Jump to content

National Characteristics and Manpower

Recommended Posts

One of the things that SC does in my opinion, is remove the charateristics that made the various nations act as they did historically during WWII. That is why I refer to those nations as there colors, not the historical nations they represent.

So here is my attempt to restore those characteristics into current SC, without having to wait for any updates or future releases. I have created a custom Campaign using these concepts.

I'll cover the general information in this post and then a specific post for each nation. In eac post I'll provide a Summary that gives the SC specific changes and then a Detail section that provides the reasoning behind the conclusions.



Each nation will start with the maximum number of units that it can build. If the unit is destroyed, it can be replaced. Exceptions will be noted under each nation.

Experience bars represent the various levels of leadership, training and doctrine of each nation in addition to actual experience.

Industrial Tech cannot be invested in.

USSR and US have a certain build and MPP balance schedule they must follow.

Axis cannot perform any amphibious operations, unless they are attempting Sealion. Axis transports can only unload in a port.

Iraq pro-German coup of April '41 occurs in 1939.

Readiness percentages changed.


Units ... I'll cover some more specifics within each nation, but basically I used the number of combat divisions a nation had during the 1939 to 1941 time frame, determined how many of those divisions made up a SC "generic" unit and then created those units. That gives me the manpower used, but unless I asked the player to keep track of those numbers (which I am unwilling to do), I can't use those numbers to reduce the national manpower pool. Hence, back to a "force pool" concept for units. The "penalty" for recreating a unit, is the loss of the experience. That is a major loss.

Experience ... The leadership, training and doctrine of certain nations (mainly German) allowed it to produce units that were superior to other nations. As units gained combat experience, they learned. Slowly feeding new replacements in will allow more of that experience to be kept. This, in conjunction with the limited number of units, makes it a wise decision to keep a strategic reserve and rotate units out of combat.

Industrial Tech ... I am using this, in addition to the unit mix and the other R&D techs, to represent the manpower limitations. For example, if Russia and Germany both earn 480 MPP's, it is "cheaper" for the Russians to replace there losses. While I am not allowing investment in this, someone made the suggestion, that perhaps that limit should be lifted at a certain year. I have to consider this, as it does appear to be a good suggestion.

USSR / US schedules ... These two nations and the Italians I could not modify the intial starting units. With Italy, it worked out ok. With the USSR and US, since certain units where not available until after they had entered the war, there is no other way for me to have those units enter other than asking the player to follow a certain schedule. I have tried to keep it as simple as possible, but am willing to hear anyone elses ideas on the matter.

Axis amphib operations ... Other than Sealion, they just weren't possible. For that matter, some would argue the Axis couldn't conduct a Sealion. Still doesn't solve the Allies ability to conduct bogus amphib operations, but have not figured a way out of that one.

Iraq pro-Axis coup ... This is a counter to the Axis getting control of Sweden, since I can't partially convert certain Swedish or Norwegian hexes to German control. I'll probably end up going the route JerseyJohn advocated... Portugal and Ireland to Allies as well.

Readiness percentages ... Italy, US and USSR were entering too soon. But changing these may be the wrong reaction, since the unit limits may restrict the reasons they were entering early. Won't know for sure until it is playtested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Great Thread, all these issues definitely need to be examined. I'm not sure about the opening point, each country starting out with it's maximum number of units, unless I missed something and you mean each unit is listed in a production menu (as is done in COS), otherwise it would be difficult to fit all the German units within Germany in Sept. 39! I'm sure I misunderstood your idea on this point.

I like the limiting idea regarding German amphibious invasions. With a special rule regarding Norway, which can hardly be considered an amphibious invasion in the normal sense, that ought to work out fine. Germany didn't have the naval resources to carry these things out; if they had ever gotten Sea Lion off the ground I think most of the real troop input would have been done after paratroop capture of British airfields enabling the straight air transport of reinforcing troops. Later, as the initial areas expanded to add coastal ports they'd have been able to bring more troops and supplies in by sea.

