German Tank Group = ?

[gwgardner]

Is a Tank Group equivalent to an historical Panzer Army? A Corps?

[Ostwindflak]

I haven't decided that yet either gwgardner. I have been treating them like Panzer Armies due to how hard hitting they are. In my mind the Medium Panzer units represent Abteilungs or Kampfgruppes.

[TheBattlefield]

Maybe Tank Army (Tank Group) / Tank Division (Medium Tanks) / Tank Brigade (Light Tanks)?

[BillRunacre]

There isn't a hard and fast definition, and these unit types have to work for both sides and all countries.

So it really follows an approximate measure of what feels right, because there was no standard, across the board organisation that fits all nations.

This does also limit the choice of name for this unit type, e.g. Tank Group. It can't be Panzer... and to be something like Tank Corps would also lead to it being used by some countries who never had such an organisation.

So Tank Group is a best fit, rather than an ideal fit.


PS Apologies for not answering this in the other thread discussing this.

[ncc1701e]

I disagree with this implementation. Why don't you call a cat a cat?

For historical accuracy, we must be able to buy:
. Motorized Korps
. Panzer Korps
. Panzer Army
. Tank Corps
. Tank Army

You have already Shock Army within the game for Russian... Why don't add the remaining?

[BillRunacre]

The problem is that there are only a limited number of slots.

The Shock Army unit type was converted from the Pillbox slot, and I'm not sure that we have any left.

It's really a difficult one, as the suffixes describing the unit types need to work for all the countries that have them.

[Ason]

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

I disagree with this implementation. Why don't you call a cat a cat?

For historical accuracy, we must be able to buy:
. Motorized Korps
. Panzer Korps
. Panzer Army
. Tank Corps
. Tank Army

You have already Shock Army within the game for Russian... Why don't add the remaining?

I agree, would increase immersion and a game as good as this deserves to have these specific units with different names on both sides :/ I hope we can see this in future patches or expansions.

[sPzAbt653]

I suggested this somewhere else but it was either missed or ignored for its sheer ignorance as a suggestion - Can't the Icon be used instead of the name ? In my simple mind the program is using the name to key on something, so why not switch it to key on the icon ? If this were possible, then we could have appropriate historical names for all forces.

[TheBattlefield]

It's not just a unit name but also gives a "feel" for the strength ratios. Using the example of a unit called "Infantry Division" I know immediately and without extensive study of the unit specifications that in direct comparison with an "Infantry Corps" this formation will at least be inferior in terms of firepower. That's called haptics of a game.

[sPzAbt653]

Agreed, we could really use better haptics.

[BillRunacre]

I do understand what you're saying, it's just very difficult to accommodate the different organisational forms for all countries throughout the war with a limited number of unit types available.

Question is, would changing the Tank Group unit type to be called say, Tank Corps, work for all nations that currently field Tank Groups, and for all phases of the war?

That would mean for instance that the French Tank Group becomes a Tank Corps, as would the two German units poised to invade Poland, and all subsequent ones, and the British 7th Armoured too.

[gwgardner]

You all make good points, and Bill's review of the restrictions on naming is definite. I would love to able to use the proper names, of course, but even more I'd like to have a general idea of scale. Does a Tank Group 'kindof' mean a typical Panzer Army a la the 4th Panzer, in Barbarossa? Or to create a 4th Panzer, would the player need three Tank Groups and some mech units?

[BillRunacre]

4th Panzer Army would definitely require 2 Tank Groups and maybe some more assets to be represented, that's the type of scale I'm thinking of.

[gwgardner]

ORIGINAL: Bill Runacre

4th Panzer Army would definitely require 2 Tank Groups and maybe some more assets to be represented, that's the type of scale I'm thinking of.

Excellent, thanks.

[gwgardner]

ORIGINAL: Bill Runacre

4th Panzer Army would definitely require 2 Tank Groups and maybe some more assets to be represented, that's the type of scale I'm thinking of.

Excellent, thanks. So what I'd do is get that group of units and have an HQ named 4th Panzer Army (if that's possible, I haven't even tried renaming HQs).

[gwgardner]

...

[sPzAbt653]

You can change the HQ name to a certain extent. For example, 'Rundstedt HQ' can be renamed 'OB West Rundstedt HQ'.

[sPzAbt653]

it's just very difficult to accommodate the different organisational forms for all countries throughout the war with a limited number of unit types available.

Fair enough. I can name them something like '48 PzK Tank Group'. It's much easier for me to do that than to expect the game to be changed.

[dhucul2011]

How about calling it Heavy Tanks to be in line with Light Tanks and Medium Tanks. Rename the research category to Advanced Tank Design or just Advanced Tanks. This would be in line with Advanced Aircraft. I would also then change Infantry Weapons to Advancec Infantry Weapons. This streamlines the unit names and research categories.

Now everything is streamlined and the "size" of the unit is based on the strength as per the manual.

[BillRunacre]

There is a problem with calling them Heavy Tanks in that their graphics early in the war don't reflect the Heavy name, i.e. Panzer Is.