Upgrade/Change Division Types

[Wulf145]

I would like to be able to 'Upgrade' divisions loosing little or no Experience.
Historicaly Germany upgraded Motorised Infantry Divisions to Mechanised/Armoured divisions during the War.
This could be achieved by using an Upgrade function similar to the upgrade functionality in HOI 1, costs some IC but only a fraction of the MP that a new Division would cost.

 

[Frank+Frei]

Same to me!
This would also help for british+soviet divisions.

 

[Driggsd]

I would like to be able to 'Upgrade' divisions loosing little or no Experience.
Historicaly Germany upgraded Motorised Infantry Divisions to Mechanised/Armoured divisions during the War.
This could be achieved by using an Upgrade function similar to the upgrade functionality in HOI 1, costs some IC but only a fraction of the MP that a new Division would cost.

I would prefer to see a return to how the upgrades were done in HOI1 Also I would like to see units being able to change between types. Such as infantry being upgradeable to PAR or MTN and units being able to be down graded like INF to MIL or GAR.

I dont think that unts should keep all thier experiance. I also think that units that are out of combat for some time (over 6 months) should start to see a decrease in thier experiance. As in realife replacements and transfers wopuld start to take the experianced men out of those units.

 

[Wulf145]

I would prefer to see a return to how the upgrades were done in HOI1 Also I would like to see units being able to change between types. Such as infantry being upgradeable to PAR or MTN and units being able to be down graded like INF to MIL or GAR.

I dont think that unts should keep all thier experiance. I also think that units that are out of combat for some time (over 6 months) should start to see a decrease in thier experiance. As in realife replacements and transfers wopuld start to take the experianced men out of those units.

I liked the HOI2 update method sending the updated hardware into the field, since in HOI1 you had to 'remove' the unit/division from the field to upgrade 'everything' from a new radio set to a new Tank.

Loosing experience over time is something that would have to be very well balanced, since a combat veteran does not forget all his experience just because he is not at the front any longer, if we are talking about 12-18 months I think it would be better than 6 months.

As for being able to 'downgrade' units INF to MIL or GAR - I think that INF to MIL is a bit unrealistic, but if one wants to that why not ( the idea of Panzer Commanders having to go Infantry due to mid war Budget cuts is great :rofl: ).

 

[Driggsd]

I liked the HOI2 update method sending the updated hardware into the field, since in HOI1 you had to 'remove' the unit/division from the field to upgrade 'everything' from a new radio set to a new Tank.

Loosing experience over time is something that would have to be very well balanced, since a combat veteran does not forget all his experience just because he is not at the front any longer, if we are talking about 12-18 months I think it would be better than 6 months.

I beg to differ, a combat vetran does not lose his experiance but units lose combat vetrans! This affects how much "experiance" a unit has. Also being out of combat does. However being out of combat in the rear for to long does take away from experianced units combat rhythem. Trust me on this. There are plenty of other combat vetrans on here that can tell you how quickly a great unit can go soft.

As for being able to 'downgrade' units INF to MIL or GAR - I think that INF to MIL is a bit unrealistic, but if one wants to that why not ( the idea of Panzer Commanders having to go Infantry due to mid war Budget cuts is great :rofl: ).

What country do you live? I can garantee they have something like the US National Guard (MIL) or the UK's Teritorial Guard (MIL) which can effectual be upgraded to front line infantry (INF) durring wartime and then downgraded back to the MIL type status.
Trust me on this. I have 16 years in. I am not being UNREALISTIC. However I agree the Idea of a Panzer Commander being put in charge of a infantry unit is kind of funny. But I will give you points if you can tell me what 2 Panzer SS divisions were changed Into Panzer Grenadiers, and then towards the end of the war in SS Infantry division? Due to mid war budget and material availability.

History can be quite funny! In a way......

Edit. Sorry just saw that you are from Germany, I will call over to the German element on base here and find out what the name fo your militia equvilant is.

 

[Wulf145]

I beg to differ, a combat vetran does not lose his experiance but units lose combat vetrans! This affects how much "experiance" a unit has. Also being out of combat does. However being out of combat in the rear for to long does take away from experianced units combat rhythem. Trust me on this. There are plenty of other combat vetrans on here that can tell you how quickly a great unit can go soft.

Here I beg to differ, since during the time period in question the Wehrmacht had a replacemant system similar to the British regimental system i.e. once you were part of a division you remained in that division for the duration. This was fundimentaly different to the US Army of the time. As I said in my other post, I do not disagree with you on principal, but on the timeframe.

