Matrix Games Forums

I have been examining the ASIGINT reports avidly lately and gathering info on what is where.
I am looking to start moving on the Solomons and so far I have found the following units
Tk regt
Ind AA Gun Co
Fd AA Machinecannon Coy
Jaaf Bn
Mtn Gun Regt
Ichiki det
Road const Co
Garrison unit
Then I decided I needed to work out what actually comprised a JAAF BN or a Garrison unit and so on.
I cannot find anywhere in the game what these are made up of. That is unless I drop out of being an Allied player and switch to being a Japanese player. I really don't want to do that as I feel it is somewhat cheating.
Is there somewhere that some kind soul has assembled such info. I would have expected my various Int agencies to have at least a general idea of what these are, at least by now.

I suggest that you load up the Japanese side and take a look. Unit composition may change over time as well.

I had a feeling someone was going to say that. I may have to and I will try and not look at dispositions although I suppose it could be considered Intel if I look at a garrison unit and it happens to be located where I want to go.
I know that on the allied side titles are just that. I have a BF that has an aviation spt of 16. The next one has an aviation support of 32 and there are those that have an aviation support of 60. All with the same titles.
I realise that units compositions change with time. After all, the Australians came back from the desert and had to alter their org to a reduced motorised division and with other changes to a Jungle Organisation. I was just hoping that there was somewhere a list of what Japanese units looked like at the outset.
Or at least what they looked like when allied forces ran up against them. Such things as do their divisions have three regts each of three bns each of three Coys or are they more three regts each of three bns with a support Bn and each has four coys?
Google and other information sources do give basic structures but was the odd ones such as garrison units and JAAF Bns that don't appear on google search that I was after.
looks like I will have to become a Japanese player for a turn to find out.
Thanks for the response.

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

I had a feeling someone was going to say that. I may have to and I will try and not look at dispositions although I suppose it could be considered Intel if I look at a garrison unit and it happens to be located where I want to go.
I know that on the allied side titles are just that. I have a BF that has an aviation spt of 16. The next one has an aviation support of 32 and there are those that have an aviation support of 60. All with the same titles.
I realise that units compositions change with time. After all, the Australians came back from the desert and had to alter their org to a reduced motorised division and with other changes to a Jungle Organisation. I was just hoping that there was somewhere a list of what Japanese units looked like at the outset.
Or at least what they looked like when allied forces ran up against them. Such things as do their divisions have three regts each of three bns each of three Coys or are they more three regts each of three bns with a support Bn and each has four coys?
Google and other information sources do give basic structures but was the odd ones such as garrison units and JAAF Bns that don't appear on google search that I was after.
looks like I will have to become a Japanese player for a turn to find out.
Thanks for the response.

If you are playing against the AI, the destination of their LCUs will be determined by the script that is running (there are 13 for stock scenario 1).

You can look up the units in the database using the EDITOR. The LCUs are listed under "Locations" just put the name of the unit in the search box after you are in that tab.

Otherwise, learn to live with FOW. General rules of thumb: A division has ~300-350 AV; a regiment has ~120 AV; a brigade has ~ 160-220 AV and extra guns vs a Rgt TOE; A battalion has ~ 30-60 AV. A company has ~ 8-10 AV.
There are some special units like the Ichiki Det. that may fall in between those general descriptions.

Mountain and Jungle guns are small caliber - usually 3"/75mm.

The AA unit has larger caliber AA guns (75mm and up); The Machinecannon unit would have rapid fire, small caliber guns. Japanese AA is not particularly effective at game start (no radar). Fly over 8000 feet high and you should be fine.

The Tk Rgt will likely have a mixture of medium and light tanks, both of which can be handled by Stuarts. Their guns are short-barreled/low velocity so they do not have good penetration until they are close range. Say about 60-70 tanks and a similar number of trucks. The trucks usually get knocked out first, so don't count "AFV" losses as meaning tank or AV losses.

