Mountains tanks

[laska2k8]

Road to Rimini 1944...

take a look at the British 8th Army 25th tank brig 51 Tyl Tnk Regt located at 14,18....

How can armored tanks travel across mountains, rocky escarpment without a road ?
It seems a little bit unreal..or I totally mispelled the info on the botton of the panel...

[laska2k8]

this is the unit detail..

[JAMiAM]

Mountain terrain does not block the movement of tanks, nor does escarpment.

[Chuck2]

Well, they can go up there but then move very slowly. [;)]

Seriously, you have a good point, though. Mountain terrain should be flagged as badlands in the scenario. That would prevent tanks from going into the mountains.

[golden delicious]

The assumption is that if a hex doesn't contain badlands then there are probably some dirt tracks which, whilst far from ideal, do permit the movement even of heavy vehicles.

[laska2k8]

thanks for the clarification, considering the assumption I'll have to reconsider my tactical defense not only through the valleys but also up on the mountains ambushed near some "dirty track". Hoping for a "terrain penalty" for the attacker (or is this another story ?).

[Chuck2]

Yes, there are pretty severe penalities for using armor in mountain terrain. They will suffer a good deal more losses in combat than if they were down in the valleys.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: laska2k4

thanks for the clarification, considering the assumption I'll have to reconsider my tactical defense not only through the valleys but also up on the mountains ambushed near some "dirty track". Hoping for a "terrain penalty" for the attacker (or is this another story ?).

On top of that, even if he does break out in the mountains he will have a hard time reinforcing or supply an advance across them and you may be able to cut off and destroy the lead units.

I see you're still using regiment icons for units which are actually battalions, Chuck. Ignore the word regiment. It means something totally different in the British army.

[Chuck2]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

I see you're still using regiment icons for units which are actually battalions, Chuck. Ignore the word regiment. It means something totally different in the British army.

No. If a British infantry brigade is going to get the brigade symbol (as you advised), than the artillery and recce units are getting regiment symbols.

http://www.ra39-45.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk ... index.html

[geozero]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

Mountain terrain does not block the movement of tanks, nor does escarpment.

At larger map scales I can see where we could just slow down movement of motorised units, but at smaller scales such as 2.5k/h or even 5-10k/h the system should prevent such movement UNLESS a road is added to the hex. It's just unrealistic and gamey.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: geozero
At larger map scales I can see where we could just slow down movement of motorised units, but at smaller scales such as 2.5k/h or even 5-10k/h the system should prevent such movement UNLESS a road is added to the hex. It's just unrealistic and gamey.

Not particularly. At the smaller scales "mountain" terrain should be considered to be different than "mountain" terrain at larger scales. Scenario designers have several tools to make the terrain impassable to motorized vehicles, like badlands, for example. For very constricted terrain, they can even use major escarpments to block all but mountaineers and special forces.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Chuck2
No. If a British infantry brigade is going to get the brigade symbol (as you advised), than the artillery and recce units are getting regiment symbols.

http://www.ra39-45.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk ... index.html

These units are battalions. There are composed of batteries and three together form a brigade. They are just called regiments because of the traditions and establishment of the British army. It is misleading and inaccurate to label them as regiments and there are never marked as such in official documentation.

[Chuck2]

Every piece of official documentation labels them as regiments. They shall be labeled as regiments. On the other hand, the infantry is usually labeled something like 3/King's Own Fish & Chips London Regiment. These we can consider battalions since there are other parts of the regiment. But there is only one 12th Field Regiment.

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: Chuck2

Every piece of official documentation labels them as regiments. They shall be labeled as regiments. On the other hand, the infantry is usually labeled something like 3/King's Own Fish & Chips London Regiment. These we can consider battalions since there are other parts of the regiment. But there is only one 12th Field Regiment.

Ah...the famous "Fighting Fishmongers". My grandad was with them. They proudly wore the "cod, spud and yesterday's newspaper" cap badge, along with the unit's traditional aprons. Their delicious smell used to induce hungry Germans downwind of them to surrender in droves. [:'(]

Cheers, Neilster

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Chuck2

Every piece of official documentation labels them as regiments.

Where? Show me the map or OOB where they are marked with the regiment symbol. You can't- because they never are.

They shall be labeled as regiments. On the other hand, the infantry is usually labeled something like 3/King's Own Fish & Chips London Regiment. These we can consider battalions since there are other parts of the regiment.

More than that, they're specifically called battalions. In wartime, each regiment raises multiple battalions as the size of the army increases. In peacetime, the regiment and the battalion can be one and the same.

But there is only one 12th Field Regiment.

...and it's a battalion. The Royal Artillery as a whole is the equivalent of a regiment in the British Army system, since it has its own traditions and system of recruitment.

Think about what happens when one of your regiments is divided. One's left with a lot of "battalions". This is erroneous; the regiments break down into squadrons or batteries- because they're battalions.

You totally fail to appreciate that the British Army's regiment is totally different from the "regiment" used by, say, the US Army at the same time. The British Army retains the system that was common in the 18th century of regiments as the basis for tradition and recruitment rather than military organisation.

[PDiFolco]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
...
More than that, they're specifically called battalions. In wartime, each regiment raises multiple battalions as the size of the army increases. In peacetime, the regiment and the battalion can be one and the same...

So it's irrelevant if you call them regiment or battalion [:'(] ! And please remember that the Great Britain military organization, measurement systems, left-side driving and culinary habits are ununderstandable objects of puzzlement in the rest of the world [:D].

BTW all this has nothing to do with the post topic [:(]...

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

So it's irrelevant if you call them regiment or battalion [:'(] !

It's misleading to label them as regiments in TOAW, especially where there are some battalions which are correctly labelled. The player will imagine some distinction in size between the two which does not exist.

And please remember that the Great Britain military organization, measurement systems, left-side driving and culinary habits are ununderstandable objects of puzzlement in the rest of the world

You're just jealous.

As to driving;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Driv ... storic.png

[Chuck2]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

So it's irrelevant if you call them regiment or battalion [:'(] !

It's misleading to label them as regiments in TOAW, especially where there are some battalions which are correctly labelled. The player will imagine some distinction in size between the two which does not exist.

Actually, if you compare a German artillery battalion with a British artillery regiment it makes sense. 27 guns to 72 guns. And the British Recce and Armored Car regiments are quite large as well. [:D]

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: Chuck2

Actually, if you compare a German artillery battalion with a British artillery regiment it makes sense.

Yes. Both are comprised of three batteries, therefore both are battalions. British field regiments usually have 24 guns- but plenty other artillery regiments have 16 or even fewer guns.

And the British Recce and Armored Car regiments are quite large as well.

Three armoured recon squadrons. Sounds like a battalion to me.

[Chuck2]

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

ORIGINAL: Chuck2

Actually, if you compare a German artillery battalion with a British artillery regiment it makes sense.

Yes. Both are comprised of three batteries, therefore both are battalions.

Your king and queen should have called them battalions then.