Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653
Maybe they could look like this? If you are in agreement with the change, any other suggestions for Icon and Unit Name?

Whatever you decide to do is okay with me...I don't know one from the other and it's over my head and above my pay grade. Hey, Allied turn 2 is finished. Patrick is going great guns. He's making headway all over the place and I can't guard them all so his progress is ensured for the foreseeable future. Bastogne is practically captured already, the Butgenbach and Robertville depots are almost in German hands already and it's looking like he might just make it to the next river to the west before I get any reinforcements that I can use to defend. WHAT A GREAT GAME ! Turn 2's AAR can be found here:

http://www.filedropper.com/augustfogivturn2

Maybe another possibility. The icon is for a motorcycle unit, but it looks a little more unique than the standard PG icon.

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Each of the German Infantry divisions has a Fusilier battalion and a Hetzer detachment. These are kind of anty, so I was wondering if you guys playtesting would agree that combining them might be a good idea. I don't think it's stretching history because the Germans formed mobile kampfgruppes within their infantry divisions.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't these two units have extremely different uses? It would be kind of like combining an AAA battalion with an infantry battalion and calling it good. While the Germans did put anything and everything together for whatever a situation dictated gluing these two units together permanently would not model that flexibility but would defeat it.

Since being on these forums I see alot of stuff thrown out about 'anty' units. It would seem to me it's not the units that are the problem but the people who use them in a manner that would not be seen in the real world. Recce units forging 100km ahead of the parent unit is not something a division commander would want to see. These are the division's eyes. Using a company to occupy a 10km front to block the retreat of an entire division is also stupid. They couldn't do it.

Don't know what the final solution can be but throwing reality and history out the window shouldn't be it and I'm seeing alot of both lying under the windows. Very sad.

Sorry, maybe I got a bit off topic. My apologies. [&o]

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't these two units have extremely different uses?

I agree that it might not be common to see these two units solely combined together for use in a combat situation. Overall it's probably better to split them between the three regiments of the division. But when I looked into the Fusilier units, these were made up of heavy weapons and recon elements of the division. They were separate from the other regiments. In the Bulge the infantry divisions formed 'mobile' detachments from whatever they had that could move faster than the horse and foot elements. So it seems reasonable to combine these two units. You say they have extremely different uses, but you don't explain these uses. This would help in making a decision.

... 'anty' units. It would seem to me it's not the units that are the problem but the people who use them in a manner that would not be seen in the real world.

Agreed for sure, and I was recently involved in a lengthy e-mail discussion about it. In putting together units for a scenario, all I feel I can do is to limit the number of ant units. I can't dictate what tactics some feel are unreasonable, while others feel they are acceptable. All I can suggest is that players compete against other players that are in agreement with tactics. That said, the reason I call these two units 'anty' isn't because of tactics, it's because of their size on a battlefield dominated by Allied regiments that are 5x their strength. During play you end up taking pains to stack them with other units to avoid the rbc's that will drive them all over the map. It's stupid and a waste of time. Combining these units seems an obvious solution, but that is why I brought it up here, to get your opinions.

... throwing reality and history out the window ...

That's the last thing I want to do. Of course, it is an unreal and unhistorical scenario [;)].

As for the AAA units, we'll get to them next. [:D]

Thanks!

What was to actual role of the Fussilier battalions?? We still have them in the British Army to this day but their titles are only historical they are standard infantry formations and have been for a long time i think origionaly they where formed to assist the Artillery in the field

Fusilier: An historic German term often used to refer to heavy infantry units, original refering to the type of weapon carried of the same name. During WWII used to name infantry formations with some recon abilities that replaced an infantry division's recon battalion mid-war when the Germans reduced the number of standard infantry battalions in their divisions from 9 to 6.

The Axis advance is slow, slow, and slower. *sigh*

Turn 3 Axis End: Extreme Southern Sector

The Axis unlocked the Allies 7th Army and German 1st Army on turn 1, catching the US forces off guard as a rapid advance ensued. The 21st Panzer is leading the charge. However, looks can be deceiving. The US has three other divisions in the area, and I'm sure they are gearing up to meet the Axis forces head on. Axis forces are clearly outnumbered. If it weren't for the shock, the Germans would be on their heels. The German 347th Infantry Division did not cooperate and went into reorg, which was very unfortunate as it means a turn of shock was wasted.

Well, turn 3 is finished.  Patrick is still advancing all over the map but I'm seeing more and more German units that are red in health.  Patrick reports he has had two units vaporize in combat.  Bastogne is looking mighty empty these days.  Gavin isn't there yet and it looks like the Germans might capture it.  The Butgenbach depot is practically captured as well.  I may have to call in XXX corps to restore the map.  Turn 3's AAR can be found here:

http://www.filedropper.com/augustfogivturn3

Edit: you convinced me to embed a picture in this post sapper32. Thanks for that says all those keeping up with this thread.

