Dismounted PanzerGrenadiers coy.

[chuckfourth]

Hello
Each platoon in the dismounted armoured panzergrenadier company, "PzGrKp gep (a)" has a 3 MMG squad attached to it. I believe this is intended to represent the rear LMG having been taken out of the halftrack and used in the squad. I think there might be two inconsistencies here, firstly the rifle platoons halftracks didnt carry tripods so the 'extra' MG's should be LMGs not MMGs. Secondly I think it would make sense to model these not as an extra squad with 3 LMGs but to use the same modeling as is applied to the 2 BAR American squads, ie combine the 2 LMGs into the same weapon slot and increase that slots hit value. In this case the hit value would move from 8 to 13.
Best Regards Chuck.

[DRG]

OK, I'll look into that

Don

[Nick_Hyle]

Don, I swear when we came up with this (3xInf + 1xMMG[3]) formation for dismounted PzGr Kompanies we had documentation that they did have tripods stored in the SdKfz 251s.

I'll take a look in my books.

[DRG]

Nick

They did.

This quote from "Schützenpanzer" by Bruce Culver and Uwe Feist

"The Motorized infantry regiments in the Panzer Divisions were
organized with two battalions each. Each battalion contained three rifle
companies and a heavy support company. A rifle company had three rifle
platoons, each of which consisted of three infantry squads ( Gruppen ) .
Each squad had two MG34 light machine guns, one on a heavy tripod mount, and
8 Mauser 7.92mm Kar 98k rifles. The heavy MG section in each platoon had two
MG34's on Heavy tripods, and there SPW's also had a heavy mount for the
vehicle's forward MG34"

Of course, Chuck thinks this is wrong ( of course...) personally, I think both sources are correct and the tripod was available if needed and the gun could be set up either as a LMG or a MMG depending on the tactical situation. ( one of the strengths of the MG34/42 was this flexability )

These nit picking conversations are getting a bit tedious though... Now we're down to should the Moterized PzGren be in Opels of Protze when in game terms there is little difference and in reality the Pzgren formations would be happy with anything with wheels that had a motor.

Don

[Gud]

.... the ability to field fully motorized (or perish the thought, mechanized) coys of PzGrd post 1943 was really wishful thinking. In theory one regiment should be half-tracked, in practice it was one battalion (2 in SS), and in reality a company or two.

[chuckfourth]

Hi DRG
I think this as a bit more than nit picking. why I hear you ask?
First the grenadier coy with a MMG in each squad and the grenadier coy without rifle squad MMGs play very differently, ie firepower and mobility are worlds apart.
The Protze has a much better cross country abiltiy than the Opel. This is important when the grenadiers are trying to follow tanks. Not to mention that if the protze was used the grenadier coy would now have effectively 6 rather than 3 squads very different to what we now have ie a lot more flexable.
From the link below we also see that Grenadier coys were also mounted on bicycles and in 250s. Adding the bicycle formation into the game would I think add a lot of interest, and keep the germany had no petrol or equipment players happy.
Lastly is seems there may only be the one reference supporting MMG rifle squads, everywhere else (I can find) says MMGs restricted to the support coy.
So where we now can choose betwen Opel or 251 we would be able to choose Opel or 251 or protze or bicycle or 250 mounted coy.

For completeness sake Ill drop this post in here also

Looking at The link Clause supplied
http://chrito.users1.50megs.com/kstn/okh/okhmain.htm
It would appear that maybe shutzenpanzer has suffered in translation or that this is a typo.
There are several grenadier TOES this one in particular
http://chrito.users1.50megs.com/kstn/kstn11141nov41.htm
details the protze mounted grenadiers as described in Bayonet.
Also I have looked at I think each grenadier formation and yes these TOEs do show the rifle squads carrying 2 LMGs and the tripod MMGs restricted to the Support company. This is also the case in the one book I have "german tanks and fighting vehicle of WWII" ISBN 0 7271 0006 8 and pretty much anywhere else on the internet I can find.

The LMG interpretaton makes sense to me as
Obviously a company assault would be impossible to coordinate using this number of MMGs.
All the extra tripod MMGs would only really be useful in prepared defensive positions. So the rest of the time the tripods wouldnt be of much use. This would be a bit wateful as they were very expensive to make (much more than the actual MMG) not to mention training a gun crew in each squad only to 'waste' them as LMG operators.
The normal infantry battalion only had MMGs in the support Coy if this formation was good for the infantry why would the grenadiers need a MMG to be assigned to each rifle squad as well? seems far too generous an allocation ie very top heavy.
Apologies for the tedium Chuck.

