Land Basics

The First Question we have to talk about is, which our basic maneuver unit will be. In the beginning of WWII this was clearly the Division, but already at the end the trend goes to smaller combined units in Brigade size, as they better suited the rapid mobile warfare of late WWII/CW. Basically the Division HQ takes the Position of the old Corps HQ as HQ Formation of three to four tactical maneuver and combat units.
Today the next step is to go one level down, so that the battalion is the main maneuver and combat formation.

If we take the 'brigade-solution', a brigade would consist out of battalion-components, with to possibility of individual independent battalions.

The only problem would be that we had also to change the whole WWII structure to battalion level, which will lead to immense oobs.
So we have to decide between a smooth approach between vanilla and our mod, or a new system with will fit the CW/Modern times.

I would prefer the brigade-solution

------------------
The basic approach of the tech tree is okay, but I would like to smooth it clearly. E.G.: No three times research for the same standard infantry rifle and the possibly of different doctrine researches like HOI2.

I would suggest the following types of battalions:

I. Combat Formations:

- Irregular Formations
=> Militia
=> Partisans
=> Insurgents
=> Guerrilla
===> Last three as non-buildable to simulate different kinds of insurgency

- Infantry:
=> Food
=> Motorized
=> mechanized

- Specialised Infantry:
=> Paras
=> Mountain Infantry
=> Light Infantry
=> Marines (may also some kind of Heavy/Mechanized Marines to simulate USMC
=> Special/Elite Forces

- Cavalry
=> with Horse
=> Mechanized (Armored Cavalry)
=> AirCav
=> Air Assault (As moderner more heavier Approach of AirCav)

- Tank
=> Light (May Airborne, or a special Armoured Paras [May only as Company Formation])
=> Medium
=> MBT (as Successor of Medium | In difference to simulate the ongoing use of upgraded WWII medium typ Tanks in smaller country)
=> Heavy (Strictly Modernized to simulate British Conqueror/IS-3, etc)
=> Super-Heavy (Yeah, Germany and its uberheavy dreams...)


II. Combatsupport Formations:

- Artillery
=> Towed (May difference between old style and motorized units?)
=> Self-Propelled
=> Light (E.G.: Mortars, may airdropable)
==> Rocket versions of those? (Not sure if we could simulate through upgrade techs)

- Anti-Tank
=> Towed
=> Self-Propelled (more motortowed AT)
=> Tankhunters

- Anti-Air
=> Towed
=> Selfpropelled
=> Light
==> Rocket versions of those? (Not sure if we could simulate through upgrade techs)

- Helicopters
=> Pure AT Helicopters
=> Attack Helicopters
=> Reconnaissance Helicopters
=> Helicopter transported Infantry
=> Transport Helicopters (just logistic)
( => Naval Helicopters | as component for ships and cag unit)
===> General Question: May we should simulate the whole AirCav thing through those battalions?

- Pioneers
=> Normal
=> Light

- Reconnaissance
=> Light (To simulate food/horse/bicycle based formations)
=> Armored (More capable in fight as light)
=> Offensive (To simulate e.g. American Armored Cavalry Regiments)
===> The last both may collide with Armored Cavalry

- Logistical Forces ?
===> Or should those simulate through HQ and better stats of the units, as non sightable?

- Security Forces
=> Garrison
=> Military Police
=> Security/Counterinsurgency Forces

Other proposlas?

Well, I had an idea, when you claimed there was nothing else but the choice between Div-size OR Brigade-size.
After a short amound of thinking:
We can use both and simulate a transition over from divisional warfare to brigade-warfare.

How?
Well, I just want to point out that this is a very rough idea by now and that it needs some more polishing, but the basic would be the following:

A tech in the Doctrine-reseach branch that increases the number of Brigades per "division", reduces the max strenght of every brigade to that of a Battallion and reduces the attack-values of every unit in proportion to their strength-reduction (if that is not calculated automatically in that way by reducing the max_strength, did not try it yet).

