Matrix Games Forums

We really need cavalry brigades as something that can be deployed as an "economy of force" role. This is very "historical" and would be very useful.

Buggies and motorbikes?

I use their battalions for screens and cover missions. They are effective.

Buggies are better for cover. Motorbikes are excellent for screen. Given separation, OHQ isn't particularly helpful.

Militia units tend to offer an adequate fixing force against incursions by non-aligned units in rear areas.

In terms of the future, I'm looking forward to air assault units to perform additional missions in restricted terrain. Gunships will make the dinosaurs extinct once again.

Birds eye view of a part of my map. You see the individual units (red) spread about here. Recon spies are very important for keeping an eye on non-aligned.

This is the frontier. My core zones are to the east. I recently pushed into this area.Two minors lived in the center here. Now fighting two majors in the northern part of the AO for the same city and zone.


Use to corral enemy into pockets and then destroy them in detail.

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

Buggies and motorbikes?

I use their battalions for screens and cover missions. They are effective.

When you're fighting against minors (except Spiders or robots) that's a pretty good combo, since you always have good recon and have enough firepower to beat them easily, they are also pretty cheap early on, the only problem is than you can only upgrade the armor of your motorbikes to padded envirosuit, so you cant rely on them after mid game against majors unless you're using them to flank or secure secondary fronts.

Buggies and motorbikes still have their roles. As stated in the OP, economy of force. Also, both provide high recon values.

However, as you wrote, for battles (multiple engagements), you need full combat forces as supporting efforts as well.

Per above, the general security role is to provide a force being protected with time and maneuver space to react, while also detecting and providing information about the enemy. Deny the enemy direct contact with and fires against your main forces--except at a time and in a place you choose. Take a position of advantage over the enemy.

Protection in layers, from from inside out...

A guard force--combat forces that do not operate independently, subordinate units or formation auxiliaries, etc.

A covering force--independent forces to protect your main body from direct fire; within the game this is a block and defensive role; expect losses, but more economical than using the mass of your main body

A screening force--primarily provides early warning to the protected force; detect and observe, but avoid decisive engagements

In the above image, my main force is taking the prize, because it did not have to wait and give the initiative to the other major regime. Less valuable units are performing security to protect it and its lines of communication.

I didn't sweep from east to west. I started south and used the mountains as a natural obstacle. I then pushed north through the AO so that the enemy could not use the terrain (heavy forest--on my flanks) to slow my progress. All the while, I was trapping the non-aligned forces in the northeast in the open. Hammer to anvil to finish them off as well.

I sent the guard force, a MG brigade combat team, to the west to stop the non-aligned forces pushing west to east through those corridors between bodies of water. You can see them spread wide on line. They destroyed some dinosaurs and militia, but are most importantly denying entry to the AO.

Finally, the supporting attack, a faster mechanized brigade, in the northwest is pushing the non-aligned forces out the forests, while my covering forces in the east trap them in the pocket.

The screening units along the east of the image are protecting my core zones.

Spies are very important--they are like IMINT.

ORIGINAL: Malevolence
Buggies and motorbikes?

I use their battalions for screens and cover missions. They are effective.

Buggies are better for cover. Motorbikes are excellent for screen. Given separation, OHQ isn't particularly helpful.

Militia units tend to offer an adequate fixing force against incursions by non-aligned units in rear areas.

Yes, I'm aware that buggies and motorbikes are goof for screens and cover missions--that's why I'm requesting a cavalry brigade. I don't really agree that a formation would be useless given separation--the point is that the whole formation could move quickly to concentrate to confront threats. The problem with militia units is that they are too slow and cannot react quickly enough. Not sure if it is random or not, but incursions by the bad guys (or creatures) always seem to occur wherever my units are not...and by the time militia gets there, the road has been cut, a town thrown into chaos, etc.

And why not have cavalry brigades? Do we really need, what, 20 different types of infantry formation? How about a little more variety?

ORIGINAL: 76mm

We really need cavalry brigades as something that can be deployed as an "economy of force" role. This is very "historical" and would be very useful.

With the term of wikipedia, I am not sure what you are talking about.

If you are asking for a cheap and spamable unit to fill a frontline thta can not fight, I had this idea:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4827953

If you are talking about people riding animals, this is partially in the game. Also this sugestion:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4829005

Would motorized or mechanized (where you design for speed) infantry not solve this need? In conjunction with using Bikers and Billies of course.

