Under Powered Infantry

[bwheatley]

Well in my talks with tankerace i was under the assumption build rate was daily and being that US & IJA squads would come in at a rate of about 12 a day making it take 20 days to rebuild a full division. But after research build rate is MONTHYL. So that means it will take 20 months to rebuild 1 division. Thats crazy. I think tanker might have had a typo somewhere the buildrate for infantry squads should be about 370 a month. Unless the replacement rate increases eventually??

IF this is indeed a typo on someones part is there anyone i can send one of my PBEM's to and have fixed? That is if the replacement rate doesnt rise eventually due to the scenario. Will it? or am i stuck with 12 squad reinforcements a month for a long time?

[Fallschirmjager]

Rebuilding a 1920 division should take 8-10 months IMO with full equipment.

[bwheatley]

Considering we're playing a game and considering what tankerace said that he wanted to aim for less then 20 months and even considering what you just said it seems like its still too long .

20>8-10

We're not saying these are trained recruits but there would be enough man to fill in the empty spots sure it would sap the experience of the unit but 20 months is just broken it seems like.

[bwheatley]

yikes didnt mean to sound like such a jerk sorry

[bwheatley]

Well my ija squad replacements just went from 12-15 so i'm guessing they will go up over time tankerace?

[Tankerace]

Im away from my PC (taking a well deserved break). I think total rate is closer to 30 a month, but will verify.

I have it so low for two reasons. 1) because without mass production, especially in the 1922 campaign, rebuilding a division that is shattered should be a very slow process. Remember in 1918, some 3 or 5 of the new US divisions that arrived had to be canabalized for replacements for the original divisions that were there, thanks to the lack of replacements. It is that way in WPO, that you will have to throw new units into the fray while old divisions rebuild.

The second reason is that I felt that for the 1940's time, WitP land combat is way to fast. Especially invasions. So, making divisions take time to rebuild (and which can also be considered retraining) help bring invasions to a far more historical (at least in my mind) time frame. Given troop levels, equipment production, shipping, and the like, I really don't see either side, realistically, being able to mount more than four large scale amphibious assaults a year. For land combat in large areas (China, India, Luzon, etc), units won't take as many casualties, and as such the impact is significantly less. Historically speaking, if a Division is shattered in an amphibious assault in June of 1922, I don't think that with new replacements, retraining, etc, it could be ready for another one until February 1923 at the earliest. That is 8 months right there. That's not saying it can't participate in WWI style combat, but it shouldn't be anywhere able to land at an occupied enemy base before then, and I think that the significantly lower replacement rate reflects that.

If however, it takes almost a year to replace all divisions, then I may up the rate, and ask Mike to do a Device update like he did for WitP v1.6, where the database changes where added in, and a restart would not be required.

[bwheatley]

Well my IJA squad replacements just went from 12 at start to 15 around 2 months into the battle.

Do the replacement rates change at certain dates? And unless i misread and teh scen started with 15 replacements but i could have sworn it started at 12 and then went up to 15. If you scale up replacements i guess that is fine.

But with only 30 replacements a month that will mean it will take 10 months to rebuild just the inf squads of 1 division. So to rebuild the 8 shattered divisions i have on Luzon
would be almost 80 months thats outside the scope of the game. But i could just not understand the way it works properly.

The avg for a jap division was 300+ inf squads (not counting the other stuff because inf squads are the bulk of the combat units)at the replacement rate i have (15).

I could even go with 10 months to rebuild a division but then we'd at least want enough replacements to do that right? 30 squads per month per division would get all divisions rebuilt in 10 months.

30 Squads X # of divisions for a side = # of monthly replacements.

For japan
30 Squads X 21 divisions = 630 Squad replacements a month. That would give you the ability to rebuild all divisions (this doesnt include BDE or other units but you get the idea) within 10 months. Or if you turn off replacements you could rebuild 2 full divisions a month. I guess this could simulation central command giving priority to a certain unit.

Does that sound far off? I mean i could be way off with the #'s maybe 15 replacements a month is alot. Maybe you are upping replacements after time goes by?

