Matrix Games Forums

I managed to pocket and destroy 9WG Pz Div HQ, the game seemed to turn a bit chaotic at that point in time with german units flying all over the place. The 2nd Korps wasn't due for a long while and KG von Tettau HQ wasn't due for an hour or so. At the time, it was the highest command unit on the map.

Just how dramatic a hit is it to loose a major command group?

Well I lost a battalion HQ in the historical campaign, surrounded by counterattacking German units. I was suprised to see it immediatelly reforming on the safe side of the lines. Obviously this isn't quite realistic, and I'd would guess the same happened to the 9th SS Pz Div HQ in your game.

Very realistic, I would say. You will find the HQ recreated at a much-reduced efficiency, which is surely what happens in RL. The loss of a whole command structure must create chaos but after a while new elements take command just as they are trained to do. Your captain gets killed; does the lieutenant run round in circles like a headless chicken or does he get a grip and produce order from chaos? I know what I would do .... panic! Beam me up Scottie
Ray

Originally posted by RayWolfe
Very realistic, I would say. You will find the HQ recreated at a much-reduced efficiency, which is surely what happens in RL. The loss of a whole command structure must create chaos but after a while new elements take command just as they are trained to do. Your captain gets killed; does the lieutenant run round in circles like a headless chicken or does he get a grip and produce order from chaos? I know what I would do .... panic! Beam me up Scottie
Ray

Good to hear that the efficiency is reduced, but if a HQ is first cut out, and then totally wiped out, like in my game, it would take a while before a new Bn HQ would be established (and in a frenzy combat situation perhaps not at all) . In this case it would be more realistic if the units of the destroyed Bn would be automatically reattached to a superior HQ, and the Bn HQ reformed after a significant delay.

SS

Something wrong with Waffen-Grenadier (WG)?

Originally posted by Mr.Frag
Something wrong with Waffen-Grenadier (WG)?

Yep, I just hope there would be a patch to change it (god d@mn CDV!).

Anyhoo, my little complaints don't change the fact that I'm enjoying this game sooooooo much!

Keke,

Appreciate your comment about ading an extra delay to the resurrection of HQs. Good idea. But will require significant work. Too late now for HTTR. But I will add it to our wish list for our next game.

Just looking at the units with their staff points:

2nd WG Pz Korps HQ - 18 (19 units attached, 4 are HQ)
9WG Pz Div HQ - 15 (25 units attached, 7 are HQ)
10WG Pz Div HQ - 15 (12 units attached, 4 are HQ)
KG von Tettau HQ - 7 (17 units attached, 5 are HQ)
Heavy Pz Bn 506 HQ - 12 (5 units attached)

From an understanding point of view, would re-attaching units around result in better/faster communications?

Mr Frag,

Short Anser = Yes to a degree.

Long Answer. It is always a balance between speed/effeciency and the short term requirements. Certainly, in theory it is best not to overload your HQs. But often their will be other factors to consider, like the the location and forces required for a task, the availability of other HQ, the time it will take for transfers to be affected. The different command ratings. For instance it may be still better to have an overloaded but highly effecient HQ rather than a poor quality one that is not overloaded. Also it may be better to retain an overloaded HQ at location X, than shifting forces away to another HQ that is at location Y many kilometers away.

hm, reminds me of a game I played a while a go on german side.
It ended with me chasing 1Airborne div. HQ which consisted of one (1!) person unarmed running like hell, a bit like an old-fashioned fox hunt!

I understand what you are saying Dave, but the reverse also sounds to be true ...

Shifting a much needed unit to a difference HQ to motivate it to actually get off it's butt and do something instead of re-org for 3 days could obviously be very effective from the sounds of it as that unit would now benefit from the higher *smarts* level of this new HQ ???

Some of the early units under Tettau "the sleepy" would probably benefit from this change in command and might actually enter into the battle before day 12 :rolleyes:

Does the Command HQ subsidize for a hopeless Unit commander at all here or am I reading too much into this?

It's true that a "reluctant" superior HQ may hamstring a subordinate unit by not wanting to be too aggressive. It's also true that the stronger the force raqtio is in its favour the more likely it is to be aggressive. So to a degree by reinforceing a command you increase the force ratio and thus its probability of going on the offensive. However, the more timid the commander is the greater the force ratio required. So ading a small force may not be sufficient.

Added to this is the question of the superior's orders. If these are to Defend then heh, that's what they will do.

*** SPOILER ***

KG von Tettau has more than enough good quality troops. Sure he has the delights of the Dutch SS Hell Bn and the 184th Arty ( come infantry ) Bn but he also has KG Lippert with four very qood SS Mot Inf Bns. As an advice to a player, I would recommend that you would give KG Lippert direct orders and bypass von Tettau.

Not really a spoiler Dave, just appears to me to be common sense. Re-working HQ's so good troops are under the control of good commanders just makes good sense. It's nice that the game actually permits these actions.

Low quality troops= speedbumps

Good old Tettau and his 'mish-mash' of troops! I normally detach Lippert from his control as soon as they arrive. Against the AI I normally leave Tettau's weaker forces covering the northern end of the rail-bridge. With the integrated morters they are useful troops dug-in. If I'm playing as the Germans, once I launch my counter-attack I leave the majority of Tettau's force covering all the river crossings.

In HTTR, you will find that most of the battalion sized units under von Tettau have been replaced with their company constituents. So they end up as a HQ, three companies and one or two mortar platoons. In many ways it increases the otpions available to the Germans but they are individually weaker units. But overall it's a much better simulation.

Here is a sample ofvonTettau's order of battle taken from the ScenMaker of HTTR.

Hmm, that could help, overall they may be weaker, but from a flanking standpoint, number of units count more then strength. The only hardship will be the reaction speed of the units will make it difficult to exploit the added flexibility.

Curious if you have reduced the staff costs for smaller units or increased the Main HG to deal with the increases. I remember reading in another post that all directly commanded troops take from the theater commanders staff total...

No staff capacity has not been increased. If you want to micromanage we recommend playing without orders delay.

Ok, final question then you can go back to work writing the strategy guide so I can read the answers there

Lets say we take the 82 Airborne boys:

XXX Corps HQ, 82 Div HQ, 4 Reg HQ, 12 Bn HQ

Commanding at the Reg or Bn level (not all the way down to the individual unit level) still take command points from the 30 corps HQ? or does this only happen when I completely isolate a unit such as grabbing E Coy 2/505 directly and controlling it?

At which level would it be considered micromanagement? Obviously moving at the Div level is way too high up the food chain.

Also, what is the net effect of the superforce HQ (30 Corps/2 Korps) not being in play yet? Does it simply drop down a level to Divisional HQ (and automatically figure out which Div is senior?)