Matrix Games Forums

A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold Ask Buzz Aldrin!Pike & Shot gets Release Date and Twitch Session!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Organizational Doctrine?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> The War Room >> Organizational Doctrine? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Organizational Doctrine? - 6/12/2012 1:14:47 PM   
Primarch

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 11/13/2005
Status: offline
Have you guys worked out a good unit organization doctrine anywhere? Just curious if anyone has something like that researched for this game?


Thanks,


Clay
Post #: 1
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/12/2012 2:27:21 PM   
Josh

 

Posts: 2371
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Leeuwarden, Netherlands
Status: offline
Not quite sure what you mean with "organization doctrine" but here's how I play.
My organization is all centred around the all important HQ's.
The rules of the game decide how my organization looks like, that is your army is organized around a HQ. The efficiency of an HQ is say 10-12 hexes wide, further than that and the HQ bonus diminishes to zero. Up to three hexes away from an HQ its subordinate unit gets 100% HQ bonus, so 3 + 3 plus the one hex the HQ is on makes 7 hexes, add some more hexes with decreasing HQ bonus and you get a 10-12 hexes broad frontline. That's the largest part an HQ can cover efficiently.
So from there you build your groups, the more resistance you meet or expect to meet the more troops you give to a certain HQ. Here comes my second thumb of rule, always make units uo to 50 points strong, so two of these units fit in a hex without overstacking penalties. You could make one unit 100 points strong but that ain't flexible enough IMHO. Now when you're facing very little resistance your HQ may be consisting of say 50 Staff, sufficient to give 100% bonus to a dozen units in a 10-12 hexes radius. Some more resistance and your HQ already needs 100 Staff to cover the 100% HQ bonus to a bigger force (say a few Inf units, some Armour and Art units).
Now when you're facing heavy resistance and you need to take on strongpoints and cities, your HQ can exceed 200-250 Staff (to get that 100% HQ bonus). Your army up for that considerable task looks like this, every hex in your 10-12 hexes frontline  has one or two units (each 50 points or more), some fast units are also present for encircling, Arty units (very important) are behind the front line, and so is Flak.   
The HQ size is not set in stone, but try to stick with a certain number because HQ experience is all. An very experienced (70 and higher) HQ lvl II can blast through everything! 
Sometimes I create a small HQ for very fast armoured units, they are so fast that they can outrun their HQ easily. Yes they can be cut off, but because their HQ is still around it gives them some time before their supplies are gone. A cut off unit (red dot on counter) loses very fast its fighting power, so its HQ around gives it 2-3 more turns before things get hairy.
So that's my "organization". Very organized, unlike my desk...

(in reply to Primarch)
Post #: 2
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/12/2012 3:34:04 PM   
Primarch

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 11/13/2005
Status: offline
Basically I meant unit organization. So a HQ, 3 Infantry chits, 2 Armor, 1 Arty, or...one chit has 40 Rangers, 10 MGs, 2 ATGs, 3 Mortars, whatever those mixes are. Things like that. Thank you for your information though, some good stuff in there as well.


Clay

(in reply to Josh)
Post #: 3
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/12/2012 8:21:39 PM   
Jeffrey H.


Posts: 2908
Joined: 4/13/2007
From: San Diego, Ca.
Status: offline
Spinger did some statistical testing a year ago, you can see his post on this main page down towards the bottom.

I don't really do a good job of mixing up the units with SFT's I tend dowards single SFT units and just overload them. It's way too tedious to manage production of all the various SFT's.





_____________________________

History began July 4th, 1776. Anything before that was a mistake.

Ron Swanson

(in reply to Primarch)
Post #: 4
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/13/2012 12:39:33 PM   
Josh

 

Posts: 2371
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Leeuwarden, Netherlands
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Primarch

Basically I meant unit organization. So a HQ, 3 Infantry chits, 2 Armor, 1 Arty, or...one chit has 40 Rangers, 10 MGs, 2 ATGs, 3 Mortars, whatever those mixes are. Things like that. Thank you for your information though, some good stuff in there as well.


