"Radio Strength" - from Twitter screenshot

[Battlecry]

In the unit stats, there's a heading called "radio strength". Any thoughts on this?

I'm thinking:
a) Most likely it will affect how "detectable" a unit is to enemy listening posts.

b) It might affect how far a unit can operate from its parent HQ - or at least there might be severe penalties for operating outside radio range of the HQ.

 

[Alex_brunius]

I agree with a)

Or that its:

c) a passive combat bonus to symbolize how many radiosets there are in the brigade.

d) a passive bonus to signal intel to enable you to see a few provinces away even when you have no listening stations in range.

 

[unmerged(134661)]

I agree with a)

Or that its:

c) a passive combat bonus to symbolize how many radiosets there are in the brigade.

d) a passive bonus to signal intel to enable you to see a few provinces away even when you have no listening stations in range.

a) would make sense

I hope that:

i) Radios are seperate technology that may be included in divisions (low radio would worsen coordination bonii between forces and combat eff, but high radio makes you more likely to be detected.

ii) Doctrines and maybe choices like issuing 'radio silence' can modify these commands

 

[Sirveri]

It might modify attack cooldown time. In HoI2 you'd attack a province then have to wait for something like 24 hours after combat to reissue orders. It might also increase the potential for combat events given by the HQ. It might make it more or less visible to enemy intel. It might increase org levels. It might do a combination of things.

 

[zeekater]

From DD 11:

We also have a generic radio technology that gives combat bonuses to your units but also makes them easier to detect (our logic here that even if your ability to decrypt the enemy radio signals is poor things like traffic pattern analysis will allow you to build up a picture of what the enemy is doing).

 

[unmerged(134661)]

Funny that I've read every DD and consider it the highlight of my day and I didn't connect that one into this topic. :rofl:

 

[unmerged(52507)]

I think it will probably give armour a bit of an advantage over inf.

 

[unmerged(12217)]

I think it will probably give armour a bit of an advantage over inf.

Why? Many nations had tanks without radios. Most countries had man-portable infantry radios at least at the battalion level, early in the war. And later, the Americans invented walkie-talkies - short ranged, but effectively making each squad able to connect with it's platoon, etc, etc. And large infantry formations (regiment and above) usually had truck-mounted radio systems to talk with division.

I think that this relationship is variable and not a given

 

[von Sachsen]

This was probably in other screenshots, but I just noticed... individual regiments have names.

 

[Wulf145]

I am preety sure that the amount &quality of radio comunication will influence the org regain rate very heavily. For example:
A division which has radio comunication right down to squad level will be able to reorganise itself a lot quicker than a division which has radio comunication only at company level and above.
IMO Doctrines should also influence how heavily the prevelance of radio is rated, i.e. the more centralised the operational control the higher the reliance on radio comunication.

Kudos to whoever designed the counters - they are the best I have ever seen in a game (incl. Avalon Hill board games)

P.S. I love the UI, very clean and lots of information.

 

[Ostheim]

I think it will probably give armour a bit of an advantage over inf.

Infantry had radios too!

 

[Zuckergußgebäck]

I hope that the OOB is just a place-holder, given that not a single thing about that division is correct.

 

[Johan]

I hope that the OOB is just a place-holder, given that not a single thing about that division is correct.

What sources do you use?

A quick google check confirms our sources rather nicely.

http://niehorster.orbat.com/011_germany/39_organ_army/39_pz-03.html

http://s13.invisionfree.com/3rd_Panzer_Division/ar/t82.htm

 

[unmerged(94130)]

Maybe a bonus fr regaining organization, it's easier to regroup its forces when we have not to send soldiers with messages...

 

[Zuckergußgebäck]

What sources do you use?

A quick google check confirms our sources rather nicely.

http://niehorster.orbat.com/011_germany/39_organ_army/39_pz-03.html

http://s13.invisionfree.com/3rd_Panzer_Division/ar/t82.htm

My mistake. I read it as the sixth armored division, which didn't exist until 1940. o

 

[Kikaider]

My mistake. I read it as the sixth armored division, which didn't exist until 1940. o

Edit: since the mistake was corrected

 

[Ankor]

What sources do you use?

A quick google check confirms our sources rather nicely.

http://niehorster.orbat.com/011_germany/39_organ_army/39_pz-03.html

http://s13.invisionfree.com/3rd_Panzer_Division/ar/t82.htm

The motorized infantry and tanks are correct. But first URL gives info that there were also 75. motorized artillery regiment.

 

[Kikaider]

The motorized infantry and tanks are correct. But first URL gives info that there were also 75. motorized artillery regiment.

As well as a recon company (armored cars?) from the sounds of it...

 

[mlepkows]

The motorized infantry and tanks are correct. But first URL gives info that there were also 75. motorized artillery regiment.

Every (or almost every) division had an artillery regiment in WW2. In all previous HoIs it was abstracted. Artillery brigade (visible as separate entity) symbolises strenghtened artillery for given division. We won't be seeing it in every combat unit that had an artillery regiment. That is the case with recon companies and such too.

Maciek

 

[oribiasi]

On the unit icon in this AWESOME screenshot, there is "0-2" -- what does that stand for?