Its not looking good for Bastogne Larry lets hope those engineers can slow them down enough but the path to Bastogne seems wide open with no rivers to slow them down looks to me like you have to stop a Division with a couple of scattred companys[:(]

The entire 9th SS Panzer Division "Hohesnt" is on the tail of the 12th Volksgrenedier Division that has cleared the path to Bastogne through Clerf. The 12th has done remarkably well on its own. There is only so much room on these tight roads. It's time for the 9th SS to take the lead.

There's nothing left to keep the Germans out of Bastogne. So he's captured it, almost. Gavin and his 82nd and Taylor and his 101st are almost there too. It's going to be interesting. Patrick is making great gains in the deep south and Sedan looks naked to his assault. I'm blowing bridges and falling back in some places and standing fast in some other places and it's looking like Patrick is going to be in Antwerp in another 10 turns. LOL. Turn 4's AAR can be found here:

http://www.filedropper.com/augustfogivturn4

End turn 5 Axis

So Larry scrounged up a few units and put them in the path to Bastogne. Which means, his paratroopers will be in placed this turn. ugh!I Many need that Volksgrenedier Division after all.

Northest of Malmedy: Axis turn 5 End

My quick advance created some sizable pockets. Now I have to deal with these large pockets. Most of the corp artillery was destroyed, except for a few long range tubes. It's nice, because they will no longer fire on my guys!

There's a US supply depot that I've been playing PingPong with. It's the circle underneath the supply depot. In that stack, there's a US supply depot with lots of fuel and goodies. UNFORTUNATELY, my supporting volkdgrenedier division went into re-org and that stopped the encirclement. I hope he does not have an engineer nearby to rescue the supply depot. *ugh*

Patrick is winning everywhere all over the entire map.  At least that's the way it seems.  WHAT A COOL GAME.  I didn't know the Axis could do that.  Patrick is a good player and it shows.  I'm going to get some reinforcements soon.  'Cause if I don't I'll lose the deep south and the horseshoe area and who knows what else.  Turn 5 is finished.  The AAR can be found here:

http://www.filedropper.com/augustfogivturn5

Open letter to Ralph:

Hey Ralph:
First of all, thanks for all your hard work. We DO appreciate it. Really. I'm wondering if it would be a hard change to get TOAW to display in a new panel how many of each type was lost during what turn. Take a peek at the picture to surmise what I'm saying. Maybe in some future version? The picture is the Allied losses as of turn 6.

Yes yes yes! Larry's side by side comparisons are very nice, indeed! Now we need a statistician and mathematician to analyze these numbers

Btw, why do our formations lose so many mortar teams? 80mm+ mortars are usually well behind the action. Oh well, just curious, which often gets me into some sort of trouble. *lol*

I did some counterattacking this turn and to my surprise I opened some holes in his lines in the middle of the map!  I didn't know I could do that.  So I guess I should start my push to the Rhine river now.  LOL.  The turn 6 AAR can be found here:   http://www.filedropper.com/augustfogivturn6

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

I'm wondering if it would be a hard change to get TOAW to display in a new panel how many of each type was lost during what turn.

Does any of that information appear in the logfiles that TOAW can be set to generate? If so, I could maybe knock something up that does the job. Won't be straight away because I'm still testing my OOB editor and nearly a week after Steve sent me a copy of Autumn Fog, I've only just managed to find time to start it this morning.

ORIGINAL: parmenio
Does any of that information appear in the logfiles that TOAW can be set to generate?

Here's the contents of a sitrep_log01.txt file:

Allies Turn 15 Battle at 61,32
Allies approximate equipment and personnel losses - 1%
Germans approximate equipment and personnel losses - 9%

Allies Turn 15 Battle at 54,10
Allies approximate equipment and personnel losses - 3%
Germans approximate equipment and personnel losses - 6%

Allies Turn 15 Battle at 46,9
Allies approximate equipment and personnel losses - 0%
Germans approximate equipment and personnel losses - 9%

Allies Turn 15 Battle at 61,33
Allies approximate equipment and personnel losses - 1%
Germans approximate equipment and personnel losses - 7%

Allies Turn 15 Battle at 60,35
Allies approximate equipment and personnel losses - 2%
Germans approximate equipment and personnel losses - 3%

Allies Turn 15 Battle at 61,30
Allies approximate equipment and personnel losses - 2%
Germans approximate equipment and personnel losses - 16%

Allies Turn 15 Battle at 55,11
Allies approximate equipment and personnel losses - 2%
Germans approximate equipment and personnel losses - 22%


So I guess the answer is no for this particular file. There must be a file that has those numbers in it however since the numbers are carried forward from turn to turn in our PBEM files we send to each other.
Note to Patrick: I'd be curious to know what the Axis losses are right about now. Must be pretty high.