[DRG]

chuckfourth said:
The Protze has a much better cross country abiltiy than the Opel. This is important when the grenadiers are trying to follow tanks. Not to mention that if the protze was used the grenadier coy would now have effectively 6 rather than 3 squads very different to what we now have ie a lot more flexable.



True enough, the Protze with A/T wheel capability would be better at following tanks and I will consider that change but splitting the Pzgren squads in half so they could be placed into 6 Protze is not going to happen.

Don

[chuckfourth]

Hi DRG
Something else I have found that may have bearing on the discusion, the TOE for the gross duetchland panzergrenadier regiment.
http://chrito.users1.50megs.com/kstn/gliederungen/1940/grossdeutschgelb.htm
Again this TOE shows the rifle coys to be equiped with LMGs However note the the fourth heavy/schwere company of each batttalion does seem to have a MMG per squad. Perhaps this is what the Schützenpanzer reference is referring to? not the rifle squads in the rifle coys but the "rifle" squads in the Battalions 4th heavy support coy?

Would I be rude to ask why the panzergrenadier squads wont be split? is it to much work, not feasable, not realistc? The TOE shows 6 protze trucks per platoon each would carry a 6 men plus the driver, ie a 2 man LMG team and 3 riflemen plus the section leader with LMG?

also this link may be of interest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grossdeutschland_Division#Panzergrenadier_Regiment _.22Gro.C3.9Fdeutschland.22

[chuckfourth]

Hi Gud
Of course there is always the exception, pz Lehr had all the grenadiers in armoured transport.
Best regards Chuck.

[cbo]

chuckfourth said:
Would I be rude to ask why the panzergrenadier squads wont be split? is it to much work, not feasable, not realistc? The TOE shows 6 protze trucks per platoon each would carry a 6 men plus the driver, ie a 2 man LMG team and 3 riflemen plus the section leader with LMG?



Generally, small units die or become ineffective much quicker than larger ones.
Also the game is really based on the squad (or individual vehicle) as the smallest unit, save some special cases. You would get some squads that plays like a single unit and some where the player will have to dabble in squad tactics.

So some squads will be more resilient because they are big, others will be more flexible because they are split. Not because they were any different in reality but simply because they used different transports.

Furthermore, once you start splitting units, you double the number of units that has to be handled and reduce the number of actual squads in the game by 50%.

Plenty of reasons NOT to split units, really http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Claus B

[chuckfourth]

HI Claus
Yes I am well aware of the play penalties associated with the projected two six man rather than one twelve man grenadier squads. However if one is worried about the inherent fragility of a 6 man suad one could simply play the squads in one hex. Though this will not play exactly the same as a 12 man squad it is a pretty close approximation. Even though you disagree with a 6 man grenadier squad, I notice that the game is quite happy to field a 5 man paratrooper squad? When I raised this issue, the thread was ignored, so while I have your attention, would you be able to tell us what the 5 man paratrooper squad represents? And if it does represent a LMG team why isnt it 3 man and size 0 like those in the rest of the game?
Regards Chuck

[cbo]

chuckfourth said:
Yes I am well aware of the play penalties associated with the projected two six man rather than one twelve man grenadier squads. However if one is worried about the inherent fragility of a 6 man suad one could simply play the squads in one hex. Though this will not play exactly the same as a 12 man squad it is a pretty close approximation. Even though you disagree with a 6 man grenadier squad, I notice that the game is quite happy to field a 5 man paratrooper squad?



I dont object to a 5 or 6 man squad if that is how it was in real life. What I do object to is to start operating with half-squads when the game is really based on squads as the smallest unit. Much better to modify the transport to carry the full squad instead, IMHO.


When I raised this issue, the thread was ignored, so while I have your attention, would you be able to tell us what the 5 man paratrooper squad represents? And if it does represent a LMG team why isnt it 3 man and size 0 like those in the rest of the game?



I know it will be an earthshattering surprise to you Chuck, but game designers and playtesters are not put on this earth exclusively to serve you every whim and every call.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

Claus B

[chuckfourth]

Hi Claus
The game is not based on squads. There are just a lot of squads in the game. The game quite happily represents single men, pairs of men 3 man groups etc ect ect. So as you cant actually present any reason why we cant have the 6 man squads I guess its because you dont like the idea?
Re paratrooper squads for someone who considers himself such an authority on the game and WWII in general its interesting how you duck this question, somehow I think there is something fishy?
Regards Chuck.

