OOB information questions

[Mad Russian]

Air support is the BIG FORCE MULTIPLIER that NATO was depending on. The Soviets were well aware of that and had all hard surface runways in Europe targeted with chemical weapons. It would have taken NATO some time to have recovered from those initial strikes. When they did recover most of the their initial response would have been deep strike on Soviet airfields, logistics centers and transportation centers to isolate the battlefield. For some time the only only NATO aircraft they would see would be an occasional fixed wing or much more likely helicopter support.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Stimpak]

NATO Divisional HQs aren't included in Red Storm, thus far. Any pointers to their compositions?

[Tazak]

A UK Div HQ would consist of;

Signals Regt HQ & signals sqn
AAC regt HQ
RE regimental HQ
Div Recce HQ
RLC Regt HQ
RMP & defence company
Div Arty (including AD) HQ
Plus other HQs of attached units

Each of the above would be a mix of Sultans, FV432 and comms trucks (you'd need to copy the soviet COMV trucks but use the UK 4 or 8 tonne trucks),

Div Primary HQ + Div secondary HQ each of:
7 HQ troops
4 Sultans
8 FV432 (no 'peak' version)
11 COMV trucks
3 Infantry squads
2 Blowpipe/Javelin

Edited to account for stacking limit of 35 subunits per hex

[Stimpak]

For Scenario 4, a US ORBAT has been decided upon:

US 5th Infantry Division ORBAT:

2nd Brigade, 5th Infantry Division
3-77th Armor Battalion: M1 (may have been renamed 4-35th Armor)
3-6th Mech Infantry Battalion: M113
4-6th Mech Infantry Battalion: M113
(2-152nd Armor with M60A3s is still in the USA)

4th Brigade (Aviation):
4th Sqdn, 12th Cavalry Regt: 19 M60A3, 32 M113, 4 M577, 4 M106, 24 Dragon, 8 AH1F, 12 OH58C
1-5th Attack Helicopter Battalion: 21 AH1F, 13 OH58C

5th ID DivArty:
C Battery, 21st Field Artillery Regiment: 9 MLRS

1-55th Air Defense Battalion: 24 Chaparral, 24 Vulcan SP, 60 Stinger



What I would like to know is the identity of the A-10 force based in Ahlhorn.
Relikte (Same site used for the East German ORBAT) points to the 81st TFW:
http://relikte.com/ahlhorn/index.htm

[WildCatNL]

Detachment 3, 10th Tactical Fighter Wing
http://usmilitarypatches.com/gallery/di ... p?pid=9584

"Die Streitkraefte der U.S.A. in Europa, 1989, Standortverzeichnis" indicates this, and the above badge seems to confirm this.

William

[Stimpak]

Thanks again, William.

The plan is to have these harassing the player's forces, until SCUDs with chemical warheads destroy Ahlhorn.

[soapsuds]

Would appreciate some info:

1. If both a Nato and Warsaw unit on same hex and Nato artillary used on hex do both units get damaged or just opposite side?

2. If both a Nato and Warsaw unit on same hex and one unit destorying bridge is the time bridge being destroyed cancelled/delayed?

3. Can mines be cleared?

4. While in a 3 way point transit, if e.g., a tank group is attacked does it stop and thewaypoint(s) deleted and therefore have to be re-issued?

5. Artillary cannot destroy bridges?

THX

[CapnDarwin]

1. Both sides can take losses and readiness loss.
2. Not currently. You can stop a bridge from being blown or built by forcing the unit out of the bridging hex.
3. Yes, mines get automatically cleared by abstracted engineers after 30 minutes once a unit hits the field.
4. Not for an assault order. Hasty and deliberate moves can get dropped into screen and require new movement orders.
5. No. Artillery is not precise enough for bridge demolition. It could be used on units trying to buikd/blow a bridge however. Aircraft also cannot target bridges in the game for the same reason. There is a case for laser guided weapons, but we do not have that modeled at the moment.

Hope that helps.

[soapsuds]

Jim,

Thx for yr response"

Further mine clearing, I don't see a reference with unit NEXT to mine hex to clear same? You suggest a unit has to enter an enemy minefield, die, then engineers arrive 30 minutes later?

Another question!

I am not a programmer but why use shift and control THEN a letter key to access i.e. elevation etc? With a mouse in right hand quickly accessing "ctrl" then a series of letter/keys becomes cumbersome. Can you bypass the shift and control function? Just use keyboard letters

OR

You already have mouse click/links for LOS, Command and Paths; why not add max.fire and "spotable", mobility and hinderance factors etc?

Regards

[CapnDarwin]

If you spot a field before hitting it you can go around. In the next game engine we will have a number of changes to engineering that will allow for discreet assets. In that case if you had some engineers you could clear a field if you need to.

The hotkey is a wishlist item. Both to be able to change and to be single key press. It's a code issue right now. We will be looking at this for Southern Storm. Same with the little function buttons. We plan to add more there as well. Currently we are UI limited for space and I was happy to get three in there.

[Stimpak]

What does a subunit's top speed change, other than of course how fast it gets from point A to point B? Does it affect stabilizers or chance of being hit?

