Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy Mega Pack releases on SteamDeal of the Week Da Vinci's Art of WarCivil War II Patch 1.4 public BetaHappy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Community Modding Discussion

 
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] >> Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Community Modding Discussion Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/21/2012 6:44:20 PM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
Hey Phil, I have renamed the Soviet formations and want to make this availablle to you so as to avoid extra work. If you like I can email you the files so you can continue with the OOB work.

Also, I have a few further ideas about the german Panzer formations:

It seems the standard practise, in theroy, was to have 2 x leichte (light) Company, and 1 x mittlere (medium) company in each Pz Bn so we could use this as a starting point and add seperate Bn for those PzD that had more than 1.

This would give the PzDv some needed flexability with their panzer regiments as now all tanks are in one counter usually with the armoured infantry too. This is tactially inferior to the Soviets and ahistorical.

Troy

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 121
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/21/2012 7:23:28 PM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
DCCB proposed MODEL for building blocks for Panzer Divisions. These take into account the Stab or HQ tanks that were not dummy. Bear with me as we are limited to groups of 5 tanks so there may be a bit of fudge...

German Panzer Bn. 'a'
3 x PzIIF (15 tanks)
7 xPzIIIJ (35 tanks)
3 x PzIVG (15 tanks) should be 12 PzIVg and 1 PZIVf @ HQ

German Panzer Bn. 'b'
3 x PzIIF (15 tanks)
7 xPzIIIJ (35 tanks)
2 x PzIVF (10 tanks) Should be 10x PzIVf1 and 1 xPZIVf @ HQ

German Panzer Bn. 'c'
3 x PzIIF (15 tanks)
7 xPzIIIH (35 tanks) generally 1/3 of the Panzer III were the short (kurtz) 5cm Kw.K.38
2 x PzIVF (10 tanks)

The K.St.N for the mittlere panzer kompanie shows that it should be 3 x platoons, 1 x light platoon and hq for a total of 14 x PzIV and 5 PzII BUT this was forbidden by a further order and was limited to 2 x platoons and the light so should we keep the mittlere @ 15 or 10 pzIVs? Having the one Pz BN 'a' with 15 allows for the absorbtion of these extra vehicles.

Your thoughts?

Troy

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 122
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/21/2012 10:27:24 PM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
Hey All.

I have worked over the German Panzer Divisions and created the models needed to change all of them. This has resulted in 6 or so unique UNIT types (read battalions). The basic building block is the Panzer Bn - not regiment. As well, the subdivisions are included in this mod. Anyone that wants them let me know and I will put them up on the Ritterkrieg mod thread so we do not have to redo everything.

Troy






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 123
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 2:02:47 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg
Hey Phil, I have renamed the Soviet formations and want to make this availablle to you so as to avoid extra work. If you like I can email you the files so you can continue with the OOB work.


That would be great ... email is at the bottom of my sig, I think, or ...

aspqrz@tpg.com.au

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg
Also, I have a few further ideas about the german Panzer formations:

It seems the standard practise, in theroy, was to have 2 x leichte (light) Company, and 1 x mittlere (medium) company in each Pz Bn so we could use this as a starting point and add seperate Bn for those PzD that had more than 1.

This would give the PzDv some needed flexability with their panzer regiments as now all tanks are in one counter usually with the armoured infantry too. This is tactially inferior to the Soviets and ahistorical.


From my German TO&E thread ... organisation of an Army Panzer Division ...

=====
1st PzGr Regiment: 1800 Infantry, 200 x Engineers, 250 Trucks, 120 x Halftrack, 15x 50mm AT, 10 x 37mm AT, 10 x 75mm LeIG, 5 x 150mm SIG33, 5 x Marder II, 5 x 20mm AA

2nd PzGr Regiment: 1800 Infantry, 200 x Engineers, 350 Trucks, 60 x Halftrack, 15x 50mm AT, 10 x 37mm AT, 10 x 75mm LeIG, 5 x 150mm SIG33, 5 x Marder II, 5 x 20mm AA

3rd Panzer Regiment: 65 x Pz II, 100 x Pz III, 50 x Pz IV

4th Artillery Regiment: 200 2nd Rate Infantry, 25 x 105mm LeFH, 5 x 100mm K8, 10 x 150mm SFH, 150 Trucks
=====

Note: The above is based on a 3 Battalion Armoured Regiment with each Battalion having 2 Light and 1 Medium Tank Coy, which is the standard TO&E, as you say.

I am not sure about where to put the Infantry in Halftracks ... there's one Battalion of it in one of the two PzGr Regiments, and one Company in the other ... maybe it should be placed in the Panzer Regiment?

