I was thinking of changing some stats

[the_iron_duke]

I was thinking of changing some stats. This is partly as part of a broader aim to try and get each sub-unit in the game to represent a company-sized formation.

Some things I've been thinking of:

a) Increasing capability of the Rifle sub-unit by 50-100%, making it worth 150 or 200 production points, rather than 100.

b) Changing artillery. If an infantry sub-unit is a company, then an artillery sub-unit would be a battery. However, I think the Artillery unit in the game is about as strong as a battalion - three times more powerful. So I'm considering reducing the power and cost of artillery units.

Another consideration is the game's "resolution". If we were to really model the Artillery Regiment, it would have something like nine light howitzer and two or three heavy howitzer batteries, divided between four battalions. If there are twelve artillery sub-units in an Artillery Regiment now, then that lends the idea to divide them into light and heavy howitzers. The light howitzer would be a modified "Infantry Gun", with it's gun range changed to match Artillery and also halved in power, and the Artillery unit would be halved in power and become a heavy howitzer.

One of the main reasons I am interested in doing this, rather than having separate military organisational rules for artillery, is that heavy artillery (always) exists as independent Corps-level battalions. If an Artillery unit in the game is a battalion, then that makes the Heavy Artillery Battalion unit one sub-unit (and transport), which is very small.

c) Creating a Heavy Weapons infantry company. This would be the power of 2 x MG and 1 x Mortar divided by three. These would be the divisional level troops heavy weapons companies and the Machine-Gun unit and Mortar unit would instead only exist as independent Corps-level attached battalions (Machine Gun Battalion and Mortar Battalion). This is because mortars and MGs do not exist as companies in real-life TOEs, but rather are mixed as platoons in Heavy Companies.

d) Which brings me on to bazooka and SMG. I am thinking of deleting these formations, because, again, they do not really exist as company level units and instead are dispersed in Rifle companies, in mixed anti-tank battalions. Potentially SMG units could be adapted into Combat Engineer companies, armed with flame-throwers and other heavy-weapons.

e) Which brings me on to Anti-Tank guns. Like artillery, I think these can be reduced in power and cost. Possibly anti-aircraft too!

[bobarossa]

You may want to look at the Four Seasons Mod (which is far more than a weather/terrain mod) and see what he did. He cheapened/weakened a number of units (artillery, aircraft) and created a hvy weapons company as you are suggesting. Don't think he tried creating real Assault Guns though.

[Twotribes]

Actually since the scale of the game is NOT defined I don't see how you can claim any size stats.

[the_iron_duke]

I am saying the opposite - that there is no consistent unit size applied to the game, which is why I am interested in attempting to make it conform to real military organisation, with one sub-unit representing one company/battery.

Although the default counters used in the game are called "Divisions", the game cannot function as a divisional-level game (each counter representing a division) since mixing unit types in one counter - combining infantry, armour, artillery, anti-tank, anti-aircraft and so on - does not work with the game's rules.

So therefore it's either a game set at brigade/regiment (+ battalion) level or at battalion level. A game set at battalion level produces formations/units that are too small for the game (like four or five infantry as one counter), so brigade/regiment (+ battalion) level is the best fit.

Another alternative, would be to make a divisional mod with which artillery could function in the same counter as other units.

[Twotribes]

My general formation of Infantry is 30 rifle 3 mg 2 mortar 1 Infantry Gun 1 AT gun and mobilization. Works JUST fine

[the_iron_duke]

Real armies probably haven't used "general formations of Infantry" in their military organisation since before the beginning of civilization. [:)]

[ernieschwitz]

I think that your approach to this is all wrong the_iron_duke. Instead of thinking that you are changing some stats for the base game, you are really creating a new mod/base game/scenario with other rules. Once you make that declaration, things get much more easy. You are designing something new, and you can scratch almost everything you don't like and create things anew.

Bombur has done that, with his Bombur Mod/Random game, and others have too.

At the same time you are removing any confusion about the game as it comes in the box. You are no longer saying this or that is wrong, and thus you are not rubbing anyone the wrong way. Twotribes correctly identifies that the game functions well, if you buy into the assumptions that the orginal maker (Vic) has done.

In that sense you are both right.

[ernieschwitz]

Oh and if you make that declaration, stating you want to make something new, then I can say, welcome to the world of scenario and mod creation. ATG is so much more than a game. Indeed it was marketed as among other things, a wargame construction set. Once you begin to look at it in that way, you almost have infinite possibilities in making your game great, or even fantastic!

[the_iron_duke]

I don't understand why you both think I am wrong. Is not changing the base stats of a game the very definition of modding?

