Please Sir, send the 105mm AA guns to the front!

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: Baron von Beer

But all that said, you can't honestly say the idea of an SS Panzer Division filled out with 200 Tigers doesn't make your barrel elevate. [:D]

I plead the 5th!

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

I wish I had more control over creating units, keeping units versus withdrawl or better yet, having the ability to upgrade or not upgrade to next TOE change. I could have 1/2 divisions at 45 TOE and the other 1/2 at 42 TOE if I wanted them to be.

I am very glad this level of control is NOT available. Quite simply, it allows the player way too much ability to optimize, while ignoring the real life reasons such things were not done.

There is a reason units have TO&E, and it has to do with much more than just economics and logistics. It also has to do with consistent doctrine, tactics, and employment of resources. The German military of WW2 was already incredibly inefficient in these factors, with specialized units all over the place with varying TO&E, and it hurt them in many ways. There was no consistency in capability, supply needs, spare parts, etc., etc. between what should have been similar units.

Allowing the player to "tweak" this even more would just give the players even more ability to ignore the real life limitations. You know what would happen - players would just optimize the fighting formations at the expense of the more static formations. That isn't a bad thing in theory (lord knows the Germans and Russians did just that) but I don't think it should be allowed to be done anymore than was actually done. JMO of course.

Not to mention that the TOEs changed due to losses. Hard to have a division with a 1941 authorized strength of 10,000 if by 1945 you don't have the troops to give it more than 5,000.

Russians had the same problem. Many divisions in 45 were down to 2,000 men.

[karonagames]

Not to mention that the TOEs changed due to losses. Hard to have a division with a 1941 authorized strength of 10,000 if by 1945 you don't have the troops to give it more than 5,000.

Ummm... the TOE's for Infantry Divisions do change each year, and you can adjust the max. TOE of each individual unit to a minimum of 50%

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

Not to mention that the TOEs changed due to losses. Hard to have a division with a 1941 authorized strength of 10,000 if by 1945 you don't have the troops to give it more than 5,000.

Russians had the same problem. Many divisions in 45 were down to 2,000 men.

Indeed. Both sides realized that while the 10k man division might be ideal, a division at 50% strength of a 19k division was NOT ideal, and you were better off designing for the smaller size, rather than having a 10k TOE at 50% strength.

In other words, a division designed to be 6000 men at full strength is better than a division designed to be 10,000 men at 60% strength.

The germans did this a LOT with their Panzer divisions. By the end of the war the "Panzer" division TOE was what, half the number of tanks? And less in reality?

I remember noting that a typical US infantry division in late 1944 had more AFVs directly attached to it than most Panzer divisions.

[Great_Ajax]

You nailed it. During 1941, Eastern Front units only got around 20-25% of all armored vehicle production. So in the short term, the German player gets the benefit of average production up front, then it levels out in the middle, and then has to deal with less than ideal production at the end. The pool is where the game makes up those cyclic peeks and dips.

Trey

ORIGINAL: wosung

ORIGINAL: el hefe

No, those pools are specifically for the Eastern Front and Jim would have to give you the specifics on the production model. My point is that it is difficult to first of all figure out exactly how many units of x went to Russia. Anybody have the exact number of 105mm Howitzers or the number of Bf-109G6s that were sent to Russia as replacements during the entire war? We know about how many total were produced during the war and then we have to strip out the number of units were shipped with reinforcing units and thus leaving us with a rough number of units that were shipped as replacements. Then we say that x % were shipped East and then we average that number over the number of months of the conflict. This doesn't model any production that increases or decreases over time as it is just an average so it would be a lofty goal to make a production model that is dynamic enough to model the complexities of historical production. Not being defensive here but production is a tough one and compromises were made to make a game. There is so much information that is hard to obtain that you end up making educated guesses. Try figuring out the German manpower situation in 1941. Thats a fun on too.

Trey

Using average numbers for production probably made the game easier to design and to code. So it was the right decision to take.

OTH, fixed average production numbers don’t represent German weapon allocation for the Eastern front, which was not very steady during the war. Tanks were held back to equip new units instead of strenghtening those up front. The decision maker’s strategic outlook about a quick victory in the East in 1941 influenced weapon allocation in the Führer state considerably, as well as changing the strategic Schwerpunkt towards Western Europe in late 1943. So, for the East replacements there were considerable ups and downs from month to month. No fixed replacement percentage for the 1941-1945 time span possibly could represent this. Arguably, the percentage of East replacements out of the total German production pool, could have reached its peak in 1942 and 1943, after the sure bet Barbarossa was fought with older use-w/o-replacement-weapons (Verbrauchsgerät) and before the strategic reorientation.

But collecting valid data about East-only weapons allocation IS a royal pain. FREX, apparently valid allcation numbers for field and AT guns in 1941 just don’t exist. Until Oct. 1941 those (well known) losses more or less were made up from general-quartermaster’s pool plus by transfers from Commander Ersatzheer and from Quartermaster West. From then to the end of the year losses simply weren’t made up, because it was planned to repatriate most Ostdivisions after the expected victory without their heavy equipment and their heavy weapons. This material was to make up losses in the occupational forces remaining in the East. Bottom line: No exact numbers for 105 mm howitzer replacements for 1941.