Which is what I have (for the moment) done with the SS Motorised Divisions (see below) which would more properly reflect its deployment in actuality, wither that or have a 3rd PzGr "Regiment" with the Halftrack Infantry (and, probably the Engineers, which I have really just subsumed as "Infantry" in the PzGr Regiments) ... giving a 5 element Division?

Note: The SS Panzer Regiment (a one Battalion Regiment, as per 19th Pz, but different mix of tanks), as I have currently modded it, has the Halftrack Infantry element (which was a separate Battalion in the SS Divisions, the regular PzGr Regiments were, according to TO&E, only Motorised at this stage) and the additional StuG Battalion that was with the Liebstandarte (but not the Wiking).




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by aspqrz -- 8/22/2012 2:08:18 AM >


_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 124
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 2:16:28 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg

DCCB proposed MODEL for building blocks for Panzer Divisions. These take into account the Stab or HQ tanks that were not dummy. Bear with me as we are limited to groups of 5 tanks so there may be a bit of fudge...

German Panzer Bn. 'a'
3 x PzIIF (15 tanks)
7 xPzIIIJ (35 tanks)
3 x PzIVG (15 tanks) should be 12 PzIVg and 1 PZIVf @ HQ

German Panzer Bn. 'b'
3 x PzIIF (15 tanks)
7 xPzIIIJ (35 tanks)
2 x PzIVF (10 tanks) Should be 10x PzIVf1 and 1 xPZIVf @ HQ

German Panzer Bn. 'c'
3 x PzIIF (15 tanks)
7 xPzIIIH (35 tanks) generally 1/3 of the Panzer III were the short (kurtz) 5cm Kw.K.38
2 x PzIVF (10 tanks)

The K.St.N for the mittlere panzer kompanie shows that it should be 3 x platoons, 1 x light platoon and hq for a total of 14 x PzIV and 5 PzII BUT this was forbidden by a further order and was limited to 2 x platoons and the light so should we keep the mittlere @ 15 or 10 pzIVs? Having the one Pz BN 'a' with 15 allows for the absorbtion of these extra vehicles.

Your thoughts?

Troy


I only worked out the Regimental totals ... 65 x Pz II, 100 x Pz III, 50 x Pz IV

Compared to your ... 45 x Pz II,105 x Pz III, 35 x Pz IV

So, there is a discrepancy with the Pz II (+/- 20) and Pz IV (+/- 15) numbers.

Did you count the Pz IIs that were usually in the HQ elements of the Battalion and Companies? ... not all were unarmed command tanks.

I'll double check the sources I have used.

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 125
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 2:45:39 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
According to the TO&E for a three Battalion Army Panzer Regiment (23rd Panzer Division) ...

RHQ: 5 x Pz II (x 1) = 5
BHQ: 2 x Pz II (x 3) = 6
CHQ (Lt): 5 x Pz II, 2 x Pz III (x 6) = 30 x Pz II, 12 x Pz III
CHQ (Mdm): 5 x Pz II, 2 x Pz IV (x 3) = 15 x Pz II, 6 x Pz IV
Lt Tank Platoon: 5 x Pz III (x 18) = 90 x Pz III
Mdm Tank Platoon: 4 x Pz IV (x 9) = 36 x Pz IV

Total = 56 x Pz II, 102 x Pz III, 42 Pz IV

OK, so it seems that my arithmetic must have been piss poor (History teacher, see, not Maths teacher ) ... still, there are discrepancies ...

56 x Pz II (mine) vs 45 (yours) ... +/- 11
102 x Pz III (mine) vs 105 (yours) ... no problems
42 x Pz IV (mine) vs 35 (yours) ... +/- 7

Closer, but still not enough.

My data is Nafziger, out of Niehorster (Handbook of German Military Forces only has 1944 org).

So, based on the assumption that they were all understrength by mid 42 anyway, perhaps go with your figures, assuming you have more reliable sources than mine?

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 126
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 2:57:23 AM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
Lots of good stuff.

In reality, there was only 1 bn Shutzen in 251 per regiment plus perhaps 1 komp in the second regiment but sometimes as little as 1 komp! I have all the figures for each Pz div.

As you say, the PzGds in 251s would normally be included with the tanks in any attack so it seems logical to include them with the tanks BUT when we have more than one tank counter it may be difficult to determine which one (as in a 3 Bn Pz regiment).

Pehaps, we could field the following for a PZ Div MODEL:

1 counter each:

I Pz Bn
II Pz Bn
III Pz Bn
I Grenadier Regt (include all you have listed)
II Grenadier Regt (include all you have listed)
ART Regiment (include all you have listed)

Many PzDv would only have 1-2 tanks Bn so it wont be a counter fest.

Troy


(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 127
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 3:24:09 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg

Lots of good stuff.

In reality, there was only 1 bn Shutzen in 251 per regiment plus perhaps 1 komp in the second regiment but sometimes as little as 1 komp! I have all the figures for each Pz div.