Anyway, in a bit of bind for time at the moment. Sorry I couldn't go over all the points listed, they look very interesting, but I'm sure this thread will be commented on by nearly everyone before I make my next entry. Which is good, as always you're started something that should spark a great deal of interesting discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lower the readiness of units that perform amphibious OPs unless they are within the historical context. I notice people actually use amphib drop corps as an extra striking advantage when a unit is out of supply, or even armies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

United Kingdom

How to turn the Khaki's into Commonwealth.


Combat Divisions by Year.... military manpower

Nation...........'39.....'40.........'41.....K = 1,000

UK ................9 .......34 ........35......5,120K

Canada .........0 ........1 ...........3........780K

Australia........0 ........7 ..........10........680K

New Zealand...0 ........1 ...........1........157K

South Africa....0 ........0 ...........3........140K

India.............3 ........5 ..........10......2,150K


8th Army ..... 4 Exp .....1 Str ..... Egypt

XIII Corp .....2 Exp .....6 Str ......Egypt

MiddleEast Corp ... 0 Exp ....5 Str ....Syria

Wavell HQ ..........0 Exp ....2 Str ....Egypt

BEF Army............2 Exp ....6 Str ....England

BEF Corp............2 Exp ....6 Str ....England

5th Army............0 Exp ....1 Str.....England

1st Army............0 Exp ....1 Str.....England

2nd Canadian Corp...3 Exp ....1 Str.....Canada

Gibralter Corp......0 Exp ....3 Str.....Gibralter

Malta Corp..........0 Exp ....3 Str.....Malta

XII Corp............1 Exp ....3 Str.....England

RAF.................2 Exp ...10 Str.....England

AASF................2 Exp ....1 Str.....England

Carriers are gone, except for the one in the Med. Replaced with Battleship unit, same name. Few other naval units added, including ships being built.

I did not work out the Strategic Bomber numbers, but I tend to believe it is no more than two (2) units.

Techs: Air 2, Indus Tech 2, Flak 3, A/T 2, Tanks 0, Grnd Radar 1, all others standard numbers.


Army equals eight (8) divisions. Corp equals four (4) divisions. No Armor units, since the British never mastered combined arms doctrine.

The combat divisions are world wide. UK has other committments than just the ETO. That is why I used '41 as the cut off point (max number of divisions was 39, in '43). As it is, I have used 34 of the British divisions. Slightly higher than I should, but I believe I am underusing some of the CW divisions.

BEF had the "professional" British soldiers. The rest of the British units that were raised were either Territorial Army or conscript units. Don't forget that once a Division goes into a Corp or Army, is stays there, unlike the way it is in real life.

BEF's, 5th and 1st Armies are all British divisions. 8th Army has six (6) CW divisions, XIII Corp has two (2) CW divisions. Middle East Corp has no British divisions. 2nd Canadian Corp is all Canadians. XII Corp has 2 CW Divisions (1 Canadian, 1 Polish).

I would have liked to put the 8th Army into the Suez Loop, since it really represents the CW units that were sent to Egypt, but I can't figure a way out to do that.

Middle East Corp is there to "capture" Iraq from the Axis. I would have liked to make the pro-Axis coup in Iraq to occur in 4/41, but cannot setup an event. So it will have to occur in 1939.

The Gibralter and Malta Garrisons really should have no more than Brigade strength (3 str points), but nothing prevents the player from increasing the strength.

I'll either edit in the manpower numbers per unit (including the support elements) or post a seperate topic.

Increased Gun Laying Radar by one, since I can't increase the spotting range of a Naval unit. Added a few other naval units as well, plus a few 1str point units representing naval units layed down but not completed.

Kept the Middle East Carrier, mainly because Egypt, Malta and Gibralter had air assets not represented in SC. If I could have increased the spotting range of those units, I would have done that instead.

