Training and Replacements.

[klyver]

This thread started out when I read another one about traits of units as in Rome 2 Total War. The arguments both for and against were many, but as I thought, its not so much about what the unit has done but more to do with how its trained and where it comes from.

About training: S.L.A Marshall states in one of his thesis that the german practice of recruiting from one specifik area, training as a unit and being hospitalised in the same areas, had a possitive effect on morale because troops were associated with the same division from the beginning and had a sense of home. On the other hand, the american practice of replacing man for man, gave a negative effect and higher mortality for the replacements.
Lastly the british used locally based units (of course there are always exceptions) that, at least during the first world war depopulated certain areas if a regiment had particular high loses.

So the proposition is:
Make a choice mechanics where you can have a) locally based regiments for a higher morale and slightly better cohesion. But slower reinforcement-rates. (fastest reenforcement will come if the regiment is returned to its garrison)
b) the Wehrkreis system (the german one): a small boost for cohesion, medium replacement speed. (fastest reenforcement in its region)
c) individual replacement: Very high speed of replacement irelevant of where it is (dependent on the supply route) but a penalty on morale when in combat. Is able to stay in the frontline for a long time.

Please give some constructive feedback, also if it should be expanded further or if at all it is relevant.

 

[Axe99]

It's an interesting idea, but probably more suited to something like Vicky which tracks local populations. If it was abstracted out and assumed unlimited replacements everywhere than it could definitely work as you've proposed . I'd probably steer clear of getting as detailed as relating reinforcement speed to distance between unit and garrison though, could get overly complicated very quick. I'm also not sure about the 'time on the frontline' being strongly related to this - I'm not sure if historical performance bears out that individual replacements give you high 'frontline' endurance.

 

[TheRomanRuler]

Good idea!

EDIT: After WW2 in Finland there were entire villages without barely any men left, since unit they served had suffered heavily during the war. Altough wars barely kill 1% of population, if your units are built from men coming from same towns and villages, there may be towns with 30% less people + civilian casualties. How about give IC penalty if single divisions suffer too much casualties (and you use #1 system)? Industrial town without workers is pretty useless. Altough since industrial workers were only conscripted as a last resort, IC penalty is not that good idea, i just threw idea out in the air and observed what happened.

 

[ikeokp]

In the book "The Forgotten Soldier", the main man was from Eastern France, while he had elements from all over Europe in his battalion. Some were Czech, Prussian, Austrian, etc.
So Im not sure I quite understand the German reinforcement thing. But it is a very good idea haha!

But he did stay with the same division throughout the war if that is what you mean?

 

[klyver]

I was actually thinking it as akin to the training laws in HoI3, just another one. Also it could be made as a simple modifier for the reenforcement speed and a simple bonus for Org and Morale.

If you have a look at the american divisions on the western front, you'll see that most of them were in continous service from D-Day to VE-day with only very short or rare breaks. When looking at the german practice they usually took divisions out for some while whilst being reenforced.

It is more where they are garrisoned and where they are trained. Of course its not all true, especially with the later german divisions. They were often more ad hoc than anything. It is mostly the units raised in peacetime.

Lastly. The placement could be as simple as: the regimental system and it has to be the same specific area, whilst the german system would be the same region or some larger unit (such as bavaria, east prussia or brandenburg)

 

[Victor Cortez]

So, to simplify it, you'd like to have an option to trade morale for reinforcement speed (or vice-versa), correct?

In game terms, if this doesn't imply other complications, then I think it makes sense.

 

[klyver]

Thats one way of saying it. Of course you could deepen it somewhat so it doesnt seem so simpel.

 

[SniperTianhao]

In the book "The Forgotten Soldier", the main man was from Eastern France, while he had elements from all over Europe in his battalion. Some were Czech, Prussian, Austrian, etc.
So Im not sure I quite understand the German reinforcement thing. But it is a very good idea haha!

But he did stay with the same division throughout the war if that is what you mean?

It is a fictional novel, u can't use it as a source to represent German army

 

[Midden]

Hmm that is a bit harsh.

It is not a "History / Science book", but it is an authentic Autobiographical work, that is indeed used for gaining an understanding of the German army at that time, by the US army today. Plus it's a very good read.

 

[unmerged(762569)]

In fact that was not only german thing.Bulgaria and Yugoslavia used similiar sistem from ww1 at least.Divisions were raised from certain geographical locations and were in fact named after some local geographic landamark particulary rivers-for example Drinska divizija,Dunavska Divizija,Unska divizija (you can check more in previsous hearts of iron if you want)...You could learn local geography from names of those units.Playing with yugoslavia and bulgaria was fun for me because aside from Americans with their awesome nicknames for divisions other nations only used number sistem for naming divisions which is meh immersion wise.

 

[ikeokp]

It is a fictional novel, u can't use it as a source to represent German army

Im pretty sure its a autobiography. Yes theirs some obvious embellishment since I doubt he was able to write at ALL times, but 'Sajer' is a real man who really served in the elite Gross division.