As you say, the PzGds in 251s would normally be included with the tanks in any attack so it seems logical to include them with the tanks BUT when we have more than one tank counter it may be difficult to determine which one (as in a 3 Bn Pz regiment).

Pehaps, we could field the following for a PZ Div MODEL:

1 counter each:

I Pz Bn
II Pz Bn
III Pz Bn
I Grenadier Regt (include all you have listed)
II Grenadier Regt (include all you have listed)
ART Regiment (include all you have listed)

Many PzDv would only have 1-2 tanks Bn so it wont be a counter fest.


According to the Nafziger TO&Es I am pretty sure that all the ones in DCCB were supposed to have 1 Battalion in the 1st Regt and 1 Company in the 2nd (of course, as we have both noted, TO&Es are theoretical once any unit has been in the field for longer than, oh, a millisecond? ).

I can double check ... but if you have more detailed data, fine, we can go with that ... but did it change during the course of the campaign?

As for fielding 3 x Panzer Battalion instead of a single Regiment of 3 x Battalion ... slippery slope, that. Then you'll have purists (me, to a degree), saying, "Well, if we're modelling tanks at Battalion level, we should model ... infantry and artillery ... likewise!"

You could certainly make a case for having the Halftrack Infantry Battalion as a separate Battalion based on similar, if not identical, logic.

What we could do, since these are mods, after all, is mod both alternatives ... the 3 separate Panzer Battalion counter mod and the single Panzer Regiment (which may be of 1 or of 3 Battalions) mod, and allow the potential players to choose?

Really, its a marginal amount of additional work in the greater scheme of things.

(Of course, I'd still argue for the separate Halftrack Infantry Battalion as well )

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 128
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 3:37:49 AM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
missed the flurry of posts...As to the discrep..

I just dont want to creat formations that dont fit history. We have to be carefull that the Panzer Div dont become uberstrong in the game.

PANZER IV: As I said earlier, there was an order to ONLY have 2 zugs of 4 vehicles in the mittlere kp. (instead of 3 zugs of 4 plus the 2 HQ tanks for a total of 15) So thats 8 tks plus 2 in the CHQ (plus maybe 1 in the Staffel) which equals 10-11 per Bn.

IMO, this was to later allow the absorbtion of the 12 Panzer IVGs (filling in the las zug) sent to all panzer divisions in Case Blue.

No panzer Division had more than 32 PzIVs (24th panzer) of all types in July 1942 and most had less than 20.

PANZER II: In June-July, no Pz div had more than 32 (again the 24th - lucky them!) with most having between 10-20. The pionere zug was removed (3tanks) and I lack of vehicles led to the abandonment of the Leichte panzer zup in the Kompanie.

I know the extra Tank Bns would be an issue but not all div will get more than 1.

It does hamstring the German player when the Sov is fielding 50 tank brigades and the german has to work with 150 tank regiments. This is totally a-historical as the Germans enjoyed a much more flexible employment of their Panzer forces.


< Message edited by Ritterkrieg -- 8/22/2012 4:02:38 AM >

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 129
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 7:41:32 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg

missed the flurry of posts...As to the discrep..

I just dont want to creat formations that dont fit history. We have to be carefull that the Panzer Div dont become uberstrong in the game.

PANZER IV: As I said earlier, there was an order to ONLY have 2 zugs of 4 vehicles in the mittlere kp. (instead of 3 zugs of 4 plus the 2 HQ tanks for a total of 15) So thats 8 tks plus 2 in the CHQ (plus maybe 1 in the Staffel) which equals 10-11 per Bn.

IMO, this was to later allow the absorbtion of the 12 Panzer IVGs (filling in the las zug) sent to all panzer divisions in Case Blue.

No panzer Division had more than 32 PzIVs (24th panzer) of all types in July 1942 and most had less than 20.

PANZER II: In June-July, no Pz div had more than 32 (again the 24th - lucky them!) with most having between 10-20. The pionere zug was removed (3tanks) and I lack of vehicles led to the abandonment of the Leichte panzer zup in the Kompanie.

I know the extra Tank Bns would be an issue but not all div will get more than 1.

It does hamstring the German player when the Sov is fielding 50 tank brigades and the german has to work with 150 tank regiments. This is totally a-historical as the Germans enjoyed a much more flexible employment of their Panzer forces.



As I said, the problem of whether to mod the actual TO&E organisation/strength or the actual organisation/strength on the ground is probably insoluble ... I think the best is to have the MODEL based on the TO&E, regardless of what may have been the situation with the actual units in the field, and hand mod each Panzer/Panzergrenadier/Motorised Division/Regiment or whatever individually.