One other problem. Movement speed. The British units are fully motorized. So the horse drawn Army/Corp units should be moving slower. But have no way to reflect this in SC. More about this when I get to the horse drawn militaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know for a fact that even Nepalese served in the Far East. My grandfather fought along side them, the dreaded Girkers<sp?> They were a force to be reckoned with... The German's had their storm troopers though in this game nothing respresents that. Could we have 2 Storm trooper Corps with 3 points of Experience? Regarding their unique training... I don't know if Brit Commando units were ever in such large #s but even a SAS low strength corps for early deployment ability by already being in transport mode and near an area of high importance...i.e. brest, norway, or Gibraltar... strength 5, and experience 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites


How to turn the Blue's into French


Combat divisions by year ............. military manpower

Nation ......... '39 ........'40 ..... K = 1,000

France ......... 86 ...... 102 ...... 5,000K


3e Armee ....... 5 Str ...... Maginot

4e Armee ....... 2 Str ...... Maginot

5e Armee ....... 5 Str ...... Maginot

8e Armee ....... 8 Str ...... Mine

2e Armee ....... 8 Str ...... Ardennes

9e Armee ....... 5 Str ...... 25,14 hex

1re Armee....... 8 Str ...... 24,14 hex (1 Bar Experience)

7e Armee ....... 7 Str ...... 24,13 hex

GC1 Armor ...... 1 str ...... Paris

Alpes Armee .....9 str...... 1 Bar experience

Gamelin HQ ......5 str ...... outside Paris

CEFS Corp .......7 str ..... French Expeditionary Force to Scandinavia, located in England.

XIX Corp ....... 10 str ...... Algeria

CSTT Corp ....... 7 str ...... Tunisia

GFML Corp ....... 2 str ...... Syria

1e de l'Air ..... 10 str

2e de l'Air ..... 6 str

One or two naval units added.

Techs: Air 1, Indus Tech 2, Flak 2, A/T 2, Tanks 0, all others standard numbers.


Army equals 8 divisions, Corp equals 4 divisions. Armor unit has the DCR divisions.

Fortress Divisions, which had no heavy artillery and no organic transport, if they are in one of the Maginot Armies, I included it. If they are not in the Maginot, I did not include them, since no major combat power. There are also two quickly raised Polish divisions.

Armor units are hard to deal with. French had about 1500 or so infantry support tanks assigned to Infantry Divisions. There are six armored divisions with about 1000 or so tanks. About half of those are equal in mobility to the German tanks. But they were not concentrated into Armor units, instead were spread out. But there was a 1er Groupement Cuirasse unit that had the 2e and 3e DCR divisions. Thats what I included. Could just as well subsitute the 6e Armee instead of the GC1.

France was "war weary" from WWI. It did not have the manpower numbers that Germany did. Normally this would be represented by a surrender after lossing a certain number of units. In SC, all we have is the fall of France if it losses Paris. So it may be appropriate to lower the number of units they are intially given to reflect this.

Some of the French units were motorized. Concept was, that along with the motorized British, they would "race" the Germans in the Low Countries to take up defensive positions inside the Low Countries (since the Germans were slower). Can't reflect that here, but it may not be a problem, since very few players will recreate the same strategic mistakes that the French made.

The Dutch Gambit. Still can occur. French have the units, including HQ. Historically, the French should be spending there MPPs to "mobilize" the units they have to full strength. But no French player is going to sit until May '40 like the historical French did. Unless... and maybe this is the solution ... the strength points of the French units are lowered even further, forcing the French player to spend quite a few turns building his units up. But the problem with that, is that a German player could operate units over on turn one and attack France turn two. That is why the strength numbers are were they are now. Have to see how it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The Ghurkas during WWII would be part of the Indian Army.

Storm Troopers, I assume you are referring to the Waffen SS. Feel free to rename any unit as a SS unit if you want. But during the '39 to '41 timeframe I am using, there were no Corp or Army sized SS formations. The big expansion of the Waffen SS occurred after '42, but I'll address that later, as it starts to deal with the way the Germans handled their manpower.

UK Commandos, US Rangers, etc... would not be used in a Corp size formation. The specialized training you are referring to was for raids and quick strikes. Not some sort of "super" Infantry unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


When I write something and people seem to interpret it as I wrote it, I'm first amazed, then wondering what went wrong! :D

Good points about the Waffen SS formations. It's expansion was really a power play between Himmler and Goering -- the Hermann Goering Panzer Division didn't have a lot to do with running an airforce.

Absolutely right about the smaller units, Rangers, Commandos, Ghurkas et al being too small to represent here. The Rangers, for example, were generally organized as batallions distributed among larger formations for special missions. They were modelled after the British Commandos, so the same applied there.

