That's a lot of vehicles in such a small space...

Joined
Apr 18, 2020
Messages
14
Points
3
Location
USA
Thought this was kind of funny. If you look at the picture below, you can see that 234th MG Garrison Battalion is ready to defend the island of Leros in the "Island Prize" Scenario of "The Cauldron Scenarios".

The top picture shows where the unit is "in game" and the bottom picture from Google Earth shows where the unit is "in reality".

That is kind of a small place to park 21 trucks. I know "in reality" the trucks are parked in the village just off the map to the south (Quaranta). I also know that dismounting is the number one user requested feature and has been discussed many times over the years.

I just thought i was an interesting example of how keeping units always mounted "in game" gives rise to what would be some interesting situations "in reality".

Edit: I wonder how much the vehicles soak up causalities that would otherwise be allocated to the fighting elements? Do the vehicle drivers contribute to the overall unit's combat value?
 

Attachments

  • Leros Picture.jpg
    Leros Picture.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 34
Last edited:

GoodGuy

Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Messages
426
Points
28
Age
51
Location
Cologne
The top picture shows where the unit is "in game" and the bottom picture from Google Earth shows where the unit is "in reality".

That is kind of a small place to park 21 trucks. I know "in reality" the trucks are parked in the village just off the map to the south (Quaranta). I also know that dismounting is the number one user requested feature and has been discussed many times over the years.

I just thought i was an interesting example of how keeping units always mounted "in game" gives rise to what would be some interesting situations "in reality".

Very nice comparison.
Hm, where is Quaranta? I can't find it on Google maps. I see Alinda and Partheni.
And how do you attach files? Looks like LnL removed the img-upload function. :jawdrop: No?

The beach line in your screenshot (from the game) looks accessible, while in reality the terrain is too steep (just right of the red square, east of the tiny beach strip that can be spotted on the google image) or too rough. The huge plateau (just south of the spotted Krad Coy) didn't make it into the CO map, the part that should appear as plateau is drawn as a mountain range with a steady gradient towards the eastern coastline.
That's why I used to dream of a 3D-version of the game that would use DGPS data, as it would avoid map inaccuracies and enhance immersion.
Edit: I wonder how much the vehicles soak up causalities that would otherwise be allocated to the fighting elements? Do the vehicle drivers contribute to the overall unit's combat value?

Good question: The drivers had personal weapons, ofc. German drivers usually had carbines, their NCOs either a rifle or a pistol, but they didn't join the fight, usually, as they had to get in reinforcements or help the supply columns to haul ammo. I would imagine that the Allies maintained a similar regime.
The trucks were also seen as assets, so they were usually left at the FUP - guarded by the drivers - or just sent back to the rear. The drivers also helped by performing medevacs, but I can't imagine that the estab designer(s) counted these troops as combat elements, I am pretty sure that they are deducted.

I do know that the estab designers didn't count Bn or Coy positions like the paymaster (who also overlooked food supplies and kitchen service) and the armorer (both were state officials - as in public servants), shoemakers, veterinary surgeons, grooms, messengers (horse or motorcycle), kitchen personnel, cooks, supply troops, the Bn surgeon + his medical officers or the Coy medics.

Looking at an old Recon Bn HQ estab entry from HTTR, I would say that the game's personnel levels are often very accurate, and only in very few HQ units a tick too high.

Example:
The layout for the HQ of a Panzer Recon Bn (1943-ish) listed a total of 95 HQ troops, including NCOs and officers and supply troops/cooks (etc.).

Only a few of them would have been been able to engage in combat, particularly the Bn commander, his adjutant, the aide-de-camp (in pre-1943 layouts), the scissor telescope officer (pre-1943 or pre-1941, I can't remember) and say 1 HQ driver or NCO.
probably around 4 or 5 in the 1943 layout.

The rest was needed to run the supply trains (food + ammunition: cooks, drivers, co-drivers, supply train clerk, shoemaker), to repair/maintain weapons or bicycles (subordinates of the armorer), relay messages (messengers) or provide medical services (BN surgeon, HQ medic who was also a radio operator). All these men were considered to be part of the staff company ("Stabskompanie"), which wasn't an actual coy, but BN elements that were needed to supply the HQ staff, to support the combat troops by supporting the Coys' supply platoons and to support command + control.