Clay


Ah I see. Well I create units the same way I create my armygroups; they follow the "rules" of the game, that is Inf for rugged terrain and forests, Armour for the open country, and no unit bigger than 100 points to avoid overstacking penalties. Sort of like in real life I would say, so it makes sense. Inf in the open without AT/Armour protection is dead meat against enemy Armour. Armour in hills and forests has a tough time against troops with AT capability.
One rule of the game, made to avoid killerunits, is overstacking rules. More than 100 points gets you an overstacking penalty, so more than 100 = bad, less = good, but not always :-)
So you could make an Inf unit 100 strong (= 100 inf as inf counts as 1 point, a tank counts as 10 I think). But in order to have some "flexibility" on the frontline I make my units 50 points strong, so 2 of them fit in a hex without overstacking penalties. So 6 can occupy 3 hexes, enough to make a succesful encirclement *and* do a subsequent attack without overstacking penalties and at the same time (when attacking from all six hexes surrounding the one enemy hex) giving you the most attack bonus (6 hexes attack gives you 200% now, used to be 300%) Note that if you include an unit from another HQ in that attack that bonus decreases.
So in my games it's 50 per unit. Then on to what is exactly in it.
30-40 Inf in an Inf unit, plus some Mg's, mortars, 1-2AT guns, sometimes some Inf guns. Up to 50 points, usually a few horses as well. Later on I add faster armoured transport.
Armoured units; 2-3 medium tanks, 1-2 light tanks, and 10 Inf as tankriders (the act as a shield soaking up hits for the tanks) Again up to 50 points, so 2 armoured units fit in a hex without overstacking penalties.
Armoured recon, my most expensive ones and they only come into play late in the game; some armoured cars, light tanks ( they move faster than heavier tanks... great for encirclements) and some Inf maybe even some AT guns when you unexpectedly meet heavy armour.
Heavy tank units, 2-3 heavies, maybe some tankhunters added, intended only for tankhunting.... but boy are they expensive. They guzzle up oil and supplies and cost a fortune to make.
Artillery; about 5 per unit plus transport. I never add more to an already existing tube unit because it decreases their all important Experience. A highly experienced Arty unit (80 or more) lvl II-III really is a Inf killer.
Flak units; about 10 per unit plus tansport, always behind the lines although the 88 is a tankkiller as well.

We have been talking about "unit templates". Say you play the game and you know how you would your units to look like. So you create a "standard Inf unit", click on "make template". That way you can create multiple units that are exactly the same without all the clicking. This hasn't been implemented in the game ... yet. Victor has been quite busy with DC East which is about to be released. So maybe in a future patch who knows, me I don't mind some micro-managing.

(in reply to Primarch)
Post #: 5
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/13/2012 3:47:08 PM   
Primarch

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 11/13/2005
Status: offline
That template option would be AWESOME! Would love to have that option in the game, looking forward to it. I am very much in learning mode right now, so every little bit helps.

thanks,


Clay

(in reply to Josh)
Post #: 6
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/15/2012 3:00:38 PM   
Madlok


Posts: 201
Joined: 9/13/2008
From: Upper Silesia, Poland
Status: online
Here are my rules http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2888927

(in reply to Primarch)
Post #: 7
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/25/2012 1:35:25 AM   
Veni

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 6/22/2011
From: Kabul
Status: offline
Great discussion!

I primarily play random games with one-city starts, and here's my 'Organizational Doctrine' which I've developed (or I should say has evolved, based on basic production and transport values).

First, I define my basic echelons: 1 Battalion (BN) consists of 10xInfantry, 1xArtillery piece, or 1xArmored vehicle; 1 Regiment (Rgt) = 2xBN; 1 Brigade (Bde) = 1xRgt + 1xBN (or 3xBN if you prefer); and then 1 Division (Div) = 2xRgt.