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
With the term of wikipedia, I am not sure what you are talking about.

um, cavalry units don't necessarily uses horses, or any animals any more...

A unit mounted on motorcycles or buggies could be considered a "cavalry" unit. And yet, I am referring to a cheap, mobile unit that could be used in an economy of force role, just like in real-world armies. It's primary role is not front-line fighting, but to screen a front. But when an enemy advances, unlike slow militia units, it could react quickly to deal with them.

Not sure why this idea is so complicated or controversial...

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
With the term of wikipedia, I am not sure what you are talking about.

um, cavalry units don't necessarily uses horses, or any animals any more...

A unit mounted on motorcycles or buggies could be considered a "cavalry" unit. And yet, I am referring to a cheap, mobile unit that could be used in an economy of force role, just like in real-world armies. It's primary role is not front-line fighting, but to screen a front. But when an enemy advances, unlike slow militia units, it could react quickly to deal with them.

Not sure why this idea is so complicated or controversial...

Because "Economy of Force" is very poorly described on Wikipedia. I guess you learned it in the US Army, but it is not that know outside of it.

What you describe does sound like the old Skirmisher idea. They are cheap (easily spammed), light (and thus mobile).
And we do have both buggies (keep the armor low) and Motorcycle troops (unable to use Combat Armor) in the game already. The issue is more one of Manpower.

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
Because "Economy of Force" is very poorly described on Wikipedia. I guess you learned it in the US Army, but it is not that know outside of it.

Yes, that is where I first learned it, but also from reading lots of military history!

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
And we do have both buggies (keep the armor low) and Motorcycle troops (unable to use Combat Armor) in the game already. The issue is more one of Manpower.

Yes, I understand that we have buggies and motorcycles, and that independent units can be used to screen a front, that's what I do now. But the point is that these units would often be grouped together in larger formations--just like every other military unit in the game--to allow for better command and control, etc.

I cavalry brigade could be used to screen a large sector of the front while fighting is going on elsewhere, and then concentrate to deal with whatever threats emerge, as long as they are not serious. There is no reason for these units not to get the same kind of OHQ benefits as other types of formations...

It's a principle of war for everyone. Economy of Force is the judicious employment and distribution of forces so as to expend the minimum essential combat power on secondary efforts to allocate the maximum possible combat power on primary efforts.

That is the English definition, although the Brits call it Economy of Effort. French use Economy of Means.

If you use WIKI--
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_war

It depends on your doctrine.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Not sure why this idea is so complicated or controversial...

It's not complicated or controversial. It's a discussion.

For me, I see Cavalry as a mission. Reconnaissance and security missions.

However, when you mentioned Cavalry formations there are three elements: OOB, model types, and HQ.

Can you describe the formation in more detail? TO&E, etc.

As an aside, forming Battlegroups is possible.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

Yes, I understand that we have buggies and motorcycles, and that independent units can be used to screen a front, that's what I do now. But the point is that these units would often be grouped together in larger formations--just like every other military unit in the game--to allow for better command and control, etc.

I cavalry brigade could be used to screen a large sector of the front while fighting is going on elsewhere, and then concentrate to deal with whatever threats emerge, as long as they are not serious. There is no reason for these units not to get the same kind of OHQ benefits as other types of formations...

Again, why not use a motorized infantry division or whatever size you want?

ORIGINAL: GodwinW
Again, why not use a motorized infantry division or whatever size you want?

Because that would be far, far more expensive, and overkill for the role. Do you really want a bunch of motorized infantry battalions sitting out there doing nothing, screening an open flank?

ORIGINAL: Malevolence
For me, I see Cavalry as a mission. Reconnaissance and security missions.
***
Can you describe the formation in more detail? TO&E, etc.

The unit could be called cavalry or recon--same thing. And yes, it is a mission that is often carried out by specialized formations--cavalry or recon regiments, etc.

Pretty simple TO&E--5 or 6 buggy battalions and an OHQ. Or motorcycle battalions...perhaps you could have different "light recon" (moto) and "armored cavalry" (buggy) brigades. Maybe add a motorized battalion for a little more weight.

I don't know what kind of planets you guys play on, but on the ones that I'm usually one, there is A LOT of unaligned territory, and out of there comes all sorts of threats. While I'm attacking another regime on one front, I don't want to have to post a combat-worthy brigade to screen these guys---use a cavalry brigade to stop them and hopefully swarm them to destroy them, and then go back to the screen.

Sure, I can use independent recon battalions, and do so, but you can make the same argument about all the military formations in the game.