Grateful for the assistance offer, I'm sure I'll have a ton of questions later in the weekend.

[ March 21, 2003, 08:27 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites


How to turn the Greys into Germans

First with the Best


Combat divisions by year ......... military manpower

Nation ........ '39 ........ '40 .......... '41 ...... K = 1,000

Germany ..... 78 ......... 189 ......... 195 ..... 10,200K


On the Polish border or in Prussia

3rd Army

4th Army

8th Army

10th Army

14th Army

VII Corp

XXXXIX Gebjr Corp.... 3 bars, 6 str




XV Pz ...... 2 bars, 8 str

Luftfl I

Luftfl II

All of these units have 2 exp bars, 10 str, unless noted otherwise.

Along Western Front or German Interior

IX Corp....... 10 str

XII Corp...... 10 str

VI Corp


V Corp

XXX Corp

Leeb HQ....... 0 exp

These units are newly raised or being raised from the '39 "core" army. 1 Exp bar, 6 strength points unless noted otherwise.

Cadre units

11 armies...... 2 exp ..... 1 str

1 corp ........ 4 exp ..... 1 str (Fallschirmjagers)

2 Luftfl (Air). 2 exp ..... 1 str

4 Panzers ..... 2 exp ..... 1 str

Cadre are new units raised after 1939.

Added a few naval units, one more sub in the Atlantic and a couple of partially completed naval units. No carriers though, but those units are there as Battleships.

Techs: Air 2, Indus Tech 2, Flak 2, A/T 3, Tanks 1, Subs 2, all else standard.

No amphib operations, unless attempting Sealion. Hence, Axis transports have to unload in a port.


Army equals 8 divisions, Corp equals 4 divisions. Panzer equals 4 divisions that are either Pz or PzG.

Starting with the ten (10) combat divisions of the '33 army, these formed the core of thirty (30) divisions. Newly formed Pz and PzG divisions added an additional 10 in '36. Annex of Austria and parts of Czech added 11 new divisions by '38.

These 51 divisions are the cream of the German Army and conducted the Polish invasion. Unlike our historical Germans though, they will not be stood down or broken apart to form new units. Hence, all of the additional units raised by '41 are good, but not as good as the "core" '39 Army.

Because of the oil and for doctrine reasons, all of the motorized units (Pz or PzG) were concentrated into our Pz units. That means the bulk of the German Army (our Armies and Corps) are horse drawn. Since we don't have a slower Army or Corp unit to represent those, I have chosen to reflect this by concentrating them into Armies, and minimizing the Corps. Even so, these units should have action points of 2 for the Armies and 3 for the Corps. Have to make do with the current movement of 3 for the moment.

I'll make a seperate post regarding the manpower misuse and the post '42 "growth" in the German Army.

Sweden is Axis now. I would have preferred to represent this by giving the Norwegian port of Novrok (?) to Axis, but I can't do that. Will probably have to give Portugal and Ireland to the Allies to counter the economic effects.

It is now important to retain a strategic reserve. Otherwise, you waste the Germans major advantage... its experienced troops. Same with fighting Russia, if you take too long, the Russians will overwhelm you with men, since you won't be able to kill them fast enough.

Because of the unit limits, Spain and Vichy are now important as strategic neutrals.

[ March 23, 2003, 04:00 AM: Message edited by: Shaka of Carthage ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

German Military & Manpower use ... after 1941

June 1941. Of the 195 German combat divisions, 134 of them (and almost all of its Pz units) are committed against Russia. Facing 180 Russian divisions, with another 40 or so out in Siberia. Within the first two months, over 100 of those Russian divisions are destroyed. But unlike the French, Russia did not fall. They kept coming.

Its now 1942. Germany has problems now with the Eastern Front. In this and the coming years, Germany had to be creative about how it used its manpower.

