NZ light arm'd regt

[Lieste]

Is there any reason why the NZ light arm'd rgt squadrons don't show up except under 'all units' or 'line units'?

Shouldn't these count as armoured, and show under this selection as well?

[Arjuna]

What scenario and what unit specifically are you referring to. Have you checked their estab info in the ScenMaker? They may be classified something different to what they are named.

[Lieste]

Sorry, the scn is Bridges at Lamia (tut #1), the unit "2nd NZ Div Cav Rgt" has 28 Vickers Mk VIb and 44 Dingos, in three squadrons plus the HQ troop. I have to run errands for the next few hours, and then bed, but I can check the estab after a snooze.

I appreciate these are only barely tanks, but in the context of the Aegean they are fairly powerful, being superior to the PzI, and roughly equivalent to the PzII. Certainly they cause a noticeable panic in infantry that cannot deal enough damage to them.

If they aren't soft, aren't guns and aren't armour, then I'm not quite sure what else they could be classified as?

[Lieste]

Something odd with these. According to the Scn Editor, these are 2nd NZ Cav Regt, Estab 3x NZ Cav Squadrons (6+12)  & NZ Cav HQ, but in play they have the larger formation which appears in the estab browser as Au Cav Squadron (8+14) and Au Cav HQ.

[Arjuna]

We'll look into this after BFTB is released. Please remind me then in case I forget. [:)]

[Prince of Eckmühl]

FOR LATER, in the same scenario, B and C squadrons of 5RTR are (I believe) mistakenly noted as regimental HQ rather than squadrons:

[Lieste]

The original question is answered:

These are 'mixed' type line formations, and therefore do not show under either soft, gun or hard classifications.
However, as to destroy them they require the application of significant AT strength (even with Dingo/MkVIb) I would argue that they should appear under 'armoured' type, and as they have a significant fraction of soft elements that can be eliminated by small-arms/artillery they could be additionally listed under 'line' (as currently) and 'soft', rather than not appearing at all as soft or armour.

The same will apply to almost all* arm'd recce or arm'd cav/mech infantry units... Alternatively a 'mixed' filter for unit type? *Not the MH a/c squadrons as these are armour pure.

[Arjuna]

I reckon it would be best to have a separate mixed filter rather than muddy the waters with multiple classifications. That would require additional coding or data.

[Lieste]

Disregard the differing estab values, on further perusal of the data both the NZ and AIF Cav squadrons are the same size.

However there is a problem apparent as here according to the SM:

HQ 2nd Cav @ 85% should have 22 men, 3 Vickers VIB, 1 Dingo SC
A Sqn @ 86% should have 73 men, 6 Vickers VIB, 12 Dingo SC
B Sqn @ 86% should have 73 men, 6 Vickers VIB, 12 Dingo SC
C Sqn @ 80% should have 68 men, 6 Vickers VIB, 11 Dingo SC

Within the scenario the strength is reported as:

HQ 2nd Cav @ 22 men, 4 Vickers VIB, 1 Jeep, 2 Dingo SC
A Sqn @ 73 men, 8 Vickers VIB, 14 Dingo SC
B Sqn @ 73 men, 8 Vickers VIB, 14 Dingo SC
C Sqn @ 68 men, 8 Vickers VIB, 14 Dingo SC

Vehicles are at 100% strength, despite the SM values reported.