What's Your Opinion on Renamed Units?

Paul Lewis · Post by **Paul Lewis** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 7:39 pm

Which format do you guys prefer? For example:

"US Rifle Sq" (Generic Default)

or

"229th A/2Pn/3Sq" (Historic)

Some players don't like the historic naming because it doesn't tell them what the unit is. Others like the historic references, and don't mind right-clicking to see what the unit consists of.

Do you guys find that the historic renaming of units interferes with your gameplay?

Please respond!

dox44 · Post by **dox44** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 7:52 pm

generic...

Christian Blex · Post by **Christian Blex** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 7:56 pm

I prefer the historic naming. It underlines the feeling of replaying/rewriting history.

Tankhead · Post by **Tankhead** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 8:01 pm

It is nice to be historic but when it comes to naming units I like generic. You start naming all the units then you don't no what kind of units you shooting with was it a 50 or 37 ect.. Then you have to look at the unit screen all the time or renaming everything makes for very slow play.

Tankhead

RockinHarry · Post by **RockinHarry** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 8:07 pm

I like the "historic" idea, but prefer the "generic". It´s simply more playable.

____________
RockinHarry

Mikimoto · Post by **Mikimoto** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 8:12 pm

The historic is more realistic, but Generics are more playable. In Campaigns (Generated Campaigns) I like to name certain units in the Kampfgruppe style, with the number of the Company commander. It's fun.

ruxius · Post by **ruxius** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 8:38 pm

As usual truth is in the middle...I like it very much to have historical names..it gives much more importance to what units represent ..
on the other hand you have to know what to do with that unit..so it's not easy to decide..

untill we will not have a longer size field for names I try to do half and half...

So I named some units as "Dubat inf" to make clear it is infantry,while Dubat is some
less generic indication about them..
Other times I wrote "Ras Tafan" only trusting in the icon showing a group of infantry...
This is a careful question...but finally I vote for historical...IMHO if one wants anonymous and fast play any on-line battle or any campaign generator could be the right alternative.. a scenario as it required creativity is worthy of a little
"HQ-studying/inspecting" about..

Alexandra · Post by **Alexandra** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 8:53 pm

Well, I fall in the middle here.

I love to rename units. But I don't really like the way it's done in the example because it relies on the player understanding what all the subparts mean, and not everyone does. For that matter, not all armies name thier subunits the same way.

I always rename my units in campaigns, using a formula. The A0 gets renamed to HQ <whatever>. Infantry units gets renamed with the type, and what platoon and squad they are, for example Rifle 1-1. <That would be the first squad, 1st platoon, in a rifle company>. Armor stays generic, until the vehicle gets 5 kills, then it gets renamed after the vehicle commander. This allows me to find my best tankers quickly when I need them!

I don't believe, however, that the gerneric labels are any more playable than renamed units. After all, if you know that country and time period, then you know what the units have and what they can do, regardless of the names. And if you don't, you'll need to refer to the unit stats often in any case.

And, the combat messages are the same if a unit is renamed. If I have a Lt Zieger in a Mk IIIh, and I'm using the generic name, I'll see a combat message like:

PzIII-h fires 50mm gun at Stuart 1a with 35 percent chance to hit.

If I've renamed it, I'd see the same message except with Lt. Ziegler where PzIII-h would be.

I can see it being an issue, perhaps, in head to head play if you rename units while playing a nation that your foe doesn't know, but that can also be a sort of fog of war. After all, the first time the Germans saw T-34s, or the Russians saw Panthers, thier AT gunners couldn't right click to see what they were called and armed with

Alex

panda124c · Post by **panda124c** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 9:03 pm

Originally posted by Paul Lewis:
Which format do you guys prefer? For example:

"US Rifle Sq" (Generic Default)

or

"229th A/2Pn/3Sq" (Historic)

Some players don't like the historic naming because it doesn't tell them what the unit is. Others like the historic references, and don't mind right-clicking to see what the unit consists of.