Nowadays, the 4th or 5th Coy of a German Tank Recon Bn provides the security platoon for the Bn HQ, so I could imagine that the Wehrmacht had a similar tradition.

A platoon consisted of the platoon HQ squad ("Zugtrupp") and the actual platoon troops, organized in groups.

The HQ squad of a Tank Recon coy consisted of 1 platoon leader, a platoon HQ-squad leader, 1 messenger (who was also the squad HQ's radio operator, in car), 1 Krad messenger, 2 drivers (for the 2 cars), and 1 litter bearer (assigned to the 2nd car tasked with medevac services, but the Bn HQ also had a dedicated halftrack for medevacs). The coy CO could also assign one of his messengers (with a radio) to such squad HQ, in order to keep in contact with the squad.
In 1943, a Pz Recon element's platoon (all on Krads with sidecars) had 3 groups with 7 troops (Krad riflemen = passengers or gunners in the sidecars) and 1 group leader each (passengers in sidecars) and 12 drivers. IIRC, the Krad drivers were considered to be riflemen, but they were sometimes held back (to guard/keep the Krad pool, but also because they were trained vehicle specialists), afaik.

So, that's 3 men in the platoon HQ squad (platoon leader, platoon HQ leader, 1 radio operator) and 36 platoon troops (incl. the 12 drivers) who would possibly join a Recon Bn HQ's personnel pool in a fight, if a Recon HQ would have been attacked.

So, 39 plus 4, that's a total of 43 men who could possibly engage in combat, IF the particular HQ had a security platoon, actually (if not: just those 4 or 5 men).
For COTA, the HQ personnel pools had been purged in quite a few units, already, they appeared to be even more accurate IIRC, but I can't remember how many troops HQs in Command Ops are holding these days (not installed atm). But the number of 44 men in the old HTTR estab is impressively accurate.
I am just not sure if the estab designers used the same thought process to get to that number, as the BN HQ layouts did not list security elements, usually. If they didn't include a security platoon in their thinking, then I wonder how they got to the number (44).

I wouldn't rule out that a "Sicherungszug" (security platoon) was defined in some Coy layouts or division layouts or even listed as separate entry, though, but it takes some work to find, unravel and match these infos/details, as these platoons were not (listed as) organic sub-elements of those HQs, so kudos to the estab designers.
If a given Recon Bn HQ didn't have a security platoon at its disposal, then it only had 4-6 men that could actually engage in combat (or in defensive actions).

In the HBO series "Band of Brothers", you can see Winters (Bn CO but still Captain) in his lone BN HQ outpost (episode about the 101st's deployment near Foy - during the Battle of the Bulge), no security detachment, just 3 guys in an open tent (pitched up in the woods). :)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 18, 2020
Messages
14
Points
3
Location
USA
Quaranta is the in game name of the town that is called Alinda in Google Maps.

To attach affile to a post, there is an Upload File button just next to Post Reply.

Great information. Thank you for the reply.

A lot of things are not worth modeling at this scale. I'm sure there are examples of cooks, armorers, clerks and other rear echelon troops stopping an breakthrough but it's not worth the computational effort to model it when it would almost never happen in game.
 

GoodGuy

Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Messages
426
Points
28
Age
51
Location
Cologne
Dang, the "upload a file" button isn't (or wasn't) visible when I use(d) the reply/quote function, lol. Ty!

leros-coastline.jpg

I wanted to show you the plateau and the "beach line" (red arrows) depicted in the game, just from a diff. angle:
There are no beaches, the gradient on the left (slightly NW of the first red arrow) is somewhat steep and the terrain of the entire coastline is somewhat rugged, packed with large stones, a number of rocks and a few flumes, a non-4x4 truck would have had a hard time to cross those sections. There are no real beaches (areas with red arrows, showing the supposed beach line), in fact, except for the tiny one marked by google at the top left.

