OOBs

[Allenby]

It does not take effect until a new model is released if you read the whole thing. Also Lothos (the AI genius) says it is probably a bug so that means that if we base our tech on that then we will have problems if they fix it.

Which is why we ought to reserve our judgement until the bug has been fixed.

We should wait and we see how this matter develops before deciding definatively how to model different sizes of division. At least, that is if people have faith in the idea of using tech advances to represent the changes in divisional structures as opposed to creating several different models.

 

[unmerged(47177)]

Quick question: shouldn't the divisions of larger manpower cost less than the other two (in Russia at least, they were given very little training) in ic and maintenance, but more in supplies?
The main idea behind Russian tactics was that men were replaced very easily, hence the relatively large division size, but lack of discipline and worse quality of life for soldiers, whereas the British wanted to avoid all the losses they could (at least in the beggining), hence their troops were better supplied, but cost fare more (and longer) to train.
I know I'm just a bystander to the mod, but it wouldn't it make more sense make the cost of the bigger divisions less than the cost of the balanced, since quality was cut so severly as size increased?
I mean as in changing

Balanced ( Firepower ) ( Manpower )
cost = 10 ( 14 ) ( 12 )

to

Balanced ( Firepower ) ( Manpower )
cost = 12 ( 14 ) ( 10 )]

 

[KingMississippi]

Quick question: shouldn't the divisions of larger manpower cost less than the other two (in Russia at least, they were given very little training) in ic and maintenance, but more in supplies?
The main idea behind Russian tactics was that men were replaced very easily, hence the relatively large division size, but lack of discipline and worse quality of life for soldiers, whereas the British wanted to avoid all the losses they could (at least in the beggining), hence their troops were better supplied, but cost fare more (and longer) to train.
I know I'm just a bystander to the mod, but it wouldn't it make more sense make the cost of the bigger divisions less than the cost of the balanced, since quality was cut so severly as size increased?
I mean as in changing

Balanced ( Firepower ) ( Manpower )
cost = 10 ( 14 ) ( 12 )

to

Balanced ( Firepower ) ( Manpower )
cost = 12 ( 14 ) ( 10 )]

But other nations who did supply more training also utilized manpower heavy divisions. The United States had quite large divisions (almost the same size as a corps of wartime British or French troops IIRC.

 

[Allenby]

Coding of this nature can be applied to .eug files:

country = {
tag = JAP
    modifiers = { 
        infantry = { 
            blizzard_attack = -66
        }
    }
}

Given this, I hope that we can include specifications that build costs, build time, organisation, speed, transport weight, supply consumption manpower, defence and attack attributes for American, Belgian and Bulgarian units be altered according to the size of their infantry divisions.

Of course, it may be the case the coding applies only to combat modifiers, in which case, including the specification 'build_cost = 50' would become redundant. I have not had the opportunity to try this yet, so I hold out hope...

 

[KingMississippi]

Of course, it may be the case the coding applies only to combat modifiers, in which case, including the specification 'build_cost = 50' would become redundant. I have not had the opportunity to try this yet, so I hold out hope...

Well try it out because I am too lazy to do anything. Damn I love Christmas break. :rofl:

 

[KingMississippi]

OK Christmas break is about over so I guess I am back to work. Since noone told me they had done anything to look into the OOB stuff I guess I will work on that in relation to the land doctrines. Testing by making Bulgaria a large manpower division nation and it works fine

Bulgaria divisions (through tech not .eug file)
+5 mp per division
+4 defense/toughness
+15% morale (greater esprit de corps)
lower ic cost (due to larger infantry in relation to heavy weapons)
same supply cost
quicker build time

 

[StephenT]

For the Brusilov battlescenario, this is the Bulgarian OOB in August 1916:

Most of the Bulgarian army was on the Salonika Front (and so unavailable for this scenario). The following troops were stationed in the north in August 1916:

Vraca province
12-ra Pehotna Divizija - infantry model 2

Pleven province
3-ta Armija (General Toshev):
1-va 'Sofijska' Pehotna Divizija - infantry model 3
4-ta 'Preslavska' Pehotna Divizija - infantry model 2

Varna province
1-va Konna Divizija - cavalry model 2
One brigade of 6-ta 'Bdinska' Pehotna Divizija - infantry model 3, 50 strength

Varna province should have one level of fortification.

Bulgaria had less than 100 aircraft in 1916, even including German ones. I'd give them a single 1915 model bomber.


