How to best design units on various scales & Various equipment questions...

[TheJSFFenix]

As I've been toying with the editor, I'd like to get your opinions on how to build various units and what equipment an average WW2 unit should have? Looking at different scenarios it differs from one to another, so I'd like to know if there's one universal template I could stick to?

1. Let's start with a Battalion scale (II), as I believe that's the lowest scale most scenarios use (I can hardly think of any that feature a Company scale). Things get weird there sometimes. Every unit obviously has squads, but equipment such as machineguns or anti-tank guns I can see are often separated into different units. Sometimes even mortars are represented in separate Bn's. Is there any rhyme or reason to that? It seems overly clunky to my taste, and those units more often than not end up sticking with their parent battalions anyhow.

So, a Battalion-sized frontline unit should always have:

- Squads
- Tanks or other AFVs (if applicable)
- Machineguns
- Mortars
- Anti-Tank gun
- Field guns perhaps?
- Transport, if applicable.

Did I miss anything?

Artillery should probably stay separate all the way up to Divisional size to be able to make bombardments.

Then, as scales go up all the way to Corps (XXX), said materiel can be multiplied by however many Battalions would make up said unit size on top of merging all those previously separate assets (artillery, recon, engineers, anti-air ) into one counter.

2. On the topic of Squads. From what I gathered reading Norm's official designer notes one squad equals 10 men, is this correct?
Also, in the base, not custom equipment list there are following types of squads:

- Light Rifle Squad - Soldiers carry only Rifles for weapons.
- Rifle Squad - Soldiers carry Rifles and one squad-level machinegun (Chauchat, MG-34/42, BAR, Bren)
- Heavy Rifle Squad - Soldiers carry Rifles and two squad-level machineguns.
- Reconnaissance Rifle Squad - Seems to be weaker than a Light Rifle Squad, and also has a recon flag.
- SMG Squad - Represents submachine guns I suppose? Equipment list that comes with the game specifies it's meant to represent Paratroopers for some reason.
- Assault Squad - It features an outline of an AK-47 and is also the only type of squad marked as later than 1940's. Does this mean that any scenarios taking place after WW2 (Cold War and so on) should only feature Assault Squads?

3. Also a question about the horses - What does the equipment flag "Shock Cavalry" do? Cavalry Squad (Sabre) and Cavalry Squad (Lance) together with Heavy Cavalry have it, but I'm not sure what does it exactly do. Does it amplify the damage in the first round or something? I believe the Napoleonic scenarios (Waterloo, Leipzig, La Grande Armee) feature them, but neither really explain what's so different about them.

4. Do crewed weapons (MGs, AT guns, Mortars, Artillery pieces) represent only said gun/mortar etc. or the equipment and it's crew, does anybody know this?

5. How much vehicles does exactly one "Truck" or one "Horse Team" represent? I remember reading in Soviet Union 1941 (Mobile variant) AAR that there's no definite answer and that I should be simply adding as many of them as is needed until the movement allowance is what I want it to be (roughly paraphrasing).

6. Back to the infantry - Are you meant to mix them within one unit? E.g having part of its strength as Light Rifle and part as Heavy Rifle? I've seen some scenarios do that, I presume for historical flavor/accuracy, but again, neither exactly explains why.

Sorry if it all sounds like a pretty disconnected rambling but I've had all those questions for a pretty long time and the manual doesn't have answers to those specifically, and I wonder if any of you have any knowledge on them, or your own personal workarounds/templates you use when designing units in your scenes.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: TheJSFFenix

Every unit obviously has squads, but equipment such as machineguns or anti-tank guns I can see are often separated into different units. Sometimes even mortars are represented in separate Bn's. Is there any rhyme or reason to that? It seems overly clunky to my taste, and those units more often than not end up sticking with their parent battalions anyhow.

Likely these are not part of the battalions, but rather units which are separate from an organisation standpoint. Typically, the elements of a machine gun or anti-tank battalion would be parcelled out amongst the line infantry, so designers may prefer to distribute their equipment. However, that's not entirely accurate either, as the anti-tank guns for example would likely be concentrated at the point of greatest need.

