Land Combat Unit suggestions

Major Tom · Post by **Major Tom** » Wed May 10, 2000 6:27 am

Hi, I guess this could be the thread where people could post things they would like to see for Land Combat Units. I guess that I will start off...

1. Have different types of units (Cavalry, Infantry, Armour, Airborne, Marine, Base Troops, Engineers, etc...). Each unit, Division/Regiment/Brigade/Battalion of Cavalry would have a different TOE than one of Infantry, or Armour.

2. Have a different TOE for each Nationality. A regular establishment of troops and guns of a Japanese Triangle Division is different from a Japanese Square Division, an American/Philippine Division, a Dutch Division or a British/Commonwealth Division.

3. Have AFV's modeled like aircraft (ie. Different types). Not every Land Combat Unit had AFV's as well. I liked how War In Russia did AFV's, with them being a separate entity, even from the units that they were attached too.

4. Have the transfer of units to HQ's editable. For example, one can change the date or trigger for when the Australian 7th Infantry Division transferrs from ANZAC to SW Pacific.

5. Have the splitting off of units from a parent force become more than just dividing everything in half. Sometimes I don't want to have to divide a Division three times in order to get a Battalion. I would like the possibility of selecting the size of the unit.

6. Have historical TOE's for National Divisions. British/Commonwealth formations had no Regiments. So, when they divide units there is just Division to Brigade to Battalion. The older style Japanese divisions had a combination of Brigades and Regiments, two Brigades with two Regiments. Whereas the American, Dutch and Triangle Japanese Divisions had Division to Regiment to Battalion.

Major Tom · Post by **Major Tom** » Thu May 11, 2000 7:52 am

Just for some ideas of AFV's that I am aware served in the Pacific with some dates and places of service that I am pretty sure of.

M3 Stuart (US Army, USMC, Australian Army)
Served in the Philippines in 1941
Served in New Guinea in 1942
Served on Tarawa in 1943

M3 Grant (British Army)
Served at Imphal in 1944

M4 Sherman (US Army, USMC)
Served on Tarawa in 1943
Served on Leyte in 1944
Served on Luzon in 1944

Matilda II (Australian Army, British Army)
Served on New Guinea 1942
Served on Borneo 1944
Served at Burma 1942

Valentine II (Australian Army, British Army)
Served on New Guinea 1943
Served on Solomans 1943
Served at Burma 1943

Vickers II (Dutch Army)
Served on Java 1942

Vickers VI (British Army)
Served at Burma 1942
Served at Java 1942

Type 95 (IJA, IJN)
Served at all theatres of war

There are many other types of Japanese tanks, but, it seems the Type 95 was the most common. There were some SP-guns in service as well.

Major Tom · Post by **Major Tom** » Thu May 18, 2000 9:04 am

Another addition to the LCU topic is that of a larger number of possible units.

There were MANY independent Japanese brigades that could not be represented due to the fact that there wasn't enough room. There were 20+ stationed in Manchuria and China, along with many garrisoning the Home Islands.

Also, Infantry replacements should not go in a general pool, especially for the Allies. There should be separate replacement levels for Infantry for the Americans (USN & USArmy & USMC) British, Indian, Dutch, Philippine, Australian, New Zealand, Chinese, (Russian?). Many nations had ample supplies of troops (Chinese, Indians), yet, others experienced major shortages later in the war (Australian, New Zealand, British) and others had poor beginning reinforcements and never had time to accelerate conscription (Dutch & Philippine) and, others had no real worry of replacements (American).

Also, there should be the option of dispanding formations in order to get their infantry replacements. The Australian/New Zealand armies had to dispand formations (1, 2 & 3 AUS Armd Divs, 3 NZ Inf Div) in order to keep the others at full strength.

[This message has been edited by Major Tom (edited 05-18-2000).]