Wednesday, August 30, 2023

Kilokrieg: Thinking About... Uber-simple OOBs?

A while back I was posting what I called 'Uber-simple' Orders of Battle (OOBs), especially for operations level action.  This led to a conversation between Neil Patterson and me as to what constitutes 'Uber-simple).  What I have set out here are some examples of what I have in mind.  This article actually has been in draft I think for the last 2 years at least - possibly longer.  High time, methought, to finish it off and publish.  But I've made some amendments to the article I was going to send.

I have left off the SP values, to be revisited on another occasion.  However, if you go back to my account of BARFist Revolution in Tchagai ('Long Live the Revolution') and the 'Unquiet Flows the Mius' posting, you will see how what I have in mind would work.

It was in the drawing up of the following that I began to think I ought to thank Neil for his 'MHO' as the results are very simple.  I've left of the Strength Points (SP) for the moment, in favour of 
Infantry: 1 stand per company
Armour: 1 AFV per company/ squadron
Artillery: 1 stand per battalion

Panzer Division, mid-1944:

2 Panzer Battalions, 4 Panzergrendier Battalions, Artillery Regiment of 4 battalions (2 of armour, 4 of motorised foot, and 4 gun/howitzers)

Command(1): any sort of command vehicle and CO
Logistics: 1x lorry and/or tanker per 'arm' 
Panzer Battalion: 4 Panther
Panzer Battalion: 5 PzIV (2)
Panzergrenadier Battalion(3) (gepanzert): 4 stands plus armoured halftrack
Panzergrenadier Battalion (motorised): 4 stands plus truck
Panzergrenadier Battalion (motorised): 4 stands plus truck
Panzergrenadier Battalion (motorised): 4 stands plus truck
Artillery SP Battalion: 1x Wespe or Hummel self propelled artillery
Artillery Battalion: 1x 15cm Howitzer
Artillery Battalion: 1x 10.5cm Howitzer
Artillery Battalion: 1x 10.5cm Howitzer

(1) The command element will have the formation's integral AA capability, which may, but need not, be depicted by an AA weapon as part of the HQ element (unit of manoeuvre).  This goes for the formation command elements of all the following.

(2) By mid-1944, the respective panzer battalion establishments comprised 78 Panther and 98 Panzer IV tanks, organised into 4 companies in each battalion plus a reconnaissance platoon.  So it would appear that the Panther companies comprised 17 AFVs and the Panzer IV, 22 AFVs. I suggest 5 PzIVs to the battalion instead of 4 to reflect the numerical disparity between the panzer battalions.

(3)The panzergrenadier battalions - infantry stands count as an integral whole, as though all mounted on a single stand or sabot.  I prefer not to use the oversized stands (shudder), as they have certain problems of their own that I prefer to avoid. The 5 separate stands can be arranged as one likes upon a single grid area, or astride a grid edge or corner signifying the battalion's occupation of both (edge) or all three or four (corner) grid areas.

Soviet Tank Corps:

Command: CO plus any sort of command vehicle
Logistics: 1 lorry and/or tanker per brigade or regiment (ideally)
Tank Brigade(4):
      3 Tank
      Motor Rifle Battalion: 3 SMG stands (tank desantski)
Tank Brigade: 
      3 Tank 
      Motor Rifle battalion: 3 SMG stands, (tank desantski)
Tank Brigade: 
      3 Tank 
      Motor Rifle Battalion: 3 SMG stands, (tank desantski)
Motor Brigade(5):
      Motor Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
      Motor Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
      Motor Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
      Field Gun and/or Mortar Battalion: 1x 76.2 field gun and/or 1x 120mm mortar.
Mortar Regiment: 3 x 120mm mortar plus truck
Artillery Regiment: 3 x 76.2mm field guns plus tractors
AA Regiment: 1 x 37mm AA, 1 x AAMG, 2 trucks
Rocket Battalion: 1x truck mounted BM13 'Katyusha' 
Assault Gun Battalion:
        1 x Su85 or Su100 or Su76
        1x SMG stand
Heavy Tank Battalion: 1x IS2 (or KV85 late 1943)
'Motorcycle Company': 1 M/c mounted SMG, 1 BA32 armoured car.


(3) The Tank and SMG stands together count as an integral whole, the presence of the SMG stand identifying the armoured element as part of a Tank Brigade, as distinct from a Tank Regiment. 
(4) Owing to, and to reflect, the manpower difficulties experienced by the Red Army, the Motor Brigade may be consolidated into a single unit of 6 infantry stands plus 1 or 2 trucks.