1942... training divisions now started performing occupation duties

1942 ... Western Front forms Static Divisions, in an attempt to have units that would not be pulled into the Eastern Front

1942 ... Waffen SS secured monopoly on recruiting German residents in other nations

1943 ... Excess Luftwaffe manpower formed into Field divisions

1943-44 ... New to&e for infantry divisions. Less manpower, same firepower

This alone btw, would increase the infantry divisions by 50%.

late '44 ... New type of division created ... Volksgrenadier ... Peoples Infantry

This represents the reason various sources give different counts for the number of German divisions. It depends on what units you decide to include. And to further complicate it, they were drawn from different manpower pools.


On the surface, it seems easy. Get a nations population. About a little over 15% is the maximum number you can use as military manpower. Of this, about 80% can be used.

You need manpower for Industry, Agriculture, Merchant Fleet as well as your military.

German use of Manpower

Above is ok unless you are in dire straights like the Germans were. Then you get creative.

Industry not a problem, since using slave labor. Need more food? Get it from the occupied nations.

Training divisions when you start using them as low grade field divisions becomes a problem, since you now have stopped the flow of trained replacements going to your front line units.

Static divisions were formed from that 20% of manpower you don't normally use. Older men, young children, disabled men and "whitebreads". Germans also enlisted POWs.

Waffen SS started getting the foreign Germans. Also recruited the "lesser" races to meet manpower shortages. So did the regular Army.

Luftwaffe Field Divisions were Air Force REMFs. Had no clue about how to fight as infantry, since the Luftwaffe "experts" were all in the Para units.

While some of the above can be handled in current SC, in total, you now end up with too many special rules that you have to remember.


The '44 Inf Div. Easy enough to handle in SC. No Corp or Army can be increased beyond strength 7. Every two existing units can "spawn" a third unit.

The Luft Field Div's. For each Air unit you disband, you get to add one Corp.

Waffen SS. Limit on strength 7 unit does not apply to them.

Problem is, way too much to remember for current SC.

So I've decided to use the Shot Himmler/Goring Rule. German Army, even with the addition of the foreign Germans (but no lesser races), realized that it could not continually expand its formations and still provide the proper support. So they capped the formations at the '41 limit and concentrated on providing increased combat power thru tech advances.

[ March 22, 2003, 02:32 AM: Message edited by: Shaka of Carthage ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Great material.

The last two sections of your entries laid it out clearly enough for anyone to understand, even me.

To implement your system properly I think the game system should have to weigh the historical drain of manpower against what the player is doing. In other words, a reasonably skillful Axis player won't have fiascos like Stalingrad and Kursk and the loss of Army Group North in Kourland and Panzer Armee Afrika in Tunesia; should Germany still be considered drained of manpower by 1944? Same with the Russians, most game players aren't about to expend their units as wastefully as was done by Stalin.

How would this be compensated for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


To implement your system properly I think the game system should have to weigh the historical drain of manpower against what the player is doing. ... How would this be compensated for?

Ideally, each unit you raised would reduce the manpower pool. Replacments for those units would also reduce that manpower pool, but obviously to a lesser degree.

As an example, suppose an Army consumed 350,000 men. Each strength point replacement consumed 2,000 men. Diasters like the ones you mentioned would be devastating, since having to replace a couple of armies would cost 300,000 to 400,000 men. Compared to replacing 20 strength points only costing 40,000 men. Avoiding those diasters would allow you to feed replacements in for a longer period, since your manpower pool is not drained. But eventually once you hit rock bottom, you either disband units to put that manpower back into the manpower pool, or you don't replace your losses.

That would be the ideal for a future SC and lets you do the "what ifs".

Back to SC though. I can't do any of that within current SC. So even though you lose a couple of Armies, you can immediatly replace them. But here is where the experience comes in. You can't easily replace that. Losing two 3 bar Armies and replacing them with two zero bar Armies is a major blow. You'll see what I mean when I post the info on turning the Reds into Russians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


How to turn the Browns into Italians

For the next three nations (Italy, US and USSR), things get interesting, since cannot modify the initial units.


Combat divisions by year ......... military manpower

Nation .....'39 .........'40 .......'41 ....... K = 1,000

Italy ....... 66 ......... 73 ....... 64 ........ 3,750K


1st Army ................. near Alps

4th Army (SC Corp) ....... near Alps

Celere Corp .............. Rome

Ariete Armor ............. new unit

XII Corp ................. Sicily

5th Army ................. North Africa

10th Army ................ North Africa

GHQ Albania (SC Corp) .... Albania

AF1 (SC Air unit) ........ new unit

AF2 (SC Air unit) ........ new unit, but cadre.