What country do you live? I can garantee they have something like the US National Guard (MIL) or the UK's Teritorial Guard (MIL) which can effectual be upgraded to front line infantry (INF) durring wartime and then downgraded back to the MIL type status.
Trust me on this. I have 16 years in. I am not being UNREALISTIC. However I agree the Idea of a Panzer Commander being put in charge of a infantry unit is kind of funny. But I will give you points if you can tell me what 2 Panzer SS divisions were changed Into Panzer Grenadiers, and then towards the end of the war in SS Infantry division? Due to mid war budget and material availability.

History can be quite funny! In a way......

Edit. Sorry just saw that you are from Germany, I will call over to the German element on base here and find out what the name fo your militia equvilant is.

There is the "Reserve" in Germany and the "Miliz" in Austria, AFAIK whole divisions did not go from INF to MIL. We musn't forget that we are talking about how the Armies were organised in the 30s and 40s, not today. But wether I am right or not I think that being able to change the type of division would be a great feature for HOI3.

Pre 1945, the German Army did have Reserve units attached to Divisions, which were based in Germany where the wounded convaleced and recruits were trained but this is nothing like the TA (UK), or National Guard in the US.

 

[Driggsd]

Here I beg to differ, since during the time period in question the Wehrmacht had a replacemant system similar to the British regimental system i.e. once you were part of a division you remained in that division for the duration. This was fundimentaly different to the US Army of the time. As I said in my other post, I do not disagree with you on principal, but on the timeframe.

Actualy at the time we used a similar system. You could request transfers but that was up to your Division. I cede the point to you here, becuase you are right on that most men stayed in the unit they started the war in. How-ever I do think that getting replacements should take away from a units experiance. What do you think about that?

There is the "Reserve" in Germany and the "Miliz" in Austria, AFAIK whole divisions did not go from INF to MIL. We musn't forget that we are talking about how the Armies were organised in the 30s and 40s, not today. But wether I am right or not I think that being able to change the type of division would be a great feature for HOI3.

Pre 1945, the German Army did have Reserve units attached to Divisions, which were based in Germany where the wounded convaleced and recruits were trained but this is nothing like the TA (UK), or National Guard in the US.

Ok. I guess I am looking at this from to much of an Anglo-phile point. in the lead up for the US's entry into WW2 we only had a few active division of Army and 2 understrenthed Divisions of Marines. But we had 70+ Reserve and National Guard division. Which were the back bone of our army to begin with.
We also used replacemnet pools but at the Corps level.

So you agree with the idea of upgradable and downgradeable units but not my reasoning...... Well fair enough. I dont mind loosing a debate.

 

[Wulf145]

Actualy at the time we used a similar system. You could request transfers but that was up to your Division. I cede the point to you here, becuase you are right on that most men stayed in the unit they started the war in. How-ever I do think that getting replacements should take away from a units experiance. What do you think about that?

I agree totaly.

Ok. I guess I am looking at this from to much of an Anglo-phile point. in the lead up for the US's entry into WW2 we only had a few active division of Army and 2 understrenthed Divisions of Marines. But we had 70+ Reserve and National Guard division. Which were the back bone of our army to begin with.
We also used replacemnet pools but at the Corps level.

So you agree with the idea of upgradable and downgradeable units but not my reasoning...... Well fair enough. I dont mind loosing a debate.

You have not lost the debate, nor have I won it. As you stated - we are looking at the same thing from different angles, you from the Anglophile view and if one looks at it from that angle you are absolutly correct; and I from a 'German' viewpoint. We Both agree that one should be able to change the type of a unit, we are only quibeling over the details
All I can say is that I hope that the Doctrine paths of HOI2 are preserved in HOI3 in order to 'create' the differences between countries Armed forces.
P.S. If you ever get the chance, read "Kampfkraft" by Martin van Creveld () it is a comparison study of the US Army of WW2 and the Wehrmacht, comissioned by the US Army in the 1980s. I think you will enjoy it.

 

[Driggsd]

I agree totaly.





You have not lost the debate, nor have I won it. As you stated - we are looking at the same thing from different angles, you from the Anglophile view and if one looks at it from that angle you are absolutly correct; and I from a 'German' viewpoint.
All I can say is that I hope that the Doctrine paths of HOI2 are preserved in HOI3.
P.S. If you ever get the chance, read "Kampfkraft" by Martin van Creveld () it is a comparison study of the US Army of WW2 and the Wehrmacht, comissioned by the US Army in the 1980s. I think you will enjoy it.

Thank you i will look it up. You may want to check out "Little balack Book of WW2" By Alfred Nofi. It is a collection of declasified and stastical analys of the Second WW as well as little know facts. Such as that the US in the Italien campange lost(out of action) more men to VD from Italien Prostitues then German Bullets. It is a good and easy read.

