Sea-Bee battalions

[unmerged(128095)]

Here is a suggestion for a new brigade option, how about building C B's, or construction battalions. I realize that the smallest unit will be a brigade, but if you look at the American Army, the construction 'battalion' usually numbered from 3,000 to 3,500 men. These were different from the combat engineers attached to divisions as they were primarily pulled from the civilian construction trades and put in uniform with just basic infantry training.

They would have limited to no offensive value, low to mid defensive value and would primarily be valuble in maintaining, recovery of infrustructure value in the provence or region they are based in. They could also be used to increase the speed that airfields and ports are built/upgraded (which was a major function of these units historically), the speed that land fortresses are built or improved, and have some anti-partisan value.

I think they could add alot of features to the game such as:

• Positioning them along lines of supply to speed infrasructure recovery from tactical/strategic airstrikes
  
• Increase supply movement through individual provinces they are based in (and perhaps adjacent ones too)
  
• Lower the 'supply tax' for supplies moving through provinces based on the abstracted assumption that roads, bridges and rail improvement/repair would be a mission focus of this type of unit.
  
• pairing them up with police or militia brigades to form divisions along lines of supply would be the primary use for this type of unit. This would provide the division sized unit that would meet the minimum sized unit for the game and provide the units benefit along with the partisan suppression.

IC cost for the unit should be the same in MP and IC as a motorized brigade or Armored Infantry brigade to reflect the cost of heavy equipment, and the supply demand for fuel and supplies would be about the same. as a MB or AIB.

An additional cost would be in the leadership supply, which has been discussed briefly in the DD. These units drew off of the tradesmen of all stripes from the civilian sector such as heavy equipment operators, carpenters, masons etc. Along with engineers, architects and construction managers, so building hundreds of these units would be impractical/expensive to this and other resources, so 'gaming' the system would be difficult.

The skill/efficiency factor for these units could also be tied into the existing tech trees. for instance, you develop a heavier tank chassis, it doesn't take much additional engineering to mount a larger excavator assembly on it. Same with improvements in improvements on motor size, etc. (there really hasn't been alot of detail on the tech development system, other than it's going to be more like HoI1, so throwing one or two in that help this type of unit shouldn't be that difficult)

anyway, just a thought to put out there.

 

[Zaku]

Engineer brigades are already in the game.
Check here. Second brigade from the bottom.
I don't know what kind of bonuses they'll give though.

 

[Rommel 459]

i think it's redundant to have these and also engineers, but i do like these effects you listed, so i'd like them to be added to engineer bridade bonuses

 

[unmerged(10977)]

Perhaps Seebees should be part of a (logistic) doctrine thus giving certain bonuses to engineer units and/or construction processes?

It would also be nice if the number of engineer "brigade attachment" located within a land region have an effect on the construction speed of airfields/fortifications.

 

[Tyson_48]

Perhaps Seebees should be part of a (logistic) doctrine thus giving certain bonuses to engineer units and/or construction processes?

Fully agreed.
As i understand correctly every nation can choose between the indivudual brigades, so the ai will focus on historical composition.
Johan has also mentioned that the doctrines for each nation (or better groups) are set from the start.
So it is very easily to simulate such advantages with the doctrine system.
Germany surely will start with dctrines with lead to blitzkrieg what gives a significant bonus to armoured units and speed etc.
He also mentioned that after combat experience the nations can "learn" from the doctrines of others. So if the allies had seen the way of german warfare, they could find out the weak points.
So it is very possible that one part of a doctrine will give {+25% bonus on engineer brigade effect]
It is also possible with the fact that production will influence research, that if nation a produces X engineer corps it will give Y% bonus on research in this special doctrine way etc.

 

[Driggsd]

Hmmm

As a Actual Navy SeaBee on active duty.... I dont realy dig this Idea. YEs there were almost 170 NMCB's serving in both theaters durring WW2 and we did provide alot of real support along with turn any Island we were landed on into a real air port. But NMCB's are to small of a unit to be represented in the game. How-ever the idea put forward to have us as a reaserchable tech, and there for used as a force multipier as we actualy were and are still today.

CE1 (SCW/AW) Driggers

 

[coreymas]

IMHO too low of a granularity of unit for HOI series.

 

[unmerged(128095)]

Perhaps Seebees should be part of a (logistic) doctrine thus giving certain bonuses to engineer units and/or construction processes?

It would also be nice if the number of engineer "brigade attachment" located within a land region have an effect on the construction speed of airfields/fortifications.

This would be an acceptable comprimise, but still not totally satisfactory IMHO. Combat engineers, as a battalion assigned to divisions as modeled in the game really don't reflect the Sea-bees in the American military in WWII. They were trained as regular infantry and then received further training as combat engineers, whereas the Sea-bees recieved as little as 30 days military training and then were assigned to their unit. As I said, they were recruited from the construction and engineering trade and were never intended to engage in combat, although they did sustain casualties and were deployed in areas still under indirect fire and infiltration, especially in the PTO.

