Other Corps Formations

[Montbrun]

I have seen references to Infantry, Airborne, Mechanized, and Armored Corps. I have not seen any references to Mountain or Cavalry Corps.

Mountain Corps:

The Germans formed approximately ten Heer Gebirgs-Divisionen, and six SS Gebirgs-Divisionen, and nine Heer Gebirgs-Korps, and two SS Gebirgs-Korps. Obviously, the Heer Korps did not all exist at the same time, and were fleshed-out with other types of divisions. However, I think that this allows for about three Heer Gebirgs-Korps, and one SS Gebirgs-Korps.

The Italians formed six of their famous Divisione Alpina, which were considered elite troops, and approximately fifteen “mountain” divisions, which were just lighter versions of the continental infantry divisions, meant for employment in the Balkans. There was one Alpino Corps formed, but I think that the justification for two Italian Mountain Corps is there.

The Rumanians formed four Divisia Munte (initially “Brigada Mixta Munte”) formed into one Corpul Munte. These were also condidered elite troops, and could warrant one Mountain Corps.

The Hungarians only formed two small Mountain Brigades during the war, and shouldn’t warrant a corps.

The pre-armistice French formed six Division d'Infanterie (27e, 30e, 31e, 64e, 65e, and 66e) specifically trained in mountain warfare. I believe that this could warrant two mountian-capable corps.

On 06/22/41, the Soviet Union had fifteen Mountain Rifle Divisions, mostly concentrated in the Transcaucasus Military District. As these divsions were “burnt-out” or destroyed, the remnants were converted to, or incorporated into regular Rifle Divisions. This still might warrant the inclusion of one or two Mountain Corps.

Cavalry Corps:

At the beginning of the war, the Germans had one Kavallerie-Division. This unit was withdrawn from the Russian Front during November of 1941, and converted to the 24. Panzer-Division. Later, the Heer formed several Kavallerie-Brigaden which were eventually combined into two Kavallerie-Divisionen. The SS also formed three Kavallerie-Divisionen, and one Kavallerie-Korps. I believe that this could warrant the inclusion of one Heer Kavallerie-Korps, and one SS Kavallerie-Korps.

The Italians formed three Cavalry Divisions, the 1a Divisione di Cavalleria “Eugenio di Savoia,” the 2a Divisione di Cavalleria “Emanuele Filiberto Testa di Ferro,” and the 3a Divisione di Cavalleria “Principe Amedeo Duca d'Aosta.” However, these divisions were a combination of horsed regiments, Bersaglieri regiments, an armored battalion, and motorized assets. These units could represent a Mechanized Corps, rather than a Cavalry Corps.

The Rumanians formed six Divisia Cavalerie (originally Brigada Cavalerie) and one Guards Cavalry Regiment (the “Regiment Garda Calare”), and one Cavalry Corps. However, I think that two Cavalry Corps could be warranted.

The Hungarians only formed one Cavalry Brigade during the war, and shouldn’t warrant a corps.

Like the Italians, the French formed five Division Légère de Cavalerie (DLC), which were comprised of mixed horsed cavalry, motorized, and armored assets. This could probably be better represented as a Mechanized Corps.

The Soviet Union was the most prolific user of horsed cavalry units. The horsed cavalry in the Soviet army was used to exploit gaps created in the line, and fill a perceived niche between the “leg infantry” and mechanized units. On 06/22/41, there were thirteen Cavalry Divisions in four Cavalry Corps. There were another one hundred and four Cavalry, Light Cavalry, Mountain Cavalry, and Guards Cavalry Divisions created during the war. However, several were disbanded, or absorbed by Rifle Divisions. The Guards Cavalry Divisions were created from the line Cavalry Divisions. I think that this could warrant the inclusion of approximately twenty Cavalry Corps.

Also, I have a question. After late 1942, would all US or Commonwealth Corps be considered Mechanized Corps, considering, at this scale, the motorization, and “typical” organization of the inclusion of armored formations within the corps?

[Zovs]

Now that was a great post with a lot of good meat on it!

[AlvaroSousa]

There are mountain and cavalry in the game.

As for motorization. The USA's large corps are motorized which means they get +1 operation points but cost more supplies to operate overseas. I wanted to give an option for anyone to motorize but it would only be an enormous advantage to the Allies since they have all the oil.

[Michael T]

The allies may have had loads of oil at the source, but getting that oil to the front was the issue. Also it's the number of trucks available to the Allies that limits motorization of Infantry Corp/Div.

Some games I have played gave the allies a limited number of Truck counters. They could then allocate these truck counters to any Inf units they liked to motorize them on a temporary basis.

Historically the allies had severe fuel problems after the breakout from Normandy in 1944. I hope Warplan can reflect this aspect.

[AlvaroSousa]

That is port supply overseas and the Germans can interfere with it. USA large corps use more supplies than other nations.

[Montbrun]

Thanks for the replies.

The Allies did face a severe fuel shortage during the latter part of 1944 - early 1945.

[Michael T]

That is port supply overseas and the Germans can interfere with it. USA large corps use more supplies than other nations.

Really the Germans were not doing much to hinder allied supply to Europe in 1944, other than hanging on to ports or demolishing them. The limitation in France after the breakout was a lack of operational channel ports. They had to truck all fuel/supplies from Cherbourg to the front. Hence the 'Redball Express'.

And the failure of Monty to secure Antwerp early was another problem.

[Fred98]

ORIGINAL: Montbrun

I have seen references to Infantry, Airborne, Mechanized, and Armored Corps. I have not seen any references to Mountain or Cavalry Corps.

Most units in the game will, it seems, be at Corps level.

The thing is that armoured units had some infantry within the unit as support;
And infantry units had some armour within the unit as support.
And all of them had engineers within the unit as support.

At this scale, I am not a fan of having specialised units. Rather, units should have varying amounts of ability to fight against enemy units that also have varying amounts of ability. Some have more armour and some some have less.The units with more armour simply cost a whole lot more to produce.

[AlvaroSousa]

The specialties don't impact combat much. If you have the completely opposite build for the function at best it impacts 10% of the combat ability of the unit if it is in that specific situation. The specialties aren't super powers. Like the elite specialty is +10% experience. They represent fanatical Nazis units, Red Banner Armies, or pretty much the best trained units for example.

You can also play a game with a friend and just say you don't want to use specialty points.