 

[Wulf145]

Thank you i will look it up. You may want to check out "Little balack Book of WW2" By Alfred Nofi. It is a collection of declasified and stastical analys of the Second WW as well as little know facts. Such as that the US in the Italien campange lost(out of action) more men to VD from Italien Prostitues then German Bullets. It is a good and easy read.

Will see if I can get it here.
I think that VD could be construded as a B-Weapon, and if we ask for that they would close this discussion , but its an interesting fact.

 

[unmerged(42723)]

Agree with the OP. It should be possible in many cases, also for example to turn vanilla inf into full mot or mech inf. Or the chance to reorganize former cavalry into something else without waiting for the arm cav/air cav later (these could still be offered as options though). I could live with a certain loss of xp though in some cases.

 

[kender79]

coming back to the begining (as BeBro),

I think It would be great to have :

- an Upgrade system
to improve a unit in its type class (INF, CAV, ...) as in HOI2.

- an Evolution system
to change the type class of a unit. I would be limited by a "Service" category ("Cavalry/Armoured", Infantry, Fighter/Interceptor, Bomber).

Germany had unit growing ( GD from inf to mot to Panzer to PZGren) and reduce à the end of the war (they were not willing but ...)
France had Active DI becoming DIM (mot) in 30s.
US had NG becoming "Active" Unit
...

Losing XP is (or not) an impact of these evolution. Soldier don't loos XP during Reforming. They loose Organisation, capacity to "follow the move", knowing what is expected from their sub unit.

-> So a lost of 10 to 20 Xp could be a good thing.
[better system must be found]
[Never mind the manpower complement not veteran that integrat the unit]

- an Formation system
All army had "Depot" unit back home to manage reserves for units.
Using this system, an army with lots of elites units (big Xp) could improve the training (Xp) of a part of their reinforcement.
This system helped Napoleon in this time and the German Army in WWII. This system broke when the armies took too much damage (Spain and Russia for N, East Front for Germany). Recruit going to the front without good training with veteran becoming less efficient and dying more quickly.

 

[Wulf145]

I am glad that I am not the only one who wants an "Evolution" option at a divisional level.

ad. "Depot" units: All armies had them at the time but there were huge differences in the implementation. In the Wehrmacht a squad/company stayed togeather from Basic training to the Front line, the US Army had a different aproach in that the recruits were not kept togeather but went from depot to depot untill they were attached to a unit.

ad. XP loss: If the XP gain in HOI3 for Land units is the rate as in HOI2 then a loss of 10 or 20 is unacceptable since it takes a lot of battles to even get 10 XP points. Maybe the Battles should be longer (like in TRP) or the rate at which experience is gained should be increased.

 

[unmerged(71941)]

totally agree about upgrading divisions. And downgrading too; remove all combat support assets and call it a garrison. Add an armoured brigade, put the log on wheels and call it a mech unit. As we all know armoured units still have a complement of infantry, artillery etc but as a formation they are all more mobile so as to be able to fight together. So in reality to re role a division would involve spliting and splicing (if you see what I mean) rather than total retraining of individuals to do different roles.

It leads me more and more to think that the equipment and manpower elements should be split. I've put this in another thread but basically soldiers are trained and go into a trained pool (xp dependant on the time spent training them) and equipment is made in factories. The two are joinedto make a division. I know this ignores corps training but I wouldn't want to have to worry about that level of detail.

A generic loss of experience on allocation to a division could represent the cost of changing your mind too many times

 

[unmerged(58541)]

Sounds like a cool idea to be able to upgrade your infantry to motorized and then Mechanized and it actually isn`t that hard to achieve nor will it unbalance the game anyway.

 

[Lazy_Boy]

Yeah upgrading basic infantry is a must. It makes no sense for the most experienced and trained units to be stuck as crappy infantry.

Imo there needs to be a whole new unit creation process to begin with. The generic production que is just stupid. Every drafted man should be able to be formed on the map as nearly unarmed infantry units. They can act as garrisons or reinforcement pools. You equip and train from there based off your available IC and whatnot.

 

[Wulf145]

Yeah upgrading basic infantry is a must. It makes no sense for the most experienced and trained units to be stuck as crappy infantry.

Imo there needs to be a whole new unit creation process to begin with. The generic production que is just stupid. Every drafted man should be able to be formed on the map as nearly unarmed infantry units. They can act as garrisons or reinforcement pools. You equip and train from there based off your available IC and whatnot.

Due to the fact that each of the major players had unique reinforcement systems I am not sure that the 'one-size-fits-all' aproach on the map would be a gain. I am quite happy with the way this has been solved in HOI2, via Doctrines.

As for all units starting our as a Garison or Infantry unit, I like to play ahistoricaly, but that is extreemly removed to how Armys were organised in the 30s and 40s.