My basic manuever unit is the Div, although operationally this may be supported by an additional BN or Rgt.
Some typical Div.s for me:
- Basic Inf Div: 2xInf Rgt (36xRif, 4xMor [usually plussed with a Support Rgt of 1xAT, 1xInfGun, 2xHorse]); this may be 'upgraded' with 2-3 Truck/Halftrack to make a Motorized/Mechanized Div
- Defensive Inf Div: 2xInf Rgt (32xSMG, 8xMG [usually supported with 2xAT]); used for holding fixed positions (I really dislike using MGs on the attack)
- Armor Div: this varies from straight up 2xArm Rgt (4xTank, 20Inf), to (what I find most effective) 1xArm Rgt, 1xMechInf Rgt, 1xRecon BN (2xTank, 1xHalftrack, 1xArmCar, 18-33xRif, 2xMor [& maybe AA])
- Artillery Div: 2xArt Rgt (4xArt, 4xHorse)
- Engineer Div: 2x Eng Rgt (40xEng, 2xTruck); used for strategic development needs

Above the Div level, the next echelon is the Army, which is the HQ filled with 50 staff (I tend to shoduce a pritload at once ahead of time so as to deploy with as high experience as possible). This of course abstracts the Corps echelon, which is not necesary since I use my Army as an integrated unit (not to mention the PP Cost!). Each Army usually consists of 4 mainline units, plus support units. Thus my 'classic' Army looks like this (which incidentally puts the staff level at just over 100%):
4xInf Div (per above)
1xRec Bde (3xArm Car, 15xRif)
1xArt Div (per above)
1xEng Rgt (20xEng, 2xHorse)

For open terrain or as a mobile reserve, a Tank Army looks like this:
1-3xArm Div (per above)
0-2xMechInf Div (per above)
1xRec Bde (per above)
1xArt Div (per above, but sans horse and 2xTruck)

Lateral between the Army and the 'Supreme Command' HQ, I have various strategic assets (e.g. air/naval commands, Eng Div.s, mobile reserves, Heavy Artillery Div.s). I do sometimes like to create an intermediate 'Army Group' echelon, which allows for streamlining of supply and more local reserves.

AND, as if I haven't geeked out on this enough already , I also use a naming convention. Thus my 'classic' Army looks like this:
1. Armee
101. Inf Div
201. Inf Div
301. Inf Div
401. Inf Div
501. AK Bde ('AK' = Aufklaerung)
601. Art Div
701. Pio Rgt

OR, a Tank Army might look like this (adjust for Staff):
12. PzArmee
112. PZ Div
212. PZ Div
312. PG Div
412. PG Div
512. AK Bde
612. Art Div
712. Pio Rgt

So that, in short (?), is my 'Organizational Doctrine'. As a general observation, the SFT costs tend to lend a production based on 4's both within the Div and having 4 mainline manuever units. This wasn't the case in the original AT. Thus my TOE evolved towards the above based on my gameplay, allowing for streamlined unit formation as well as tactical flexibility. Do I perhaps geek out on this too much? YES. But I frickin love this game!!

(in reply to Madlok)
Post #: 8
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/25/2012 10:08:40 AM   
Josh

 

Posts: 2371
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Leeuwarden, Netherlands
Status: offline
Veni, just a quick question about your "basic Inf Div." and "defensive Inf Div.". You use SMG's for a defensive role, but it is my understanding that both Rifles and SMG's have the same defensive value, only SMG's have a better attack value in close combat situations such as cities, hills, forests. So for a defensive unit it doesn't matter whether it's Rifles or SMG's. .... at least that was my understanding, don't have the game running now so I can't check the numbers.
You're right about attacking with MG's... they die very fast when attacking, guess they must be running ahead of the assault instead of giving them covering fire LOL. It's been discussed before but never changed. Still MG's are a must on defense.

(in reply to Veni)
Post #: 9
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/26/2012 2:56:31 PM   
Veni

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 6/22/2011
From: Kabul
Status: offline
Josh, you're right about their similarities. If I remember right, the difference with SMGs is a bonus (15%?) on both attack and defense in close combat (forests, cities, forts), but the same penalty on attack and defense in open terrain (plains, hills, mountains). I could be wrong, I'll look it up when I have a chance.
There are two reasons why I separate Rif & SMG. First, I use SMGs for dedicated tasks on either attack or defense to use the bonus, and avoid the penalty. I also sometimes create 'Storm' div.s of 36xSMG, 4xMor, 2xInfGun, 2xHorse for assaulting hard positions. Rif on the other hand are multi-purpose. The second is simply one of expediency. I find it awkward trying to fill a counter with both types, especially at the beginning of the game. It's just easier and quicker for me to stand up a solid 36xRif, 4xMor Div than mixed formations.
Agree on the MGs! Same principles here for me: it's more efficient not spending time throwing MGs into units which both attack & defend, and better to use them only at what they're really good for.
Hope I answered your question!