Well yes they are expensive.

Kinda funny actually, because cavalry was also expensive. Only nobles could be it. Horse and armor and sword, all cost way more than a normal farmer could make.

But I now understand, you just want to be able to field a Buggy Battalion basically. Yes, why not? I agree, could well be an OOB that could be discovered early on.

Let me throw out an attempt to understand what you want:
- a Brigade made of Buggies, Motorcycles, guys on 2-legged animals or similar fast stuff
- with each unit only being size 5 (rather then the normal 10)
- but propably double the amount of units

The idea being, a cheap way to get a lot of units out on the field? So more like my first linked idea?

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
- but propably double the amount of units

I don't think he mentioned double the amount of units, and given blocking that would upend balance. At the moment, you can surround an enemy with one organic OHQ, but you must put your HQ at risk.

HQ's have the capacity to handle 3-5 maneuver elements before the strain on mission command (i.e. centralized intent with decentralized execution) becomes an issue -- 10 would be too great. Before the ubiquitous use of computers, many considered three subordinates optimum at the tactical level.

Consider the difficulty of voice radio communications for command and control (and signals).

Arguably, this becomes less of an issue at the operational level and above in modern forces. However, the coordination of combined and joint forces, along with specialized multipliers, removes much of that potential capacity.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

The unit could be called cavalry or recon--same thing. And yes, it is a mission that is often carried out by specialized formations--cavalry or recon regiments, etc.

Pretty simple TO&E--5 or 6 buggy battalions and an OHQ. Or motorcycle battalions...perhaps you could have different "light recon" (moto) and "armored cavalry" (buggy) brigades. Maybe add a motorized battalion for a little more weight.

I don't know what kind of planets you guys play on, but on the ones that I'm usually one, there is A LOT of unaligned territory, and out of there comes all sorts of threats. While I'm attacking another regime on one front, I don't want to have to post a combat-worthy brigade to screen these guys---use a cavalry brigade to stop them and hopefully swarm them to destroy them, and then go back to the screen.

Sure, I can use independent recon battalions, and do so, but you can make the same argument about all the military formations in the game.

Does this not exist? Buggie Armies, etc? Motorbike Armies, etc?

I assumed the OOB had not be discovered by me. I don't know of any list of existing OOB's. I assumed all the models followed the same OOB patterns with the added mix of combined arms subordinates (siege, etc.) as more advanced formations.

I think these would be good, but I thought they were hidden somewhere in the game already.

You could definitely attach auxiliary motorized/mechanized infantry or tanks too.

The issue, I think, is that any TO&E is going to look much like units that already exist but with a different name and NATO symbol.

Let's try the old Cold War Armored Cavalry Regiment (ACR) or Division Reconnaissance Squadrons as a test. That TO&E would look something like below... (given the game's rule of 10s)

Heavy Reconnaissance Battalion:

400 Troopers
20 APCs
10 Tanks
10 Artillery (self-propelled)

Light Reconnaissance Battalion:

400 Troopers
20 Buggies
10 Tanks
10 Artillery (self-propelled)

An example Regiment is close to three of those squadrons (added support).

1500 Troopers
70 APCs
30 Tanks
30 Artillery (self-propelled)

Build out OOB's from there, but I couldn't see them as Divisions or Armies. Also, if there are OOB rules about troops to transport ratios, I don't know them.

These units had aviation as well--when that is added to the game.



I bet there is an OOB already in the game that looks like those, but is called something else.

What about a Stratagem card that gives bonuses and changes the NATO icon to cavalry?

ORIGINAL: Malevolence

ORIGINAL: zgrssd
- but propably double the amount of units

I don't think he mentioned double the amount of units, and given blocking that would upend balance. At the moment, you can surround an enemy with one organic OHQ, but you must put your HQ at risk.

HQ's have the capacity to handle 3-5 maneuver elements before the strain on mission command (i.e. centralized intent with decentralized execution) becomes an issue -- 10 would be too great. Before the ubiquitous use of computers, many considered three subordinates optimum at the tactical level.

Consider the difficulty of voice radio communications for command and control (and signals).

Arguably, this becomes less of an issue at the operational level and above in modern forces. However, the coordination of combined and joint forces, along with specialized multipliers, removes much of that potential capacity.

Screening forces need a bit more indepedant decisionmaking anyway. of course that means they may not be able to benefit from postures, wich means they are basically just independant 50 buggy/500 cycle units.