German Regular  Infantry Division 1944 (E.g. 352nd Division at Omaha Beach)

Command: CO plus command vehicle
Logistics: Lorries, pack horses or wagons
Schutzen Regiment 914:
     I Battalion: 4 Schutzen Inf stands
     II Battalion: 4 Schutzen Inf Stands
Schutzen Regiment 915:
     I Battalion: 4 Schutzen Inf stands
     II Battalion: 4 Schutzen Inf Stands
Schutzen Regiment 916:
     I Battalion: 4 Schutzen Inf stands
     II Battalion: 4 Schutzen Inf Stands
Fusilier Battalion 352:
     4 Fusilier Infantry stands
Panzerjager Abt 352(5):
      Stug Company: 1x StuGIIIG
      Marder Company: 1x MarderII, III or 38
      AA Company: 1x 20mm portee mounted AA gun(s)
Artillery Regiment 352:
     1x 15cm howitzer, plus tractor
     3x 10.5cm howitzer; plus tractors.

(5) Panzerjager companies were numerically rather weaker than the AFV companies of Panzer Divisions (10 StuGs and 14 Marders, c.f. 17 Panthers and 22 Panzer IVs). However, they were a significant enough part of the Division that they ought to be separately included.  Not all Divisions were so 'lavishly' equipped.

Soviet Mechanised Corps (6):

Command: CO plus command vehicle
Logistics: Trucks or half-tracked trucks
Tank Brigade:
      3x Tank Battalions(7): 1 Tank, 1 SMG infantry stand (tank desantski)|
 Mechanised Brigade:
     Tank Regiment: 2 tank
     Motorised Infantry(8,9):
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          (AT Rifle Coy: 1 stand PTRS)
          (Mortar Battalion: 1x 12cm mortar)
          (Artillery Battalion: 1x 76.2mm field gun)
          (AAMG Coy: 1 x AAMG)
Mechanised Brigade:
     Tank regiment: 2 tank
     Motorised Infantry:
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          (AT Rifle Coy: 1 stand PTRS)
          (Mortar Battalion: 1x 12cm mortar)
          (Artillery Battalion: 1x 76.2mm field gun)
          (AAMG Coy: 1 x AAMG)
Mechanised Brigade:
     Tank Regiment: 2 tank
     Motorised Infantry: 
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          Motor Rifle Battalion: 4 stands, 1 truck
          (AT Rifle Coy: 1 stand PTRS)
          (Mortar Battalion: 1x 12cm mortar)
          (Artillery Battalion: 1x 76.2mm field gun)
          (AAMG Coy: 1 x AAMG)
Mortar Regiment:
        1x120mm Mortar, 1 truck 
Guards Mortar Battalion:
        1x BM13 'Katyusha'
Assault Gun Regiment: 1x Su76
Assault Gun Regiment: 1x ISU122
Assault Gun Regiment: 1x ISU152 (10)


(6) The Mechanised Corps is a big and powerful formation - almost (as I thought the Soviet Mechanised Brigade under Command Decision rules) the ideal War Games formation.

(7) The Tank Battalions in the Tank Corps and the Mech Corps Tank Brigade were about the size of a full strength Panzer Company.  So all 3 Soviet tank battalions have in this organisation been merged into 1 stand, plus the SMG stand (detached from the Brigade's motor battalion).

(8) Alternatively, recognising that attrition played merry hell with the Red Army's Divisional manpower, each Brigade's motorised infantry may be consolidated into a single 'unit' of 6 stands

(9) Elements in parentheses are optional

(10) Absent the Tank Brigade, all other armour, and the Rifle battalion motor vehicles; substutute assault guns for equivalent towed artillery, and you'll have a 'leg' Infantry Division.

Additional equipment in the way of artillery, rockets, heavy tanks, special assault gun units, engineers, and reconnaissance units, may be supplied, per campaign or scenario, from 'Army' inventories.

Just for the sake of interest, here is a...