[DRG]

The size of the PzGren squads we have in the game will stay as they are now. That's a design decision. I am not reducing the ones we have now in size nor will I be adding new ones specifically for the Moterized PzGren formations. Again, that's a design decision. You could have 6 man Pzgren half squads if you open up MOBHack and edit them then see how all that fits together with the pre-existing PzGren formations then test to see how that all works in the game. That's why we provide MOBHack with the game.


Don

[chuckfourth]

Hi DRG
First I should just say Im not demanding that the unit appear in the game, I just point out that the unit exists and that its inclusion would make the game more interesting, If I can help get the unit in the game I would be happy to do so.
So if I mobhack them what am I looking for? I imagine that the formation could be created easily enough? by someone who knows what they are doing of course. Then am I just play testing the formation to see if it isnt to fragile to powerful etc? does it have to fit with the preexisting formations? wouldnt it be sort of stand alone?
And if I did this and it looked OK do I send a file to SPCAMO and they put it in the game, if they like it? or if I read your post correctly have we already decided not to use it?
So Many questions, so little time, Chuck.

[wulfir]

chuckfourth said:
The game is not based on squads. There are just a lot of squads in the game.



Oh, I'd say it's based on squads all right. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif


chuckfourth said:So as you cant actually present any reason why we cant have the 6 man squads I guess its because you dont like the idea?



I don't like the idea of half-squads much either.
I sometimes use Panzeraufklarer sections to represent depleted German squads. They don't have much staying power compared to full-squads...

[Smersh]

I had a sort-ev http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif related discussion about smg squads being spilt up into 5 man tank desant squads. the reason being that they could also be mounted on light tanks.

Of course that was already present in the game, and this one is about adding a half-squad formation.

My two cents:
I personally don't like the idea of half-squads either. although these panzer infantry squad was carried by two vehicles did they not form up into a full squad after-dismounting? because in reality too, half-squads have no staying power. I can't think of a way u could model a squad reforming (after dismounting) using the sp engine.

[DRG]

We are looking into the PzGren issue but we will NOT be creating half squads to fit into vehicles. It's not going to happen. The idea of split squads reforming was discussed and rejected years ago ( remember... we've been doing this since 1998 ). The Motorized units will have AWD transport added when the patch is issued but they will retain their "standard" size and the transport carry capacity will be altered to allow that. It's a compromise. It's sometimes necessary. I will be going on vacation soon and when I get back we will finish up the patch then take most of the rest of the summer off and start work on the revision to WinSPMBT sometimes in August or September.

Don

[chuckfourth]

Hi wulfir
Well yes and no, you shouldnt compare a half squad to a full squad, you need to compare 2 half squads to a full squad. I believe a squad suffers pinning once it has lost half its members. So one 12 man squad pins after losing 7 men two 6 man sqads pin after losing 4 men each so 8 men. Also if they work in adjacent squares you have twice as much return fire to anyone that fires at them. So maybe 2 half squads less fragile than one full squad?
Best regards Chuck.

[chuckfourth]

Hi Smersh
Correct they would have returned to the full squad no doubt, but with 2 LMG per section they perform prettty well on there own as well. Though they cannot be "recombined" playing them both in the same hex is a reasonable approximation, they get twice as much return fire but also twice as much suppression.
Best Regards Chuck

[Smersh]

yes, but you would only need to take a few casualties before becoming pinned , routed or destroyed. also did they carry 2 lmgs, each squad section. or would one squad get a lmg and another just rifles. It becomes in-practical. more reason why I don't like half-squads.

[chuckfourth]

Hi DRG
Thanks for your consideration and enjoy your holiday!
Regards Chuck.

[chuckfourth]

Hi Smersh
They need to take 4 casualties before becomming pinned. but there are 2 of them, so 8 alltogether, one more than the single squad.
Thats the thing with the early motorised grenadiers they actually had 2 LMGs so makes the squad very easy to halve.
Best Chuck.

[narwan]

chuckfourth said:
Hi wulfir
Well yes and no, you shouldnt compare a half squad to a full squad, you need to compare 2 half squads to a full squad. I believe a squad suffers pinning once it has lost half its members. So one 12 man squad pins after losing 7 men two 6 man sqads pin after losing 4 men each so 8 men. Also if they work in adjacent squares you have twice as much return fire to anyone that fires at them. So maybe 2 half squads less fragile than one full squad?
Best regards Chuck.



