Further to my recent blog post about a possible way to calculate Strength Points so that they reflect a unit's training, experience, and equipment, I have applied this to divisional-sized formations, and the results are interesting.
- Before battle begins, each division or group of assets is allocated an Exhaustion Point that is equal to a third of the total Strength Point values of the units in the division or group of assets.
- When a division or group of assets has lost a third of its total Strength Point value, it has reached its Exhaustion Point. From that point onwards it may continue to fight but it may not advance and may only move if it is withdrawing from the battlefield.
Examples
- A Russian rifle division led by an average general has:
- A conscript infantry reconnaissance battalion (with a Strength Point value of 1)
- Three conscript rifle regiments (with a Strength Point value of 2 each)
- An anti-tank battalion (with a Strength Point value of 2)
- A field artillery regiment (with a Strength Point value of 3)
- A supply column (with a Strength Point value of 2)
- An average divisional command unit (with a Strength Point value of 1)
- Its total Strength Point value is 15 SPs (1 + 2 + 2 + 2 +2 + 3 + 1 + 2 = 15), and it will reach its Exhaustion Point after losing 5 SPs.
- A German panzer division led by an exceptional general has:
- An armoured reconnaissance battalion (with a Strength Point value of 2)
- Two medium panzer regiments (with a Strength Point value of 4 each)
- A regular motorised infantry regiment (with a Strength Point value of 4)
- A motorised anti-tank battalion (with a Strength Point value of 3)
- A motorised field artillery regiment (with a Strength Point value of 4)
- A motorised supply column (with a Strength Point value of 2)
- An exceptional divisional command unit (with a Strength Point value of 4)
- Its total Strength Point value is 27 SPs (2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 2 + 4 = 27), and it will reach its Exhaustion Point after losing 9 SPs.
Hi...I am the last person to get involved in the design of wargame rules but I have to say I think you are on the right track here. I have always thought that insufficient weight is given to the quality of specific units or the logistical support they possess. That said I note the points given to both divisions are the same for the supply units. Although historically neither were particularly great, I do think the German supply service was a little better especially in the early years of the war. I think the factors you are looking at can become even more important in other periods especially 19th century conflicts. Just my tuppence worth. Regards.
ReplyDeleteTony Adams,
DeleteCheers! Thanks for your feedback … which I found very helpful.
I am looking at the role of formation supply, and may subsume it into a generic divisional command & supply ‘unit’ (which will ‘hold’ the divisions current LOG) with separate rules for suppling a division from a central supply system.
All the best,
Bob
Bob, I am finding this interesting with the variable strength points as it is something that is a good way to reflect quality and logistic support is often overlooked.
ReplyDeleteAs I'm back to thinking about my modifications to the PNW for the American Civil War I'll probably try and post something on my blog soon about this concept.
Dave,
DeleteCheers! It certainly does seem to add something to the basic rules.
If you take away the AFV bonuses, the list of bonuses and penalties I outlined in my earlier blog post should be applicable to the ACW. I look forward to seeing how you have adapted the PNW rules.
All the best,
Bob
Hi. Just to say that your Portable Wargames are a real boon! However, I am a little confused about the underlying thoughts about some of the characteristics. Strength Points (like Hit Points in role playing games) are a useful abstraction to simplify the weakening of a unit until it suddenly ceases to be combat effective. Similarly, the idea of Exhaustion reflects the diminishment of intrigity/cohesion at a higher organisational level. But I'm a little unsure about how the two link together?
ReplyDeleteFor example, a panzer division that loses 9 SP fairly evenly spread across the units though with no unit falling below 2 SP would still be at full combat effectiveness but unable to advance. Whereas a panzer division that lost both of it's panzer regiments would have it's combat effectiveness severely reduced yet it would retain its operational functionality.
Should the catastrophic loss of combat effectiveness have a greater impact on the higher organisation?
Krhysd,
DeleteThanks for you comment and question.
Think of the Exhaustion Point as representing not just the degradation of a unit’s fighting strength in terms of men and equipment, but also in its supplies of ammunition and fuel and the general fighting fatigue of its personnel. Therefore a panzer division can still fight on once it has reached its Exhaustion Point but cannot mount any offensive action.
In real life very few units are ever wiped out, but once they reach a certain level of losses, they become offensively ineffective.
I hope that explains the thinking behind the rules.
All the best,
Bob
Bob,
DeleteThanks for taking the time to respond.
I concur with your view on the role of the Exhaustion Point reflecting the current integrity of the higher organisation and that the loss of its constituent units' SP can be seen as a reasonable reflection of the body's coherency. However, it feels that a unit that has its combat effectiveness broken to the extent it's no longer present in the fight should have an impact on the higher organisation greater than just the loss of one SP. For example, I would expect seeing the remnants of a panzer regiment 'retiring with haste' from the battlefield would generate far more alarm and confusion amongst the rest of the division than the awareness that the regiment was in the middle of a gun fight with a bunch of T34s.
I don't have a clear way of resolving this though it could involve an additional SP factor against the Exhaustion Point (either one SP for each 'neutralised' unit or doubling the unit's SP impact on the EP or somewhere inbetween.)
Good lick with your continued exploration of PW,
Kev
Krhysd (Kev),
DeleteI always try to respond to comments, both out of a sense of politeness and respect for the person who has set aside time to make a comment.
There is no reason why you cannot experiment with adding an additional penalty to a formation’s Exhaustion Point for the total loss of a unit. Give it a go, and see if it feels right for you.
My PW rules are not set in stone, and are designed for users to adapt to suit their own requirements … so please feel free to do so!
All the best,
Bob