Sources:
Bernhard R. Kroener, Die personellen Ressourcen des Dritten Reiches im Spannungsfeld zwischen Wehrmacht, Bürokratie und Kriegswirtschaft 1939-42 [Third Reich’s personnel ressources between Wehrmacht, bureaucracy and war economy], in: Deutschland und der Zweite Weltkrieg, vol. 5.1, pp. 693-1001, esp. p. 867.
Ibd., p. 868. Rolf-Dieter Müller, Das Scheitern der wirtschaftlichen "Blitzkriegstrategie" [The failed economic Blitzkrieg strategy], in: Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, Vol. 4, Der Angriff auf die Sowjetunion, pp. 936-1078, see pp. 974-975. tm.asp?m=2684171&mpage=1&key=�


As for German manpower situation in 1941:
tm.asp?m=2696271&mpage=1&key=?

Regards

[bodmerm]

I have the same problem. 400 105 mm AA guns, 100 Tigers and 360 Stug IIIb (?) waiting in the pool. Needs to be fixed since my panzer divisions hardly get replacements (medium tanks). In addition, I have aboout 170 BT-70 as light tanks.

[Berkut]

But none of those things are medium tanks. How is this a problem that needs to be fixed?

Are you suggesting that if there are not medium tanks available, your Panzer divisions should take 105mm AA guns instead?

[Steelers708]

Here are the Tiger I production figures.



The argument over these 200 Tiger I's being historical or not is irrelevant, the game is only historical in the sense that the Divisions etc that were on the Eastern Front are on the whole on the Eastern Front. As soon as you start playing the game it becomes 'ahistorical', why do I say that? Well the German divisions are tied to the games defined TOE, you have no control over individual Pz Abt, your Pz divs' are what they are until the TOE changes when they all change at once and this is once again just plain 'ahistorical'.

Allow to explain further, the TOE's do not take into account that some Pz Divs' had 3 Pz Abt whilst the rest had 2, it also doesn't take into account that from mid 1943 onwards most Pz Divs' fighting on the Eastern Front fought with only a single Pz Abt as the other one would either be refitting(usually in France) with Panthers, or detached to another Pz div' or to act as HeeresTruppen.

Talking of units re-equipping with Panthers, in game they all appear to re-equip with the introduction of the March '44 TOE and yet some Pz Abt. received them in September/October 1943 whilst some even later(than March 44) e.g. July 1944.

In terms of the fixed TOE it has the advantage that at times units will be stronger than they actually were, but at the same time it has the disadvantage that units may be weaker than they actually were, one example is the 101st Pz Brigade which arrives in August 44 and is never withdrawn, when in reality it was disbanded and integrated into the 20. Pz division in October 1944.

Personally I hate the fixed TOE concept, If I'm doing historically better in say late 1944- early 1945 and I have the required stocks, e.g. 3000 Pzkpfw IV & 2000 Panthers, and relatively no fuel or transport problems why on earth would I choose in real life to change to the '45 Pz Div TOE, and after losses, give each Pz Div just 20 of each tank. The same can be said for any period though, if you have the required stocks you should be able to either bring forward or more importantly delay/not implement a later TOE if it is detrimental to your forces..

[Lrfss]

ORIGINAL: Steelers708

Here are the Tiger I production figures.



The argument over these 200 Tiger I's being historical or not is irrelevant, the game is only historical in the sense that the Divisions etc that were on the Eastern Front are on the whole on the Eastern Front. As soon as you start playing the game it becomes 'ahistorical', why do I say that? Well the German divisions are tied to the games defined TOE, you have no control over individual Pz Abt, your Pz divs' are what they are until the TOE changes when they all change at once and this is once again just plain 'ahistorical'.

Allow to explain further, the TOE's do not take into account that some Pz Divs' had 3 Pz Abt whilst the rest had 2, it also doesn't take into account that from mid 1943 onwards most Pz Divs' fighting on the Eastern Front fought with only a single Pz Abt as the other one would either be refitting(usually in France) with Panthers, or detached to another Pz div' or to act as HeeresTruppen.

Talking of units re-equipping with Panthers, in game they all appear to re-equip with the introduction of the March '44 TOE and yet some Pz Abt. received them in September/October 1943 whilst some even later(than March 44) e.g. July 1944.

In terms of the fixed TOE it has the advantage that at times units will be stronger than they actually were, but at the same time it has the disadvantage that units may be weaker than they actually were, one example is the 101st Pz Brigade which arrives in August 44 and is never withdrawn, when in reality it was disbanded and integrated into the 20. Pz division in October 1944.