Indeed they do change, but I think to all intents and purposes what BBfanboy says is a good rule fo thumb. Also remember that AV is not in itself the sole issue, as the Allied forces grow in firepower they become even more formidable, on the other hand the 'never say die' attitude of the Empire's forces is a pain in the rear when you want to get an invasion done and move on.

Cheers

Roger

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

I had a feeling someone was going to say that. I may have to and I will try and not look at dispositions although I suppose it could be considered Intel if I look at a garrison unit and it happens to be located where I want to go.


The LCU TOE templates are easily found in the editor. Your own side's TOEs are available in game from the unit screen.


I know that on the allied side titles are just that. I have a BF that has an aviation spt of 16. The next one has an aviation support of 32 and there are those that have an aviation support of 60. All with the same titles.


Not true. They have different titles. Pay closer attention to the full unit name.


I realise that units compositions change with time. After all, the Australians came back from the desert and had to alter their org to a reduced motorised division and with other changes to a Jungle Organisation. I was just hoping that there was somewhere a list of what Japanese units looked like at the outset.
Or at least what they looked like when allied forces ran up against them. Such things as do their divisions have three regts each of three bns each of three Coys or are they more three regts each of three bns with a support Bn and each has four coys?


Have you actually looked at one of your own units and seen one of these structures. Seen the TOE of any Allied division which states that it has 3xregts, with each regt in turn comprised of 3xcoys? It is all abstracted in the AE TOEs.


Google and other information sources do give basic structures but was the odd ones such as garrison units and JAAF Bns that don't appear on google search that I was after.
looks like I will have to become a Japanese player for a turn to find out.
Thanks for the response.

Alfred

The in game orbats are based on research of real life, so I found docs like this interesting if you have a bit of time to read up in between turns.

https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Japan/ ... B-3.html#I

https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Japan/IJA/HB/HB-4.html

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/l ... orces.html

Thanks Alfred and BBfanboy.
I am always reluctant to look at the editor as once upon a time in another game I did so and apparently flipped a switch that ruined the whole game. And no-one could tell me what I had done to be able to reverse it.

I have had a careful look at the editor and poked my nose cautiously into a few areas and that seems to give me what I need. Just the simple fact that a JAAF Co can support so many a/c and a JAAF Bn can support a different number etc. Construction units have so many engrs, a typical garrison unit, if I haven't degraded it by sinking the troop tpt it came on or by bombing, should be about so many squads with so many guns, and so on. That gives me an idea of what is likely to be at a base. And what may be facing me.

Don't forget also that there are different "flavors" of Japanese divisions as well. Some are more for garrison/light duty while others have a lot more support with a lot more firepower.

Some of the units that you will see did not appear in the war as such but are an almalgam of forces that were at a base. These were put into one unit to represent them.

the devs research on TOE was thorough and they used a combination of documents to settle upon one. You can search the threads and this topic was discussed at length and depth. The devs gave a GREAT deal of specific info on this and many forum members contributed to the final result.

To state that the TOE's are correct is an opinion. But to state that they researched this as much as possible at the time and concluded with a set of TOE's that are as accurate as the documents of that time allowed is a fact. One of the most discussed points was that TOE's of all participants were somewhat fluid throughout the war; units were often forced into action with what they had, other units were given temporary assets for a specific mission, etc. The game doesn't allow for this very well, so by necessity there are a lot of compromises. Again, much of this was discussed in the public forums. I am sure the discussions in the dev forums were also considerable.

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS


I know that on the allied side titles are just that. I have a BF that has an aviation spt of 16. The next one has an aviation support of 32 and there are those that have an aviation support of 60. All with the same titles.


Not true. They have different titles. Pay closer attention to the full unit name.

