A Suggestion - How to implement attached brigades/regiments

[endimielle1]

Greetings.

As we know many nations used rather small formations (regiment-brigade size) of pure artillery, heavy tanks or tank destroyers (on Corpse-Army-Army Group level). They were used to radically boost normal inf/arm division capabilities when needed (especially to breakthrough enemy positions in major offensive).

The problem:

Spoiler: The problem description...

As we can interpret diaries and videos, the current mechanics would formally allow building such "mini-divisions", but they would probably be totally useless:

- they will often not reinforce the combat in time to contribute;

- they will have small Org values so will easily break;

- they will suffer heavy losses and be generally ineffective since they have no inf.

These issues could be solved later in future expansion with some clever game mechanics - the thing that developers surely would not waste their time on NOW.

But! There is possibly a rather simple (and cheap) way to make those small formations really useful.

The suggestion:

A +50% reinforce chance for such brigade (mini-Division) if (all must be true):

- This "division" consists of only one brigade (and is not inf/mot/cav/? for balance issues)

- Of already fighting divisions in this battle there are more proper "big" divisions than such Brigades.


As you can see these will make them the short power-ups that would deliver some real punch and then quickly lose Org/Equipment, allowing the rest of the army to continue the offensive on their own. This is pretty close to what they really did in WW2.

Thanks for your attention.

 

[Vidkjaer]

Greetings.

As we know many nations used rather small formations (regiment-brigade size) of pure artillery, heavy tanks or tank destroyers (on Corpse-Army-Army Group level). They were used to radically boost normal inf/arm division capabilities when needed (especially to breakthrough enemy positions in major offensive).

The problem:

Spoiler: The problem description...

As we can interpret diaries and videos, the current mechanics would formally allow building such "mini-divisions", but they would probably be totally useless:

- they will often not reinforce the combat in time to contribute;

- they will have small Org values so will easily break;

- they will suffer heavy losses and be generally ineffective since they have no inf.

These issues could be solved later in future expansion with some clever game mechanics - the thing that developers surely would not waste their time on NOW.

But! There is possibly a rather simple (and cheap) way to make those small formations really useful.

The suggestion:

A +50% reinforce chance for such brigade (mini-Division) if (all must be true):

- This "division" consists of only one brigade (and is not inf/mot/cav/? for balance issues)

- Of already fighting divisions in this battle there are more proper "big" divisions than such Brigades.


As you can see these will make them the short power-ups that would deliver some real punch and then quickly lose Org/Equipment, allowing the rest of the army to continue the offensive on their own. This is pretty close to what they really did in WW2.

Thanks for your attention.

Small divisions does not have less Organisation. They have less manpower/Hitpoints and defensive value, but not less organisation. Organisation of the division is an average of the individual battalions organisation.

 

[Sun_Killer]

in overall they have less org. because the org damage is split over the amount of bats. If you have only one bat, the bat takes all the damage. so lets say 5. Your whole division lost 5 because only 1 bat. Now you have div with 5 bats. It gets the same 5 dmg, but here the dmg is split on all 5 bats. So the org only drops 1 in each bat. So overall the org drops only 1.

 

[Vidkjaer]

in overall they have less org. because the org damage is split over the amount of bats. If you have only one bat, the bat takes all the damage. so lets say 5. Your whole division lost 5 because only 1 bat. Now you have div with 5 bats. It gets the same 5 dmg, but here the dmg is split on all 5 bats. So the org only drops 1 in each bat. So overall the org drops only 1.

That is new to me. Is there a link to this info?

 

[Frosted Vert]

I want my Schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilungen!

I agree. As I mentioned in the artillery thread, for 'Grand Battleplan' and 'Superior Firepower' in actuality that supporting firepower was not organic to a division. At El Alamein and Bagration (Grand Battleplan) and during Cobra (Superior Firepower) the heavy firepower was achieved by using corps and army-level artillery, not each division's own tubes.

 

[potski]

in overall they have less org. because the org damage is split over the amount of bats. If you have only one bat, the bat takes all the damage. so lets say 5. Your whole division lost 5 because only 1 bat. Now you have div with 5 bats. It gets the same 5 dmg, but here the dmg is split on all 5 bats. So the org only drops 1 in each bat. So overall the org drops only 1.

Yes, but he's not talking about 1 bat of TDs etc in combat with 1 normal Div. He's talking about several normal Divs plus the TDs v several normal Divs.

Say you have a template called "Infantry 43", then you could duplicate it, then add a battalion of TDs "Infantry 43 + TD". Now any time you want, providing you have TDs stockpiled, just grab an Infantry 43 Div, apply the +TD template, and voila! A Div with an attached TD battalion.

The logistics system will have to provide the extra equipment, but as long as your unit is in supply, then it will get there.

Once the attached TD is no longer required, then re-apply the Infantry template and the TDs go back to the stockpile.

Note that the TDs, not being a fixed unit won't accumulate experience that way. But there is never a single bat unit roaming around that could end up in combat on its own. It will always fight with infantry support, and in a unit with lots of org.

Of course, micro-hell. But if you want to play with battalion level attachments that's one way to do it.

 

[Frosted Vert]

To borrow from Gary Grigsby's War in the East/West - why not represent Corps and Army assets off map?
Bear with me here:

I produce equipment consisting of heavy artillery, heavy armour, heavy TD, etc. In the logistics view, there is a window for Corps (and maybe Army) units. In this window are the unit icons filling with equipment and training off map, as now. However, instead of using the same template as on-map units, there are special templates for these units. Maybe they cost more XP, maybe less. They are limited to 1 Regiment, and can be as small as 1 Battalion.

So in the window, I create a template for Schwere Panzerjäger-Abteilungen, which consists of 1 TD Battalion. I set the equipment to take 45 x Nashorn (So Pz III (1939 medium) -> TD -> Variant with +X firepower). Since it is only one battalion, I cannot assign a support company. (Maybe? I know separate battalions were themselves attachments, but maybe brigades get them?)

When it comes time to deploy, or to train 'on map' I assign this unit to an army or theater (or maybe state?) Instead of being visible on the map as divisions are, this unit is considered attached to that command. Maybe the interface shows it in a window when you select the command / mouse over the battleplan. This unit suffers attrition from training, requires supply, equipment etc. just as a regular unit.

When the battleplan is carried out, the attachment is either assigned to certain parts of the plan manually, or automatically 'goes' to bolster divisions in combat, joining the combat with reinforce chance etc. So if I am attacking enemy armour as part of a plan, I attach my TD Battalion to the segment of the plan that will do that. When the divisions come into contact with the enemy armour, the TD battalion appears in the combat view, taking losses, doing damage, and so on. When the combat is ended, it returns to being an attachment and can join the next combat after a delay (travel time, attack delay, new equipment, rebuilding org, reinforce chance).