Giving engineering battalions additional skills for infrasturcture improvement and airbase/fortress construction to provinces or regions were they are located would be a reasonable compromise, with research of related techs and doctrine, but I think it's not unreasonable to consider including them as a separate buildable unit in the game. Consider the fact that over 175,000 were deployed in the pacific alone, and that they were organized in battalions, regiments and brigades during the war. In Okinawa, by July of '45 there were over 55,000 stationed preparing bases, hospitals, supply facilities and everything else needed for the planned invasion of Japan. I mean, come on, the game has cavalry as a buildable unit, (and yes, I know the USSR, China and Japan did field calvary units during the war, and I'm sure someone will point out that there were 'several dozen divisions' or what ever). Calvary was not used by any western power at all, or Germany after the invasion of Poland, so why is it included as a buildable unit?

(BTW, upgrading any cavalry units you have early in the to 'armored cavalry' when it is researched late in HoI2 is silly too. Most of the cavalry units were long converted to armor or motorized/mech. infantry before then.)

 

[Rommel 459]

the main argument i can think of offhand that cavalry should be in the game while seebees are not would be that the cavalry were deployed on a regimental/divisional level while seabees were as i understand it deployed more as a battalion. they were also during world war two part of the navies civil engineering corps which may limit their attractiveness to be included into a wargame

i'm for the effects you had for them being included in the engineers repoirtiore(sp?)

probably only after some doctrinal research is done.

 

[Driggsd]

This would be an acceptable comprimise, but still not totally satisfactory IMHO. Combat engineers, as a battalion assigned to divisions as modeled in the game really don't reflect the Sea-bees in the American military in WWII. They were trained as regular infantry and then received further training as combat engineers, whereas the Sea-bees recieved as little as 30 days military training and then were assigned to their unit. As I said, they were recruited from the construction and engineering trade and were never intended to engage in combat, although they did sustain casualties and were deployed in areas still under indirect fire and infiltration, especially in the PTO.

OK lets examine this......No the combat engineers in the game do not reflect us ( SeaBees). Becuase they are COMBAT ENGINEERS!. We (the Seabees are not and have never been trained as combat engineers. We are engineers. Not sappers. We do construction, not blowing up bridges or planinting and clearing minefields. The reasin we (historicaly ) are not used in combat is 2 fold. 1. Engineers are a very rare commodity. And the marines had enough trained infantry men. They needed us to do construction. 2. When Seabees did take part in combat ops we got our assess handed to us. MBC 133 Okinawa landing, 1st day of combat 90% cas..........

Giving engineering battalions additional skills for infrasturcture improvement and airbase/fortress construction to provinces or regions were they are located would be a reasonable compromise, with research of related techs and doctrine, but I think it's not unreasonable to consider including them as a separate buildable unit in the game. Consider the fact that over 175,000 were deployed in the pacific alone, and that they were organized in battalions, regiments and brigades during the war. In Okinawa, by July of '45 there were over 55,000 stationed preparing bases, hospitals, supply facilities and everything else needed for the planned invasion of Japan. I mean, come on, the game has cavalry as a buildable unit, (and yes, I know the USSR, China and Japan did field calvary units during the war, and I'm sure someone will point out that there were 'several dozen divisions' or what ever). Calvary was not used by any western power at all, or Germany after the invasion of Poland, so why is it included as a buildable unit?

Ok for infrastructure and airfield improvement. Well the game abstracts this. Who do you think is building the infrastructure and airfeilds in the PAc when you click on Guam and add infrastructure. It is an abstract of milliatry engineers, contractors and impressed workers.

Dude I am proud as hell to be a bee. But really in this game we are way bellow the threshold. Unless we are a special event for the US. some thing like "5 MAR 1942 ADM. Ben Morrel organizes the first Naval Construction Battalions under the Civil Engineering Corps" The us gets a 20% bonus on airfield, infrastruture, habor and AA construction. And it costs 40 Manpower.

Or something to that effect.

 

[Khevenhuller]

(and yes, I know the USSR, China and Japan did field calvary units during the war, and I'm sure someone will point out that there were 'several dozen divisions' or what ever). Calvary was not used by any western power at all, or Germany after the invasion of Poland, so why is it included as a buildable unit?

(BTW, upgrading any cavalry units you have early in the to 'armored cavalry' when it is researched late in HoI2 is silly too. Most of the cavalry units were long converted to armor or motorized/mech. infantry before then.)

The US used cavalry in Italy in 43-45 as it was better than mechanised units for Recce in the difficult terrain. Similarly the British in Burma in the same time frame.

As we are modding brigades in HoI 3, it should be available. The preconcieved idea that mechanisation was better than horseflesh in all circumstances does not hold water.

K

 

[Driggsd]

The US used cavalry in Italy in 43-45 as it was better than mechanised units for Recce in the difficult terrain. Similarly the British in Burma in the same time frame.

As we are modding brigades in HoI 3, it should be available. The preconcieved idea that mechanisation was better than horseflesh in all circumstances does not hold water.

K

Hell for that matter some US army units in Afgahnistan were using horses to patrol as recently as last year, Until they quad bikes.. ( I know because I was there and saw them)