Alfred

Actually not correct. If you look at 109th RN Base Force and 106th RN Base Force, the titles look alike as the only thing different is the number. However, the 106th RN Base Force has an Aviation Support of 16 and a few other minor things. The 109th (and the 111th RN Base Force) has an Aviation support of 32, and a naval support as well as 6" guns and 40mm guns.

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS


I know that on the allied side titles are just that. I have a BF that has an aviation spt of 16. The next one has an aviation support of 32 and there are those that have an aviation support of 60. All with the same titles.


Not true. They have different titles. Pay closer attention to the full unit name.

Alfred

Actually not correct. If you look at 109th RN Base Force and 106th RN Base Force, the titles look alike as the only thing different is the number. However, the 106th RN Base Force has an Aviation Support of 16 and a few other minor things. The 109th (and the 111th RN Base Force) has an Aviation support of 32, and a naval support as well as 6" guns and 40mm guns.

Look at the show unit TOE toggle button at the bottom of the unit screen. This really distinguishes the TOE of the unit, for example there are lots of different types of IJA Divisions.

For your own troops, you can actually sort by load cost to help identify troops quickly.

I use aerial recon to estimate ground strength as not all troops will show up on sig int reports although they are quite helpful.

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

ORIGINAL: Alfred



Alfred

Actually not correct. If you look at 109th RN Base Force and 106th RN Base Force, the titles look alike as the only thing different is the number. However, the 106th RN Base Force has an Aviation Support of 16 and a few other minor things. The 109th (and the 111th RN Base Force) has an Aviation support of 32, and a naval support as well as 6" guns and 40mm guns.

Look at the show unit TOE toggle button at the bottom of the unit screen. This really distinguishes the TOE of the unit, for example there are lots of different types of IJA Divisions.

For your own troops, you can actually sort by load cost to help identify troops quickly.

I use aerial recon to estimate ground strength as not all troops will show up on sig int reports although they are quite helpful.

Those base forces that you quoted may have those additional devices due to the fact that those devices were there at the base at the start of the game. Instead of making another unit to show those, there were simply included into the base force. My understanding is that the base force is an abstraction anyway of various smaller units at a base and this is how the developers show that.

That may be but Alfred did state the difference was to be found in the titles. What I am pointing out is that if I simply looked at the titles, as Alfred has suggested, there is no way I can know what the unit actually consists of, unless I open up the unit and hit the TOE button. And there are literally hundreds of base forces in the game. I nearly got caught sending a Base Force with a Naval support of 125 and aviation support of 32 off into the wilds of the Burma Hills when all I needed was a simple extra 16 Aviation points.

As I said upthread, mere titles do not mean anything. And I was told they did mean something and to look more closely at the full unit name. I did and as I stated, the titles look the same, apart from the different number but the composition differs.

yes I know the game is a micro-managers paradise. I can live with that and I constantly find myself opening units to see what they should be. But sometimes, I just want a fan to be a fan rather than a rotary air impeller Mark III*

But as I stated, sometimes the devices/squads at the base are folded into a unit. What is actually there for the unit may also differ from the TOE if you check that. There may also be "upgrades" to the units removing those extras.

Ranger Joe, I do realise that. What was concerning was the straight out statement by Alfred that I could tell the difference in the TOEs by the title. This is obviously not the case. Wether or not the unit had other devices folded into it at some time has nothing to do with my post.

I think Alfred was referring to the title of the upgrade … they are generally uniquely named ….

Thanks for that but I still don't accept it. Titles are titles. You see a unit in both real life and the game called for example 7th Mountain Division. It is not referred to as 7th Mountain Division Type Mtn Div 8/42. Official histories talk about the 7th Mountain Division and they may say somewhere in the history that it was organised on the Type Mountain 8/42 TOE. So suggesting that the upgrade or the TOE should be regarded as being in the title would mean all titles should have their relevant TOE listed after the title. That has not happened anywhere that I can see and therefore is not a justification.
Let's just leave it there. All I was trying to say was that Alfred was incorrect when he told me to read the full title as that would tell me what the unit was made up of. People seem to have somehow decided this was a gross attack on the system when it was a mere aside.