Then, as scales go up all the way to Corps (XXX), said materiel can be multiplied by however many Battalions would make up said unit size on top of merging all those previously separate assets (artillery, recon, engineers, anti-air ) into one counter.

Typically, real world organisations have supporting equipment all the way up the hierarchy. So an infantry battalion might have an organic heavy weapons company- but there could be AT guns attached at the regiment level and an AA battalion at the division level- then more stuff at the corps level too. It's not just a heap of battalions.

Are you familiar with Niehorster?
http://niehorster.org/

2. On the topic of Squads. From what I gathered reading Norm's official designer notes one squad equals 10 men, is this correct?

It's a rule of thumb. Squads in real armies have widely variable numbers of men from country to country and period to period. I would suggest sticking to the organisational strength of the unit- if a platoon is divided into three squads, there are three platoons in a company and four companies in a battalion, that makes 36 squads to the battalion. Doesn't matter than there are 800 men and 500 rifles- those guys aren't all going to be on the firing step. Having said that, if the squad itself is 17 men or something (like in the Polish army) you might want to consider adding extra light rifle squads to compensate.

4. Do crewed weapons (MGs, AT guns, Mortars, Artillery pieces) represent only said gun/mortar etc. or the equipment and it's crew, does anybody know this?

It'll fire nicely enough on its own, I'd say it includes the crew.

5. How much vehicles does exactly one "Truck" or one "Horse Team" represent? I remember reading in Soviet Union 1941 (Mobile variant) AAR that there's no definite answer and that I should be simply adding as many of them as is needed until the movement allowance is what I want it to be (roughly paraphrasing).

That's exactly right. Don't worry about how many trucks were in the inventory. When the unit moved, did the men go in the truck, or did they march?

6. Back to the infantry - Are you meant to mix them within one unit? E.g having part of its strength as Light Rifle and part as Heavy Rifle? I've seen some scenarios do that, I presume for historical flavor/accuracy, but again, neither exactly explains why.

Some Light and some Heavy Rifle is probably to manage replacement rates (you see this a lot in long scenarios, especially in a WWI setting), as this would otherwise just be merged into one pool of rifle squads. Otherwise, there's no "a bit light" rifle squad, so a mix of rifle and light rifle is a good compromise, e.g. if only two squads per platoon have an LMG.

[TheJSFFenix]

Likely these are not part of the battalions, but rather units which are separate from an organisation standpoint. Typically, the elements of a machine gun or anti-tank battalion would be parcelled out amongst the line infantry, so designers may prefer to distribute their equipment. However, that's not entirely accurate either, as the anti-tank guns for example would likely be concentrated at the point of greatest need.

So what you're saying is that realistically there should be a separate battalion containing all the machineguns/mortars/anti-tank guns, but from the gameplay standpoint it's more convenient to break it up and integrate individual pieces of it into infantry battalions, yes?

And yeah, I forgot to mention that individual Corps or Divsions could probably have some odd tank platoons/battalions/brigades or other elements being attached to them depending on the circumstances, but I know that and keep it in mind.

Thanks for the Niehorster link, I'll be sure to read up on it in case I need some specific resources that they have.

Now, do you know anything more about that cavalry thing I mentioned? I know those do not show up too much, but I'm curious about them nonetheless.

Also, is this "template" of mine for a typical battalion unit roughly accurate, or am I overlooking something in it? I mean in terms of trying to simulate a combat power of a battalion semi-accurately.

[rhinobones]

Ben’s recommendation of Niehorster is spot on. The site provides detailed information of organization and unit TO&E from army down to company. Covers multiple countries from about 1938 thru 1945. Everything you’ll need to build battalions with reasonable accuracy.

Regards

[sPzAbt653]

5. How much vehicles does exactly one "Truck" or one "Horse Team" represent? I remember reading in Soviet Union 1941 (Mobile variant) AAR that there's no definite answer and that I should be simply adding as many of them as is needed until the movement allowance is what I want it to be (roughly paraphrasing).

That's exactly right. Don't worry about how many trucks were in the inventory. When the unit moved, did the men go in the truck, or did they march?

