Battalions and Brigades

[TheBob]

Since major powers during World War 2 fielded hundreds of divisions, will SR1936 switch to brigade sizes? If the Soviets field 200-300 divisions, that could be 4000-6000 battalions... ouch.

[Balthagor]

Short answer - no, still Battalion size.

Long answer - later in development cycle.

[Hullu Hevonen]

I think the answer might be in the battlegroups, I usually organize my units into 'brigades'. If these battle groups could work more as an unit or absorb some functions, this could avoid you from having to create million armies. In the Orbats file there's alot unused fields which could be to indicate different assigned units, brigade, division, army etc.

[Zuikaku]

Please, add division containers. There are many benefits of that.

1. WW2 battle scope is just to huge to be handled via battalions. Thatway, everything is going to be solved via selecting all units on the screen and rushing them to horde-type attack. That is 0% of strategy IMHO

2.Divisional containers might also help AI to use artillery in offense and defense and not to send artillery units alone. AI coul'd finally use combined weapons in force...

3. Naval divisions might also help AI not to send single capital ships unescorted....

4. Production should stay battalion sized, so we can produce specific weapons like we do now.

5. Player and AI can use single battalions like we do now when there are no divisonal containers or when there are too few resources/time/commanders to train a new division

6. To produce divisional container, you need military academy. Divisional container costs money, time and commander. Commanders are also trained in military academy.

7. Each divisional container have specific number of slots for different types of battalions.
So, infantry division might have 12X slots for foot infantry, 1X slot for recon, 4X arty slots, 2X Anti-tank, 1X AD and 4X transport (trucks which helps moving slower battalions within division and carrying supplies).

On the other hand, armoured division container might consist of: 2X recon slots, 8X tank slots, 8X mechanized infantry, 4X arty, 2X anti-tank, 4X AD, 4X transport/supply

And so on for airborne, mountain, motorized divisions

8. This way, player and AI can mix available equipment from the reserve into divisions. And that is very realistic, since divisions in RL used to mix everything available and were often very heterougeneusly equipped and not at full strenght. So we can have Panzer division armed with Stug IIIb, Pz IIIJs and Pz IVEs....

9. When division is fighting, every type of battalion slot tries to neutralize that type of slot in opposed division. So, Arty will try to counterbatter enemy arty, tanks are trying to destroy tanks. When successful in neutralizing same type of slot in opposed division, slot battalions are free to support other slot types within the division. so, when arty neutralises enemy divisional arty it starts supporting tanks and infantry. when infantry deals with enemy infantry, it starts supporting tanks or recons. When recon in the enemy division is neutralized, our own division gets recon bonuses and our attack/defence values are increased

10. Commander experience and specialities increase efficiency of the division in combat and outside the combat.

11. Division experience increase efficiency of the division. This represents how well are battalions within division cooperating together.

12.Divisions and battalions can be trained at the cost of money, fuel, time and military goods....

13. When fighting in specific terrain (cities, mountains, forests), only battalions with higher values fight each other. The rest serves as support. Unless division is very poorly led and trained or very experienced and well led...

I do not think that this is impossible to implement in SR engine...

[number47]

Wow, you really are on fire today
Like it, especially no. 7!

[Hullu Hevonen]

The only problem with divisions is that they would have to span 2-4 hexes or the engine would have to be made to accommodate them in one hex. Teaching the AI to use and make brigades/divisions instead of half battalions might yeald game speed improvements and make their military operating more effective. If they have say one artillery, one infantry and one tank brigade in one division and if these supported each other in battle. If the hotspot is a city, then the AI would send the infantry first into attack while the tanks go secure the surroundings and the artillery gives bombardment, for example.

[Zuikaku]

The only problem with divisions is that they would have to span 2-4 hexes or the engine would have to be made to accommodate them in one hex. Teaching the AI to use and make brigades/divisions instead of half battalions might yeald game speed improvements and make their military operating more effective. If they have say one artillery, one infantry and one tank brigade in one division and if these supported each other in battle. If the hotspot is a city, then the AI would send the infantry first into attack while the tanks go secure the surroundings and the artillery gives bombardment, for example.

Container is to occupy single hex. Only divisional container is represented on the map. Battalions are packed inside the container and are not represented separately unless detached from division....

[Aragos]

I like it. However, you'd have to adopt what Paradox did for HOI3--the idea of frontage. A Division never had all its elements on line fighting at one time. And only so many battalions would "fit" in a 16km box.


Example: A hex has 6 sides. If a Division is in the hex, it can put 1/6th of its combat power toward any one direction. If it gets hit from two directions, then more elements can participate (there is more "space" to fight)--two sides of the hex being attacked would mean that 2/6th (1/3) of the division could fight. This would only apply to INF, Armor, Recon units; Artillery could participate at full strength at all times, and truck/support elements could only fight if all combat elements had been destroyed (e.g., the enemy has broken through to the rear area depots).

This could lead to a more historically accurate portrayal of how division-level combat took place in WWII.

[Zuikaku]

Anyway, battalion level is a bit too uncontrolable in large scale combat.....
Battalions shoul'd stay, but let us be able to organize them into divisions...