ORIGINAL: LGKMAS

Thanks for that but I still don't accept it. Titles are titles. You see a unit in both real life and the game called for example 7th Mountain Division. It is not referred to as 7th Mountain Division Type Mtn Div 8/42. Official histories talk about the 7th Mountain Division and they may say somewhere in the history that it was organised on the Type Mountain 8/42 TOE. So suggesting that the upgrade or the TOE should be regarded as being in the title would mean all titles should have their relevant TOE listed after the title. That has not happened anywhere that I can see and therefore is not a justification.
Let's just leave it there. All I was trying to say was that Alfred was incorrect when he told me to read the full title as that would tell me what the unit was made up of. People seem to have somehow decided this was a gross attack on the system when it was a mere aside.

I'm off the s ene for some tim e because of internet problems and I return to see an arrogant, incapable of noticing the bleedin obvious text because they have a preconceived opinion of how things should be, and if the game doesn't support their myopic perspective, has the gall to say that I made a mistake.

You find base forces with 16, 32 or 60 aviation support and state that they are all the same type of unit and therefore there is no logic why they have different aviation support. As I told you, look at their titles. Every US Army base force has the same TOE template. Every US air corps base force has the same TOE template force for its own units, which TOE is not the same as an army base force because they are a different organisation, as is quite evident from their unit title. Ditto for US Navy base forces which for that organisation, have the same TOE template. Again evident from their unit title.

Just so that even you can not misinterpret the game abstraction (yes look up your Websters to discover what that means and why your OP is a fools errand);

there is a TOE template for US army base forces
there is a different TOE template for US air corps base forces
there is a different TOE template for US navy base forces

And if you could ever concern yourself with non American units, the TOE templates of other nationalities base forces are different again ... but internally consistent with their unit titles.

Here is a suggestion. As you know so much more than the AE devs, create your own game. AE is clearly a game not up to your self perceived rigorous intellectual standards.

A mightily peeved off Alfred

Alfred
I am not trying to be difficult. Let me explain step by step what happened.
1. I was trying to see if there was an ORBAT chart anywhere to show the different sizes of units.
2.You came back and suggested that I look at the editor.
3. I explained that I was nervous about using an editor because of past bad experiences with other games but I did venture out and found what I wanted.
4. Someone made a remark to which I replied that the titles may be the same but the TOEs are often different.
5. You came back and rather abruptly told me that the titles told me everything and I should read the full title. I took that to mean the title of the unit.
6. I was puzzled by this. I knew from the start that the USA forces had different titles, as you have just posted.
7. However, I was delving deeply into the UK side of things and using RN Base Forces.
8. I opened up the 106th RN Base Force and found it was a 16 Aviation point unit with a few other minor bits.
9. I then looked at 111th RN Base Force and discovered it was a 32 point with massive support and naval support.
10. I then suggested that your post about the titles was incorrect.
11. A number of people then posted suggesting I was a. wrong or b. should have looked at the TOE as well as the title.
12. A TOE is not a title, which is what I responded.
13. You have now arrived back on the scene and told me something I already knew, that the USA Base forces had different titles and therefore TOEs. You mentioned nothing about the RN Base Forces.
14.I was then told that apparently I was an arrogant know it all and I should piss off and develop my own game.
15. I Fail to see how pointing out that the RN Base Forces were different than the USA Base forces merits point 14.
16. I suggest you look at the TOEs for 106th RN Base Force and 111th RN Base Force and tell me if the titles are the same why the TOEs are different. If it was a DEV fix, I am happy to live with that but it does invalidate your post about all titles being a key pointer to the size of the unit.
17. Up to now, I have found this board a rather happy band of brothers ready to assist newbs with where to find things and what is actually meant by section xyz of the manual. I am disappointed that this has now changed.