Unit size?

[Scipio]

I'm sure I have missed it on this forum, the website and the FAQ, but just for an idiot like me: how big is the smallest unit I can give orders to?

I have read somewhere, for infantry it will be a platoon. How about guns and vehicels?

Can units be splitted and merged during a battle?

[Moon]

No splitting.

The unit size depends on the campaign author. The concept that CMC uses is called "Maneuver Element". You could make a whole battalion into one ME. Or you could do the same with a platoon. I am fairly sure that you can use single vehicles as ME's, too, but it might not be very practical. I am guessing that most of the time you'll be playing with Companies and Battalions on the big operational map as your main meneuver elements.

Martin

[Zalgiris 1410]

What's the maximum maneouvre elementals size for CMC Moon, I'm thinking of at least interms of a regimental sized combined arms kampf/battle-group?

[Moon]

I guess you could turn a whole regiment into one ME, but it might be stretching it due to the "no-splitting" resitriction... plus it would only be able to occupy one 2km by 2km tile at any time. Perhaps a little unrealistic and stiff. I am guessing that Companies up to Battalions are good MEs, perhaps Platoons (like a Recon platoon) for smaller campaigns...

The nice thing is that after you create an OOB, it's only a matter of left-clicking a little check box to turn sub-units into MEs and back. So once you have the OOB in place for, say, a whole regiment, you can then break it up into smaller ME's as you desire for your campaign. You could create a few small recon elements or armor and bigger formations (like infantry battalions) where you'd want your main effort for example...

Martin

[General Bolt]

Any restrictions to the number of ME's allowed in to a given 2km x 2km tile?

Where are the OOBs/unit selection put together in CMBB or CMC?

[Scipio]

More Questions :

So a ME can consist of various units type, shall we say infantry, artillery, tanks all together?

How about units that are generally not included in CMBB for the tactical level of a battle, like off map artillery, or headquarters? Are they represented on the operational map, and what if a 'normal' combat unit would attack such a support unit. For example, I move tanks into the backyard of my opponent to attack his artillery, a HQ or a supply depot. How will this be solved?

[Reichenberg]

Moon stated before (can not remember in what thread) that in the case of an attack of tanks against an off-map artillery in CMC, only the components are in the CM:BB battle, that have their own CM:BB models (in this case probably the trucks of the off-map artillery)....making it hazardous to keep heavy stuff in CMC to close to the action. No defence capability there.

The actual artillery is just represented in CM:BB by the trucks pulling it.

Uwe

[Scipio]

How unpleasant for the defenders.

But what if the defender simply moves the trucks off map - does this mean the artillery has survived? Sounds not logic, in case of an armored attack on an artillery position, there's not time to mount the artillery on the transport.

[Sailor Malan]

Now we know why BFC don't like to announce things too early. Imagine haveing to do this for years, whilst the adoring fan base keeps asking questions...oh, wait they already have! Thanks for the patience, BFC.

Now, how are imobilised vehicles dealt with - will they be lost, or can they be recovered depending on the overall CMC situation, or national capabilities, or maybe both?

[Scipio]

Bad Scipio. Asking complicated things

How about the general moral? When troops on the operational level are caputered in a pocket, will this have an influence on the moral at the beginning of a tactical battle?

Same thing with the overun of an artillery position scenario. Will the artillery unit (or the trucks) start the battle as 'panicked', maybe even broken/routed?? This would of course solve the problem of moving them from the map, since there can't be issued any orders anyway. Would be of course a short and boring battle. Maybe it's better to 'lock' this problem out, and in this cases the battle can only be auto-resolved. I guess there's no doubt about the result anyway...

Damn, I even don't know if the CM1 engine takes a general moral into consideration from the start...

[ October 15, 2005, 01:20 PM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

[Matt May]

The actual artillery is just represented in CM:BB by the trucks pulling it.

Uwe [/QB]

I'm sorry, but that's dumb, just dumb. Why would the arty not fight? What if they get jumped before they can limber? By what you said a puny recon unit could destroy a heavy arty unit virtually w/o loss, and that just is not very likely.

[Renaud]

For certain arty units in CMBB, there are no on-board models. Nebelwerfer, 120mm mortar, lots of soviet artillery all come to mind.

They aren't going to make a bunch of new models and stuff for CMBB, so campaign designers will have to be creative in substituting 105's for everything bigger, etc. Attach some LMG's or light infantry to gun batteries for self-defense, etc.

[PzKpfwIII]

Originally posted by Matt May:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The actual artillery is just represented in CM:BB by the trucks pulling it.

Uwe

I'm sorry, but that's dumb, just dumb. Why would the arty not fight? What if they get jumped before they can limber? By what you said a puny recon unit could destroy a heavy arty unit virtually w/o loss, and that just is not very likely. [/QB]</font>

[Matt May]

Most of you guys seem to think it was quite rare, yet somehow, the majority (if not more) of German arty units in the war suffered this fate. I rather doubt Hitler would have tolerated a doctrine that basically threw away his heavy arty when they came in contact with the enemy, though I must confess that I have not studied the historical record in detail.

[PzKpfwIII]

Originally posted by Matt May:

Most of you guys seem to think it was quite rare, yet somehow, the majority (if not more) of German arty units in the war suffered this fate. I rather doubt Hitler would have tolerated a doctrine that basically threw away his heavy arty when they came in contact with the enemy, though I must confess that I have not studied the historical record in detail.