The following units were sent to Bulgaria by her allies as reinforcements after Romania declared war:

(September 1916)
Heeresgruppe Mackensen - HQ (German - leader Mackensen)
25. 'Damascus' Piyade Tümeni - reserves model 1 (Ottoman)
15. 'Yozgad' Piyade Tümeni - reserves model 1 (Ottoman)

(October 1916)
217. Infanteriedivision - reserves model 2 (German)

(November 1916)
Goltz Kavalleriedivision - cavalry model 3 (German)
26. 'Aleppo' Piyade Tümeni - reserves model 1 (Ottoman)

 

[StephenT]

This is the Rumanian OOB. The others are going to take longer.
Unfortunately I don't know the Romanian words for "Army", "Group" and "Corps", so I've used the English terms.


Craiova province
I Corps:
Divizia 2 Infanterie - infantry model 2
Divizia 11 Infanterie - reserves model 1
Brigada 1 Cavalerie - cavalry model 2, 50 strength

1st Army (General Culcer):
Divizia 1 Infanterie - infantry model 1
Divizia 20 Infanterie - infantry model 1
Divizia 12 Infanterie - reserves model 1

Pitesti Province
Alt Lotru Group:
Divizia 23 Infanterie - infantry model 1
Divizia 13 Infanterie - reserves model 1
Divizia 1 Cavalerie - cavalry model 2

Ploesti Province
2nd Army (General Crainiceanu):
Divizia 21 Infanterie - infantry model 1
Divizia 26 Infanterie - infantry model 1

II Corps:
Divizia 3 Infanterie - infantry model 2
Divizia 4 Infanterie - infantry model 2
Brigada 2 Cavalerie - cavalry model 2, 50 strength

Braila Province:
III Corps:
Divizia 5 Infanterie - infantry model 2
Divizia 6 Infanterie - infantry model 2
Brigada 3 Cavalerie - cavalry model 2, 50 strength

Iasi Province
IV Corps (General Prezan):
Divizia 7 Infanterie - infantry model 2
Divizia 8 Infanterie - infantry model 2
Divizia 2 Cavalerie - cavalry model 2

Bucharest Province
3rd Army (General Aslan):
HQ
Divizia 10 Infanterie - infantry model 2 with Artillery brigade
Divizia 15 Infanterie - reserves model 1
Brigada 4 Cavalerie - cavalry model 2, 50 strength

VI Corps:
Divizia 16 Infanterie - infantry model 1
Divizia 18 Infanterie - reserves model 1
Brigada 5 Cavalerie - cavalry model 2, 50 strength

Constanta Province
VII Corps:
Divizia 9 Infanterie - infantry model 2
Divizia 17 Infanterie - reserves model 1
Divizia 19 Infanterie - reserves model 1

Tulcea Province
RUSSIAN XLVII Armeyskiy Korpus on loan as an expeditionary force
(General Saharov):
61. Pekhotnaya Diviziya - reserves model 2
Serbian Volunteer Division - infantry model 2 (Can someone translate that into Russian for us?)
3. Kavaleriyskaya Diviziya - cavalry model 3


Bucharest province should have two levels of fortification, and Iasi province one.

The Romanians only had 15 serviceable aircraft in August 1916 - not enough for a unit.

 

[The Wookiee]

Thank you Stephen, here's the OOB fully deployed (Apart from the russian corps of course, and the bomber). Currently the german and ottoman exp. forces are in the scenario from the beginning, but in the finished version they will be given to Bulgaria in events...

 

[Zuckergußgebäck]

For the Brusilov battlescenario, this is the Bulgarian OOB in August 1916

Might I ask as to why this is in the OOB thread rather than the battle scenarios thread?

 

[StephenT]

Might I ask as to why this is in the OOB thread rather than the battle scenarios thread?

Because I was wondering where the best place to post an OOB would be, and decided that the thread called "OOBs" seemed most logical?

 

[StephenT]

Thank you Stephen, here's the OOB fully deployed (Apart from the russian corps of course, and the bomber). Currently the german and ottoman exp. forces are in the scenario from the beginning, but in the finished version they will be given to Bulgaria in events...

Looking at the map, I do wonder if Romania is too strong compared to Bulgaria, considering that historically the Romanians were on the defensive.

So as a suggestion, perhaps the Romanian VII Corps in Constanta province, the two infantry divisions in the VI corps in Bucharest, and the 1st Army in Craiova province should be changed to Garrison troops instead? And perhaps put the leader Culcer in charge of I Corps instead of 1st Army, which is now immobile.

 

[Zuckergußgebäck]

Because I was wondering where the best place to post an OOB would be, and decided that the thread called "OOBs" seemed most logical?

