Good comment Peter. I have modified my previous post to explain that this is a rare occurrence. The norm is that the allocation code will prevent this from arising in 99% of cases. But there is a chance it may not prevent it because of competing requirements. Also, once a mission is underway it may arise if the line unit is destroyed and the force chooses not to abandon for some reason. So it is rare but it needs to be handled.
I am not up-to-date regarding the newest bells and whistles under the game's hood....
The game engine can handle mergers, means routing/beat up units will release a certain amount of men and the number will be added to the merged unit, while the original unit will be removed and its casualties deducted before moving the surviving men to the destination unit, right? (correct me if I am wrong)
Now my question: Can the engine go the opposite way and spawn units?
The reason for asking:
The Germans used dedicated units to provide rear-area security. The layout per inf coy and per inf regiment (in the security divisions) matched the equipment/weapon loadout of the corresponding reg. Wehrmacht inf units, for the most part, usually.
Example:
An SS Panzer Corps had a "Sicherungs-Kompanie" (Security Company). The coy could be tasked with securing the HQ area, but could also secure an objective, when each and every line unit was needed to push elsewhere.
If the engine could spawn such element, then the spawned unit could occupy the objective, simulating a historical security unit moving up from the rear.
There were a number of Security Divisions, where some of them were attached to Army HQs later on, where then their Inf Regts and their arty Bn were seen and used as fire brigades.
Their inf regiment ("Landesschützen-Regiment", 3-4 Landesschützen Bns, 1 arty Bn, 1 guard Bn with 4 guard Coys, 1 Police Bn) had the very same layout as a regular inf regiment, with slight differences regarding the weapons loadout and number of Inf Bns. Their arty bn had 3 batteries with light field guns (usually), but some of these Bns had 75-mm or 105-mm Feldkanonen. (German guns and captured ones). Most of the Security-Divisions also had 1 or 2 Coys with captured tanks, from 1942 to the end of the war.
In practice, when attached to Army HQs, the HQs tended to employ these supposed 2 fire brigade elements (inf Bns and the arty Bn) like regular line units, though, which was some form of "misuse", but obviously needed. Such a division also had 4 Police-Coys (4 coys, all motorized).
Back to the actual question/problem:
If the engine cannot spawn units:
If you add a single Coy to the OOB that simulates (historically accurate, btw) a Corps' security detachment (the Security Coy mentioned above), then the AI could send that Coy to the objective, so that the plan/execution doesn't have to aborted/re-calculated, where then a proper force allocation is maintained.
In theory, a Security Coy was a mix of line unit and Police unit. In practice, they had a rather normal weapon loadout and the same training, so they could secure and defend an objective.
The Feld-Ersatz-Bns (field replacement bns), the training and personnel-pool units employed right behind the front, were the field training units of the Wehrmacht, where recruits were assigned to after boot camp (in the "Ersatz-Bn" - Replacement Bn - in Germany), but they were usually tasked with securing the rear areas behind the front or with securing (uncontested) objectives. They were also thrown to the the frontlines during emergency situations.
Technically, a given regular inf Bn would draw men from the attached replacement Bn in its rear whenever it needed replacements and when the recruits had received sufficient training, under normal conditions. The Inf Bn would draw single men or groups of soldiers like say platoons or even complete Coys, while trying to maintain the experienced skeleton (NCOs and officers) of a unit. If the conditions allowed, they tried to move groups who had trained together - say a platoon or half-platoon - together, to improve cohesion/teamplay, afaik.
So you could also take these types of units and abstract this rather complex replacement and security regime by adding 1 replacement Coy, to simulate a dedicated rear area unit and attach it to the Corps HQ directly, and task this unit (just like the security coy with securing the objective. From your POV, it's just almost the same coy layout in both cases, just with different names, and with more additional training (thus better cohesion and somewhat more experience) for the field replacement Coy, I guess.
Both solutions would be very historical.
I am sure the US Army had a comparable system, I am just not sure what type of units performed such task.
Military police? Were there security coys? MP Coys or detachments?
The US rear area was packed with MP checkpoints during the Battle of the Bulge. In Vietnam, when the Viet-Cong attacked Saigon, most of the first responders were MP officers/soldiers. The US must have had a rear area security detail, right?
Anyway .... Currently, the senior HQ's goodies (base units, artillery Bns/rgts and - yes - the invisible supply trucks) suffer of a lack of rear guard and objective security.
(Yes, I know, quite a few things are abstracted and maybe have to be abstracted in order not to overload the game, like the abstraction of supply trucks ... btw, it would be cool if supply trucks would be rendered, this would allow to 1. redirecting - means manually re-route friendly trucks, to get them out of harms way and 2.it would allow to recon/find/destroy enemy trucks, just like in real life
), but I think it would be a nice addition to the game to add such type of units and to give the AI a) the means to occupy objectives when all line units are needed elsewhere and b) to actually protect the most vulnerable assets: arties and base units.)
If the allocation routine doesn't determine that the security company is needed to secure/occupy/defend an objective, it could be tasked to set up in the vicinity of a) a Base unit or b) an arty rgt/Bn, to provide ... *drum roll* protection.
Side effect: With such unit a base/arty unit could get out of harms way more easily, as such security coy could either attack the threat or perform a defend task to give the base/arty the opportunity to get out of there.
Not sure it this would be too complex, but I always felt that Corps and Army assets are often endangered to get caught with their pants down (due to the lack of protection). And it's also somewhat frustrating to having to use large base or arty assets (with up to ~1,000 men) as occupation force for uncontested objectives (eg. in cities).
PS: (Additional thought: I am not sure if the code should allow the player/the AI to have large arty units hog cities. Such units could not set up inside cities, they were just too large and the space in cities too confined, imho. Base units could use plazas, houses, factory buildings, backyards, etc., so bases could still be allowed, imo).
What do you think?