I would like to hereby declare that I am not part of the production team of this game and therefore things discussed in this thread are not official changes to the game that you have purchased

[the_iron_duke]

This page offers an excellent summary of U.S., British and German military organisation from the (First and) Second World War(s), if anyone is interested. Generally, I think the American and later German regimental systems serve as better models for military organisational structure than the British ones*

* Although lack of manpower in the later war led to the number of battalions of infantry in German infantry regiments to be cut from three to two. So, if manpower wasn't an issue, they would probably have had 50% more infantry.

http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/services/dro ... an_99.html

[the_iron_duke]

Here is the T.O.E. for the late-war German Infantry Division:



This can be summarized as:

Fusilier (Recon) Battalion

4 x Fusilier (Cavalry is the existing game unit that best fits the fusilier battalion role, being infantry with increased movement and recon ability)

Signal Battalion

- not modelled

1st Infantry Regiment

1st Infantry Battalion

3 x Rifle
1 x Heavy Weapons

2nd Infantry Battalion

3 x Rifle
1 x Heavy Weapons

(3rd Infantry Battalion)

3 x Rifle
1 x Heavy Weapons

(as commented on, earlier and some later German infantry divisions had three battalions, and the reduction to two appears to have been one of necessity due to manpower shortage)

Infantry Close Support Howitzer Company

1 x Infantry Gun

Panzerjager (Anti-Tank company)

1 x Bazooka (mix of bazookas and AT guns - the game's AT gun is probably too powerful to be used as this unit)

2nd Infantry Regiment

(as 1st Infantry Regiment)

3rd Infantry Regiment

(as 1st Infantry Regiment)

Artillery Regiment

1st Light Artillery Battalion

3 x Light Howitzer

2nd Light Artillery Battalion

3 x Light Howitzer

3rd Light Artillery Battalion

3 x Light Howitzer

4th Medium Artillery Battalion

3 x Medium/Heavy Howitzer

Panzerjager (Anti-Tank Battalion)

1 x AT Gun
2 x Assault Gun (Tank Destroyer)
1 x Flak

Engineer Battalion

3 x Engineer

Divisional Services

- not modelled

I have attempted to model the German Infantry Division in four ways:

a) in a single counter, using company/battery as sub-unit scale
b) in a single counter, using battalion as sub-unit scale
c) with separate counters for divisional regiments and support battalions, using company/battery as sub-unit scale
d) with separate counters for divisional regiments and support battalions being amalgamated into the regiments, using company/battery as sub-unit scale

a) Modelling the German Infantry Division in a single counter, using company/battery as sub-unit scale):

Infantry Division

4 x Cavalry (representing bicycle fusilier recon)
27 x Rifle
9 x Heavy Weapons (mix of MG and mortar)
(using 3 battalion system - would be 18 Rifle, 6 HW using two-battalion system)
3 x Infantry Gun
6 x Anti-Tank (mixture of bazooka, AT Gun and Assault Gun (in Tank Destroyer role)
9 x Light Howitzer
3 x Medium/Heavy Howitzer
1 x Flak
3 x Engineer

b) Modelling the German Infantry Division in a single counter, using battalion as sub-unit scale):

Infantry Division

1 x Fusilier recon
9 x Rifle (6 if using two-battalion system)
3 x Light Howitzer artillery
1 x Medium/Heavy Howitzer artillery
1 x Anti-Tank
(1 x Engineer)

c) Modelling the German Infantry Division using a regimental system with support battalions as separate counters (four regimental counters, two or three battalion counters):

1st Infantry Regiment:

9 x Rifle
3 x Heavy Weapons
(or 6 x Rifle, 2 x HW if using two-battalion system)
1 x Infantry Gun
1 x Anti-Tank (probably bazooka as game's AT gun would be too powerful, relatively speaking)

2nd Infantry Regiment:

(as 1st Infantry Regiment)

3rd Infantry Regiment:

(as 1st Infantry Regiment)

Artillery Regiment

9 x Light Howtzer
3 x Medium/Heavy Howitzer

Anti-Tank Battalion

3 x Anti-Tank (technically, a mix of AT Guns and Assault Guns, but they may be too powerful, relatively speaking)
1 x Flak

Fusilier (recon) Battalion:

4 x Cavalry

Engineer Battalion:

3 x Engineer
(since the game's engineers are not combat engineers, this battalion could be omitted)

d) Modelling the German Infantry Division using a regimental system with support battalions not as separate counters but rather attached to and divided between the regiments (four regimental counters):

1st Infantry Regiment:

9 x Rifle
3 x Heavy Weapons
(or 6 x Rifle, 2 x HW if using two-battalion system)
1 x Infantry Gun
1 x Anti-Tank (probably bazooka as game's AT gun would be too powerful, relatively speaking)

with attached:

1 x Cavalry (from Fusilier recon battalion)
1 x Anti-Tank (from Anti-Tank Battalion)

2nd Infantry Regiment:

(as 1st Infantry Regiment)

3rd Infantry Regiment:

(as 1st Infantry Regiment)

Artillery Regiment:

9 x Light Howitzer
3 x Medium/Heavy Howitzer

(with attached: maybe gets the Flak company from the Anti-Tank Battalion)

[Twotribes]

Your units except maybe the division one are to weak. 9 infantry can not compete with regular sized units.

[the_iron_duke]

That's one of the reasons I think units could be rebalanced, such as making Rifle sub-units more powerful. It's also why I think option d (counters representing regiments with attached sub-units from divisional support battalions) is the best fit for the game (as well as it separating the artillery sub-units into a separate formation to make it work with the game's rules).

This is the Infantry Regiment I have been using for my games and I have given each of the three consitituent battalions an extra SMG company to try and fill it out. I think it's a decent-sized unit for the game's purposes:

9 x Rifle
3 x Heavy Weapons (2 x MG, 1 x Mortar)
3 x SMG (extra company given to each battalion to fill it out)
2 x Bazooka (one representing the regimental anti-tank company and one representing an attached company from the divisional Anti-Tank Battalion)
1 x Cavalry (representing an attached company from divisional recon (fusilier) battalion)

I left out the Infantry Gun, as at 1000 production points, I think it's too powerful for the regiment.

[the_iron_duke]

Here's a screenshot from one of my battles using the regimental + attached system - a particularly intense battle with much greater concentration of troops than is typical.



I think generally it's a good fit with the unit strengths of the counters the AI produces. Full-strength Infantry Regiments have power strengths of something like between 35 and 55, depending on morale and experience and most of their power is defensive, so in defense those stats will be a lot higher.

[Twotribes]

ORIGINAL: the_iron_duke

That's one of the reasons I think units could be rebalanced, such as making Rifle sub-units more powerful. It's also why I think option d (counters representing regiments with attached sub-units from divisional support battalions) is the best fit for the game (as well as it separating the artillery sub-units into a separate formation to make it work with the game's rules).

This is the Infantry Regiment I have been using for my games and I have given each of the three consitituent battalions an extra SMG company to try and fill it out. I think it's a decent-sized unit for the game's purposes:

9 x Rifle
3 x Heavy Weapons (2 x MG, 1 x Mortar)
3 x SMG (extra company given to each battalion to fill it out)
2 x Bazooka (one representing the regimental anti-tank company and one representing an attached company from the divisional Anti-Tank Battalion)
1 x Cavalry (representing an attached company from divisional recon (fusilier) battalion)

I left out the Infantry Gun, as at 1000 production points, I think it's too powerful for the regiment.

I find the units just fine since I am not wed to a fantasy number for a unit.

[Twotribes]

My experience with ai is that it makes units from 30 to 100 rifle it however mixes and matches with no rhyme or reason for why it selected what it did. It breaks down premade units as well and mixers them all up, your 9 rifle will die ignoble deaths against most actions by the AI I am used to playing.

[the_iron_duke]

Well, I have 436 hours on this game, according to Steam's timer. Having used this system for most of that, I can say that infantry regiments work just fine. As I described above, the Infantry Regiment is not just nine Rifle. The 2 MG and 2 Bazooka in each give them a lot of (defensive) strength. Plus, they have a cavalry unit for recon (and offensive power), a mortar and a further three SMG for game balance reasons. Also, of course, one does not play with just one counter per hex and so one combines multiple formations in hexes. Using a regimental system gives a lot of flexibility in how one stacks one's units according to tactical needs.

The Infantry Regiments are, on their own, a defensive formation and are only good on the offense if the target has been effectively suppressed through artillery and air support and with the further advantages of attacking from multiple hex sides and with armour support.

Having said that, I would like to improve the Rifle unit by 50%, making it 150 production points, and then remove the SMGs that I had added to the Infantry Division. So the Infantry Regiments rifle companies would improve a little (1230 prod points on 9 Rifle, 3 SMG vs 1350 points on 9 x improved Rifle).

There are two ways of looking at the military formations - their organisation and their equipment. For example, if going by their organisation, there would be no SMG units, since these are distributed down to squad level and there are no SMG companies; or if one metaphorically rips apart the organisation or puts the formation in a blender so to speak, then SMGs will appear.

