need forces to defend provinces and you can just imagine a scenario where serbia has like 40 brigades on 500 provinces... A simple Bosniak militia could easily take 50 provinces until you can stop him.

It's a game with lots of weaknesses when trying to model this. It was made for WW2 and didn't do a very good job at it, putting the same engine to a complete different war, in other time, that was fought on a complety different scale will be very hard to model.

Smaller units(compagnies, batteries) can be represented as brigades indeed as they are too small to operate independently.

Yes, but that's why companies (and battiers, etc, less than 500 soldiers) ONLY can be attached to an already existing brigade/battalion...

I don't think we need to have e.g. tank battalion as separate unit AND tank battalion as attachement for infantry brigades. If you want to "attach" the tank battalion to an infantry brigade, just put it in the same formation.

But as I said earlier, if you're going to take Sarajevo, you'll probably want brigades with strong battalions. If your going to defend some southeast provinces in east Serbia, perhaps you'll settle for a local infantry battalion... It's just a design decision that will give the opportunity to creat small and big forces dependeing on what the country needs and what the country afford.

This system works quite good in MDS1.6 and CORE, so I don't see why it wouldn't work here?

But I still think at least some "brigade" slots should be kept to represent better equipement. Are you really against this? I think we have enough slots to represent both small unit attachements and equipement.

Yes, if you by that mean to simulate foreign support, I'd say yes, let's say latest MBT's from Soviet Union to FRY Yugoslavia, sure, they could be added as a "brigade" and have some good stats compared to a regular tank battalion/companie, but if you mean that we could add an Ak74 (think you used it as an example) I'd say no, because I can't see any good argument for that kind of detail if we only can add one "brigade" per "division".

[Mesina2]

Estonia decides to be free.
Heh?



Also Partisans ofscreen.




Later Ukraine and Latvia went free.

I knw why but is hilarious.

Edit
NORWAY WENT INSANE!

[Supaplex]

Gukan, without you this mod would never been done.
Thank you!

[Amallric]

Yes Teutonburger I think we misunderstood ourselves. I completely agree with the brigades/battalions thing, like in CORE.

What I don't agree with is that you suggest that we have some battalions as independent units(=divisions in game terms) and other battalions, identical units, as attachements to brigades(=brigades in game terms). I just don't see the point. If you need a brigade with an attached battalion to take Sarajevo, just build your brigade(as independent unit) and build your battalion(as independent unit). Why should we have the very same unit in the game twice, I just don't understand. We have a huge map to defend? THAT's why we need all battalions as independent units and not as attachements!

Yes, but that's why companies (and battiers, etc, less than 500 soldiers) ONLY can be attached to an already existing brigade/battalion...

That's exactly what I said...

To sum up, how I would see it:

Independent units: brigades and battalions.
Attachements: compagnies, platoons, batteries.

Yes, if you by that mean to simulate foreign support, I'd say yes, let's say latest MBT's from Soviet Union to FRY Yugoslavia, sure, they could be added as a "brigade" and have some good stats compared to a regular tank battalion/companie, but if you mean that we could add an Ak74 (think you used it as an example) I'd say no, because I can't see any good argument for that kind of detail if we only can add one "brigade" per "division".

But why? In regular HoI you can for instance upgrade your infantry from 41 model to 43, which includes giving them better equipement, abstracted through the research/upgrade process. However in the case of Yugoslaw wars there wasn't any real research, but there was some extensive weapon smuggle that DEFINETELY needs to be represented somehow. Do you have any idea how to do it? My system allows to simulate it very easily. Just write an event that makes some "brigades" appear in the pool, representing better equipement smuggled from abroad. I'm less concerned with the level of detail than with the necessity to find a satisfactory way to simulate smuggling of limited amounts of arms from abroad.

[Hax]

Independent units: brigades and battalions.
Attachements: compagnies, platoons, batteries.

Alright, but:

Batteries I would like to have as independent units.
Like artillery units who isn't attachments, what do you think of that?
I think you said that you would like to have like that in previous posts.

[TeutonburgerW]

Independent units: brigades and battalions.
Attachements: compagnies, platoons, batteries.

The reason why I want battalion as both "divisions" and "brigades" is because it makes no sense to have a company attached to a brigade, because a company is in or attached to, a battalion. So purely to be more "historical" and "accurate"..

Also, with your (great method, you know divide the models 1-3, 4-6, etc) the number of models wont matter much since we're aiming for such a short period of time (compared to vanilla) so we will never need more than 2-3 models for each unit, so there's room for both attachble tank battalions / companies as well as independent brigades and battalions in my eyes and as I said in my post earlier, if it's to simulate weapons, tanks, etc given by other countries, sure they'll fit in, but not just to randomly add some AK47s...

Batteries I would like to have as independent units. Like artillery units who isn't attachments, what do you think of that?
I think you said that you would like to have like that in previous posts.

I think both I and Amallric agrees on that we should have independent AA brigades and battalion as well as some kind of art attachment...

[Amallric]

Like artillery units who isn't attachments, what do you think of that?

Yes of course. Artillery, SPArt, AA, all those should be independent units. But you would have the choice: either to build a small units which would be an attachement(artillery battery) or a bigger unit that would be independent(artillery battalion or brigade).

The reason why I want battalion as both "divisions" and "brigades" is because it makes no sense to have a company attached to a brigade, because a company is in or attached to, a battalion. So purely to be more "historical" and "accurate"..

Well
1/Nobody forces to attach a compagny to a brigade, just attach it to a battalion, what's the problem? However with your system this would not be possible if the said battalion is already an attachement to a brigade, that's why it's better to go the "full independent battalions" route...
2/What you say is not exactly accurate, of course a regiment consists mainly of battalions but you'll also have independent compagnies, platoons, batteries...directly attached to the regiment. Those are mostly specialised units.

Also, with your (great method, you know divide the models 1-3, 4-6, etc) the number of models wont matter much since we're aiming for such a short period of time (compared to vanilla) so we will never need more than 2-3 models for each unit, so there's room for both attachble tank battalions / companies as well as independent brigades and battalions in my eyes

I agree but I think this will lead to confusion. I still do not see any advantage of battalions as attachements. Do you have any example of a situation that cannot be represented with independent brigades, independent battalions and compagnies as attachement?

and as I said in my post earlier, if it's to simulate weapons, tanks, etc given by other countries, sure they'll fit in, but not just to randomly add some AK47s...

Yes AK-47 is a bad example because they were probably able to manufacture it locally. This system would rather be for rare weapons smuggled for abroad in limited numbers.

[TeutonburgerW]

Amallric, I've started a thread on BOPworld (re: Unit and models):

http://bopworld.org/viewtopic.php?p=1533#1533

[Mesina2]

Hax, give me a new mission.

[Supaplex]

I will try to find military leaders for Vojvodina.

[Gukan]

Supa, Mesina, i will need some help here.
Can you take the in-game map (screenshot at post 1) and mark where the cities we decided to be included in the mod (somewhere arround page 100??) must go?
Another think is that i would like to have some province spliting proposed, so if you like you can paint the new frontiers in a visible color and post the final result here.

Thanks!

[Supaplex]

OK Gukan

Sandzak military leaders

Ismail Prentic


Mehmedin Koljši