Luftwaffe Division:

Command: CO, command vehicle, (optional) AA (see Note 1 supra), (optional) Fusilier Coy of 1 stand.
Logistics: Truck.
Jager Regiment:
     Battalion: 4 stands
     Battalion: 4 stands
     Battalion: 4 stands
Jager Regiment:
     Battalion: 4 stands
     Battalion: 4 stands
     Battalion: 4 stands
Artillery Regiment:
     3 x 10.5 cm howitzer plus horsed traction
AA Abteilung:
     1 x 8.8cm FlaK (in AT role) plus horsed traction

Megablitz or Hexblitz, this isn't.  In scale it lies between Command Decision and those operational level game systems.  I was thinking of calling the system Kilo-blitz or Killer-blitz, but why not go all alliterative...(?)

... Kilokrieg

Possibly more to come...

21 comments:

  1. These are the same sorts of OBs that I use for NBC WW2 games, at one stand per company, although I would rarely field a whole division (we have occasionally). I usually just scale up existing Command Decision scenarios to use company elements instead of all those platoons. They still have a tactical feel but you can push satisfyingly large formations around. Depending on the scenario I often include 'platoon' sized elements (half companies) for things like recce or carrier platoons, but if there is a lot of stuff, I ignore them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Martin -
      Another method of scaling back, is to leave off the 'extra' bits, and just go for tanks, guns and infantry. These formations need not be confined to a gridded table, at that. The 'Mius' battle I mentioned in the posting fielded the best part of a Mechanised Corps on the Soviet side, and, on the other, most of a Panzer Division plus two battalions of an Infantry formation. Yes, the table was a bit crowded, but traffic problems merely add an interesting dimension to the proceeding.

      By the way, that won't stop my fighting battles at the 'Megablitz' scales.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  2. Eastern Front WW2 - top stuff. I’ve recently bought some painted 6mm stuff for early Barbarossa and also have some unpainted 2mm stuff too. I’ve not given too much thought about what rules I’ll be using, but much lower level than this Ion. Still, it’s always good to hear other people’s thought and to see “toys on the table” 😉
    Cheers,
    Geoff

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Geoff -
      Sometime soon I'll be trying out Andrew Rolph's East Front campaign set in May 1942. The formations will probably be little different from what you have seen here. I have drawn up a hex map for the first action - it just has to get onto the table... I have also another East Front action mapped out, September 1943, along the Dniepr south of Kiev.. That might actually be 'done' first.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  3. Ion, I'm flattered by the acknowledgement that I influenced your thinking!
    It's identical to how I've been building 20mm LW NW Europe forces. I started from the idea of 1 battalion = 1 stand, but decided it wasn't granular enough. I don't want to go back to 1 stand = 1 platoon organisations with all those fiddly support platoons. I therefore compromised on company level stands. There are a few published rules, notably CWG WW2 and Field of Battle WW2 (Piquet) that use this scale. You can of course also move up to 1 stand = 1 battalion from the same models organised this way although that will give huge forces. My idea is to paint with second option in mind and build up to company level. If you already have the toys, not an issue.

    In your Panzer Division, you mull fielding 5 Panzer IV v 4 Panther models, based on raw numbers. An alternative, is to adjust the SP to reflect this. In Megablitz and Hexblitz to some extent, you get 1 SP per 15 tanks OR company. At full strength, this gives 5 SP to Panther btn and the Pz IV gets 6SP. Factor in superiority for the Panther and assuming crew training is identical, you will end up with around 8 SP per btn (5 or 6 for strength, +1 for Panther, +1 for tank, +1 for veteran = 8sp) or 2SP per company. So both have 4 models which is much neater.
    It all depends on personal preference and how you intend to allocate SP.

    I have encountered similar issues with my Arab-Israeli which are organised at 1 stand per battalion.
    Arab T-34/85 battalions were quite weak, 22 to 30 tanks which gives 2-3 SP depending on whether downgraded for training or quality of tank.
    By contrast, an Israeli tank battalion in a mechanised brigade has a single battalion of say 34 M-51 Sherman (105mm) and 38 M-50 Sherman (75mm). Now I could simply work on 1 stand with SP of 4 to 5 strength +1 tank, +1 training giving 6 or 7 SP. Do I give +1 for the 105mm fielded by only half the battalion? Or I can work on fielding two models an M-50 and an M-51 with 4SP and 5SP respectively which also allows the Israelis greater tactical freedom (they often detach companies and ad-hoc task forces). If I do the second option, then I need to apply the same logic to armoured brigades with two battalions. 66 M48A3 can be one 8SP model or 2x 6SP models.

    A lot depends on how you want to match the SP system to the aesthetics of models fielded.

