Please keep the Panzer leaders !

[Big Nev]

Wikipedia disagrees:

"The 75 mm Gun Motor Carriage M3 was a United States tank destroyer and self-propelled artillery piece of the World War II. It was the most numerous tank destroyer in United States Army service"

In fact they even put a smaller AT-gun on a jeep and called it a tank destroyer
(M6 Gun Motor Carriage)

Well if it’s in WIKI, then it must be correct. :huh:

Did you read the entire page and note that most were converted back to being troop carrying halftracks prior to being issued? So of the 2200 built, only 842 saw service in this configuration.

Also, according to WIKI, the M10 Wolverine was also the most numerous US Tank Destroyer. Hmm…

The Helcat was also built in greater numbers that the M3. Also according to WIKI. You see, WIKI isn’t always that accurate and different articles frequently contradict. I’d rather rely on Jane’s.

They put a smaller AT gun on a Jeep?

Ahhhh… They put a 37mm on a small truck & called it a tank destroyer as a stop-gap. Which, apparently, almost turned them over.

A Jeep (of the Willys variety) could withstand the recoil of a ½ inch MG, but nothing much larger AFAIK. I have read (un-confirmed) that a recoilless gun was used successfully though. Probably by some nutters like the LRDG, SBS or Para’s.

So, reading the WIKI page, I think the half-track in the picture, deployed with infantry as a tank destroyer actually fits the description of Light Artillery &/or Light AT included in a Mechanised Infantry brigade. This implies that we need mechanised marines!

But we could go on like this for ever and, frankly, I’d prefer to agree to disagree as “a rose by any other name & all that” and unite in calling for a Panzer Leader trait over & above Battlemaster (I hate the name) that reflects what Rommel & Guderian were all about. Fast-moving formations lead by armour.

Yes, I know armour is useless without infantry & increasing the speed of infantry would un-balance the game, but a buff to the speed of units that are already fast?

And, especially, have the HQ unit able to keep-up. Maybe that would be enough. The Pazerleader buffs the HQ so much that it’s the equivalent of a Mot brigade when it forms part of the division and the whole division moves 1 or 2 km/h faster than its otherwise slowest brigade. Provided all the brigades have base speeds greater than 4km/h to start with.

Now I need to ask a question.

Is the standard Art/AA/AT towed or is that SPArt/TD? We don’t even have SPAA, yet(?) Rommel kept his FLAK 88s with him as they were towed. Well, nothing’s perfect.


And Nicolas, count me IN

 

[Aernil]

I too think it would be nice to have a trait different from Battlemaster (which now affects pretty much ever division).
If there would be a designated Panzer Leader trait (aka leading fast moving armored formations) I think it would be best to tie it to the highest Armour of a Division

...All tank type brigades, and armoured cars, now have an Armour value...[DevDiary#2]

, giving a high (15%?) combat movement bonus if the armour value is high enough to conclude there is a tank brigade used.
The other possible solution would be to keep the Battlemaster trait, rename it to Combined arms specialist and make the change non-linear (the more CA you have, the more boni you get). THough this seems harder to implement.

 

[Wraith11B]

p.s., I see

I thought CA meant Combines Arms.. but no. what does it stand for?

That's exactly what it means, at least in my little explanation there. Sorry I put it in together in a confusing manner.

 

[FelixMajor]

Lets just give some commanders the same CA bonus as battlemaster but keep the old logo so people know which are supposed to be attached to panzer divisions for the purposes of flavor. It sounds to me like this is the real issue behind the thread.

 

[Pugmak]

I'd like to see panzer leader, or armor leader or tank leader or whatever it ended up being called kept in too.

But, I'd like to see the trait reduce after-attack-delay as well as add a bit to morale or org of a unit.

Something in a trait to mimic the aggressiveness of say, the Ghost division in France, for example. A division able to be way in advance of expected ground covered over time of attack, moving when it should have been resting, etc and so on. That was a real leadership trait and not many had it.

 

[PEP]

Yes I am also sorry because I wanted to know if others foromites were thinking the Panzer leader trait was worth keeping under a new form, or not.

It's OK for me if a realize I am alone in my boat

Many people, me included, said they wanted a panzer leader and a battle master trait. I can assure you you're not alone.


Back on topic:

The old Panzer leader trait was given to general that were great at commanding armored divisions: every division with the CA bonus before TFH included tanks or TDs.

The new battle master trait should be given to much more generals than only the old panzer leaders since it applies to every division including infantry and almost any other type of brigade. Many generals had no clue how to properly use tank on the battlefield but still fit this new trait.

That's why the old Panzer leaders should retain a trait applying specifically to tank divisions, while the new trait should be given to any general that could coordinate efficiently different type of units on the battlefield.

 

[Nicolas I]

I too think it would be nice to have a trait different from Battlemaster (which now affects pretty much ever division).
If there would be a designated Panzer Leader trait (aka leading fast moving armored formations) I think it would be best to tie it to the highest Armour of a Division (...All tank type brigades, and armoured cars, now have an Armour value...[DevDiary#2])

Yes, that could be a way. It's always best to use a number that is already calculated by the system than creating a new mechanic (which is time/money consuming).

 

[PEP]

I don't now if it's possible but a "new" panzer leader trait (whatever its effect is) could be applied only to divisions including at least a brigade with a low softness (<30% for instance).

 

[Nephandus]

I don't now if it's possible but a "new" panzer leader trait (whatever its effect is) could be applied only to divisions including at least a brigade with a low softness (<30% for instance).