The plateau (green circle) has a slight gradient, but it is so flat that it can be crossed easily. If you would move to the center of the plateau, some elements of the Krad company (the entire coy in-game, if the plateau would have been rendered) wouldn't be visible in RL, as most of the northern lower section would be in a blind spot.

I'm sure there are examples of cooks, armorers, clerks and other rear echelon troops stopping an breakthrough but it's not worth the computational effort to model it when it would almost never happen in game.

Correct. The desperate German attempt to man more sections of the Siegfried line bunkers by using rear echelon troops comes to mind, or the desperate Russian efforts to keep the momentum during the Battle for the Seelow heights, where they ran out of reserves - due to the heavy losses - and where they then browsed rear echelons for usable troops, for example. In the main, cooks, mechanics, clerks and communication/supply troops were just evacuated - or made quick getaways. In some EF sectors, quite some of them took (or were ordered to take) the last available transports - so that quite some remnants of the frontline units on the southern front had to perform (fighting) withdrawals on foot (!), in late 1943/1944.

EDIT: The elements of one or another Regiment had to cover distances between 600 - 1,000 km to rejoin their units or parent units - on foot and with the Russians chasing. Only when the Russians stopped after around 300 - 600 km, because the supply lines were overexpanded, the units got some rest (and logistical help locally - means rides to rendezvous points). Some men only got away because their officers either issued Pervitin, or because they used their own personal stocks. But like you say, such occurrences don't have to be rendered.
 
Last edited:

GoodGuy

Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Messages
426
Points
28
Age
51
Location
Cologne
Yes and no. The plateau is missing and this creates a ridge leading up to a hilltop in the west, and 3 smaller ridges going down to the coast line. While in reality the immediate coastal strip (width like 10 meters?) consists of rough terrain that can't be used by vehicles, the area behind that strip can be accessed by 4x4 vehicles, motorbikes and tracked vehicles, as the gradients aren't that steep and as the gradients do not change, it's basically an angled but flat piece of terrain, on each of these 3 "fingers" (ridges).
So the map design is partly responsible, but it's still not clear why a gradient of 21 (doesn't matter if it's % or degrees) would make the engine deny vehicle movement in transverse direction.
 
Last edited:

Perturabo

Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
70
Points
8
Age
37
Location
Poland
Wouldn't it be better if these vehicles would be absorbed into base unit?
 

GoodGuy

Member
Joined
May 20, 2015
Messages
426
Points
28
Age
51
Location
Cologne
Then it would turn into a foot unit. A better level of realism could be achieved, if there'd be a dismount feature, though, since combat units didn't bring their unarmored trucks to the fight. Advancing/winning units would basically roll and get to FUPs and bases and destroy or capture the remaining truck/transportation pool, unless retreating units managed to evac (the vehicles) or fill them with survivors (to evac as many troops as possible). So while the current setup kind of indirectly simulates such retreat-related vehicle losses, it does not allow the player/AI commander to preserve his vehicle pool. If losses occur, even a dug in unit at the frontline will lose trucks, eventually, where in reality the trucks would be kept in the rear. Titanium mentioned that in reality the vehicles were parked in Quaranta (Alinda).
 

About LnLP

Welcome to the official Lock 'n Load Publishing Community page. Here you will find the latest information on our released and upcoming games.



We enjoy designing, developing, and publishing some of the best strategy games in the world. Lock 'n Load Publishing has published over eighty products, including our fan favorites Nations at War Series, World at War 85 Series, and Lock 'n Load Tactical series. We have expanded the publishing line now to include novels to go along with our game series in Paperback, EPUB, and Audiobook lines.

As Lock 'n Load Publishing moves forward, it intends to continue to broaden its product lines. We thank God for blessing us and allow us to follow our passions and thank you for support in our endeavors.


Like us on Facebook

Donate Cadence International

Cadence serves all branches of the U.S. military in American and overseas locations. Comprised of nearly 4 million people, the U.S. military community has proven to be one of the largest, most responsive sub-cultures today. Cadence ministers not only to military personnel but to their spouses and dependents as well.

Thank you for your interest in supporting our us. Please specify an amount below to begin the secure, tax-deductable donation process.

Donate to Cadence International
Top