(in reply to Josh)
Post #: 10
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/26/2012 4:44:30 PM   
Josh

 

Posts: 2371
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Leeuwarden, Netherlands
Status: offline
Yeah I play the same way, usually dedicated units. Rifles at the start ofcourse as they are the cheapest, later on when you're facing strongpoints I create dedicated attack-units such as you describe; SMG's, mortars, Inf guns, sometimes horses added sometimes halftracks. Problem is when facing such a strongpoint is that you need at least 2-3 "Storm" units to get numerical superiority and multiple-hex attack bonus. And to create such a force takes some dedicated production in your cities. Once they're created though they're my Marines so to speak, treat them with care and they become a powerful force.

(in reply to Veni)
Post #: 11
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/26/2012 8:34:37 PM   
Jeffrey H.


Posts: 2908
Joined: 4/13/2007
From: San Diego, Ca.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veni

Great discussion!

I primarily play random games with one-city starts, and here's my 'Organizational Doctrine' which I've developed (or I should say has evolved, based on basic production and transport values).

First, I define my basic echelons: 1 Battalion (BN) consists of 10xInfantry, 1xArtillery piece, or 1xArmored vehicle; 1 Regiment (Rgt) = 2xBN; 1 Brigade (Bde) = 1xRgt + 1xBN (or 3xBN if you prefer); and then 1 Division (Div) = 2xRgt.

My basic manuever unit is the Div, although operationally this may be supported by an additional BN or Rgt.
Some typical Div.s for me:
- Basic Inf Div: 2xInf Rgt (36xRif, 4xMor [usually plussed with a Support Rgt of 1xAT, 1xInfGun, 2xHorse]); this may be 'upgraded' with 2-3 Truck/Halftrack to make a Motorized/Mechanized Div
- Defensive Inf Div: 2xInf Rgt (32xSMG, 8xMG [usually supported with 2xAT]); used for holding fixed positions (I really dislike using MGs on the attack)
- Armor Div: this varies from straight up 2xArm Rgt (4xTank, 20Inf), to (what I find most effective) 1xArm Rgt, 1xMechInf Rgt, 1xRecon BN (2xTank, 1xHalftrack, 1xArmCar, 18-33xRif, 2xMor [& maybe AA])
- Artillery Div: 2xArt Rgt (4xArt, 4xHorse)
- Engineer Div: 2x Eng Rgt (40xEng, 2xTruck); used for strategic development needs

Above the Div level, the next echelon is the Army, which is the HQ filled with 50 staff (I tend to shoduce a pritload at once ahead of time so as to deploy with as high experience as possible). This of course abstracts the Corps echelon, which is not necesary since I use my Army as an integrated unit (not to mention the PP Cost!). Each Army usually consists of 4 mainline units, plus support units. Thus my 'classic' Army looks like this (which incidentally puts the staff level at just over 100%):
4xInf Div (per above)
1xRec Bde (3xArm Car, 15xRif)
1xArt Div (per above)
1xEng Rgt (20xEng, 2xHorse)

For open terrain or as a mobile reserve, a Tank Army looks like this:
1-3xArm Div (per above)
0-2xMechInf Div (per above)
1xRec Bde (per above)
1xArt Div (per above, but sans horse and 2xTruck)

Lateral between the Army and the 'Supreme Command' HQ, I have various strategic assets (e.g. air/naval commands, Eng Div.s, mobile reserves, Heavy Artillery Div.s). I do sometimes like to create an intermediate 'Army Group' echelon, which allows for streamlining of supply and more local reserves.