I tend to agree, to a degree, with modding the separate battalions ... but that creates its own problems. Unless you are suicidal, the tanks will operate with the infantry ... and, for those Divisions that have 3 Battalion Panzer Regiments (by official TO&E that is all of the Panzer Divisions in the game, except the 19th, which has only one), that presents an operational dilemma of sorts.

(Do you have hard data that the Pz Divisions other than the 19th Panzer actually only had one or two Battalion Panzer Regiments (I know you have different sources to what I am using)? Or is it that you are simply saying that they had the tank strength on hand of only 1 or 2 Battalions?)

3 Panzer Battalions and 2 PzGr Regiments in one attack (if not necessarily one stack)? Or split it 2/1 and 1/1? Or, if you are crazy wasting tanks, 3 Pz, 1 PzGr, 1 PzGr?

Operationally, I think you might find that having the Panzer Battalions + Halftrack Battalion (reinforced with the 1 Company from the 2nd PzGr Regiment and, possibly, the Engineers from the Engineer Battalion in an Assault role?) plus some of the SP guns (AA, IG, AT) from the PzGr Regiments moving, if not attacking, together ... using them to penetrate the gap the 2 x PzGr Regiments and the Artillery punch through the line would make more sense.\

(Mechanised Battalion/Kampfgruppe: 1000 Infantry, 120 Halftracks, 5 Marder II, 5 x SdKfz-138 Bison, 5 x SP 20mm AA, for example, reducing the PzGr Regiments appropriately)

YMMV, of course.

As for not having 3 Battalions in a 3 Battalion Regiment simply because the number of tanks historically available is low ... well, it never seemed to worry the Germans! They'd simply form a Kampfgruppe until things looked either a) better or b) so desperate that even splitting small numbers of tanks was the least bad option

Phil

< Message edited by aspqrz -- 8/22/2012 7:45:13 AM >


_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 130
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 4:45:22 PM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: aspqrz


As I said, the problem of whether to mod the actual TO&E organisation/strength or the actual organisation/strength on the ground is probably insoluble ... I think the best is to have the MODEL based on the TO&E, regardless of what may have been the situation with the actual units in the field, and hand mod each Panzer/Panzergrenadier/Motorised Division/Regiment or whatever individually.

I tend to agree, to a degree, with modding the separate battalions ... but that creates its own problems. Unless you are suicidal, the tanks will operate with the infantry ... and, for those Divisions that have 3 Battalion Panzer Regiments (by official TO&E that is all of the Panzer Divisions in the game, except the 19th, which has only one), that presents an operational dilemma of sorts.

(Do you have hard data that the Pz Divisions other than the 19th Panzer actually only had one or two Battalion Panzer Regiments (I know you have different sources to what I am using)? Or is it that you are simply saying that they had the tank strength on hand of only 1 or 2 Battalions?)

3 Panzer Battalions and 2 PzGr Regiments in one attack (if not necessarily one stack)? Or split it 2/1 and 1/1? Or, if you are crazy wasting tanks, 3 Pz, 1 PzGr, 1 PzGr?

Operationally, I think you might find that having the Panzer Battalions + Halftrack Battalion (reinforced with the 1 Company from the 2nd PzGr Regiment and, possibly, the Engineers from the Engineer Battalion in an Assault role?) plus some of the SP guns (AA, IG, AT) from the PzGr Regiments moving, if not attacking, together ... using them to penetrate the gap the 2 x PzGr Regiments and the Artillery punch through the line would make more sense.\

(Mechanised Battalion/Kampfgruppe: 1000 Infantry, 120 Halftracks, 5 Marder II, 5 x SdKfz-138 Bison, 5 x SP 20mm AA, for example, reducing the PzGr Regiments appropriately)

YMMV, of course.

As for not having 3 Battalions in a 3 Battalion Regiment simply because the number of tanks historically available is low ... well, it never seemed to worry the Germans! They'd simply form a Kampfgruppe until things looked either a) better or b) so desperate that even splitting small numbers of tanks was the least bad option

Phil


Hey Phil.

I ran into a graphic issue when I began to model the individual Bn in the Panzer Dv so we may have
to go to a regimental-sized Panzer unit. The spent shrowd causes issues with the Bn symbol on the top

As to the amount of panzer Bn in the regiments, I have the following very good sources:

Panzertruppen vol 1+2 : Jentz (highly recommended!)
Panzer Divisions: Osprey Battle Orders 32, 35, 38 : Battistelli. (also good books)
Armagedon in Stalingrad Trilogy: Glantz (an MASSIVE read!)

All back up the less that optimal Panzer situation with info regarding each panzer regiments amount of Bn. I think I will edit the regiments individually so as to have them correct for the start of the campaign (in structure, with the correct amount of Bn). I will allow the extra tanks needed to fill up the Bn and let the random strength thing take care of the rest. Its only 20 or so regiments and less than 10 Bn for the motorized dv.

