Mod Idea: Battalions

[PIT_AMERO]

I support Brigades because they are the smallest reasonable strategic unit. I think the division should be the basis as Johan has informed us, but that Brigades should be able to have independent movement. At least we should be able to use mini-divisions so that rear areas and coasts can have a more realistic and balanced force, rather than the stacks of full-size divisions HOI2 required for these brigade sized tasks.

I support the idea of composing your divs with brigades. But I don't like the idea of having them as separate units. It would be a heck of a micro.
Maybe, when you order a division to cover the coast, it can "stretch" itself and to deploy its brigades in 2-3 provinces.
I think that that will prevent the micro, but will allow the minors to coup with the increased number of provinces and use one div to advance on a bigger front.

 

[unmerged(122975)]

I think Paradox will try to please everybody: For those who don't want micromanagement , they can build divisions from brigades (if they want, otherwise there are the templtes). But as there are so many peolple interested in building divisions from battalions, It will be probably moddable. it will increase the game's life span.

Unless they want to leave room for some improvement for HOI4

 

[unmerged(131989)]

Majors tend not to command Companies... that honor is usually left to 1st Lieutenants and Captains. On the outside, generally a Major (promotable) is in charge of a Battalion.

Nope... the command structure I gave is correct. Look it up on wikipedia if you don't believe me. I have never experienced a Major as full battalion commander, or a 1st Lieutenant as full company commander (they may temporarily be 'acting' as the commander, though). The ranking-to-unit structure I gave really is correct, I can assure you.

EDIT: Think you may be getting mixed up with how the USA describes positions. Majors and 1st Lieutenants may be 'executive officers' in battalions and companies, respectively, but this doesn't make them 'commanding officers', it makes them the 2IC (second-in-command). We are referring to who commands what unit size, not their 2IC's.

 

[dsteve3]

I'm a little confused as to the difference between "motorized" and "mechanized" in both game terms and the actual formations.

Was it that different countries arranged their formations differently? Or were "panzer grenediers" actually motorized units and not mechanized?

Whats the difference? I thought motorized were units equipped with trucks while mechanized units used APCs.

 

[PIT_AMERO]

Whats the difference? I thought motorized were units equipped with trucks while mechanized units used APCs.

Yeah, something like that. The mechanized have more armor and sp art.
As to the panzer grenadiers, I think that the are mech.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

I'm a little confused as to the difference between "motorized" and "mechanized" in both game terms and the actual formations.

Was it that different countries arranged their formations differently? Or were "panzer grenediers" actually motorized units and not mechanized?

Whats the difference? I thought motorized were units equipped with trucks while mechanized units used APCs.

Main difference would be that motorized units use trucks to move their troops, while mechanized units use mostly tracked vehicle to move their troops.

Panzer Grenadiers were first just the name used for the infantry in Panzer divisions, but soon all motorized infantry was named Panzer Grenadier, while most of the infantry still used trucks for ways of movement. Just one battallion in each division was equipped with halftrackes

 

[unmerged(131989)]

Yeah 'half-tracks' is what I always considered 'mechanized' to mean.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

I would say, that in WW2 you would consider a force to be mechanized depending on the number of tanks, support artillery and armored antitank. Not just whether the infantry used trucks or half-trucks.

A German panzer grenadier division could certainly be considered to be either Armour, mechanized or motorized. Some divisions had one or two battalions of half-trucks some did not, some had more tanks (usually StuG and Jagdt-Panzer). Some Panzer grenadier had more tanks and amour than Panzer divisions.

I would say that the definition are up to interpretation in regards to brigade sized units. But I would say that a Mechanized brigade could be one battalion of StuG, two battalions of motorized infantry and one company of Armored cars, some motorized heavy company and AT guns or pioneers.

Another mechanized brigade could be an American one with one infantry battalion of infantry in half-trucks, two with trucks and some support armor such as open topped infantry and AT guns. Including an assortment if loose companies such as engineers, AA and such.

A motorized brigade would have considerably less amount of armored units. Perhaps some armored cars and at the most one battalion with half-trucks or a company of armored assault guns or armored SP artillery.

 

[unmerged(12217)]

Not all battalions are equivalent.
For example, late war US Tank battalions had 3 companies of medium tanks (17 per company) and one company of lights, for a total of about 70 tanks including the HQ element (but excluding the AG platoon, which would add about 4-6 more AFV's - either M-8 GMC's or M4/105's.
By comparison, a Soviet tank battalion at the time would typically have about 30 tanks...half the size of the US battalion.
German battalions varied greatly too, even mixing tanks at different times in the war.

Those advocating battalions as a unit building block would have to compensate for the fact that battalions are not all the same size, or composition. And what's more, the AI would have to figure out how to go about building divisions up from a hodge-podge of different battalions. Then the game would have to track thousands of battalions all over the globe.
Sounds like a lot to ask given that people don't like game slowdowns.

