P. 1
Soviet Units - ww2

Soviet Units - ww2

Ratings: (0)|Views: 855|Likes:
Published by e.viegas

More info:

Published by: e.viegas on Sep 07, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





To the readers;The intention of these documents is to provide potential Steel Panthers scenario designers anunderstanding and ability to create historical and realistic scenarios. Additionally, E-Mail games can nowbe “based” real force distributions instead of spur of the moment and ad hov creations. There are threetake aways:1.Realistic force creations2.New tactical opportunities3.New units creations
Most nationalities utilized triangular formations. The different forms were dependent upon units available,strength of units and operational goals. Almost all armies used battalion sized unit formations as their minimum size. Steel Panthers limits this important characteristic with formation sized parameters.I am not recommending playing regimental sized battles, but true battalion sized battles are currentlyimpossible with the limits on unit numbers. An example of an realistic operational unit would be an American Regimental Combat Team.Please refer to the RCTs organization.Normally the RCT would have two advancing formations with a third in reserve. Each advancingformation would be a battalion of infantry and 1 or 2 companies of engineers. The artillery battalion andbattery would be with the reserve formation. The armored company would be split between theadvancing formations. This basic formation (one of the advancing columns) requires: 1 or 2 platoons of tanks, 2 or 3 sections of off board artillery (maybe on board), 1 or 2 platoons of engineers with trucks,roughly 28 infantry squads with supporting heavy weapons. The divisional motor pool would providetransportation for the infantry - some on the tanks and the rest in trucks. This may seem like a lot of unitsbut it is only roughly 400 points!! (120 for the tanks, 40 for the artillery, 32 for the engineers, 16 for their trucks, 84 for the infantry, 36 for their trucks, and 70 for misc. (like a company from the Recon battalion - ACs)). This would be a standard formation used in SP. Yet, this type of formation is impossible toachieve with the unit number limitation.
If players could create this type of formation, tactics would be dramatically different. Effective flankingmaneuvers, thrusts ,etc. could be staged. You could afford to be aggressive because you could havesome on board reserve to accomplish the mission if you make a mistake or miscalculation. Now, if atactical mistake is made, you are essentially up a creek.My goal was not to compliant, but provide an easy reference source to truly challenge other players ingames. With unit formation charts, players can simulate an armored attack against an infantry unit andknow what possible units would be available. Again it changes tactics. If you know the enemy will nothave tanks, your selection of forces is going to be different. You might choose slow moving SP artilleryunits to “blast” at bunkers, etc. versus fast moving mobile tanks because you do not have to worry aboutan armored counter attack.Thus, challenges would be what type of engagement, the year and month, the nationalities, and the unittype (Armor division versus an infantry or Armored infantry). This will create “unbalances” in player formations strengths. Armored units will have force advantages over infantry. This is what real militarycommanders hoped to achieve when attacking.So how to make the game “fair”? Simple, negotiate point reallocations before the game; such as theinfantry division defender has a 25% point bonus or the armor attacker has 25% penalty. Again thesepoint reallocations change your tactics. It is not enough to capture two of the three objective areas, butas the armored commander you must assault all three to win.My goal is to provide the resources to create circumstances like these, allowing different tactical plays.Unit structures and organizations create limits for force selections. In turn these limits provide differentopportunities for tactics based on unit types. Indeed you’ll be faced with the same chooses actualcommanders had or the lack of chooses dependent on you perspective.
Furthermore, anyone using Spedit can now create additional units based on realistic structures. For example, I have integrated (with the editor) the 4
platoon of the standard German infantry company intothe other three platoons. This is realistic, the heavy weapons rarely operated alone, and it allows a largegroup (pool) of men to transport (carry) the heavy weapons. So their movement rates are notdramatically different than infantry (now they are so slow without motorized transport).
I have researched four force structures:1.German2.American3.British (still being cleaned up)4.Russian (still being cleaned up)
These documents are not commercial in nature and the information found in them is freely available in public libraries, etc.
I highly recommend reading the reference sources listed. Most of thestories and accounts are dramatic and compelling. Any copyright infringement is unintentional and thisdocuments distribution is free. My sole request is: if you create scenarios with these charts, I’d love toplay them.Please include this preface and the reference sources with any distribution.
I do not plan to update or revise the documents - the compilation took too much time. I would appreciatereceiving corrections or adjustments. Again these charts and tables are from multiple sources, whichsometimes had slightly different organizations and unit strengths. Additionally, I have rough draft formsof the British and Russian forces. Once I clean them up, I post ‘em.Have fun. Thanks.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->