What does a unit represent in this game?

[Txema]

Let me ask one question: when you have a "Tiger Ausf. E" unit, for example, what does it represent? Is it a Tiger battalion? or is it a Tiger regiment or division? I am asking it because as you probably know the largest unit that included mainly tigers was the battalion. There were also divisions that included Tigers but just forming one of the battalions of the division. In the same way, if you choose a Panther Ausf. G unit, what does it represent? A Panther regiment? A Panther division? because as you know a Panzer division was formed by one regiment of tanks and two regiments of Panzergrenadiers, and it included also artillery and reconnaissance elements...

So.... what does one unit represent in this game?

Thank you very much for your help !!


Txema

[Adam Parker]

Units in the scenarios offered are divisional with one assumes, brigade to battalion strength assets.

You have to approach this game (and any game at this level) of course, with a very open mind and a readiness to accept abstraction.

[Erik Rutins]

I'd see it as something like the later SS Panzer Divisions that had an attached Tiger Company or Battalion, etc. The units are considered to generally be regiment to division sized and the type of equipment represents the predominant or most advanced type in the unit. It's definitely abstracted and up to the scenario designer to decide what best represents the historical unit in each case.

[Erik Rutins]

Also, you can always use the Strength to adjust the unit size. So a true separate Tiger Battalion might be a Tiger unit with a Strength of 3, but I would caution against doing too much of this as for the hex scale and the combat formulas its better to keep units at Strength 5 or above and not go below Regiment scale in terms of what you are representing with each unit.

[Txema]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

I'd see it as something like the later SS Panzer Divisions that had an attached Tiger Company or Battalion, etc. The units are considered to generally be regiment to division sized and the type of equipment represents the predominant or most advanced type in the unit. It's definitely abstracted and up to the scenario designer to decide what best represents the historical unit in each case.

OK, let's take the 1st SS Panzer Divison as an example. In 1944 it was composed mainly by:

1. SS-Panzer Regiment
1. SS-Panzergrenadier Regiment
2. SS-Panzergrenadier Regiment
1. SS-Artillerie Regiment
1. SS-Panzerjäger Abteilung
1. SS-Flak Abteilung
1. SS-Sturmgeschütz Abteilung
1. SS-Panzer Aufklärungs Abteilung
1. SS-Panzer Pioner Bataillon

How do you represent it in this game?? Just by a Tiger unit of strength 10? But then the reconnaise and engineer battalions are not properly represented in the game, and even less the artillery regiment... Or would you use a Tiger unit, an artillery unit, a reconnaise unit and an engineer unit? Then a related question arises: what do the artillery, reconnaise and engineer units represent in the game? Do they represent regiments or battalions that were a lot of times part of a division? Or they represent truly independent units that were attached to corps or even armies?

This issue was my main problem with the Panzer General series, and I would like to have your opinion on it.

Thank you very much for your explanations !!


Txema

[gunnergoz]

The Panzer General series was never meant to represent an accurate portrayal of real-world historic combat units and battles.  It was highly simplified, abstracted and distilled to make it feel like war and be fun to play; in practice, it was actually more akin to a rock-paper-scissors game where you had to figure out each unit's particular strengths and weaknesses and use them in a complementary fashion to achieve your objective. 

Everything I've seen about Operation Barbarossa convinces me it sticks to the same formula.  So if you want to represent real world, historic units in battle, with all their complexity, interdependency and details, this may not be the best game to do it with.  But if you let your imagination loose and just think of how you are having to use your infantry, armor, artillery and air units in a complementary fashion to achieve your mission goals, then you might learn something about war in the abstract.  

[Rosseau]

Well said, Gunner.

With Op Barb, I have a hard time seeing these 3D icons as divisions. Considering the 1-13 strength limits, they would have been better representing squads and platoons, so don't know what the devs were thinking. Bottom line, as you said, it doesn't really matter.

[goodwoodrw]

Yep I agree totally, Gunner. This game is what u see is what u get, there aint in depth plans to analyze, mountains of info to digest, or hours of planning ahead of ya, just some good old fast planning entertainment. When I come home from work the last thing I want to do is to sift through combat and intelligence reports, and to move 1000s of ships, airplanes and personnel all over my LCD screen and take 5 to 6 hours to analyze to previous move and to plan the next one. Its a simple fun game and if it hasn't enough depth for some, skip and go back to the likes of WITP AE, don't whinge about it. For the record I've purchased AE as well.

[Adam Parker]

ORIGINAL: Txema

OK, let's take the 1st SS Panzer Divison as an example. In 1944 it was composed mainly by:

1. SS-Panzer Regiment
1. SS-Panzergrenadier Regiment
2. SS-Panzergrenadier Regiment
1. SS-Artillerie Regiment
1. SS-Panzerjäger Abteilung
1. SS-Flak Abteilung
1. SS-Sturmgeschütz Abteilung
1. SS-Panzer Aufklärungs Abteilung
1. SS-Panzer Pioner Bataillon

How do you represent it in this game??

Hi Txema, just a quick reply - check the Scenario Design thread here.

What I would do in this case is select the Tiger as the unit type and modify its character components to resemble your picture of its sugested behavior and strength. I'd then set up my other units in comparison to this.