We could add the Panzergrenadiers to the Pz regiment to keep the Infantry regiments mot only if you like. I will need the structure if you have it already (saves me the research!). We could keep the Stug/Panzerjagers with the infantry - no? Also the AA should be split between the different formations too?

Troy


(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 131
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 6:45:05 PM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
Hey Phil,

So far, the Panzer units I have involved in Case Blue or the later defensive battles are:

3rd PD w/3bn
4th PD w/1bn
6th PD w/2bn
7th PD w/2
9th PD w/3bn
11th PD w/3bn
13th PD w/3bn
14th PD w/3bn
16th PD w/3bn
17th PD w/1bn
19th PD w/1bn
22th PD w/2bn
23rd PD w/3bn
24th PD w/3bn
27th a shell with only about 2000 men in total!

Plus the mot and SS formations. I am not sure the LSSAH should be in the mix after August as it was withdrawn to France.

I will model these as regiments with the attached Pzgrenadiers and 251s if you think this is best.

Troy

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 132
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/22/2012 7:16:41 PM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
OK a test.

With the 3rd Panzer (6th Panzer Regiment)

Where:

MODEL is the set number in the Units tab.
REAL is the actual number in the real world
RANDOM is the result when you load the scenario

Pz II: MODEL=30 / REAL 25 / RANDOM=10
PzIIIh: MODEL=70 / REAL 66 / RANDOM=65
PzIIIj: MODEL=40 / REAL 40 / RANDOM=30
PzIVf: MODEL=25 / REAL 21 / RANDOM=50
PzIVg: MODEL=15 / REAL 12 / RANDOM=10

One thing, the random factor reduces always so we always need to round up to the next 5 when setting in the model. The random factor is too much of a reduction. Looking at a work around...

Troy


< Message edited by Ritterkrieg -- 8/22/2012 7:23:41 PM >

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 133
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 1:41:18 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg

Hey Phil,

So far, the Panzer units I have involved in Case Blue or the later defensive battles are:

3rd PD w/3bn
4th PD w/1bn
6th PD w/2bn
7th PD w/2
9th PD w/3bn
11th PD w/3bn
13th PD w/3bn
14th PD w/3bn
16th PD w/3bn
17th PD w/1bn
19th PD w/1bn
22th PD w/2bn
23rd PD w/3bn
24th PD w/3bn
27th a shell with only about 2000 men in total!

Plus the mot and SS formations. I am not sure the LSSAH should be in the mix after August as it was withdrawn to France.

I will model these as regiments with the attached Pzgrenadiers and 251s if you think this is best.


Good catch. I'd only been looking at the at start Panzer units, not the reinforcements.

I actually have no real problem with modelling them with Battalions, as an option, if a way can be worked around the technical issues of doing so.

I guess the only issue I have is a philosophical one ... if you model individual Panzer Battalions, well, as I've indicated, the way they'll be deployed will rarely be as three separate units for the 3 Battalion units ... and, really, it begs the question of why not 3 Artillery Battalions or all the constituent Infantry Battalions instead of a Regiment as well.

Having a Battalion level game would be quite different! But not necessarily worse, or better. Just different.

As for adding the actual Halftrack mounted infantry into the Panzer Regiment, it would, operationally, be more realistic, I think.

However, I have been thinking about it in light of my discussion about adding Motorcycles etc. to the game elsewhere.

If we add the Halftrack Infantry as Halftracks + Infantry and losses to the Regiment leave insufficient Halftracks for the surviving Infantry, well, it reduces the Regiment to Infantry movement status, which is obvious not what the Germans would have allowed to happen. However, since we really have no real control, except with the relatively blunt instrument of PRIORITY reinforcements, of how a unit is organised as the game plays we have to consider that.

I'm coming to think that the solution is one of the two following suggestions ...

* Give the Tanks a small Load rating, perhaps 0.5 (or 1 if the 0.5 rounds up automagically), which would minimise the problem, but probably not eliminate it.

* Create a Mechanised Infantry sftype which is basically a Halftrack with Infantry aspects ported on to it, representing a combination of both, with the Halftrack reinforcement type. Strictly speaking, this is problematic as the unit represents Vehicles = 5 but Infantry complement = 100, but, since the combination of the two would be the same anyway, it can, I think, be ignored. This would mean losses to Halftracks and Infantry in the Panzer unit would always be 1:1 and it would always retain its Tracked mobility, which is more realistic. The issue with reinforcements shouldn't be a big issue, I have come to realise, as the availability of the Halftrack reinforcements would always be the limiting factor ...

Of course, the *only* use of such Mechanised Infantry would be in the Panzer Regiments of Panzer/Panzergrenadier Divisions in DCCB.

So, yes, with the above things considered, it might be an idea to add the Halftrack infantry to the Panzer units of Pz/PzGr Divisions.

