Finish SU's??

[Capt Cliff]

I see that the Finish HQ's have SU's but the division CU do not have the assign option in their menu, why?

Now I do not have HQ locked checked.

That HQ locked is a bit confusing, something like the ole HP calculator with reverse Polish inputs. It locks units at that HQ so other HQ's can not use the SU's, right?

[2ndACR]

Only 2 Axis Allies I have found that can have any SU assigned are the 2 Rumanian Fort Brigades. I hope they change that. At least the HQ's assign help automatically during battles if they are close enough.

[vinnie71]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Only 2 Axis Allies I have found that can have any SU assigned are the 2 Rumanian Fort Brigades. I hope they change that. At least the HQ's assign help automatically during battles if they are close enough.

Yep and funnily enough these two Romanian brigades can actually have multiple attachments. I too hope that Axis minor allies can get to assign SUs as well because I see no reason for them not having this facility.

[Capt Cliff]

One of the Finish HQ's I looked at had at least 12 SU's!!! But with HQ locked not selected/checked they will sit there, if I am read the locked HQ meaning correctly.

[Baron von Beer]

locked had me scratching my head too. From what I've gathered on here, the SUs will work fine in those locked HQs. When you read it stops "movement" of SUs, it means it stops automatic reassignment, ie: OKH -> AGN -> PZG4,  not stop those SUs from joining battles within the HQ's range.  It simply makes it so the player and only the player can swap them between HQs. You send unit XXX to HQ YYY, it will remain there until you move it. Likewise, reinforcements will go to OKH/Stavka until you tell them where to go. It's the "AI keep your dirty mitts off muh stuff!" switch.

*Waiting to be told I've got it completely wrong and return to being totally clueless.   [:D]

[2ndACR]

Nope, that is how it works. I keep forgetting to lock OKH and now I have 4 Stug, 3 Art, 2 Pioneer waiting to be assigned. I locked it a few turns ago. I found a 16th Army Corp that had only 3 Div yet had 4 art, 7 Stug, 5 Pioneer in it. Blasted computer.[:-]

[karonagames]

Yep and funnily enough these two Romanian brigades can actually have multiple attachments.

I'll have to double check that as a possible bug - they may have picked up some fortified zone characteristics by mistake, or it could be there intended as mobile fortified zones.

[vinnie71]

In fact they are Fortress Brigades found in XI Rumanian Corps.

Will Axis minor ally divisions be able to attach SUs from next patch?

[karonagames]

Will Axis minor ally divisions be able to attach SUs from next patch?

That's not in anything being tested atm.

[vinnie71]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

Will Axis minor ally divisions be able to attach SUs from next patch?

That's not in anything being tested atm.

that's a great pity since most minor axis ally SUs end up doing nothing for a long time. Also direct attachment of say MG, ski and AT battalions was normal during the war and it would make them a little more competitive vs the Red Army.

[Capt Cliff]

Minor Ally SU's need to be assigned to lower command units.

[karonagames]

I think it was design decision to reflect the lesser tactical/operational flexibility of the Axis Allies compared to the German tactical doctrines, but maybe a developer can comment on the design decision

[B455]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

I think it was design decision to reflect the lesser tactical/operational flexibility of the Axis Allies compared to the German tactical doctrines, but maybe a developer can comment on the design decision

Hmm, nevertheless it should not effect the Finnish Army. It was very flexible and "kampfgruppes" etc were constantly formed. Also, this is off the top of my head so I could be wrong, I think in the north Germans and Finns had "kampfgruppes" composed of mixed German and Finnish units. Finnish artillery was far more flexible and more accurate than German btw.

[Flaviusx]

Arguably the Finns should be treated differently than the other Axis minors so far as this goes and be allowed attachments.

On the bright side, the new SU commitment code should get more of the Axis minor SUs into play.

[Update]

Thanks for the nice comments on Finns. [:D]

History:
Starting from the Winter War(11/39) Finns formed different Taisteluosasto (Combat team or -group, in German that would be Kampfgruppe[X(]) by taking infantry unit (size from battalion to regiment/brigade) and assigning different support units (SU's!) to it in permanent or semi-permanent way. For example: summer -41 Osasto L (Lagus) was formed by taking 1. JPr (Jager Brigade) and attaching to it one (and only) Finnish armored battalion, Motorized AT-Bn (the only one), motorized engineer Bn and extra artillery. The first three were with brigade almost a year and then were included to the armored division at the time of it's forming.