The problem is, that Brigades would still have the name "Brigade" and Divisions would still have the name "Division", not Brigade.
Maybe this is moddable too, but I would not rely on that.
Furthermore, the units that are already existing would not be split when using this approach. They´d lose a good portion of their strength due to the max_strength-limitation, which in fact means he looses X percent of his whole land-army. This is probably the bigger problem, however, maybe we can find a solution for that?

At least if the naming-problem is not considered a big problem - then this idea could be a solution gameplay-wise to create a smooth transition from one order to the other

Another Hybrid-Solution would be to create each unit two times. Once as Brigade/Regiment strength unit and then again a battalion strength unit. Through an Doctrine tech the old brigades are deactivated and you can only build battalions.
Here would be a problem still the fate of your old brigades...
It could be so much easier if we could upgrade one kind of a unit to another. So just

By each for me thinkable hybrid solution will be a lot of annoying flaws. Begin with naming of units, the commanding cap, the tactical unit signs, etc.

For an stricter gameplay and unit structure we should decide for either only brigades or only battalions.

I think I will keep my eyes open and my brain sharp, maybe we find a solution for the problems of the transition. I have no grip of the huge modability of HoI3, maybe it offers more than we suppose now...

However, IF we must choose between Battalions and Divisions, I will also vote for Battalions as well (though I don´t want to be the one who translated the OOB into the new form... maybe we should make an automated process out of this?
For example:

Code:


search & replace

      regiment = { type = infantry_brigade historical_model = 0 }

into

      regiment = { type = infantry_brigade historical_model = 0 }
      regiment = { type = infantry_brigade historical_model = 0 }
      regiment = { type = machinegun_brigade historical_model = 0 }
      regiment = { type = mortar_brigade historical_model = 0 }
      regiment = { type = light_artillery_brigade historical_model = 0 }
      regiment = { type = logistics_brigade historical_model = 0 }


With standartized sets for every translation from Brigade -> Batallions-sets (at least for one country) it should not be that much of a problem.

What do you think?

...Strange, why is this topic not where I moved it to? Seems like the Forum is experiencing some problems... worrysome

Battalion-level OOB and tech tree would be my choice as well, for previously mentioned reasons (changes in operational thinking) Although it is good to remember that they would most likely require immense amounts of research to mod in enough new leaders - a singe step down in scale would mean that the game suddenly needs thousands of new leaders.

You are absolutely right, that would be a shitload of work.
Maybe we have to go a way in between? Having Divisions as basic-unit to maneuver with, consisting of Battalions that can be switched around?
The transition-tech will again only reduce the brigade-per-division value for future builds, such that future "divisions" are in fact only Brigades now, while they had division-size in WW2-era?

And we in the Beginning just use the already existing onestar-generals?
We would change the system like that:

Brigade/none => Battalion/none
Division/Major General => Brigade/Brigadier General
Corps/Lieutenant General => Division/Major General
Army/General => Corps/Lieutenant General
Army Group/Field Marshal => Army/General
Theater/Field Marshal => Army Group, Theater/Field Marshal

This is may not accurate but should work without an problem...

I´m sorry folks, I was very preoccupied with private things last week and had no possibility to make any useful input due to lack of time and interest.

Anyway, I just noticed Foxbats random leader-generator, which could be a useful tool for generation of batallion-commanders without doing a shitload of research. Of course, reality will suffer from this, but to be honest, I do not know ANY commander on batallion-level and apart from the history-cracks there will be no one noticing that, would there?

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=424754

Black Guardian wrote:Anyway, I just noticed Foxbats random leader-generator, which could be a useful tool for generation of batallion-commanders without doing a shitload of research. Of course, reality will suffer from this, but to be honest, I do not know ANY commander on batallion-level and apart from the history-cracks there will be no one noticing that, would there?

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=424754

Just keep some of the younger WWII-era commanders around in higher positions later on (for those few history-cracks out there) and fill the rest of the chain of command with ahistorical types. I see no trouble with this approach and it could indeed enable us to scale down to battalion level.

Iraq ın unıts al futuwwa