Phil



_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 134
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 1:47:33 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg
One thing, the random factor reduces always so we always need to round up to the next 5 when setting in the model. The random factor is too much of a reduction. Looking at a work around...


I'm almost thinking that a Vehicle/Gun = 2 ratio would be better, under the circumstances, than the existing Vehicle/Gun = 5 one.

Of course, all the relevant sftypes and the reinforcment schedule and reinforcement cards would have to be changed as well.

However, would this make the units proportionally more powerful, or does the game system use the x2 or x5 factor as a modifier.

(That is, if the value of a Pz II is, nominally, say, 10, is a 5x unit = 50 while a 2x unit = 20, or does the system treat both as = 50, which would be a "bad thing").

Certainly, a careful allowance for initial hand modding being affected by randomisation should be allowed for.

Of course, as I have noted somewhere else, the difference of 2 days combat on one of the Panzer divisions involved was on the order of 20 Mk IIIs lost! So, maybe, nudging the "historical" figures a little higher to allow for an averaging outcome?

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 135
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 1:57:58 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg
I ran into a graphic issue when I began to model the individual Bn in the Panzer Dv so we may have
to go to a regimental-sized Panzer unit. The spent shrowd causes issues with the Bn symbol on the top

As to the amount of panzer Bn in the regiments, I have the following very good sources:

Panzertruppen vol 1+2 : Jentz (highly recommended!)
Panzer Divisions: Osprey Battle Orders 32, 35, 38 : Battistelli. (also good books)
Armagedon in Stalingrad Trilogy: Glantz (an MASSIVE read!)


Books here in Oz are prohibitively expensive, so I don't always get everything that I'd like ... unless I get it through Amazon, which means I don't always get everything I should like, because I don't know it exists or how good it is ...

(Forex, the Glantz trilogy is available locally, at $80 a volume when first released (that was around US$80 at the time) ... Amazon is now $40 or less)

I used to get most of the Ospreys, but my regular bookshop that got them in, new, closed down and it's hard to keep track of all the releases

Still, I've checked out Amazon re Jentz, and will order both volumes eventually ... and probably the Ospreys right away. Glantz, too ... but, alas, I have lots of books that I have ordered over the years (including his "Kursk") from Amazon that I have on my reading list, way in excess of a couple of hundred

Even if I order now it will still be two weeks till they arrive ... Oz is the **** end of the universe, after all

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 136
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 2:31:07 AM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
I can send u a scan of the osprey stuff if u like.

Played around a lot today with reinforcements and Random factor issues and I am running into a few roadblocks. It seems that when the game wacks down the units in the beginning, it stays somewhat permanent.

Im beginning to think Pzgrenadiers in the Infantry regiments instead of the armor as this may create a nightmare when waiting to reinforce units as well as the reasons you mentioned.

Troy

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 137
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 3:28:51 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg

I can send u a scan of the osprey stuff if u like.

Played around a lot today with reinforcements and Random factor issues and I am running into a few roadblocks. It seems that when the game wacks down the units in the beginning, it stays somewhat permanent.

Im beginning to think Pzgrenadiers in the Infantry regiments instead of the armor as this may create a nightmare when waiting to reinforce units as well as the reasons you mentioned.

Troy


Hmm. I'm leaning more towards creating a Panzergrenadier sftype (i.e Halftrack + Infantry combined, with Halftracks as replacements), as this would model things effectively (and, given the small amounts of infantry involved, it shouldn't skew things).

I just ordered the middle Osprey and first Jentz an hour or so ago ... so, 10 working days, in theory and I'll have them ... the rest after next payday

Phil

< Message edited by aspqrz -- 8/23/2012 3:31:07 AM >


_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 138
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 12:30:26 PM   
High Krausen


Posts: 204
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: Montgomery, Alabama
Status: offline
Gentlemen, As I discussed with Ritterkrieg about a week ago, our fall term has just started and my free time (as well as editor savvy) is non-existent. I will, however, contribute my opinion (which you may freely disregard).

Anyhoo, I agree that the German panzers and motorized units need greater operational flexibility, and, in my mind, this could be achieved by breaking the PZ units into bns and adding in separate recon bns (either krad or AC). So the typical PZ div at this time would (IIRC) consist of 2x PZ bns, 2x Mot. Inf rights, an Arty right, and a recon bn. This sounds like the direction you're headed, so just adding in my 0.02

< Message edited by High Krausen -- 8/23/2012 12:32:16 PM >


_____________________________

Roll Tide

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 139
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 2:51:00 PM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
It seems as if it may not be possible to split the Armour Regiments into Battalions ... and, evidently, most units that had Recon elements were having them transformed to Jaeger Battalions (?) around this time.

The problem with this is that, from memory, a lot of the elements so converted were not necessarily motorised.