Therefore, I think that Finns should be able to assign SU's to Div (x3), Brig (x3) and Rgt (x1) on the next batch. Other Minor Axis I am not familiar enough to give exact info, but I feel that they should be also looked into.

[vinnie71]

Flexibility is relative. For example the Rumanians had rather rigid artillery doctrines (corps artillery mostly) but did attach pak and machine gun battalions to particular division, especially if they were interested in holding a particular position or in assaulting one. I'm not sure about AA and indipendent horse battalions. Sometimes they even had German SUs with them mixed in as a 'stiffening' though that would be very problematic to implement and I only recollect it happening a few times.
 
The Hungarian army seems to have evolved over time during the war (as reflected in the TO&E upgrades). I don't know much about them so I can't really comment and they also seem to have a low number of SUs as well.
 
The Italians definitely attached SUs to divisions depending on particular missions. For example in the desert, following their initial collapse, they steadily reinforced their motorised and especially armoured divisions (the latter with the inclusion of Bersaglieri regiment if I remember well). So much so that they aquitted themselves very well and Ariete was especially praised even by Rommel. Also in the fighting in Tunisia, they proved quite adaptable, ironically under Messe (the general in command of the initial ICSR in Russia). 
 
Regarding the Finns, I was under the impression that individual divisions actually took command of any additional forces that high command decided to engage in a particular sector.
 
On the Slovakians, I don't know much but the Schnell division actually operated mostly as part of the Wehrmacht and was highly regarded too.
 
Maybe to reflect less flexibility on part of the minor Axis allies, the allowance of SUs per division could be reduced from the 3 allowed for the Germans to 2 or 1 for their allies. In game terms this would make the Finns a bit more formidable and Romanians slightly less prone to be slaughtered on the first onslaught. Speaking off the top of my head, only the Finns have sufficient SUs to actually have SUs attached directly with each division. The Romanian army is simply too big and they have only a few attachable SUs, the Hungarians have too few SUs and the Italians should have enough attachable SUs for the initial ICSR but not for the army that comes in later.

[Update]

Regarding the Finns, I was under the impression that individual divisions actually took command of any additional forces that high command decided to engage in a particular sector.

That is right, the division took command of any additional general support forces. The case here is that the SU's were assigned directly to these groups (the infantry unit to receive these SU's were mostly independent or detached from the divisional structure at the time), mostly by higher HQ. Sometimes even the GHQ gave an order to form a group for a task that they had in mind. The actual command relationship was determined by the situation. Sometimes groups were under divisions command, sometimes they operated as independent units. The later case was most common in flanks or in a isolated road in the middle of nowhere, so to speak.

[Jakerson]

ORIGINAL: B455
Hmm, nevertheless it should not effect the Finnish Army. It was very flexible and "kampfgruppes" etc were constantly formed. Also, this is off the top of my head so I could be wrong, I think in the north Germans and Finns had "kampfgruppes" composed of mixed German and Finnish units. Finnish artillery was far more flexible and more accurate than German btw.

Finnish artillery could calculate targets fastest during the World War 2 this was largely by the fire control chart developed by General Vilho Petter Nenonen talented officer, also a brilliant scientist and inventor. This enabled the quick transfer of fire (i.e. fast switching of targets).

The new benefits of the new firing chart was numerous. It made the calculation of firing data quicker being at the same time simple enough to be used efficiently in the battlefield. It also removed the usual "bunch of small errors", that plagued the sine-technique. And if the exact position of the battery was unknown, the chart made it possible to determine it's exact position with a few ranging shots.

The fire control chart was quickly classified, as the fast fire control system was, at the time, ahead of any other system anywhere in the world.

More about Finnish artillery tactics from World War II
http://www.winterwar.com/forces/FinArmy/FINartiller.htm

[Capt Cliff]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

I think it was design decision to reflect the lesser tactical/operational flexibility of the Axis Allies compared to the German tactical doctrines, but maybe a developer can comment on the design decision

Huh?? The why even have them?? They sit at HQ and do nothing!!?? In WIR the Fin's had attached units and they worked fine. This might be an oversite. If you want to show lack of tactical flexibility then only allow 1 SU per division.

[karonagames]

They sit at HQ and do nothing!!

They don't do nothing. They will join combats using the normal support unit commitment rules, the only negative from the current system is that they are not guaranteed to join combats due to direct attachment.