Ok, I remember reading somewhere on here about how replacements for unit loses would be handled by the AI, I don't see a problem with this, but where would the replacements come from? Would they come from your reserve forces and reserve equipment? Also, if at the 'front' you have 4 tank battalions with only 3 battalions worth of tanks, would you be able to combine the 4 Tank Battalions into 3 Tank Battalions?
And a question about experienced troops/crews. Lets say I have a really experienced M60 tank battalion, but then I purchase a battalion of Leopard 2A5s, would I be able to 'transfer' the crews from my existing battalion without losing experience? Or would I have to disband the unit, then crew the Leopard 2A5s from the Reserves? This could of coarse go for fighters, ships, just about anything else.
Replacement and reorganizing...
Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators
-
George Geczy
- General
- Posts: 2688
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
- Contact:
"Replacements" are a special case in that the soldiers come out of reserves, but the replacement hardware comes out of your raw military goods stockpile - this means that you don't loose from "reserve battalions" that you have at your bases, etc.
There were some discussions about experience, and we decided that it is not unreasonable to keep the battalion's experience level even as green recruits come in as replacements for lost strength. In effect, the mix of surviving vetrans and experienced junior officers should be able to keep the unit's experience benefits.
It is planned to be able to combine and split units.
It is going to be possible to "upgrade" equipment with an upgrade stream easily (ie M1A1 to M1A4, etc). I forget what we decided about the re-equipping of battalions with new equipment (ie M60 to M1, or M113 APC to M2 Bradleys, etc); we have discussed it a few times, but I do not recall what the decision on this was; I'll let David or Chris tackle that one.
There were some discussions about experience, and we decided that it is not unreasonable to keep the battalion's experience level even as green recruits come in as replacements for lost strength. In effect, the mix of surviving vetrans and experienced junior officers should be able to keep the unit's experience benefits.
It is planned to be able to combine and split units.
It is going to be possible to "upgrade" equipment with an upgrade stream easily (ie M1A1 to M1A4, etc). I forget what we decided about the re-equipping of battalions with new equipment (ie M60 to M1, or M113 APC to M2 Bradleys, etc); we have discussed it a few times, but I do not recall what the decision on this was; I'll let David or Chris tackle that one.
-
Slash78
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 583
- Joined: May 09 2003
- Location: California
It basically sounds good, but I would like to make a point about the replacement of military hardware.
If you purchase 10 battalions of Challenger 2s and you can't produce them, then you won't be able to replaces loses via your method. What you might want to do is divid the equipment up, 4 'active' battalions, 4 'reserve' battalions and then have 2 'replacement' battalions. Replacement equipment can come form 'Replacement' units without degrading your reserves.
Of coarse for units like light infantry, your system would work great. But for units were equipment might be harder to produce, such as tanks, fighters, attack helicopters, etc, you might want to think something like this. Just a suggestion.
If you purchase 10 battalions of Challenger 2s and you can't produce them, then you won't be able to replaces loses via your method. What you might want to do is divid the equipment up, 4 'active' battalions, 4 'reserve' battalions and then have 2 'replacement' battalions. Replacement equipment can come form 'Replacement' units without degrading your reserves.
Of coarse for units like light infantry, your system would work great. But for units were equipment might be harder to produce, such as tanks, fighters, attack helicopters, etc, you might want to think something like this. Just a suggestion.
-
Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22106
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
I still think this is an area we can go with what we’ve got. The time that a unit takes to receive “replacements†to build back up to full strength is affected by how much they invest in maintenance and repairs. The base timeline is a function of how long the unit takes to build. As such, Tanks would take longer to get repaired and aircraft even longer. I see no reason why we can’t assume that when you buy a “Squadron†of 24 aircraft that you are actually paying for 30 aircraft and a stockpile of repair parts. When checking the “opening inventory†to give a country we usually ignore any aircraft marked as trainers. The player could be getting replacements from training groups and having those replaced…
-
Slash78
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 583
- Joined: May 09 2003
- Location: California
-
George Geczy
- General
- Posts: 2688
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
- Contact:
I don't think we lose much in the way of realism by not dealing with replacements on an "equipment type" basis. Two reasons:
1) Replacements come from a pool of "military goods". As Chris indicated, these goods can be considered to have some replacements and spares for the types of equipment found in the forces.
2) As a battalion loses strength, it can also be assumed that many equipment pieces are not being entirely destroyed, just rendered unusable. So for instance, to bring a tank battalion back up to full strength, you may not need 3 replacement tanks, instead you'll need 1 engine, 1 set of road wheels, one barrel, etc. It is true that many would be complete losses, and for that see point #1.
So, without forcing an unreasonable amount of micro-managing on to a player, this should still do well to simulate replacement goods.
-- George.
1) Replacements come from a pool of "military goods". As Chris indicated, these goods can be considered to have some replacements and spares for the types of equipment found in the forces.
2) As a battalion loses strength, it can also be assumed that many equipment pieces are not being entirely destroyed, just rendered unusable. So for instance, to bring a tank battalion back up to full strength, you may not need 3 replacement tanks, instead you'll need 1 engine, 1 set of road wheels, one barrel, etc. It is true that many would be complete losses, and for that see point #1.
So, without forcing an unreasonable amount of micro-managing on to a player, this should still do well to simulate replacement goods.
-- George.