Matrix Games Forums

LAntorcha,
 
The MG34 had two different mounts: 1) a bipod mount that was used within the rifle squads.  This is the LMG mount;  and 2) a heavier tripod mount with more ammunition, extra barrels to sustain fire longer (so the barrel doesn't overheat), and a larger crew to keep the weapon firing (mainly extra ammunition carriers).  This is the "heavy" mount.  But since TOAW treats the Heavy MG as 12.7mm (0.50 caliber), then you have to use the Medium MG for TOAW purposes for the MG34 in its "heavy" configuration.

I Knew that. I've fired an MG3.[:'(]

What do you think of this:

Schützenkompanie b

5 Command Group
1 Support Squad
9 Rifle Squad
9 Light MG <--- Equivalent? MG (Early) or just add 9 Medium MG more?
2 Medium MG
3 50mm Mortar
6 Horse Team
1 Truck

Maschinengewehrkompanie b

4 Command Group
1 Support Squad
8 Medium MG
6 81mm Mortar
21 Horse Team

What should I change? Are those figures too high?
Source: SCHÜTZENKOMPANIE (Reich)
KStN 131b (R) dated 01.10.1937

ORIGINAL: LAntorcha

I Knew that. I've fired an MG3.[:'(]

What do you think of this:

Schützenkompanie b

5 Command Group
1 Support Squad
9 Rifle Squad
9 Light MG <--- Equivalent? MG (Early) or just add 9 Medium MG more?
2 Medium MG
3 50mm Mortar
6 Horse Team
1 Truck

Maschinengewehrkompanie b

4 Command Group
1 Support Squad
8 Medium MG
6 81mm Mortar
21 Horse Team

What should I change? Are those figures too high?

You only need Command Groups and Support Squads in HQs. I would leave them out entirely of combat units.

Do you think this is unbalancing as a general rule?

German Inf "Gruppe" - Unteroffizier

1 Heavy Rifle Squad
1 Medium MG (MG34)

USA Inf "Squad" - Sergeant

1 Rifle Squad
1 Medium MG (BAR)

Brithis Inf "Section" - Corporal

1 Light Rifle Squad
1 Medium MG (Bren)

ORIGINAL: LAntorcha

Do you think this is unbalancing as a general rule?

German Inf "Gruppe" - Unteroffizier

1 Heavy Rifle Squad
1 Medium MG (MG34)

USA Inf "Squad" - Sergeant

1 Rifle Squad
1 Medium MG (BAR)

Brithis Inf "Section" - Corporal

1 Light Rifle Squad
1 Medium MG (Bren)

A Heavy Rifle Squad includes 2 LMGs. A Rifle Squad includes 1 LMG.

Thanks. Where do you get that info?

As you say German squad should be a Rifle Squad, and Brittish a H Rifle Squad? But The Comparission of The MG34 with the BREN it's out of place.

I think the next TOAW Help File should carry some explanations of the kind of squads, or at least some clear examples.

Schützen Abt (German Inf Bat)

1 Command Group
1 Support Squad
18 Rifle Squad
8 Medium MG
9 50mm Mortar
6 81mm Mortar
39 Horse Team
3 Truck

Schützen Reg (German Inf Reg)

3 Command Group
3 Support Squad
54 Rifle Squad
24 Medium MG
27 50mm Mortar
18 81mm Mortar
117 Horse Team
9 Truck
12 37mm Gun
2 150mm Gun
6 75mm Gun
3 Engineer Squad

+ Reece Bn <-------- ???
+ Despatch riders
+ Signals Plt

Any corrections? The Transport component should be incorrect...
Which is the Recon component in a Inf Reg?

ORIGINAL: LAntorcha

I think the next TOAW Help File should carry some explanations of the kind of squads, or at least some clear examples.

This information is in Equipment List.doc, towards the end.

Schützen Abt (German Inf Bat)

1 Command Group
1 Support Squad
18 Rifle Squad
8 Medium MG
9 50mm Mortar
6 81mm Mortar
39 Horse Team
3 Truck

Sure 27 Rifle squads (3 squads x 3 platoons x 3 companies)? There's no need for any of that transport. It will make the unit move too fast. And as above, if this is a single TOAW unit, I would leave out the command and support squads.

3 Command Group
3 Support Squad
54 Rifle Squad
24 Medium MG
27 50mm Mortar
18 81mm Mortar
117 Horse Team
9 Truck
12 37mm Gun
2 150mm Gun
6 75mm Gun
3 Engineer Squad

Corresponding to the above, 81 Rifle Squads. Also the 75 and 150mm peices are the "Light Guns" from the equipment list.

Which is the Recon component in a Inf Reg?