So I'd rather see some abstraction here, in a grand strategy game. Abstraction at the brigade level is probably a more efficient use of computer CPU time - not that I'm a programmer, but it just sort of makes sense.

But if we are talking mod, then mod away, so long as it is not adopted for the game itself.

 

[Zuckergußgebäck]

Whats the difference? I thought motorized were units equipped with trucks while mechanized units used APCs.

In theory, yes. The Germans were chronically short of half-tracks (as with most other combat vehicles), so some panzer-grenadier divisions ended up using trucks or simply no motorized transport at all.

 

[unmerged(131221)]

+ using Assault Guns instead of Tanks

 

[unmerged(39280)]

Nope... the command structure I gave is correct. Look it up on wikipedia if you don't believe me. I have never experienced a Major as full battalion commander, or a 1st Lieutenant as full company commander (they may temporarily be 'acting' as the commander, though). The ranking-to-unit structure I gave really is correct, I can assure you.

EDIT: Think you may be getting mixed up with how the USA describes positions. Majors and 1st Lieutenants may be 'executive officers' in battalions and companies, respectively, but this doesn't make them 'commanding officers', it makes them the 2IC (second-in-command). We are referring to who commands what unit size, not their 2IC's.

Are we talking about US army only ? In german army in the late 30s majors usually commanded battalions AFAIK. I'm almost sure it was the same in other european armies of the era (except GB).

Not all battalions are equivalent.
For example, late war US Tank battalions had 3 companies of medium tanks (17 per company) and one company of lights, for a total of about 70 tanks including the HQ element (but excluding the AG platoon, which would add about 4-6 more AFV's - either M-8 GMC's or M4/105's.
By comparison, a Soviet tank battalion at the time would typically have about 30 tanks...half the size of the US battalion.
German battalions varied greatly too, even mixing tanks at different times in the war.

Not all battalions are equivalent, you are correct but at least they existed in every army in the era. Brigades did not, many armies used battalion --> regiment --> division structure skipping brigade level.

 

[zeekater]

For those who consider this too much micromanagement: Johan has stated that you could play an entire game without ever seeing the division-maker screen (just using templates of divisions)

 

[Wraith11B]

Nope... the command structure I gave is correct. Look it up on wikipedia if you don't believe me. I have never experienced a Major as full battalion commander, or a 1st Lieutenant as full company commander (they may temporarily be 'acting' as the commander, though). The ranking-to-unit structure I gave really is correct, I can assure you.

EDIT: Think you may be getting mixed up with how the USA describes positions. Majors and 1st Lieutenants may be 'executive officers' in battalions and companies, respectively, but this doesn't make them 'commanding officers', it makes them the 2IC (second-in-command). We are referring to who commands what unit size, not their 2IC's.

You're debating this with someone who is a part of the S-3 shop of the Battalion Headquarters company... and wikipedia is sometimes wrong. For example:

CO of 2nd Battalion, 156th Infantry: was LtCol Kranske, is now MAJ Rivers
CO of Charlie Company, 2/156th: 1LT Alera

The rank of Major is usually a staff position in the US Army, but they do command battalions. Rarely are they ever in command of companies, unless they just got promoted from Captain.

 

[unmerged(131989)]

You're debating this with someone who is a part of the S-3 shop of the Battalion Headquarters company... and wikipedia is sometimes wrong. For example:

CO of 2nd Battalion, 156th Infantry: was LtCol Kranske, is now MAJ Rivers
CO of Charlie Company, 2/156th: 1LT Alera

The rank of Major is usually a staff position in the US Army, but they do command battalions. Rarely are they ever in command of companies, unless they just got promoted from Captain.

Well this is indeed very rare. I am not just basing this from wikipedia, btw, I too have a military background. The rank-to-unit structure I gave is the 'ideal' form of command, although occassionally you will have someone of 'insufficient' rank taking up that command... they are expected to be promoted soon?? However, these occassions aren't the usual structure which armies aim for (which I'm guessing you already know) yet sometimes have to have in rare circumstances.

 

[Johan]

the amount of buildingblocks inside a unit is moddable. (you just have to mod .gui files if you want to go >5 as well.)

 

[unmerged(131221)]

the amount of buildingblocks inside a unit is moddable. (you just have to mod .gui files if you want to go >5 as well.)

Hell Yeah!!!!
\m/
God praise Satan! Thats a great news!

 

[Ape]

the amount of buildingblocks inside a unit is moddable. (you just have to mod .gui files if you want to go >5 as well.)

Great news, might then even be worth getting this game afterall

 

[unmerged(122975)]

This small comment is worth a dev diary

 

[PIT_AMERO]

Great now I will have nightmares like-
"Cool the enemy have ony 30 divs."
encounter
"Noooooo, they have 20 brigades in them"


Actualy I think that the news is good. But we will have to be able with the help of the intelligence to gather some information about what are enemy division's OOBs.