AND, as if I haven't geeked out on this enough already , I also use a naming convention. Thus my 'classic' Army looks like this:
1. Armee
101. Inf Div
201. Inf Div
301. Inf Div
401. Inf Div
501. AK Bde ('AK' = Aufklaerung)
601. Art Div
701. Pio Rgt

OR, a Tank Army might look like this (adjust for Staff):
12. PzArmee
112. PZ Div
212. PZ Div
312. PG Div
412. PG Div
512. AK Bde
612. Art Div
712. Pio Rgt

So that, in short (?), is my 'Organizational Doctrine'. As a general observation, the SFT costs tend to lend a production based on 4's both within the Div and having 4 mainline manuever units. This wasn't the case in the original AT. Thus my TOE evolved towards the above based on my gameplay, allowing for streamlined unit formation as well as tactical flexibility. Do I perhaps geek out on this too much? YES. But I frickin love this game!!


Do you actually produce all that stuff ? Amazing. Nice work, it must really feel bad when they get attacked.

It could be a neat option to the random games to have such a structure of starting units available. Then not have any production other than supply. See who wins.



_____________________________

History began July 4th, 1776. Anything before that was a mistake.

Ron Swanson

(in reply to Veni)
Post #: 12
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/26/2012 8:35:26 PM   
Veni

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 6/22/2011
From: Kabul
Status: offline
Spot on! The first part of my games usually involve the rapid creation of the 'classic' or tank armies (as fuel/ore allows) described above to stabilize lines and blunt the initial AI attacks. From there specialized task-organized formations for point defense, assaulting positions (like your Marines), exploitation, etc. ..
Also, I do like to edit games beforehand to give the AI airfields & fortifications since it does not construct these itself in-game.

(in reply to Josh)
Post #: 13
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/26/2012 10:10:54 PM   
Veni

 

Posts: 44
Joined: 6/22/2011
From: Kabul
Status: offline
Jeffrey, I do, although not at once! My initial builds go something like this:
1. 12xArmCar, 40xEng
2. PP, Sup, 2xTruck (to meet up w/ Eng.s
3. 100xStaff
4. 100xStaff
From there, 4xRecon Bdes push out, Eng.s develop, and Capitol pumps out PP/supply (& another Eng Div) until I determine the first armies need to be fielded. The HQs for up to 4 armies are created, Recon Bdes & (split) Eng Rgt.s meet up as possible, & Capitol rotates production 80xRif, 8xMor, 4xAT, 4xInfGun between them, then 80xRif, 8xMor, 4xArt. The liberated cities' production covers Sup, Horse & PP. It's not much, but sufficient to provide defense when entrenched in key terrain. The only issues at this point are lack of air power & developing armor. I can't say I feel too bad when they take losses: expectation management!
I should also mention my usual setting is 2 player medium map w/ 'wild land', reg AI, which means I have better defensive opportunities for these initial armies.

I agree about prefab units for random games. I mentioned it in another post some time ago, but never bothered with trying to tweak a ruleset. The only issue I see is individual users' preferences for predefined units...
Cheers!

(in reply to Veni)
Post #: 14
RE: Organizational Doctrine? - 6/27/2012 2:12:22 PM   
Josh

 

Posts: 2371
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Leeuwarden, Netherlands
Status: offline
Veni quote; "The only issue I see is individual users' preferences for predefined units..."

True, so it should be added as an option. And as I know Vic to be very good in details these 'predefined' units should be (more or less) as in real life.
So it could be an optional rule to make use of 'predefined units' such as existed at the time, where each side has it's own typical units, maybe even evolving thoughout the years. (that sound like a lot of work though)
It also could be an optional rule to make use of user defined templates, where the player decides how he wants his units to look like.  

Veni quote; "
Also, I do like to edit games beforehand to give the AI airfields & fortifications since it does not construct these itself in-game"

Yeah you're right about that too, unfortunately. I'd pay twice as much if the AI would be ... somewhat better, more flexible I mean, make it use paradrops, strongpoints and more airfields. Maybe one day we'll see the AI do a recon and *then* hit your rear area   (or how do you call that in english...) with 100 paratroopers.

(in reply to Veni)
Post #: 15
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> The War Room >> Organizational Doctrine? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.093