    Another thought is your mechanised / motorised formations. Have you considered a separate sabot base? I've seen it done with micro, but there's no reason you couldn't do similar with 20mm. A base of an appropriate size for the hex with the models placed loose on the sabot base.

    Neil

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comments, Neil -
      I have long thought over the adjustments by strength point to reflect numbers, but I keep coming back to wanting reserve the SP to qualitative features. I'm not too fussed about the violence done to 'organisational integrity', as I have already kind of 'fudged out' the Bn HQ and Recon tanks anyhow. Basically I have fudged out the company subunits.

      I am thinking of a whole different Strength Point system from those that characterise the standard Portable Wargames and Megablitz systems, something possibly a little closer to Command Decision, but much simplified. A Panther stand is still likely to be a little tougher than a PzIV; and a veteran battalion to have more stickability than a raw conscripts. More on this perhaps a little later.

      The relative sizes of units I hope I have reflected in the numbers. The Soviet tank battalions comprising just 21 tanks all get just the one AFV, though in tank brigades, I have not differentiated the battalions. The independent heavy tank battalions also get just one KV or IS tank. The 45-tank regiments of the Mechanised Corps get just 2 AFVs only.
      In effect I have allocated 1 tank model to represent roughly 20. The exception would probably be the AFV allocation to the Infantry Division series '300', which will be slightly overrepresented. On the other hand, I have left off their PaK40 AT guns. They didn't have many of those!

      I have thought of the sabot base - something I believe Tim Gow does with his 'Little Cold Wars' game system. I'm not sure it would be necessary - something to considerperhaps.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
    2. Interesting. From this I take you are equating SP with cohesion / morale / staying power rather than actual strength / losses?
      I've toyed with similar ideas, very influenced by Fire & Fury with the concept that losses produce a result after a certain number is reached, with the unit moving from "fresh" to "worn" to "spent" in incremental stages. More resilient units could spend more time in positive states, while brittle ones become worn and spent faster for the same SP loss. The problem is that it became cumbersome.
      Neil

      Delete
    3. That sounds about right, but not particularly going down the F&F track altogether. One possibility is to do the Command Decision 'green/yellow/red' thing as damage is accumulated per stand. Once past red, the unit is KO.

      There is a 'quicker' system I invented for my Army Wars battles, though would probably be pretty bloody. This applied specifically to armour, though in those games the scaling was entirely different. When an AFV took a damaging hit, it rolled a D6. The score indicated the level of damage it took. It could fight on, but once the total damage exceeded 6, the vehicle was KO.

      I THINK such a system might be adaptable to the sort of battles I want to fight. Of course, that does mean that weight of gun and armour may have to be differentiated outside the SP system, possibly a bit more finely than the present Portable WW2 system.

      We'll see.
      Ion

      Delete
  4. I experimented with something similar, but I scaled it back even more with one stand or vehicle representation a battalion and small divisional assets an AA being rolled into the HQ. Strength points were used to handle the relative strengths of units. While not as visually appealing it produced a nice quick division sizes game with a small footprint. I also tried it out using micro armor with one stand/tank per strength point.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mark -
      I've done the 'rolling into the HQ' thing as well (See my 'Hexblitz Approximately' series: http://archdukepiccolo.blogspot.com/2017/11/assault-on-apresski-early-morning.html
      That is still possible, especially AA and engineering elements.
      At brigade or regimental level one might include the appropriate inventories, such as heavy infantry guns or mortars. It would go towards formation integrity after all! Stray too far from HQ, and you lose the coverage of those support assets. Something to think about!
      Thanks!
      Ion

      Delete
  5. For the 'rolling it all together' approach, that is what I do with my One Hour WW2 adaptation - all the units are battalion equivalents, and the support stuff gets added in as extra capabilities: so a Panzer Division has Two Panzer Battalions and Four PG battalions, plus extra bits added to each. I tend to be very ungenerous with the Russians though, their infantry 'Regiments' are usually only the strength of a single German battalion, possibly two in Guards regiments. Typical Sov infantry division strengths were around 4,000 later in the war, maybe 6,000 for Guards, vs 8,000 for German infantry divs, 12,000 for the better maintained ones, so that feels about right. Looks like a fun project anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Martin -
      That the Soviet formations - especially the rifle and SMG toting bits - tended to about half the size of the German suggested the 6-stand regimental units rather than the 12-stand plus add-ons I listed. The 6-stand units include the MMG, mortar-infantry gun and AT Rifle stands together with 3 rifle or SMG stands. Brigade HQ could then hold the AAMG and field or AT guns.