Btw congrats on the vacation and happy new year.

[Tankerace]

While I may up the replacements, I doubt it will be 630 a month... not even a tenth of that at the max. That would mean cranking out 2 full divisions a month, nevermind forming of new ones. That would be absurd, ahistorical, and gamey.

Historically speaking, using the closest war (WWI), if a division was shattered, i.e. 60% destroyed, rather than being rebuilt it would simply be merged with another division, i.e. the four total brigades reforming into two, under one of the divisional HQs.

You can't do this under WPO's engine, but you can consider 4 "shattered" divisions, rebuilt to regimental strength (about 99 squads) as acting as a single division. That would assume a 75% destroyed rate for four divisions, and be more historically accurate.

If a division is completely destroyed, in reality, it probably would be withdrawn and reformed, or simply disbanded, its attendent artillery and divisional train elements assigned to another division.

So, speaking in a historical sense, if you have 8 shattered divisions, at at least regimental strength, we have 8 regiments, which can form into four brigades, which will reform into 2 divisions. To do this in game, I would have four units operate together, going into the same hex as the others and operating as one.

For the United States, in 1917-1918 all of the troops were being trained and sent over in divisions, leaving barely anything for replacements. So, Pershing in 1918 had to use the "new" divisions as replacements, in effect creating empty divisions while assigning the new troops to the veteran units. While this cannot be simulated in game, pulling the shattered unit out of the line and replacing with a fresh division would have the same effect.


But, having a low replacement rate also forces a historic choice on players. In WitP, so many replacements are received that all units can be happily set on accept replacements and be on their way. But in WPO, you have to make a choice. Do you send critical replacements to the division totally destroyed early in the war (which again, historically, probably would have either been reformed in another theater, folded into another unit, or simply left alone), or do you sent them to that division down two battalions.

If either side lost eight divisions in one blow destroyed (and I mean all 360+ squads KIA), neither would be able to replace those divisions and form new ones. So, at least in my mind, the logical choice is keep the replacement rate low, and have the "real replacements" come in the form of new divisions.

I personally think 15 is a resonable number in the strict sense that a war in this time is primarily a naval war, where land combat would either be over before replacements could have any effect in a battle (an invasion), or the land campaign would be in a theater in which replacements would be a low priority anyway (China, etc). 30 might be a better bet for game balancing, allowing faster rebuilding yet not allowing the steamroller effect of WitP. Anything over 60 a month would be insane, as that is roughly 2 free battalions of replacements a month (again, free of new unit formations), something that would almost certainly not be a reality in the 1920's.

All that said, I may increase both side's replacement rate to 30. That will ease the bottleneck, though not create too many fresh bodies coming in.

[bwheatley]

that makes sense i suppose. 30 is better then nothing .

And i guess that does make some sense you could rebuild 1 division in 10 months. do enough ground reinforcements come into the map? You said the total divisions would be around 45-50 is that per side? becuase if not that means japan only gets another 4 divisions and thats not going to be hardly enough to carry out offensives. I know that in WWI alot of people were killed uselessly but they did manage to refill the ranks somehow. Having replacements at 30 would mean it would take 10 months to rebuild 1 division and japan starts with 21 divisions that would be 210 months to rebuild every division. Thats almost 17 years seems a bit much. Ok i just checked japan gets about 12 more divisions over the course of the war. So i guess thats not too terribly bad but still with the tiny amount of replacements there will never be any major ground battles.

I guess its better then nothing though i appreciate it

[Tankerace]

Thats per side, though not in Divisions per se. Japan gets 10 more divs I think, plus about 30 brigades (15 more divisions in essence).

To put it in perspective, there are roughly 1/3-1/2 the ground units of WitP, but replacements are 1/5 of them (15 vs 71). So, it isn't quite as drastic as it may seem.

[bwheatley]

spiffy i guess a little nudge in replacements will still be helpful.

Though knowing how bad replacements are now will change my strategy in any new games....

Must use overwhelming force to keep from burning my units up.. my damn divisions at Manilla can't seem to take his guys out either lol.