Experimental Estab & Scn

[Lieste]

Played about a bit with the Estab editor:

Armour:
UK Armd Regts - no 17pdr at HQ. only 4 17pdr in each Sdn. (not used in the scn)
Armour values (heavy armour and T/D) all adjusted to be average of thick*(cos(30)/cos(slope))^1.45
Armour penetration (all guns) all adjusted to be the nominal 30 degree penetration.
Cromwell equipped with Applique armour.
Most missing MG34 added to SPW - let me know if I missed any.

Artillery:
Effective radius re-calculated based on area of 50% ECR of 25lbr, modified for shaping factor. The relative effectiveness of each shell given in 'weight of fire' website plotted against calibre and shell weight gave a closer fit for calibre based estimate. New radius ~ 0.1467 Cal^0.8726
Most weapons have a revised radius which is around 50% of the original value - some mid calibre weapons are reduced less (note this must be an integer - I missed this the first time around, and had to re-edit the file correcting it). Artillery effectiveness is 'about' 1/3 to 1/4 of original values (I think??), but it can be fired closer to defending/assaulting troops due to smaller units and reduced ECR.
Firing Battalions broken down into 3 bty, plus HQ and base - can be moved en-bloc using HQ and no-basing, or individually arranged. HQ can also act as spotter for Bn if Basing is used.

Nebelwerfer:
ECR calculated as above, plus 2m for 'vertical' descent and tail mounted warhead/thin case. Might need reducing to standard value - thoughts on effectiveness welcome..
Firing batteries arranged as for FH Bn.
Reload reduced from 10 minutes to 1 minute for 15cm NW (NW41) or 3 minutes (IIRC) for 21cm NW.
Rates of fire 1rpm in slow, 6rpm for both normal and rapid fire.
Although you can fire close to friendly units, be aware that the pattern scatters outside of the 'safe' box a bit, and you can inadvertently drop fire on assaulting troops even without ignoring their presence.

Infantry:
The infantry battalion also receives a base unit, of small capacity. Often (partially) deprecated in favour of Regt base, particularly when the latter is forward positioned, but retains small reserve that can you can afford to push forward into a Kessel.

Armour:
UK Armd Regts - no 17pdr at HQ. only 4 17pdr in each Sdn. (not used in the scn)

Other minor additions - some more wildly experimental than others.


The scenario test file grew from a test of the new ROF of the NebelWerfer & it's battalion base, into a small river-assault crossing:

(Most of an) Infantry division seizing two bridges across the Our, each defended by a US infantry battalion force, with a third Bn, plus an artillery Bn and light armour Bn in reserve.
Decidedly unbalanced - the US heavy equipment is off map at start, and NW barrages - although scarce - are potent. There are no dedicated A/T guns or T/D in the German orbat as given. German Artillery is mostly motorised, where it should be mostly horse drawn.

Reduced artillery effectiveness overall means that total routing/destruction/surrender purely from artillery is rare, but an assault by a battalion supported by regimental artillery or NW barrages will usually force a retreat or the surrender of an unsupported deployed company. Artillery is still effective at forcing an attack to go to ground, but fll-blown retreats and routs are rarer (except where caused by combination of suppression and direct fire). Light artillery/tanks are less capable of holding ground on their own - a determined infantry attack is more likely to get close, due to reduced routing from their heavy weapons - offensive artillery again helps with the necessary suppression to protect assaulting infantry, but cannot destroy armour alone (though a few vehicles seemed to be lost after heavy barrages).
Scenario length is too long - the US force seldom survives much beyond mid-day on day 2.

Comments & thoughts welcome. Adding more 'subunit' artillery and other support units is planned, but it would be good to have feedback on usability and whether the AI can use it too.

If you need to edit & re-compile the Estab it uses a suitably renamed 'stock' images folder (left out of download for size reasons).
The Zipfile has scenario and estab paths, unzip into BFTB root directory, or manually drag files into relevant folder.

[Lieste]

A couple of errors - I meant to suppress the Regt Bases, but I think they are still present - the newly raised Bn bases are possibly a touch large (particularly for infantry) and are motorised - I need to look a bit more closely at them (basically half of the Regt Base). They are also set to Bn size, should be one echelon lower ie Company - it doesn't seem to actually break anything, but worth fixing later.

I'll push a new version of the scn and Estab with fixes at the weekend.

[parmenio]

Excellent! 

I've no time until Friday but I'll look forward to having a play.

[Lieste]

Still fiddling... have revised the terrain table, and the first impression was very favourable. Using the same revised values in this scenario produced a very different feel to the action, with more 'Elan' to the attacks (and counter attacks) - with luck you can close assault armoured companies with infantry [:D] ... of course it can all go horribly wrong too, if you start a bit far out, or he gets lucky or remembered his infantry supports... Most actions result in a few casualties to each side - far fewer no-effect battles that run out of ammunition - though you can still get an out of ammunition stale-mate it is usually after both forces have taken some KIA/WIA. Underestimating the strength of a strongpoint and assaulting across open ground towards massed HMG is not good at all though... [X(]
Finally armour operating alone in BUA or woods is asking for pain... which is as it should be.

The battlefield seems much emptier, with units mostly only showing up when firing or moving. A lot of ambushes and "unexpected" contacts, as well as the standard set-piece movements to contact. Indirect fires made a bit less effective overall*, and direct fire made more effective (when there is anything to fire at).
* ISTR a document seen many years ago that rated direct fires as 10x as efficient as indirect - I think it was to do with the Soviet use of tank and gun-howitzer direct fires for preparatory neutralisation fires but the exact source is lost in the sands of time... Any lack of efficiency you can make up with by just firing at a higher rate or for longer... Direct fires are also only useful when the target is visible, while barrage fire can be shot blind with little difference in effect.

Hard to tell how close it is to a 'final' set, as many units are still surrendering (but even this is reduced a bit as visibility ranges for stationary units is shorter), this tends to distort the kill-ratios a wee bit.