A platoon of mounted infantry. 3 Mounted Rifle Squad (late). Later, these were replaced with cyclists due to the shortage of cavalry mounts.

Talking aboout real combatants strenghts, I have found this article interesting:

Bayonet Strength

Which is the Equipment List equivalence for leichte Schützenpanzerwagen (7.5cm) Sd.Kfz.250/8 from the Aufklaerung Abteilung?

SdKfz 251/9 - same gun, roughtly same armor protection, same mobility

I've never understood why TOAW was designed this way. In fact, I don't see why it couldn't be changed now. Rather than the 'squad' as the base unit, we could just have different flavors of individual riflemen and MG teams. Naturally, all the other numbers in the database would need to get multiplied -- but so what? It just doesn't sound very hard.

Hi Colin, long time no hear.

I agree, the above would have been a much better way to model inf since all other unit types are individual anyway. The stats of each squad would also have to be multiplied downward and the stats of each other unit in the db adjusted accordingly. Would throw pretty much every scenario out of wack, which is why the perfect time to do it would have been with the release of TOAW III.

ah well, looks like we'll have to wait for TOAW IV....

ORIGINAL: Veer

I agree, the above would have been a much better way to model inf since all other unit types are individual anyway. The stats of each squad would also have to be multiplied downward and the stats of each other unit in the db adjusted accordingly. Would throw pretty much every scenario out of wack, which is why the perfect time to do it would have been with the release of TOAW III.

As far as continuity goes, there's no reason why you couldn't have squads AND individual infantry weapons. Then existing scenarios would be unchanged, just with all the values scaled up.

Not that I think it's necessarily a hot idea. It will just encourage people to count rifles "Well, the colonel's batman has a rifle, so I'll add him too..."

ORIGINAL: golden delicious
It will just encourage people to count rifles . . .

Stated as though this doesn’t already happen on a daily basis.

If people want to count rifles and rivets, go ahead and let them have their fun. After all, that’s what it's is all about.

Regards, RhinoBones

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Stated as though this doesn’t already happen on a daily basis.

Your posts happen, too. However, I still feel it is important not to do anything to encourage them.

Them? Who exactly are the "Them"? Are you not one of the "Them"?

As a military historian, I would think that individual rifles would be of great interest to you. Why would you want to limit the fun of others to count rifles?

Do you not count rivets? Wouldn’t take much of a search to find debates where you provided input to the number of individual weapons and rivits assigned to protect the shores in 1940.

Regards, RhinoBones

As far as continuity goes, there's no reason why you couldn't have squads AND individual infantry weapons. Then existing scenarios would be unchanged, just with all the values scaled up.

Interesting, so is there a reason why it can't be done thataway? Either via BioEd or a matrix-update patch?

I'm thinking if it was fairly simple to do it would be done already.

Like the idea, but wonder whether it is practical due to the mathematics. By this I mean that the current AP for rifle squads’ starts at such a low number assigning APs to individuals requires getting into fractional numbers. The more primitive the weapon, the smaller the fraction. If someone wanted to BioEd a database for individual soldiers, think that they would need to start a basic rifleman around 20AP and scale everything from there on.

What would the comparative AP of a 1940’s tank or a 210mm HE round be if a semi automatic rifle started at 20? Maybe this is why Norm elected to use squads rather than individual soldiers.

Regards, RhinoBones

I think it could be possible with obvious tweaking and testing, as well focusing on a smaller time period than from 19th century on would help. I would see the basic rifle man with a bolt action rifle with a 1 ap and a defense strength of 4-10. Not sure if you would want the 1,000s of units for a regiment and up though. ive done some tinkering with fire teams instead of squads for modern scenarios given the usual smaller unit scales of them.
been a while since I messed with toaw or bioed but IIRC each unit fires 3 times a round in combat. so this would mean that a tank could only kill 3 soldiers every round! I see this more as the problem and that their would need to be adjustments to this for it to work.

ORIGINAL: rhinobones

Like the idea, but wonder whether it is practical due to the mathematics. By this I mean that the current AP for rifle squads’ starts at such a low number assigning APs to individuals requires getting into fractional numbers. The more primitive the weapon, the smaller the fraction. If someone wanted to BioEd a database for individual soldiers, think that they would need to start a basic rifleman around 20AP and scale everything from there on.

What would the comparative AP of a 1940’s tank or a 210mm HE round be if a semi automatic rifle started at 20? Maybe this is why Norm elected to use squads rather than individual soldiers.

Regards, RhinoBones

Colonel Dupuy wrote a book about this called Numbers, Predictions, and War. In that book, Dupuy quantifies a large number of weapons. So, if you used Dupuy's book, then you could answer the question: If a rifle is X, then what is a 210mm HE round?