AE Land and AI Issues [OUTDATED]

[Blackhorse]

Hey BB,

The Motorized Support # does *not* equate to an equal number of trucks. It is an abstract representation of how "vehicle heavy" a formation was. During the war, General Headquarters and US Army Ground Forces was constantly pushing to reduce the amount of transport in infantry formations, because of both the critical shortage of shipping, and the shortage of rubber.

Eventually, General McNair settled on a formula that infantry divisions should have enough vehicles to carry 1/3 of the unit at a time. US Army infantry divisions start the war about 50% motorized. (Or, in other words, half of the support is motorized, the other half is not) As the TOE updates, the support drops to 33% motorized. The separate infantry regiments are 33% motorized from the get-go, and that doesn't change as the TOE updates.

In stock, only motorized and armored divisions had motorized support. This change in AE better reflects the need for more sealift to carry all the trucks even a slimmed-down US Infantry Division took into combat.

I hope this is helpful.

ORIGINAL: Buck Beach

I have been doing some reviewing of the TOE's of the Infantry Regiments and Battation sized units and am totally confused as to the Motor Support given (or lack there of) the 2357, 2387 and 2516 units. I thought I had an understanding of how this was approached in the game from another thread, but, I would like to have some clarification (for my modding purposes) as to how the game numbers might differ from those indicated in the following online publication:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8801662/Ospre ... ons-194243

It seems to me that the numbers given the Motorized Regiment 2386 TOE are more in line with history.

Just for clarification my comparisons have been to the Regiments and Battaions in Alaska at the begining of the war.


BTW I had mentioned to JWE previously that I thought there might be a mix up with the withdrawal and arrival date of the 37th (Sep) Regiment, that in the game is set to arrive in 1944 when that is the historic date they went back to Kansas.

[Buck Beach]

Thank you very much Blackhorse.

[Oliver Heindorf]

Hi, in my game I own Wake Atoll since the game started. However, the AI tries to take it. This time, I had a small jap landing force landing on Wake but refuse to assaukt ist. irrc on atolls, you have to shock attack and you are feared to be taken out. This time the japs doesnt assault shock - they sit there since three days...any ideas ? thank you

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: Oliver Heindorf

Hi, in my game I own Wake Atoll since the game started. However, the AI tries to take it. This time, I had a small jap landing force landing on Wake but refuse to assaukt ist. irrc on atolls, you have to shock attack and you are feared to be taken out. This time the japs doesnt assault shock - they sit there since three days...any ideas ? thank you

do they have non disabled combat squads left? if there aren´t any combat ready combat squads then there isn´t a shock attack

[sven6345789]

Hi, checked the russian OOB the other night and did not find a single unit with yellow TOE.

Does this mean the russians are stuck with BT-7 and the like in 1945?
Or does the whole russian OOB change at a later date (Tank Corps and the like)?

[BigJ62]

Just like in witp devices can upgrade individually.

[doc smith]

Does anyone have any information about the convoys that appear at Capetown or Pt. Stanley and disappear a few days later? What are we supposed to do with them? They have lots of neat stuff. I see them dropping off fuel and supplies, but their "manifest" describes details like "M3-Lee tanks".

[Andy Mac]

They go to the pool when they disband

[WLockard]

Andy Mac, I noticed that when playing a game with +/- 60 day reinforcements, when I get a CD Convoy early, it still doesn't disband until its scheduled disband date. Is that intended?

[Andy Mac]

Urrrghh not sure probably not but its probably int he too hard to fix without data changes camp

[BigJ62]

Under the current code any CD convoy unit when it comes on map its' withdraw date is reset to 3 days.

ORIGINAL: WLockard

Andy Mac, I noticed that when playing a game with +/- 60 day reinforcements, when I get a CD Convoy early, it still doesn't disband until its scheduled disband date. Is that intended?

[somali]

misspelling of IJAAF Base force(4976)

Tachirai miss

Tachiarai correct

Tachiarai was the name of airfield near Fukuoka(103,57)

[gajdacs zsolt]

I hope this is the right place to ask this:

While creating my own personal mod i noticed inaccuracies in the values of japanese and allied tanks. (example: Type 2 light tank armor:40mm(16IRL) , penetration:60mm (25IRL); Valentine III: armor: 100mm (65IRL), penetration: 90mm (49-17mm depending on distance, angle of impact, with the 2 pounder (i assumed this to be Valentine MKIII))

Are these values set up like this for balance reasons, are they were just overlooked?

Thank you!

[PMCN]

One thing I noticed when comparing the forces for the 25th Army from the Neihorster site to what I saw in game was the independent engineering, tank and recon regiments.  These are actually battalion sized formations regardless of the name but the counter for them shows a "III" of a regiment.  Is the TOE for a battalion or a regiment?

[Kereguelen]

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

One thing I noticed when comparing the forces for the 25th Army from the Neihorster site to what I saw in game was the independent engineering, tank and recon regiments.  These are actually battalion sized formations regardless of the name but the counter for them shows a "III" of a regiment.  Is the TOE for a battalion or a regiment?

Battalion TOE's.

But it doesn't make any difference in the game (technically) if a LCU is defined as a battalion or as a regiment.

[PMCN]

Thanks for the reply.  The definition isn't important but the TOE would be!  It would probably be confusing to show "II" and beside that have the name Ind. x Rgt.

[FatR]

I have a question that is related to modding (sorry if it already had been asked). If I change armament for some but not all units from a certain category, will the reinforcements they receive be determined by their "template" TOE, or by changes I introduced? For example, if I change the type of AA gun in some of Japanese AA regiments from X to Y, without changing TOE, will these units receive guns of type Y as reinforcements?

[BigJ62]

don't do that, currently mismatch toes can cause problems if the devices don't match as far as replacements are concerned.
devices should match toe.

ORIGINAL: FatR

I have a question that is related to modding (sorry if it already had been asked). If I change armament for some but not all units from a certain category, will the reinforcements they receive be determined by their "template" TOE, or by changes I introduced? For example, if I change the type of AA gun in some of Japanese AA regiments from X to Y, without changing TOE, will these units receive guns of type Y as reinforcements?

[jwilkerson]

ORIGINAL: Paul McNeely

Thanks for the reply.  The definition isn't important but the TOE would be!  It would probably be confusing to show "II" and beside that have the name Ind. x Rgt.

A number of Armies in WWII used a name like "regiment" to refer to units whose TOE was more like "battalion" ... Japanese recon, engineer and tank units were among them.

[Andy Mac]

I always struggle with Regiments being more akin to a Bde in the US Army I guess its what you are used to Regiment = Bn for me