If you could name a single unit that suffered that fate, the circumstances of its destruction, and the source you are referencing, it would add a lot to the discussion.

Alternately, reference to one of the German manuals of the time (even one of the Reibert canteen books, if they discuss such things) would be of interest.

I think you'll find that most armies did not teach how to do a lot of practical things; without being facetious, almost no army taught its men how to surrender, for example.

If you can explain why you feel that "the majority (if not more)" of German artillery suffered overrun it would be of interest.

[76mm]

...the majority (if not more) of German arty units in the war suffered this fate. I rather doubt Hitler would have tolerated a doctrine that basically threw away his heavy arty when they came in contact with the enemy...

OK, I've got to call you on this one. While I rather doubt that the "majority" of German heavy arty units defended themselves fiercely (not to mention effectively) when overrun, I can't disprove it. But to suggest that using heavy guns in a defensive direct fire role must have been correct and rational because Hitler would not have "tolerated" something that was otherwise is really kind of funny. This is the military genius who instituted the "no retreat" policy that went a long way toward the German defeat.

[Matt May]

Ok, I'm not likely as well read on unit actions as some or perhaps even most of you. I rely on my knowledge of other games with designers who have presumably done their homework. Yes, I know its third-hand knowledge, but it works for me. Having said that, every game I've played has the Germans with increasingly less access to OBA as the war progresses. Why is that if, as some seem to imply, the arty escapes (into a smaller area thereby concentrating the number of such units)? This DID happen with German AA units, BTW, as the Americans found out in the Hurtgen Forrest. This isn't a highschool Oxford-Oregon debate where everything you say must be supported by a reference. It's OK to use your heads here (isn't it?) Look, if Battlefront wants to ignore this issue, fine. No game is perfect.

[citizen]

Since everyone is so key on creating the largest ME possible, what penalties will that player suffer during the game? Will there be strategic points on the operational map that a player who uses Coy sized ME's will be able to control and rack up points?

I'd hate for the game to encourage players to just roll across the map with one giant ME, crushing the smaller ME's one by one with no penalty.

Will the fatigue rules be harsh enough to discourage this? If a 2 BN ME fights one Coy, will it gain just as much operational fatigue as it would fighting an even matchup?

[Sergei]

Originally posted by citizen:

I'd hate for the game to encourage players to just roll across the map with one giant ME, crushing the smaller ME's one by one with no penalty.

I'd prefer the game to be realistic. If the offensive doctrine was to concentrate forces and overpower the enemy, then it should be the norm, not exception.

Of course there are practical limitations to this. The greater your force density, the more effective your enemy's artillery is going to be. As in real life.

[citizen]

Yes, I know concentration of forces is a good thing, but I've seen past games allow such concentration that there was never any need for a campaign map. If both sides do the One Big ME strategy, there is no line integrity to maintain. There's just two juggernauts fumbling around until they meet, one battle takes place, and the victor wins the campaign.

The reason I ask is that I'm worried about the lack of a supply system, as Hunter has mentioned. If that one huge ME can't be cut off from supply by someone who controls every road junction with a Coy of Engineers, I find that to be a problem, as that too is a realistic strategy.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by citizen:

Yes, I know concentration of forces is a good thing, but I've seen past games allow such concentration that there was never any need for a campaign map. If both sides do the One Big ME strategy, there is no line integrity to maintain. There's just two juggernauts fumbling around until they meet, one battle takes place, and the victor wins the campaign.

Unlikely. Direct attack under such circumstances would be prohibitively costly. The wiser player would go on defensive using terrain to his advantage, letting the other player bleed his strength while other units outflank the Juggernaut and cut his supply lines.

[Runyan99]

I understand the jauggernaut concern, but I have to agree with Sergei. Given equal sized jaugernauts on both sides, the defender should be able to defend the ground of his choosing and hold off the attacking jauggernaut with only a portion of his overall force. Or at least bloody it so badly that it can be defeated in detail soon after.

Maneuvering your whole campaign force in one army like Hannibal on the march shouldn't be a successful strategy against a skilled defender. Particularly when you throw modern indirect artillery into the mix, as was pointed out.

[citizen]

I should have been more clear and mentioned that if both juggernauts are fumbling around looking for each other, the battle would be a meeting engagement. And I was just mentioning that this is what has happened in past games that try this.

I just thought of way the programmers could include some incentive to go with a non-juggernaut strategy. Have Division and Regimental Artillery spotters not travel with particular ME's. Have them on call at the start of a battle. Assign them where you want them, based on the opposition. During actual battle, even non-spotters could often call back for the heavy stuff. Of course, in CMBB a spotter appears if you assign it to the battle.

So at the start of a round of tactical combat, you assign the spotters from each of your batteries where you want them. Or save them and let the battery stock up on ammo/rest/relocate. Always hated the low ammo levels of the batteries in CMBB.

[Sergei]

Actually, I believe this is how it is done - any batteries within range can be called in for support.

Artillery in support of other units, resulting in the appearance of Forward Observers on the battlefield.

[DBaron]

Just to be sure...no splitting means that if the author of a campagian deems the ME to be company size, then I am stuck using the whole company throughout the campaign. I couldn't leave one platoon behind after a battle, and continue attacking with other two?