Yet it is about a battle scenario, and hence should be confined to that thread.

 

[The Wookiee]

Looking at the map, I do wonder if Romania is too strong compared to Bulgaria, considering that historically the Romanians were on the defensive.

So as a suggestion, perhaps the Romanian VII Corps in Constanta province, the two infantry divisions in the VI corps in Bucharest, and the 1st Army in Craiova province should be changed to Garrison troops instead? And perhaps put the leader Culcer in charge of I Corps instead of 1st Army, which is now immobile.

Well, there's 2 things to it. One is that in the event the Romanian army will be very weak, as in real life (And if romania is at war, she will be at war with Germany, A-H and Bulgaria). Secondly, when Romania goes to war and invades either transsylvania or Bulgaria, there will be events spawning armies. For example, the 4th army (If I'm not mistaken) was raised by Austria-Hungary locally shortly after the romanians declared war. We could have part of it sent down to the Bulgarians if they're in danger and help out there, and also, any german help that would arrive september-november could arrive a bit earlier, but making the main german front a little bit weaker.

 

[StephenT]

Quick question: if divisions are lent to an ally as an expeditionary force, do they have to be grouped together as a unit with a commander of their own nationality, or can individual divisions be placed into the host country's own units?

For example, historically the German Süd Armee in June 1916 included one German division (48 Reserve), four Austro-Hungarian Common Army divisions (19, 32, 54, 55) and one Hungarian division (38), all under German command. Can these be represented as a single 6-unit army under the German leader von Bothmer, or would we have to have a separate unit for the A-H divisions?

(Or would it be simpler, at least for a battlescenario, to treat the A-H units as German?)

 

[unmerged(45331)]

If it is expeditionary force, you can't mix it with other nation troops, and can't change leader.
If you have military control, you can change leader, but still can't merge units.

 

[Allenby]

Yet it is about a battle scenario, and hence should be confined to that thread.

Don't be such a bureaucrat, Kenny.

For example, historically the German Süd Armee in June 1916 included one German division (48 Reserve), four Austro-Hungarian Common Army divisions (19, 32, 54, 55) and one Hungarian division (38), all under German command. Can these be represented as a single 6-unit army under the German leader von Bothmer, or would we have to have a separate unit for the A-H divisions?

As a strategy game, it would make sense to have it represented as a separate division. After all, it was under the supreme authority of the Austro-Hungarian government and could be removed from German command. But as we are referring to a particular battlescenario and not the entire war, we may wish to take a different approach....

(Or would it be simpler, at least for a battlescenario, to treat the A-H units as German?)

....might we want to establish a tag for the Central Powers, in imitation of the 'Allied' tag that is featured and used in HOI II battlescenarios?

 

[StephenT]

As a strategy game, it would make sense to have it represented as a separate division. After all, it was under the supreme authority of the Austro-Hungarian government and could be removed from German command.

In 1916? I'm not sure the Austrians would have dared, especially since the Südarmee was virtually the only effective unit they had left. But I don't mind either way... although would the separate unit also be called Südarmee?

....might we want to establish a tag for the Central Powers, in imitation of the 'Allied' tag that is featured and used in HOI II battlescenarios?

We could, but we would lose the feel of the Austro-Hungarian army disintegrating and the Germans having to rush to their rescue if they were all one big army.

There's also the upgrade problem. I'm planning on making the German infantry model-3 (1915) with some 1917 model-4 units arriving as reinforcements later on, while the Austro-Hungarians will be model-2 (1912) with a handful of elite 1915 model-3 units. If the Central Powers are all one country, the AI will want to upgrade all those Austrian divisions to German standards, at a huge cost in ICs.

 

[Allenby]

We could, but we would lose the feel of the Austro-Hungarian army disintegrating and the Germans having to rush to their rescue if they were all one big army.

I wonder how keen the German AI will be to rush to their ally's aid? I do have the most sinister premonition that the Russians will generally crush the Austro-Hungarians (even with the presence of the Südarmee) and that the Germans will maintain a large number of divisions on their own front without transferring any forces southward.

Of course, there was a great unity of Austro-German command on the Eastern Front, which may not be properly represented by two independently operated entities. A human Russian player may therefore have an easier time than they might otherwise do.

 

[Allenby]

Bulgaria divisions (through tech not .eug file)
+5 mp per division
+4 defense/toughness
+15% morale (greater esprit de corps)
lower ic cost (due to larger infantry in relation to heavy weapons)
same supply cost
quicker build time

Could you post the coding in the tech tree that you wrote to achieve this? Six command lines, I presume?