[Hullu Hevonen]

I personally dislike an divisional system, it would become too much like the HOI's comparable system. Sure meaning less units, but being more unrealistic in 'small' combat. Consider a scenario where you play as Albania, which had ~14k troops in 1943. If you would want to defend against any invasion, you could occupy 1-2 hexes depending on the division, wich means that any enemy, with inferior quality troops, but larger in numbers could easily surround the Albanian forces defending a port or the capital(depending on where you want to defend) and cust the units of from their supplies and win that way. While with the current system or a more battleqroup system you could spread out your forces to prevent this and defeat your enemy in battle. The Division system would work in frontal warfare between say Germany vs USSR, where you had enough troops/divisions to fill all hexes.

Consider WW2 tactics like 'motti' where very small units took out signifactly larger, for example the Finns managed to inflict an humiliating defeat on the USSR during Battle of Suomussalmi with this tactic. This would not be possible in-game with a divisional system, if you have 1 div vs 4-5 divs.

I think BG needs to have some color scheme or something to differentiate units in battle on to what hierarchy they belong to, have a slider/menu with all combat units in selected theatre. key controls to fast give comands and add units to formations. A way to reinforce/add units to battlegroups, say assign function to units.

[Zuikaku]

I personally dislike an divisional system, it would become too much like the HOI's comparable system. Sure meaning less units, but being more unrealistic in 'small' combat. Consider a scenario where you play as Albania, which had ~14k troops in 1943. If you would want to defend against any invasion, you could occupy 1-2 hexes depending on the division, wich means that any enemy, with inferior quality troops, but larger in numbers could easily surround the Albanian forces defending a port or the capital(depending on where you want to defend) and cust the units of from their supplies and win that way. While with the current system or a more battleqroup system you could spread out your forces to prevent this and defeat your enemy in battle. The Division system would work in frontal warfare between say Germany vs USSR, where you had enough troops/divisions to fill all hexes.

I like battalion system, but too much is too much. So, we either need some sort of divisional "containers" or much better battlegroup system. That means being able to field more battalions to battlegroups, smarter battlegroups and AI being able to use them. Current system just sucks with AI sending units one by one to be destroyed. No combined arms, no arty or air support, no unit cooperation, just zombies going to get killed....

Consider WW2 tactics like 'motti' where very small units took out signifactly larger, for example the Finns managed to inflict an humiliating defeat on the USSR during Battle of Suomussalmi with this tactic. This would not be possible in-game with a divisional system, if you have 1 div vs 4-5 divs.

I'm well aware of what Finns did to the soviets. But for being able to do that in SR, we need:
1. Unit training
2. Higher impact of moralle
3. Winter/cold area and other climate effects (now it's totally irrelevant if you are fighting in desert, jungle, tundra or temperate zone)
4. Terrain more important (Units now very often choose not to use higways but rather goes straight across forests, hills or deserts- so how to use the terrain, how to block the enemy and force him to attack where you want if terrain doesn't seems to matter at all). I have even saw motorized units moving over Owen-Stanley range (highly impassable muntaneus and jungle terrain in PNG) with ease, There were no highways there.

[number47]

4. Terrain more important (Units now very often choose not to use higways but rather goes straight across forests, hills or deserts- so how to use the terrain, how to block the enemy and force him to attack where you want if terrain doesn't seems to matter at all). I have even saw motorized units moving over Owen-Stanley range (highly impassable muntaneus and jungle terrain in PNG) with ease, There were no highways there.

Oh, I can't even begin to express my frustration with this. The road should always be better option for movement than forest or desert (or any other terrain for that matter), if it is not, than terrain modifiers are not set properley.

Think how less pathing calculating would a unit need to do if it used road because it gave the best option to move? No more zillion calculation for unit to reach Madrid from Moscow... (not that I ever personally used such huge relations)

[Hullu Hevonen]

Yes, the battlegroup system would need much upgrading, like all units in a battlegroups, while still being able to move independently would have shared resources, operated 'as one' by the AI, easier ways for human players to control them, color schemes etc.

Maybe implement some sort of map toggle function where you can only view battlegroups or individual units(like now). Playing a smaller country it would be more usefull to stear units in smaller formations, depending of course, while larger armies would operate on divisional level.

I actually managed to defeat an 2.5x larger Russian(played by my little brother ) army invading from north(I played as Finland) in a similar manner in SRCW/EE mod. Isolating them just outside Rovaniemi, cutting them of from the road etc. More terrain factors should be implemented, plus maybe weather effects as well.

[Aragos]

I agree with Zui on this. We need some sort of "container" that is a Division (e.g., I'm thinking a drag-n-drop sort of panel that has a series of "combat arms" boxes that can be filled with combat units, "artillery" boxes that have the artillery battalions, and "support" boxes for trucks, medical, aa, whatever else). Limit them based on country size or technology (e.g., Albania may only have 1 Division, whereas Germany can have up to 300, and so on).

I think that would work with the SR system. If not, we are going to need a bigger map to fit the battalions.

[vahadar]

I like the idea of containers, or at least the possibility to create more battlegroups, not just ten. And the possibility to give orders to that battle group even if units arent in the same hex or going to the same hex. I know it takes another road from actual game mechanics from Supreme Ruler, but the battalion systems when managing thousands of units would be a pain, and i never trusted AI when it comes to managing my units. SinceSR2010 i have always used the blobing tactic with my units, a few battalions, like 50+ units in a single hex and let's roll... Not very historically accurate but efficient I'd like something else for a change!