Do you guys find that the historic renaming of units interferes with your gameplay?

Please respond!

Problem, when you upgrade the name changes back to the generic. So you have to rename them everytime you upgrade. It would help if you could print out a list of your units. Then you could note what type of unit it is.

O de B · Post by **O de B** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 9:25 pm

If it's for a historical scenario design, I vote for :
"229th A/2Pn/3 Rifle Sq"

Or if too long :

"229 A/2/3 Rifle"

Therefore i can see the type of unit and have also historical info.

Redleg · Post by **Redleg** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 9:25 pm

When units are named in Finnish, German, Czech, etc formats, I just ignore them.

I can take it or leave it but when they get too cute, I would rather leave it.

USMCGrunt · Post by **USMCGrunt** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 9:42 pm

My preference is the generic names. I like playing beach assaults and with swarms of infantry running around, I hate have to right click through 20+ units looking for the engineers or assault squad to attack a bunker.

Fabs · Post by **Fabs** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 9:56 pm

I am a historic names fanatic, so much so that if I am developing a fictitious scenario I will invent a fictitious unit to give it a historic designation.

I do this for units that are evident, for instance a 6th Green Howards squad would be called 6GH, A,1,2 for 6th Green Howards, ACoy. 1st Platoon 2nd Squad.

If they are Engineers I would call them 6GH Sappers.

Sometimes you need to adapt.

lnp4668 · Post by **lnp4668** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 10:14 pm

I ususally name mine by unit type/status (elite, veteran, etc) That way I know which units needs some kills

DoubleDeuce · Post by **DoubleDeuce** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 10:33 pm

I use both. Just depends on the situation. If I was designing a scenario I would want to use the historic/military type abbreviations to make it easier for the player to get into the whole scene.

If I was playing PBEM or online I would not worry about it due to the time involved in doing the naming. Besides it only makes it easier for your opponent to target your leaders

Christian Blex · Post by **Christian Blex** » Tue Apr 10, 2001 10:58 pm

originally written by redleg

When units are named in Finnish, German, Czech, etc formats, I just ignore them

In fact, I realy love the German namings.

troopie · Post by **troopie** » Wed Apr 11, 2001 3:26 am

I rename units in small scenarios, or special forces, (e.g SASgrp Ackroyd) or give them call signs (HZ1-rifle). In large scenarios or campaigns, I use the generic.

troopie

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Wed Apr 11, 2001 3:45 am

I prefer generic with the option to rename units of my choice.

Don Doom · Post by **Don Doom** » Wed Apr 11, 2001 3:52 am

I like both. I have learn to just name the A0,B0 or C0 of the groups with names. That way you can still see what the group is.

Flashfyre · Post by **Flashfyre** » Wed Apr 11, 2001 6:40 am

In most cases, I prefer "historical" or unit-style IDs for my troops. I find it easier to keep platoons/companies together. Example:
US Rifle company
(B0) ABLE Co HQ

(C0) ABLE 1/1stPltn
(C1) ABLE 2/1stPltn
(C2) ABLE 3/1stPltn

(D0) ABLE 1/2ndPltn
(D1) ABLE 2/2ndPltn
(D2) ABLE 3/2ndPltn

(E0) ABLE 1/3rdPltn
(E1) ABLE 2/3rdPltn
(E2) ABLE 3/3rdPltn

(F0) ABLE ScoutLdr
(F1) ABLE Scout1
(F2) ABLE Scout2

(G0) ABLE 60mm Mtr
(G1) ABLE MMG1
(G2) ABLE MMG2
(G3) ABLE MMG3

I hate looking thru 30+ "US Rifle Squad"s to find all the members of the 3rd Platoon. Especially after some of them rout and blend in with the reserves.

In some cases (historical scenarios), I use the actual names, i.e. 2/17 A/1/1P for the 1st squad, 1st platoon of Company A, 2nd Battalion, 17th Infantry Regiment.

And, of course, in campaigns I always rename my A0 leader as myself. :p