Personally I hate the fixed TOE concept, If I'm doing historically better in say late 1944- early 1945 and I have the required stocks, e.g. 3000 Pzkpfw IV & 2000 Panthers, and relatively no fuel or transport problems why on earth would I choose in real life to change to the '45 Pz Div TOE, and after losses, give each Pz Div just 20 of each tank. The same can be said for any period though, if you have the required stocks you should be able to either bring forward or more importantly delay/not implement a later TOE if it is detrimental to your forces..

Now this makes good sense! Great idea as well... +1

[Berkut]

man, it is clear from that table that the Wehrmacht had just given up there at the end.

The goal for August of '44 was only 9? Pathetic! What was Speer thinking???

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

man, it is clear from that table that the Wehrmacht had just given up there at the end.

The goal for August of '44 was only 9? Pathetic! What was Speer thinking???

They probably switched production to King Tiger. The idea probably was: now that we irritated WITE players by producing 200 Tigers that only sit in their pools lets add insult to the injury by doing the same with King Tigers MWAGGHAHAHAHAHA [:D]

[Baron von Beer]

As far as the 105mm AA in the pool, that is a TO&E issue (not saying bug/mistake, simply the cause). You start the game with 400 assigned to the heavy/city based FLAK regiments. However, the TO&E of those regiments does not include the 105mm AA, so they eventually leak back into the pool and no unit in the game appears to utilize this piece of equipment. 

Just assume Herman took his toys West, and doesn't like to share.

[Berkut]

I would pay real money for the Devs to add the Maus to the production schedule. Say 3 per month or so.

Don't ever let them get into a unit of course. Just let them sit there gathering dust...that should drive everyone absolutely insane.

ZOMG I COULD WIN TEH WOR!!!!

[karonagames]

tm.asp?m=2639590

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

I would pay real money for the Devs to add the Maus to the production schedule. Say 3 per month or so.

Don't ever let them get into a unit of course. Just let them sit there gathering dust...that should drive everyone absolutely insane.

ZOMG I COULD WIN TEH WOR!!!!

Or, as Elvira, the Tiger Crew training hottie would say..."Is that a Maus jumping around in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?"

[Speedysteve]

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

Not to mention that the TOEs changed due to losses. Hard to have a division with a 1941 authorized strength of 10,000 if by 1945 you don't have the troops to give it more than 5,000.

Russians had the same problem. Many divisions in 45 were down to 2,000 men.

Indeed. Both sides realized that while the 10k man division might be ideal, a division at 50% strength of a 19k division was NOT ideal, and you were better off designing for the smaller size, rather than having a 10k TOE at 50% strength.

In other words, a division designed to be 6000 men at full strength is better than a division designed to be 10,000 men at 60% strength.

The germans did this a LOT with their Panzer divisions. By the end of the war the "Panzer" division TOE was what, half the number of tanks? And less in reality?

I remember noting that a typical US infantry division in late 1944 had more AFVs directly attached to it than most Panzer divisions.

IIRC, Mr Hitler wanted to double the number of Panzer divisions for Barbarossa. Being that they couldn't produce the number of tanks et al needed, they did they only thing they could do and cut the TOE in half.

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Baron von Beer

As far as the 105mm AA in the pool, that is a TO&E issue (not saying bug/mistake, simply the cause). You start the game with 400 assigned to the heavy/city based FLAK regiments. However, the TO&E of those regiments does not include the 105mm AA, so they eventually leak back into the pool and no unit in the game appears to utilize this piece of equipment. 

Just assume Herman took his toys West, and doesn't like to share.

And Herman hated to share anything,

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: BigAnorak

Not to mention that the TOEs changed due to losses. Hard to have a division with a 1941 authorized strength of 10,000 if by 1945 you don't have the troops to give it more than 5,000.

Ummm... the TOE's for Infantry Divisions do change each year, and you can adjust the max. TOE of each individual unit to a minimum of 50%

I know that. But I'm not talking game wise.

[hammeredalways]

given that this excellent game is modelled off of historical production values there is always likely to be variations once the Campaign starts as players ability will like vary the historical performance of either the Axis or Soviets. The key presumably is to try and establish if this a local anomaly or something deeper.
 
Until this is established the underlying dynamics of the game model are unlikely to be changed, so the perhaps the poster could try and make some local tests, perhaps simply changing the availability date of additional Hvy Tank Units, or using the editor to add a few additional ones to take care of the temporary surplus. If the game is working correctly any additional Hvy Tank Units will draw the tanks from the pool, then simply commit the units to battle etc. etc.. As the production levels out the player then has the opportunity to disband units that are understrength (presumably heavy attrition of Tigers will force the player back to historical amount of units deployed).
 
It is unlikely that the additional of a few additional Hvy Tank Units will break the game, but it is probable that if a player is performing beyond historical Axis performance that they may have surpluses in in some equipment. Historically had the Germans had made significantly better progress in 42/43 than they did, and had the luxury of 200 spare Tigers it is highly likely they would have deployed them, the editor already allows the player some local autonomy to achieve this if desired without needing to change the game model (after all this is a game not an historical simulation)
 
perhaps the poster could try and let us know, or not?