Leader traits can never be tied to conditions but always apply their percentage bonus (or penalty) to the modifier in question. Since there is no armor specific modifier there can be no leader trait that specifically works only on armor units.

 

[Traks]

that must be why everyone researches the doctrine reducing the attack delay so far ahead and why the officer ratio was reduced to 140%.
even one hour would give a big advantage. 12-24 hours would make your divisions virtually unstoppable.

Some Soviet commanders were executed in Battle for Kursk, because they arrived at designated position 2 hours later.
12-24 hours is crazy overpowered ability.

I say, leave it in and give +0 speed improvement. Everybody is happy - balance is fine, those who wanted ability got it.

 

[Beagá]

For modding purposes is it impossible to give a trait that gives bonus only to certain brigades, regardless if others are present?

 

[Nephandus]

For modding purposes is it impossible to give a trait that gives bonus only to certain brigades, regardless if others are present?

It is impossible.

 

[PEP]

Leader traits can never be tied to conditions but always apply their percentage bonus (or penalty) to the modifier in question. Since there is no armor specific modifier there can be no leader trait that specifically works only on armor units.

But the devs aren't moders. They can do what they want with the game... Just look at the new combined arms bonus: the game can definitely recognize specific brigades in a division and apply a bonus when some requirements are met. A trait giving a bonus when a division includes an armor brigade isn't just fantasy. Therefore your argument only apply to traits created by moders...

 

[Nicolas I]

For modding purposes is it impossible to give a trait that gives bonus only to certain brigades, regardless if others are present?

I made a mistake earlier refering to commando leader trait. It was in Hoi2 that it applied only to commando units (mountain, marines and paratroop). So in Hoi2 the system was capable of recognising these units. So if they (Paradox) made it in Hoi2 it is not impossible per se.

And I agree with PEP that for the new combined arms bonus, the game system has to be able to recognize specific brigades as there will be six different categories giving some bonus or (not) : Infantry (8 different kind of brigades), Armour (4 different kind of brigade), Artillery (4 different kind of brigades), Direct fire (4 different kind of brigades), Support (2 different kind of brigades) and None (2 different kind of brigades).

See DD #4 where Darkrenown added

Unit types, Base units, and the Bonuses given are all moddable, before anyone asks.

And just for Comsubpac, Darkrenown also said

As an added bonus, since we no longer need to worry about the 33-66% Softness range, many brigade types are now a bit less Soft, so expect to see more Hard targets on the battlefield

If I read well, when you say that you no longer use "softness range", doesn't that mean that you were using it before ? As was written in the manual...

 

[Nicolas I]

Leader traits can never be tied to conditions but always apply their percentage bonus (or penalty) to the modifier in question. Since there is no armor specific modifier there can be no leader trait that specifically works only on armor units.

I don't agree, there is a combined arms bonus of 5% for having an armour brigade in a division (15% after the combined arms doctrine), so the system must be able to recognize if there is an armoured brigade in the division. Also, as Aernil remembered us, for the Armour vs Piercing new mechanics, the system must check which armour level vs piercing, and only armour brigades will have a high armour level.

 

[Nephandus]

I don't agree, there is a combined arms bonus of 5% for having an armour brigade in a division (15% after the combined arms doctrine), so the system must be able to recognize if there is an armoured brigade in the division. Also, as Aernil remembered us, for the Armour vs Piercing new mechanics, the system must check which armour level vs piercing, and only armour brigades will have a high armour level.

We are talking about leader traits here. A leader trait applies to a specific value present (usually a modifier). The leader trait itself cannot have any conditions to check for certain prerequisites.

The combined arms modifier as it will be apparently will be able to be modified by techs but that still does not allow any conditions for leader traits. The amour vs piercing is strictly an addition to combat mechanics. It cannot be used in a conditional way for leader traits.

 

[Nicolas I]

The combined arms modifier as it will be apparently will be able to be modified by techs but that still does not allow any conditions for leader traits. The amour vs piercing is strictly an addition to combat mechanics. It cannot be used in a conditional way for leader traits.

I understood that the new Battlemaster trait will apply "only" to leading combined arms divisions in combat. That will now be mostly every division, except pure infantry, milita and MP. So the system must be able to regognize these units made of just infantry, milita and MP to NOT qualify for the Battlemaster trait. So the system could be made to recognize units with armour for a real (new) Panzer leader trait. It was already doing that in an indirect way, not using armour but using hardness.

Also, I remember there are terrain maluses for armoured brigades/divisions in rough terrain. So to apply the maluses to armour, the system must be able to recognize what unit has some armour in it.

Even if these number where not created with a Panzer leader trait in mind, they do exist inside the system. So they can be used in a different way, with no need to create a new mechanics from scratch (money and time consuming). I have worked with statistics and we would always try to verify if we already have the numbers somewhere else (even under a different form) before doing another costly poll. Sometimes it was alot more easy to rework with previous existing numbers than to create new ones.

 

[Traks]

More realistic bonus would be +1 to armor value, not trickling down (there are some traits which don't trickle down).
That way, adding this to plain infantry would be useless, but for units containing some kind of armor would provide a little bit of edge.

 

[PEP]

The leader trait itself cannot have any conditions to check for certain prerequisites.

It use to be possible in HoI2 so I really don't see why the devs couldn't do it in HoI3. Again it's not a mod we are talking about but an expansion.

 

[ashbery76]

Battlemaster belongs in MassEffect.Give me back my panzer leader.