All units are 0 exp bars and 10 strength, except for AF2 which as a cadre is 1 strength.

Intial MPPs are increased by 950, enough to "build" the units that are missing.

Tech: Air 0, Indus Tech 0, Flak 2, A/T 0, Tanks 0, all else standard.

As part of the Axis, no amphib operations, unless Sealion.


Army equals twelve (12) divisions, Corp equals six (6) divisions. Italian divisions only had six battalions per division, underequipped with WWI artillery pieces and generally short of equipment.

Celere divisions are units that had a mix of cavalry, bicycles and tankettes.

Other than the Ariete Armor and Celere Corp, the rest of the units are horse drawn transport, so the comments under the Germans regarding horse transport apply to these units as well.

If I had the ability to manipulate the units, I would place them differently and make a few other slight modifications. But this works close enough.

Don't forget that to land units in North Africa, you need access to a port. Not sure how to handle Malta/Gibralter, since even if they were empty, technically the Axis can't land there, under the "Axis no amphib operations except Sealion" rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Great stuff.

So far covered, UK, French, German and Italians --Looking forward to your treatment of the US & Soviet Armies.

I hope this concept and material is used in SC 2.

[ March 22, 2003, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I really like your comments the effects of a limited manpower pool and the impact it has on reinforcing units or building new ones.

It could make the decision of which unit to reinforce so much more critical, as you can't reinforce every unit, even if you have the production points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Everything I have outlined is for use in current SC. I have already created the mod and playtested an earlier version of it. It really requires TCP/PBEM play, as you need two humans. But in a pinch, you can play against the AI if you are the Germans.

Edwin P

Exactly. You could be swimming in production (MPPs) but if your manpower pool is gone, you are in deep kaka. Once I finish the US/USSR posts, I'll probably make a new topic with a suggestion on using the manpower numbers for future SC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

United States

How to turn the Greens into Americans

Second with the Most


Combat divisions by year ............... military manpower

Nation .. '39 ..'40...'41...'42...'43...'44..... K = 1,000

US ..........8 ...24 ...39 ...76 ...95...95 .....12,300K

USMC.......0 .....0 ....2 ....3 ....5 .....6

You really didn't think I would lump the Corp together with the Army units did you?


Four US Army Groups......0 exp, 10 str.

First, Third, Fifth and Seventh.

US Army Group has:

... Army

... Tank Group

... Tank Group

... Corp

8th Air Force

15th Air Force

Techs: Air 1, Strat Bombers 3, Indus Tech 3, Flak 3, A/T 3, Tanks 1, all else standard.

Build Schedule

Upon US entry into ETO, the First Army Group can be used immediatly.

After six (6) months, the Third and Fifth Armies are available.

After twelve (12) months, the Seventh Army is available.

1650 MPPs given to initial MPPs to allow units to be built that are not there.


Army equals six (6) divisions, Corp equals three (3) divisions and Armor equals two (2) armor divisions and one (1) infantry division.

Until 1936 the US infantry units still operated under a WWI to&e. Took until '41 before they started to use a triangular division (9 bn's per division). There was a political division between the Active Army and the National Guard. While there was a selective service draft in '40, there was no large scale conscription like the European nations had. In other words, it wasn't until Dec '41 that the US started to seriously build its Army. This meant, that like the USSR, the US combat units had to gain its experience the hard way, in actual combat.

US Army ended up with an 89 division army. Of those, 21 were committed to the PTO. However, there were a large number of non-divisional combat formations, so large in fact, that there were enough to double the number of divisions that existed.

US units are motorized. Especially the artillery, which is either towed or self-propelled. Because of the lack of a horse transport unit, I gave the US Armies the Armor units to reflect the faster mobility they had.

US units, because of the preponderance of artillery, would benefit from something in SC that increased the soft combat factors of the Army/Corp units.

[ March 23, 2003, 04:01 AM: Message edited by: Shaka of Carthage ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Create New...