For example, the TO&E of German Jaeger and Mountain Divisions included a Bicycle Battalion; Motorised, Panzer and PanzerGrenadier Divisions included a Motorcycle Battalion and an Infantry Division has a Recon Battalion of 2 Motorcycle and 1 Bicycle Companies.

In effect, we'd need to have every German Division having a separate Recon Battalion of at least three different movement types.

Not impossible, mind, but is it worth the effort? I am not entirely sure that the results would warrant it, unless you want to go to Battalion level for every unit

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to High Krausen)
Post #: 140
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 5:54:37 PM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
One big issue too is the Game engine reinforcement and SFT types; any new SFT types will have to be written into the program if they want to see any reinforcement

I did some extended playtesting yesterday with disasterous results. Cards reinforce with the wrong units, high command uses enemy units for reinforcements and build up a bunch of luftwaffe staff...

I have re-edited the SFTs back to their original sequence and will have to re-think the inclusion of any new unit types!

Vic replied to a few questions and confirmed what I suspected, that the order of units in the SFT types is critical to their use by the engine in reinforcments and such. It is a big issue that is forcing me to rethink my work to this point. I really need someone who has experience in the editing of events and rulevars to help out here or we are pretty much limited to vanilla with a new dress...

After extensive editing and testing of graphic overlays and not being happy with the results, (due to shrowd overlay) and to recreate the tactical use of German Panzer Bn, I have decided to show the Panzer Bn as separate counters in the division (for Panzer Divs that have more than 1 Bn) with the III regimental symbol on top but as I, II and III (if needed) battalion symbol on the side.

Currently the Soviet player enjoys an a-historical edge in tactical flexibility over the German player as the German has to employ a smaller number of huge regimental-sized tank units.

Allowing Tank Bn for the German player gives the flexibility currently missing and allows historic use of the Panzer bn as separate units (as was the case historically) The Infantry/Artillery do not get Bn status as they were usually employed as regiments.

The panzer Bns can still be stacked together as a regiment and moved with the 'g' group move for those cautious commanders who want their uber stacks.

As a German player, you will gain the ability to drive into the rear and create havoc with the smaller Bns but still face the same issues that the historic commanders faced when their smaller precious panzers Bns got cut off.

As to the Panzer Grenadiers, I am seeing the issue with the tracked/motor/foot cropping up in playtesting quite a bit when included in the Panzer Bns... Your idea of a Panzergrenadier SFT type (using the SFT slot for 251 to avoid any issues with the game engine!) is a good work around if we want them included in the Panzer Bn but if left in the Infantry regiments, the issue resolves itself.

Troy

< Message edited by Ritterkrieg -- 8/23/2012 8:32:03 PM >

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 141
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 10:23:00 PM   
High Krausen


Posts: 204
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: Montgomery, Alabama
Status: offline
I agree that modeling all recon/fusilier bns would be burdensome and not practical. I was thinking of having recon bns only for mobile formations such as Pz and Mot. That coupled with the breakup of Pz rgts into bns could provide the flexibility needed.

Not sure if it feasible, but it would be great if we could increase movement capability (by decreasing AP costs) for elements (FST subtypes?) within the recon bns

_____________________________

Roll Tide

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 142
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/23/2012 11:26:38 PM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline
Are not the recon units represented already by the 'recon value' of a hex?

Troy

(in reply to High Krausen)
Post #: 143
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/24/2012 1:26:46 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
So, let me get this straight ...

You're saying that, for example, if I create a completely new sftype at the end of the sftype list and point its reinforcement type to the appropriate type, it won't work?

For example, say I have created (as I have) an sftype in slot 126, 105mm LeFH 18(m), which is the actual 105mm Howitzer used by most Divisional Artillery Regiments in real life (or closer than the one in slot 4, actually the 105mm K18 sFH and have set the Reinforcement Type to Medium Artillery[/i, it won't work? That, somehow, artillery reinforcements won't flow to it correctly?

That seems ... counterintuitive ... and makes the Reinforcement Type button selection ... pointless

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 144
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/24/2012 1:32:02 AM   
High Krausen


Posts: 204
Joined: 6/30/2004
From: Montgomery, Alabama
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg
Are not the recon units represented already by the 'recon value' of a hex?


I don't know, I just like the idea of having an additional unit to use in a retreat blocking role. They would be fragile so, you would want to keep their retreat % low.

_____________________________

Roll Tide

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 145
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/24/2012 1:58:44 AM   
Ritterkrieg

 

Posts: 86
Joined: 8/15/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: aspqrz

So, let me get this straight ...

You're saying that, for example, if I create a completely new sftype at the end of the sftype list and point its reinforcement type to the appropriate type, it won't work?