One possibility is to keep the SMG unit and consider that of the three rifle companies in the infantry battalion, one of them is SMG to represent the SMGs distributed within the rifle squads. So instead of an infantry battalion being 3 x Rifle, 1 x Heavy Weapon (MGs/Mortars), it is 2 x Rifle, 1 x SMG, 1 x Heavy Weapon.

Another possibility, is that the Combat Engineer unit could be created, either as a replacement for the SMG unit or alongside it. The Combat Engineer unit type is currently omitted from the game, yet is an intrinsic part of military organisation, existing as companies, battalions (and maybe even regiments). Basically, this unit would be a cross between the SMG unit and Mortar unit, having better offensive stats than defense (like Mortar) but the close terrain bonuses of the SMG unit. Plus, it could probably have engineer ability too.

[the_iron_duke]

A Combat Engineer sub-unit type would be a cool addition, actually. To reflect its specialist nature, it could maybe only get the close terrain combat bonuses when it is attacking (unlike mortar, which gets penalties for attacking close terrain). So the Combat Engineer would only have one combat use: attacking close terrain, such as cities, forest.

[the_iron_duke]

Incidentally, I had a cool idea for a feature in a future concept game. Each sub-unit would have essentially four lives, representing the four platoons contained within each. These would be represented by green squares. So instead of taking damage and losing whole companies, the damage would be a bit more spread around, which would be more realistic. This also works better if containing various different sub-unit types in a single formation.

Having four lives/platoons could also perhaps give some flexibility in unit customization. For example, perhaps one could make adjustments to one's formation content, such as having the capability to pay extra, with an additional surcharge, to use five lives/platoons in one's companies. Or perhaps less platoons. Possibly there could be military organisation research.

[the_iron_duke]

I was thinking of the differences between modelling the game as counter = (division) vs counter = (regiment + attached) + (independent Corps Troops battalions)

Some thoughts:

counter = (division)

- would need to change artillery to be able to operate in same counter as other units
- few base land unit counters: infantry division, armoured division, motorized division, (mountain division: no mountain troops in this game)
- I was thinking of how to incorporate the independent Corps Troops into this system. Basically, I think one would attach these independent sub-unit battalions to the other base formations. So to attach an independent Heavy Tank Battalion to a an Infantry Division, say, one would add one Heavy tank sub-unit to it.

How many attached sub-units possible per division? One? Three maybe? Anti-aircraft artillery, which is generally non-divisional would have to be included in these considerations. A list of possible battalions (single sub-units) that could be attached I will describe later.

A problem with doing it this way, is one wouldn't be able to use the TOE system well. With it, one would have to create a new TOE for every possible configuration of attached troops one wanted to use, unless going for a few key types.

counter = (regiment + attached) + (independent Corps Troops battalions)

- all division types are made up of four counters (three of division type, plus one artillery) using the classic triangular military organisation system

Infantry Division:

3 x Infantry Regiments
1 x Artillery Regiment

Armoured Division

1 x Tank Regiment
2 x Mechanized (or Motorized) Infantry Regiments
1 x Armoured Artillery Regiment

(or proportions reversed as 2 x Tank, 1 x Mechanized Infantry, depending on how one is attempting to model it and which historical TOE one is following)

Motorised (or Mechanized) Infantry Division:

3 x Motorised (or Mechanized) Infantry Regiments
1 x Motorised (or Mechanized) Artillery Regiment

Anti-Aircraft Artillery are not technically organic to the divisions (except for armoured divisions), but operate as Anti-Aircraft Regiments that can be attached to divisions as needed on the battlefield (max one per division in my house rules).

The rest of the land forces are those that are not organic to the divisions and exist as Corps Troops. These can be thought of as being under the ownership of Supreme HQ and that are then attached to the sub-ordinate Corps as tactically needed (and which can become, to all intents and purposes, semi-permanently attached to the Corps, serving its component divisions). Unlike the organic divisional support battalions, which are amalgamated into the regiments, these independent battalions exist as separate counters.

Here are a list of potential independent battalions. My house rules are to have only one of each of these types attached to each Corps and it's worked well.

Machine Gun Battalion
Mortar Battalion
Anti-Tank Battalion
Recon Battalion
Armoured Recon Battalion (for use in Armoured Corps instead of Recon Battalion)
Tank Destroyer (Assault Gun) Battalion
(Assault Gun Battalion - Assault Gun for use in assault gun role not yet created)
Heavy Tank Battalion
Heavy Tank Destroyer Battalion
Heavy Artillery Battalion
(Combat Engineer Battalion - this unit not yet created)
Engineer Battalion - (although I tend to keep these non-combat units under Supreme HQ control)