*****************************

I'll add two more points for consideration:

Each two pieces of equipment that require transport can be transported at the TOAW designed movement rate by one transport asset. So if you have 24 105's, you only need 12 horse teams to achieve what TOAW considers to be a typical movement allowance. Use more or less to customize movement allowances [within a range].

Note that Transport Assets have a Defense Value. Therefore having a unit with say, 600 truck units, will have an inflated Defense Value. This may not be desired in some scenarios.

[cathar1244]

A couple of thoughts.

Separate mortars, infantry guns etc. When the basic units are battalions, it is a good idea to have these broken out if the mortars or guns in question can conduct ranged fire.

My understanding of the following is weak, but from what I've read here, ranged equipment is more effective when firing in indirect mode (at range). When ranged equipment is part of a battalion, division, etc., the fire effectiveness is not as high; perhaps meant to simulate the equipment being used in direct-fire mode vice indirect fire mode. This can be useful in situations where that occurred, for example, a Soviet rifle division that didn't have enough artillery observation and fire control assets and so they fired their weapons over open sights at the Germans.

Scale can change unit definitions. In a scenario showing a 1944 British division with all the bits and pieces as separate units, one would want those individual divisional units to have their assigned Bren guns and PIATs. But if the division is represented as a single unit, I personally would only include the Bren guns and PIATs of the infantry and engineer units.

Send me a private message if you would like to discuss the squads in more depth.

Cheers

[cathar1244]

Each two pieces of equipment that require transport can be transported at the TOAW designed movement rate by one transport asset. So if you have 24 105's, you only need 12 horse teams to achieve what TOAW considers to be a typical movement allowance. Use more or less to customize movement allowances [within a range].

Thanks. First time I've seen that information.

Cheers

[Lobster]

German infantry regiment with full compliment of transport divided by 4. In other words if it had 32 trucks then 8 are allotted.

[Lobster]

The same regiment with all transport removed. Very little difference in movement allowance. Evidently some super human soldiers drag the guns almost as fast as the transport. [;)]

[Lobster]

However, remove the cavalry and...

[Lobster]

Even though the cavalry does not have the transport flag it is evidently hard coded into the game. Have to keep an eye on that and some scout vehicles also.

[cathar1244]

Even though the cavalry does not have the transport flag it is evidently hard coded into the game. Have to keep an eye on that and some scout vehicles also.

Wild. Yet another, eh, "Easter Egg".

Cheers

[TheJSFFenix]

ORIGINAL: Lobster

Even though the cavalry does not have the transport flag it is evidently hard coded into the game. Have to keep an eye on that and some scout vehicles also.

I believe I might have some answer to that:

Citation from here: https://normkoger.com/oanote1.html

There was also the question of units composed of dissimilar equipment. Originally, I based the movement allowances on the slowest equipment in the unit (using transport to speed it up if available). There were folks who didn't like this, so the code was changed to reflect the mean movement characteristics of the equipment - which means unit movement in the game actually models the mean location of the unit. In some cases, the unit would actually be spread over several hexes by the end of a maximum move - but the result met with the approval of the test group, and one can argue that this model is as valid as a "slowest" equipment determination.

Those with training in physics might find this amusing: the precision of a unit's location is inversely proportional to the known speed at which the unit moves to get there.

So perhaps the game is representing that the Cavalry or Scout Vehicles (or recon assets in general?) can get to a certain place first and then the rest of the unit somehow catches up with them? Doesn't exactly make sense, but it could be an explanation.

[Lobster]

The three cavalry squads in the above screen shot is a very minor part of the regiment yet the impact on movement is enormous.

[sPzAbt653]

Part 2 of my previous post, which I was prevented from posting at the time due to the 'error 500' thing.

equipment such as machineguns or anti-tank guns I can see are often separated into different units.

Consider how such units will be used in a scenario. For example, if you have separate MG Units, what would prevent a player from focusing them on a specific area? Would this be historic? Did Corp HQ call for all MG Squads to leave their parent unit in order to concentrate on one area? Maybe they did. If you are doing a 'what if' scenario maybe it doesn't matter. If you are doing an Historic Simulation, it would be very important to get your units organized properly.

Some basic TO&E's for TOAW can be found here:
tm.asp?m=4397002
These will almost always be adjusted for any particular scenario.