 

[Wulf145]

It is a fictional novel, u can't use it as a source to represent German army

Try this as a source: Fighting Power: German and US Army performance, 1939-1945, Westport, Conn. : Greenwood Press, 1982, ISBN 0-313-23333-0

This book describes the differences in training/replacement/organisational practices very well

What the OP proposes would be a very good mechanic to model the different training and replacement methods of the Armed forces of the time. The German armed forces did try to group people of the same Area in the same divisions but did not do so as stringently as the British. What it did do though is try to keep the Soldiers who served together within the same units, one was able to transfer within the Division if one wanted, or the necessity arose, but a transfer from one division to another was rare. If new Divisions were formed they would usually be formed around from units taken from an existing division e.g. the 4th Fallschirmjäger Division was formed around one Regiment of the 1st Fallschirmjäger Division.

 

[1alexey]

What we really need is to go away from HOI3s constant instant reinforcements, and have some sort of training facilities/capacities for new recruits or replacements.

Then the system may handle the difference between rebuilding your units after sustained time and reinforcing them fast, but no connection to geography and such should ever be made.

A good way to do so, could something along the line of reinforcement soldiers come at some exp. level depending on training, and then divisions also passively gain experience up to a certain, capped, higher level then at which the recruits are coming, by just time passing by. Then, if you quickly reinforce, your novices come at worse experience and can suffer some more casualties, while if you don`t reinforce right away, at some point, as cassualties accumulate, you division becomes more and more weaker and needs to be pulled back for reinforcements eventually.

 

[Wulf145]

I wouldn't cut the reinforcement 'in the Field' since Germany and the western Allies practised it, though using different methods. I do not know how the Soviet Union and Japan handled reinforcement so I cannot say how it could be modelled.

In the last 2 HOIs your Divisions were reinforced quicker when they were placed behind the Frontlines, subject to Infrastructure/Supply levels and Replacement availability.

Suggestion: Make the amount of Recruits and level of Training variable, thus creating 'pools' of trained & semi-trained Replacements.

 

[klyver]

I wouldn't cut the reinforcement 'in the Field' since Germany and the western Allies practised it, though using different methods. I do not know how the Soviet Union and Japan handled reinforcement so I cannot say how it could be modelled.

As far as i know, the Soviets raised units and had them in line until they were more or less destroyed for then to rebuild them. I have no sources though

 

[Ruthlesssamuria]

Hmm most Americans ground troops were not even in combat until D-Day 1944! which amounted to less than 1 year total! Where as the Germans, UK and Russian forces were in combat from 1939 or 1941 for the Russians thru May 1945 that's 5 1/2 years at most for the German and UK ground Forces!

 

[TheRomanRuler]

Hmm most Americans ground troops were not even in combat until D-Day 1944! which amounted to less than 1 year total! Where as the Germans, UK and Russian forces were in combat from 1939 or 1941 for the Russians thru May 1945 that's 5 1/2 years at most for the German and UK ground Forces!

Yet USA suffered 407 000 military dead (not sure if accurate number, took it from wikipedia)... And USA were far from fighting alone, Germans on other hand constantly had to help their incompetent/badly equipped allies.

 

[Opanashc]

As far as i know, the Soviets raised units and had them in line until they were more or less destroyed for then to rebuild them. I have no sources though

Not quite. Necessity dictated it, sometimes, but the units usually stayed in line, and received a steady influx of reinforcements, to replace operational losses.

 

[Opanashc]

Yet USA suffered 407 000 military dead (not sure if accurate number, took it from wikipedia)... And USA were far from fighting alone, Germans on other hand constantly had to help their incompetent/badly equipped allies.

For every KIA, there are ~3 WIA. USA also had ~1.3 mental breakdown cases for every KIA and WIA.

 

[Klausewitz]

So the proposition is:
Make a choice mechanics where you can have a) locally based regiments for a higher morale and slightly better cohesion. But slower reinforcement-rates. (fastest reenforcement will come if the regiment is returned to its garrison)
b) the Wehrkreis system (the german one): a small boost for cohesion, medium replacement speed. (fastest reenforcement in its region)
c) individual replacement: Very high speed of replacement irelevant of where it is (dependent on the supply route) but a penalty on morale when in combat. Is able to stay in the frontline for a long time.

I am not sure i understand were the boni/mali come from.
The Wehrkreis system for example gets 'a small boast to cohesion'.
Small compared to what?
If historicality rules German units will most likely have the highest cohesion in game so is that a '5%' bonus on top of whatever else the unit already has?
A flat bonus that is small?
I also don't get the relation of replacment speed and replacement system.
The Wehrkreis system teamed up on unit at the front with one in the replacement system. Replacements were always training (since casualites were always expected) and always shipped to the front.
Where does the speed difference come from and again what is the baseline here?