[CapnDarwin]

Being on the move effects the hit function and the tech level and stability rating modify it back toward a stationary equivalent. We are not breaking anything down to a per mph/kph type of effect.

[Tcao]

ORIGINAL: Stimpak

I have that PDF bookmarked, actually. I'm well aware of why battalions/companies are sized the way they are, I was simply curious about how a Soviet MRB's tank company was distributed. There are 13 tanks in the company, so are they kept as an independent company, or are they distributed as 4 tanks per MRC?

it depends on the commander, the tank company give the soviet commander the flexibility to build up his own battle group. he can took out one Mot. battalion, reinforce the Bn with engineers, arty and tanks, and ask the new battle formation to run some suicidal mission

[markcab]

I'll be honest, for what equipment at what time, I use WinSPMBT. [:D]

[Stimpak]

I also use WinSPMBT as a source when everything else turns up dry.
Would enjoy that game much better with Flashpoint's WEGO system however.

[Stimpak]

I've found myself adding Warpact units in by the Battalion instead of by the Regiment, now. It feels more flexible and allows me to more easily control a scenario's size.

I've also been experimenting with artillery allocation, based on readings from http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a216371.pdf and http://coldwargamer.blogspot.ca/2012/06/orbat-1980s-mrr-and-trr-part-4.html, I've uncovered some interesting information regarding the sheer scope of their fire support.

Observed exercises suggest the following allocations:
for MRB Exercises:
In only 7% of the exercises was no Artillery attached
.5% of the exercise 2 Bns were allocated
5% 1 Bn and 1 Battery were allocated
34% 1 Bn
5% Nuclear Artillery
5% 2 Batterys
21% 1 Battery

A Tank Battalion would have even higher priority, receiving at least a battalion of support 80% of the time.
A main axis attack for example could see a 1:1 ratio of Artillery Bn to Maneuver element, with supporting fires attached. In addition to organic elements, that means the attachment of divisional 2S1 battalions to form RAGs, while DAG support would come in at 1 battery of 2S3 and 1 battery of BM-21 for a battalion of maneuver units.

So in ideal conditions (And ideal conditions would be so, so rare [;)]) that would see the Tank regiment in Thor's Hammer supported by 9 batteries of 2S1, three batteries of 2S3, and 3 batteries of BM-21, with supporting fires.

An individual piece that has caught my attention is the 2S5 Giatsint-S, strangely absent in the stock scenarios of FPRS. Firing a wide variety of Rocket-assisted, DPICM, FASCAM, and even Nuclear shells in the 0.2-0.4kt range, it possesses almost double the range of the 2S3 which shares it's caliber (18.5km vs 30.5km, 24km RA vs 40km RA). It's position as an army-level asset also seems to suggest a piece with a role of striking deeper targets, such as enemy HQs, other centers of communication, long-range air defenses, or counter-battery missions. To this end I have again modified my Soviet database: ICMs have been added to the National Values, and the 2S5 and 2A36 it is based on have received the ability to fire ICM missions.

The more deadly environment of 2.0.11 leaves a Warsaw Pact player with the need to pay more attention to his battlefield preparation in order to overcome strong NATO defenses. As demonstrated in a much older thread by Mad Russian, (@ http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3679371) an artillery preparation of 30 minutes would be sufficient. However, up to an hour could be given to complete the full mission hierarchy:

- Enemy Nuclear weapons and nuclear capable systems: If the NATO player has an on-map nuclear launcher, then it certainly would be in one's interest to destroy it before it could launch!
- Artillery and Air Defense: Control of battlefield supports. Destroy or suppress your enemy's force multipliers while protecting your own. My experience with FPRS thus far however sees the WP unable to effectively counter-battery NATO's strikes, while NATO artillery has a high chance of detecting and engaging my own elements. Obviously the WP player wants his artillery to be highly active, so this is the highest priority conventional mission. Probably needs heavy cooperation from recon, in the form of special forces and aerial assets. UAVs and Recon helicopters come to mind.
- Defensive strong points: The main battlefield prep, designed to trash the readiness of enemy defenders while claiming some early kills in the process. Second highest priority as it means those enemy tanks might be claiming only 1 or 2 of your own per engagement rather than 4, 5, 6, 9...
- Command Posts, OPs and communications facilities: Targetting enemy C3 restricts his ability to respond to the focus of your attack, or maneuver in general.
- Reserves, logistical support, reinforcement/counterattack routes: Neutralizing the enemy reserves before it becomes a threat is an attractive target indeed. This can be accomplished by finding and shelling the enemy reserves on their ingress, or simply laying FASCAM along their likely routes of counter-attack.

[Kiwi Red One]

Speaking of OOB's....

following of from my earlier post about the NVA (East German Army) 1988 OOB made by Alterfritz I see he has recently posted a similar OOB covering the Soviet GSFG for 1988 as well.

http://www.relikte.com/_basis/docs/gssd-1.pdf

[CapnDarwin]

Great information, Thanks for posting!

[JohnOsb]

Good info Kiwi. Will come in handy for building Soviet OOBs