For example, say I have created (as I have) an sftype in slot 126, 105mm LeFH 18(m), which is the actual 105mm Howitzer used by most Divisional Artillery Regiments in real life (or closer than the one in slot 4, actually the 105mm K18 sFH and have set the Reinforcement Type to Medium Artillery[/i, it won't work? That, somehow, artillery reinforcements won't flow to it correctly?

That seems ... counterintuitive ... and makes the Reinforcement Type button selection ... pointless

Phil


No, those should be ok. As I stated, the order of units in the SFT types is critical to their use by cards and the engine in reinforcments and such. So dont move them from the original place unless editing the reinforcement scheduale and cards and probably some other stuff too!

Troy

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 146
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/24/2012 2:16:58 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
OK. Just played several turns against myself, only combat in the Crimea, against Sevastopol, with some German and some Russian units set to "Priority" replacement ... and all seemed fine.

So, as you say, if you don't move them from their original slot, or if you add them at the end of the sftype list, all seems well.

I changed slot #4s name from the original, incorrect, one, and that seems to have no effect, either.

So, I am guessing what you may have done was to change the sftypes in existing slots *radically* ... say, changing Trucks to Panzer Vs or some such

What I have done seems OK, then <sighs with relief>

If we give each Panzer Division, those that had multiple Panzer Battalions, multiple Panzer Battalions in game, then, operationally, you really should have a separate Panzergrenadier Battalion with the Infantry mounted in Halftracks (and using my Panzergrenadier sftype, a combo of halftrack and infantry) for the Panzer and PanzerGrenadier divisions ... at the very least, on the same logic.

Unfortunately, on the same logic, I tend to agree with High Krausen, and think that all Divisions should, therefore, have separate Recon Battalions.

But I'd suggest we gp for two variants, as HK suggests, one with Panzer Regiments (including Panzergrenadiers) as a single Regiment, and the other with separate Panzer and PanzerGrenadier Battalions ... that should keep everyone happy(ish).

Note: I have German non-Panzer Divisions of types on map at start modded (but may need to go over them again), as well as all Romanian and Hungarian Divisions and will start on Italian Divisions sometime later today. Then I will have to have a serious look at the TO&E of non-divisional units and things like Luftwaffe units, Ersatz and Emergency units etc. for modding and, way at the end, mod the Corps and Army level units and organisations.

Getting there, slowly

Phil

< Message edited by aspqrz -- 8/24/2012 2:21:57 AM >


_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to Ritterkrieg)
Post #: 147
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/24/2012 2:27:31 AM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: High Krausen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ritterkrieg
Are not the recon units represented already by the 'recon value' of a hex?


I don't know, I just like the idea of having an additional unit to use in a retreat blocking role. They would be fragile so, you would want to keep their retreat % low.


The only units in game that have any percentage chance of converting a Kill result to a Retreat seem to be Halftracks, Trains, Submarines and ... Staff ... which is crazy ... unless units transported by Halftracks are also subject to their Retreat to Kill conversion, which I doubt.

Staff should NOT have any such advantage for any reason that I can see.

Note: The Motorcycle Recon and Panzergrenadier sftypes I have added *do* have a Kill to Retreat chance, the same as for Halftracks ... I haven't deleted the Staff ability yet, but am seriously considering it ... I am of two minds as to whether to give it to the SdKfz 222 and Csaba Armoured Cars as, even though they were used for recon, they are both specifically mentioned as having short legs (very short range), which needs to be modelled somehow.

Phil

< Message edited by aspqrz -- 8/24/2012 2:31:05 AM >


_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to High Krausen)
Post #: 148
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/28/2012 3:57:04 PM   
redmarkus4


Posts: 4057
Joined: 12/1/2007
From: 0.00
Status: offline
An armoured car only needs to be able to scuttle a couple of clicks in order to survive as a recon unit, so not giving the 222 etc. the retreat option would seem a bit odd to me.

_____________________________

Managers read statistics and tune processes. Leaders interpret statistics and determine strategy.

(in reply to aspqrz)
Post #: 149
RE: Community Modding Discussion - 8/28/2012 4:23:55 PM   
aspqrz

 

Posts: 699
Joined: 7/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

An armoured car only needs to be able to scuttle a couple of clicks in order to survive as a recon unit, so not giving the 222 etc. the retreat option would seem a bit odd to me.


But these are basically armoured light trucks ... 4x4, but not much range and not great Xcountry mobility ... not like the 8Rad ones the Germans used later in the war ... still, I take your point, and I can change it easily enough.

Phil

_____________________________

Author, Space Opera (FGU); RBB #1 (FASA); Road to Armageddon; Farm, Forge and Steam; Orbis Mundi; Displaced (PGD)
----------------------------------------------
Email: aspqrz@tpg.com.au

(in reply to redmarkus4)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Community Modding Discussion Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
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

0.129