R.A.D. units

[panzer51]

So many R.A.D. units (construction) are missing

For example, let's look at 6th Army OOB

http://niehorster.org/011_germany/41-oo ... 6_bau.html

It has K131, K154, K230 and K360 attached to it, as well as I-V R.A.D. detached to 1st Panzergruppe. But in the game they are missing. What's the reason?

[Great_Ajax]

Obscure units. Difficult to find much information about them.

ORIGINAL: panzer51

So many R.A.D. units (construction) are missing

For example, let's look at 6th Army OOB

http://niehorster.org/011_germany/41-oo ... 6_bau.html

It has K131, K154, K230 and K360 attached to it, as well as I-V R.A.D. detached to 1st Panzergruppe. But in the game they are missing. What's the reason?

[Denniss]

Data sources are poor or barely existing. It seesm RAD stopped its construction work in the East front area in autumn 1943, its units getting disbanded and men either absorbed by Army construction units or sent to Field Training divs for Infantry training to become normal soldiers

[panzer51]

Thanks for your answers, but wouldn't that mean they should be present at the start and then perhaps dissolved? 131 for example at least in part was still around through mid-1943.

[Great_Ajax]

I don't think so. There are a lot of actual construction functions that are not represented in the game.

ORIGINAL: panzer51

Thanks for your answers, but wouldn't that mean they should be present at the start and then perhaps dissolved? 131 for example at least in part was still around through mid-1943.

[GibsonPete]

So you are saying the historical research that put these units in WITE I is wrong? All of them. None of them existed. [&:]Then why not remove them instead of placing an unavailable until the scenario ends tag.

[Great_Ajax]

My point was that the game does not even utilize a majority of the construction functions that were performed by all of these construction units during the actual conflict. Things like bridge building and repair, road clearing, infrastructure repair, depot building and repair, road improvements, etc. are not simulated in the game so we don’t need every single obscure construction battalion that existed to be represented in the game. It is a compromise in gameplay.

ORIGINAL: GibsonPete

So you are saying the historical research that put these units in WITE I is wrong? All of them. None of them existed. [&:]Then why not remove them instead of placing an unavailable until the scenario ends tag.

[GibsonPete]

You are right it was a compromise. One that has an effect on gameplay. I realize you are just stating the facts and that our feelings on the matter are not relevant. To those who feel not including those units in the game is incorrect I suggest using the editor.[;)]

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: GibsonPete

You are right it was a compromise. One that has an effect on gameplay. I realize you are just stating the facts and that our feelings on the matter are not relevant. To those who feel not including those units in the game is incorrect I suggest using the editor.[;)]

always a valid response but then to balance I'd suggest increase construction costs to reflect all the things that the game engine abstracts away but actually do need to built/repaired etc?

[GibsonPete]

Personally, I prefer the game as is. IMO, the reasons the developers did not include all the additional SU's is to 'balance' the game. If a player desires more control, they may use the editor. Your valid proposal of making repair rates more historical after providing the missing SU's is an option. I am sure it was discussed and sidelined during beta testing. I can understand the micromanagers who want to control all R.A.D. units. I may not condone it but I understand it.