You're wrong. Damaged squads MAY suffer from suppression due to these losses which MAY result in them becoming pinned. Doesn't have to be half either. Unit experience/morale is what matters most, not absolute percentage of losses. Which you should have known if you're as experienced in this game as you claim to be.

Narwan

[Mobhack]

Also chuck, we have a sub forum for TO&E queries.

In future, please post TO&E queries in that sub-forum.

Cheers
Andy

[wulfir]

chuckfourth said:
Hi wulfir
Well yes and no, you shouldnt compare a half squad to a full squad, you need to compare 2 half squads to a full squad. I believe a squad suffers pinning once it has lost half its members. So one 12 man squad pins after losing 7 men two 6 man sqads pin after losing 4 men each so 8 men. Also if they work in adjacent squares you have twice as much return fire to anyone that fires at them. So maybe 2 half squads less fragile than one full squad?
Best regards Chuck.



I think that in game terms the half-sqaud will for all intents and purposes function as a weak squad, the main difference with a full squad is that it will die a little quicker.

Twice the firepower is IMHO somehting of a truth with modification, given that experienced players will likely have as much problem suppressing two half-squads as one full squad (what will splash damage do to weak squads deployed in adjacent hexes) not to mention that if indeed half-squads provide twice the firepower it would be neccessary to provide every nation (not just Germany) with half-squads --> lot of OOB work for no real gain IMO.

[Mobhack]

Chuck

Have you actually read the manual for the game?. It seems not, as the fitst section on the first page is entitled What is WinSPWW2?.

And if you read that section you will see:


One unit playing piece represents one vehicle or gun, or an infantry section or squad of up to 19 men or a section of 1 to 4 support weapons

.

Should you bring up a valid point, we may feel it necessary to adjust the issue OOBS, however we are not going to get into endless repetetive arguments about whether some rifle should be 2 or 3 HE kill points, or some section 10 men or 11.

We have already pointed you to the Mobhack editor, where you can make minor adjustments to adjust the game OOBS to suit your particular world-view.

Now, on the old abandoned Yahoo message board, you got into endless circular arguments about anti-tank rifles and whether 5mm of armour should count as 1 cm or whatever. This obsessive focussing on game trivia led you to getting banned from there as a "troll". As did "Leopold Leo" for similar behaviour.

You are rapidly going that way on this board.

Trolling is forbidden under the board rules (you can see these if you click on the link on the top right of the message board screen). It can lead to your account being terminated.

Cheers
Andy

[Gud]

Regarding the trucks - I have a point http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif Instead of labeling the truck Opel, and having folks complain about particular truck type being not present, how about simply labeling trucks: Light, Medium, Heavy ? After all, they all have an engine, four wheels and don't really drive well offroad. Exceptions could be done to "special" truck types.

[Mobhack]

This is what I originally did. There is really no point in giving a truck anything other than a "generic" name. Unless perhaps it brings something radical to the game (E.g a Soviet WW2 Zis-42 truck, with half tracks, to make it stand out from the standard 2WD "medium truck").

A generic naming would save OOB slots as well, especially in crowded OOBS.

However the various independant OOB designers decided to expend OOB slots on "named" trucks, which may differ by 2 carry points, or be slightly slower or faster etc.

As far as I am concerned, rather a waste of space, and a PITA when trying to get OOBs in line ("why is the GM423 truck in the Ruritanian OB 1 point faster than the one in the Ferengi OB" type questions), which a simple generic truck class would nuke (I could do a simple SQL query on the database for "medium truck").

However, some folk see that sort of micro-dot detail stuff as "realism" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif.

Cheers
Andy

[Marek_Tucan]

For me the naming of the trucks is on the same level as having commander's names displayed - it adds to the feeling http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif That's why i've added several different trucks to my MBT Czechoslovakia OOB http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

[chuckfourth]

I have never claimed to be experinced at this game. Your comment is trolling.

[narwan]

There is explicit and implicit claiming of experience with and knowledge of the game. Just as your last comment is an implicit claim you are not experienced at this game.
So perhaps it is time for you to state explicitly whether you consider yourself to be experienced with and/or have considerable knowledge of the game?

Narwan

[chuckfourth]

Hi Narwan
I dont know you tell me.
I guess I have played somewhere around 60 PBEM games. Tried every senario, begun about half the campaigns, and had a brief look at Mobhack re the manhours required to go to mm.
Regards Chuck