      In fact I house my Soviets (such as ARE housed at the moment) in these 6-stand units - I think 18 of them (I'll have to do a count). I have yet properly to organise the HQ and support weapons elements.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  6. Interesting article. Everyone seems to converge on roughly the same ratios, which ought not to be a rurprise really. :-)

    Regards, Chris

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oops, that was me ... https://notquitemechanised.wordpress.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris -
      I have to admit to owing a fairish bit to you for my approach to these TO&Es - as much to anyone else I have mentioned. I'm going back, by the way, to 6 years ago to revisit my fictitious '6th Shock Army' to see what I can do with it. It seemed to me that my 6-stand Motor Rifle Divisions were a bit on the skimpy side. The Corps formations looked fairly OK.

      Of course, those wee Divisions worked fine in the Operation Uranus game 'Jacko' and I played out at the end of 2017.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  8. Hi Ion,

    Late to this particular party (as usual!) but my thinking at present is to rely on strength points and largely abstract representative organisation. Bob Cordery has been doing this for his planned Great Patriotic War set up and within the context of the Portable Wargame it seems to work well enough.

    Eric’s 1944 collection is organised for use with Rapid Fire so goes down to representing elements such as signals platoons and other items not usually seen (as I recall rather like Command Decision) on the table top so I could be quite detailed is needs be. For preference though I would opt for something at a higher level so will follow your ideas with great interest!

    All the best,

    DC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wrt signals, Log units etc, I often like to just plonk these on the table as little dioramas or use them as markers. I've started using supply trucks to indicate units which are reorganising, so I guess that means I need to paint some ambulances and repair trucks too. My converted 'Soviet officer with megaphone' and his NKVD firing squad have been in loads of games, even though have no actual function apart from to add some interest.

      Delete
    2. David -
      I'm finding I am mixing ideas, and am having consciously to acknowledge that I'm wanting two separate things. It was whilst reading some of the comments here and thinking back to 5-6 years ago, that the realisation came that I wanted kit on the table, but also 'operations level' games. Both.

      So I might have to write another posting to reprise my '6th Shock Army' TO&E, in which a Soviet tank brigade comprises a single tank plus SMG tank desantski stand. The organisation I have in mind is not as thorough as, say, Chris Kemp's is, especially in respect of the command, comms and supply infrastructure - probably more Tim Gow and Bob Cordery's more abbreviated representation of those elements.

      Partly this is due to not wanting overmuch to increase my WW2 inventory of kit (says he who bought 5 Airfix kits 2 weeks ago).

      Mind you, I have a lot of Soviet lady radio operators, who simply HAVE to be represented in my forces.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
    3. Martin -
      I did like the TO&E of your own Operation Uranus action, a copy of which account I downloaded, printed out and placed in my folder along with a couple of other interesting items (I DO like 'hard copy').

      I have a bit of an idea with logistics elements, some of which my be integral to units within an organisation such as ammo vehicles for artillery formations. It is something I recall exploring (briefly) in respect of artillery and possibly mortar support weapons, their expenditure of ammo.

      Units that came under attack from multiple enemies 'fought' each in turn. Of course, they may have artillery support available, from their own division, or from higher command. I wanted the supports to be available against all attacks, but at the cost of 'Supply Points' 1 per combat. But firing off 2 SPs in one turn, is twice the standard ammo allocation for one turn, which, if prolonged, might lead, unless replenished, to the arty becoming unavailable.

      It would be a simple enough matter I think to incorporate such a system - the question is whether it would add interest to the game. I seem to recall it was very much a feature of the late John Sandars's 'Sandskrieg' game.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  9. I believe that simplifying things is absolutely the way to go, as chrome can always be added back if needed. My acid test is that if a model is not doing something, it should not be there. sometimes the doing something is just occupying real estate or forming a traffic jam. :-)

    Regards, Chris.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nearly missed this one, Chris - good thing I check the moderated list from time to time. Sometimes the presence of something tangible can serve as a reminder of what is needful - especially at the logistical blunt end. Of course, the rear echelons will ordinarily be sufficiently 'rearward' to be off the table, but sometimes, in a fast moving battle, they can get caught up in the action.

      Traffic jams can present interesting problems to solve. Which, by the way, is in some measure how I view war gaming: the presentation of problems that require a solution using the resources available. Chess can be like that, which is why I often like end game studies.

      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete