Matrix Games Forums

Pending any revisions, the WGer Territorial Army: (Note: the unplaced unit is a bastard relic that I might use...)
[edit: fixed mistakes!]

Hey you guys: I really appreciate all the trouble you are going through to get it right. I'm impressed. Thank you for all you do.

Mussey,

Ran across this. Italian fortifications facing Yugoslavia. First time I heard of it.

However, with Italy's membership in NATO, construction began on a new defensive line from Austria to the Adriatic along the Yugoslavian border along the Natisone and Tagliamento rivers. The new line used tank turrets in a manner similar to German defences during the previous conflict, allowing 360 degree traverse and a high rate of fire. By 1976 this system was still considered useful in any conflict short of nuclear war.

Cheers

These can be used to check the Italian OOB for missing units.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... -_1986.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... s_1986.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... -_1986.png

Cheers

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Hey you guys: I really appreciate all the trouble you are going through to get it right. I'm impressed. Thank you for all you do.

Larry, you'll know we got it right when you get a telephone call at 0300 and a gruff voice on the other end of the line tells you an alert has been called and to report to your unit. [8D]

Cheers

Hi Guys,

I want to echo Larry's comment. This is a very good game, but it becomes great with the work done on the scenarios by guys like you! Thanks,

Guys,

I have played the WP player in a couple of scenarios and I feel that they are often handicapped because of low supply. As they are on the offence, they burn through their supply pretty quickly too. Overall, I think you might want to find a way to give more supply at the outset to the WP. In my mind, the WP needed to win quickly because the longer the battle goes, the more the advantage flips to NATO.

Just a thought.

Also, when you are ready to play test let me know.

Once again thanks for all the hard work on this.

ORIGINAL: mussey

Good work Cathar, this mostly agrees with my Orbat as well. A WGer Corps:

The rail repair unit is an interesting detail. I'm about 100% sure this would not have been a military force, but rather some outfit from DB -- the German national rail service. In game terms, there should probably be a rail repair unit in every major city, reflecting the concentration of railway expertise. This comment probably goes for all the European countries; military rail repair units are only needed by those forces pushing into enemy held territory.

If you're identifying the W German corps engineers by battalion, here were their locations.

I Corps

110th Battalion in Minden
120th Battalion in Dörverden
130th (amphibious) Battalion in Minden
140th Battalion in Emerich
150th Battalion in Höxter
160th Bridging Battalion in Minden
170th Bridging Battalion in Dünsen

II Corps

210th Battalion in Munich
220th Battalion in Hemau
230th (amphibious) Battalion in Ingolstadt
240th Battalion in Passau
250th Battalion in Schwabsberg
260th Bridging Battalion in Ebenhausen
270th Bridging Battalion in Münchsmünster

III Corps

310th Battalion in Koblenz
15th Battalion in Köln (Cologne)
330th (amphibious) Battalion in Speyer
340th Battalion in Emmerzhausen
350th Battalion in Stadtallendorf
360th Bridging Battalion in Haiger

Each corps also had two MP battalions: 190, 191, 290, 291, 390, 391.

Cheers

ORIGINAL: MikeJ19

Guys,

I have played the WP player in a couple of scenarios and I feel that they are often handicapped because of low supply. As they are on the offence, they burn through their supply pretty quickly too. Overall, I think you might want to find a way to give more supply at the outset to the WP. In my mind, the WP needed to win quickly because the longer the battle goes, the more the advantage flips to NATO.

Just a thought.

Also, when you are ready to play test let me know.

Once again thanks for all the hard work on this.

Hi Mike,

My two cents. I think NATO-WP games often underestimate the sheer chaos that NATO would have had to deal with, as well as too often assuming that all NATO nations would have gone to war.

One surprise attack scenario that CENTAG considered was a Christmas offensive enabled by Soviet wargames (units out of the barracks) will every soldier tasked to carry additional ammunition, including shells for larger weapons. CENTAG thought such an attack might get them on the Rhine within 48 hours.

On supply generally, I think the Pact was front-loaded for high supply expenditure in the first week or so and then expected to develop supply distribution problems such that their offensive options would be curtailed. I know the supply for units can be set artificially high at the start of a scenario; that might address some of this issue.

Cheers

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

These can be used to check the Italian OOB for missing units.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... -_1986.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... s_1986.png
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... -_1986.png

Cheers

I found a good source for our illustrious Italian allies from Wiki Fandom site. http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Italian_ ... _of_battle. Here is a small portion:


Italian Army 1984 Order of battle
33-45 minutes
FANDOM

On March 1, 1984 the Italian institute for disarmament, the development and peace (Istituto di ricerche per il disarmo, lo sviluppo e la pace (IRDISP)) in Rome (a think thank of the Radical Party) published the entire Italian OrBat down to company level - this was justified for the radical party as on of its core demands was total disarmament of Europe, even though the data which were published were top secret. The Radical Party dissolved in 1989 (its parliamentarians had passed along the data) and the IRDISP followed suit in 1990. But Radio Radicale has survived, and the OrBat can still be found today on the homepage of the radio.

OrBat published by Istituto di ricerche per il disarmo, lo sviluppo e la pace (IRDISP) in Rome on March 1, 1984.[1]

3rd Army Corps

3 Corpo d'Armata Milano

4 Battaglione Fanteria "Guastalla" (BAR) Asti
72 Battaglione Fanteria "Puglie" (BAR) Albenga
Reggimento Artiglieria a Cavallo Milano
1 Gruppo Semovente/Regg. Art. a Cavallo Milano, 18 M109G, 2 M577, 3 M113, M548 ammo carrier
2 Gruppo Semovente/Regg. Art. a Cavallo Milano, 18 M109G, 2 M577, 3 M113, M548 ammo carrier
3 Gruppo Semovente/Regg. Art. a Cavallo Milano, 18 M109G, 2 M577, 3 M113, M548 ammo carrier
3 Gruppo Specialisti Art. "Brianza" Milano
3 Battaglione Genio Pionieri "Lario" Pavia, 2 BrPz1, 3 PionierLeopard
3 Battaglione Trasmissioni "Spluga" Milano
23 Gruppo Squadroni ERI "Eridano" Bresso, 18 AB-206
53 Gruppo Squadroni EM "Cassiopea" Padova, 12 AB-205
3 Battaglione Logistico di Manovra "Piemonte" Milano

The rail repair unit is an interesting detail. I'm about 100% sure this would not have been a military force, but rather some outfit from DB -- the German national rail service. In game terms, there should probably be a rail repair unit in every major city, reflecting the concentration of railway expertise. This comment probably goes for all the European countries; military rail repair units are only needed by those forces pushing into enemy held territory.

If you're identifying the W German corps engineers by battalion, here were their locations.

Bingo on the locations. I'm on it, thanks!

Yes, those RR's. There is no such unit I can find, and suppose that rail repair would be done by one of the four engr bns? If so, I will need to add RR engineers to them. Unfortunately, in-game regular engineers are not capable to do this work (I think it's a union thing). My only other thought was to divide and downsize the x4 bns into x5 and make the 5th the RR bn. This reduces engr sqds from 30 per bn to 24. Regardless, creative license required.

Cathar, how are these TO&E'd? Each pin is a battery I assume, comprising a bn (circled)? The original game has the Hawk bns at x24 ea., and the Herc's at x36, roughly the number of bns as you posted. Not sure if they were mobile or fixed.

ORIGINAL: MikeJ19

Guys,

I have played the WP player in a couple of scenarios and I feel that they are often handicapped because of low supply. As they are on the offence, they burn through their supply pretty quickly too. Overall, I think you might want to find a way to give more supply at the outset to the WP. In my mind, the WP needed to win quickly because the longer the battle goes, the more the advantage flips to NATO.

Just a thought.

Also, when you are ready to play test let me know.

Once again thanks for all the hard work on this.

Good point Mike. Thus far, I set 100 supply hexes within each boxed Soviet Military district (see my photo's of these on previous pages), and several 50's elsewhere including Murmansk. Also some 40's along the Danish and Norwegian coast in case of naval invasion. I have little experience with changing the editor multipliers. Do you think we need to edit this? Let me know!

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

Hey you guys: I really appreciate all the trouble you are going through to get it right. I'm impressed. Thank you for all you do.

Thanks Larry. I think I'm nearing the end of the orbat's, finishing the US 2nd Fleet, then will tie it and shipped US divisions to the event editor. Mr. Bob Cross has created a very complex event chain process that incorporates a plethora of events including 1)the possibility of various nations quitting, 2) chances of victory for the Battle of the Atlantic. This will determine what US units arrive and when.

My question for you, is how do you suggest we roll this scenario out? First, I want to personally conduct several dry runs to ensure reinforcements arrive where/when they should, then allow others to play-test it before uploading to you. The feedback needs to be collated and organized back to me to incorporate it into a finished product. Let me know what you think!

My question for you, is how do you suggest we roll this scenario out?

I like the idea of playtesting it first before rolling it out. There are probably going to be several small things that you're going to need to change / fix that playtesting will find. I would hazzard the guess that most of the big things are just fine and it's probably going to be some of the little details that need adjustment.

On that Italian Army OOB (good find!), be wary of one thing. I tracked down the original document on the internet archive, and it did not include the bit about which equipment was in the units (18 M109G etc.) -- that was probably added by someone else from the well-known "NATO 1989 Order of Battle" document by Andy Johnson. 1984 and 1989 are not that distant from each other, but whoever added that should have noted where that information came from.

One may view the original Italian document at https://web.archive.org/web/20100316144 ... ono-sapere

Cheers

ORIGINAL: mussey

Cathar, how are these TO&E'd? Each pin is a battery I assume, comprising a bn (circled)? The original game has the Hawk bns at x24 ea., and the Herc's at x36, roughly the number of bns as you posted. Not sure if they were mobile or fixed.

24 looks correct for the HAWK; a battery had six launchers. They were semi-mobile, but operated from fixed sites.

NIKE has nine launchers per battery and four batteries per battalion.

Each ADA battery was authorized 8 .50-cal MG and 8 light antitank weapon as well.

Cheers

Each corps also had two MP battalions: 190, 191, 290, 291, 390, 391.

I have x1 now, is the other for the Lance SSM unit or is it a separate unit? Also, do you see any (reserve) Jager bns for the corps or divisions? Mid-1980's orbats have them, not sure if appropriate for 1979.

24 looks correct for the HAWK; a battery had six launchers. They were semi-mobile, but operated from fixed sites.

NIKE has nine launchers per battery and four batteries per battalion.

As a design decision, do I leave them as Bn's or create battery-level units.... Let me think on this. [8D]

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

My question for you, is how do you suggest we roll this scenario out?

I like the idea of playtesting it first before rolling it out. There are probably going to be several small things that you're going to need to change / fix that playtesting will find. I would hazzard the guess that most of the big things are just fine and it's probably going to be some of the little details that need adjustment.

Good. I will post a call-out for volunteers when the time nears, hopefully by mid to late-month(?). Several here have already joined in. Thanks.