[WarInEur] RE: reconciling production systems with actual units formed and trained

[Wardall Clark]

> From: "Kent & Sue Haunschild" <kentsue at cox.net>> Subject: [WarInEur] France 1940 German OOB> > In the 1939 campaign CWIE1 substituted three 5-5 Mtn for three of the 6-5's. However, when starting the game in 1940 Greg failed to follow through and all the units are shown as 6-5's once again. This is rather unimportant except when playing with the additional units option, in which case I'd assume players would want to start with them on the map.> > Question- for CWIE2 do players want a scenario with the three 5-5's substituted once again?
 
BIG YES on this one,  1) the Axis needs every air portable units it can get, otherwise Sea Lion is a pretty much an empty threat and 
the british can reinforce North Africa far faster than the Axis can hope to do. 
2) Such units might come in handier in a Balkans Campaign than three 6-5s would.
In so far as these light divisions really did exist, they belong in the OOBs for 1939, 1940
and so forth. 
 
> Kent & Sue Haunschild <kentsue at cox.net> wrote:> Well I always include the AMPH through 9/42 and the 8-10 on 5/42. Not sure what cadre the US should start with though I think there should be a couple 4-4's but if so then the 8-10 on 5/42 goes away.> > > This query refers to the comparison of using the turn track Allied reinforcements as opposed to the Allied production spiral. A schedule is given in the rules to allow units to arrive in the first few months of 1942 to simulate the availability of US units that could not have been produced in time to meet the historical schedule (largely 2APs per month); they are simply placed on the spiral and do not have to be 'produced'. However, some units that should arrive if you use the historical reinforcement schedule cannot possibly be built in time with the limited production/personnel points available for the US. Is this deliberate? Comments.
 
 
Regarding US reinforcements and builds:
There nearly always seems to be a problem that when SPI or Decision games draws up a table 
of "in progress" productions, they include only expected final units;  the building blocks for those units 
always seemed to be left out.  As a result the time factor and step-by-step cost factors for making a 
multi-staqe units such as a Panzer Division or Us Motorized Infantry Division never seems to be taken 
properly into account. 
 
Personally, I think that the entire Production systems for Germany, the US and UK need to be reverse-engineered to 
acheive the historical results and only then should the players be given the slack to improvise. By that I mean that 
there should be all and only enough points and production facilities to make the historical builds. Like Kent I think that 
WIE can't be simulating production of game OOBs unless it can simulate production of the historical OOBS. 
 
One reason this is such a critical issue is that Game strategy is greatly dictated by the Order of Battle. If you can't 
assemble an OOB to make the strategy viable, then you have to reject that strategy.   Some of us, such as Jean Marc
Cardin want WIE to simulate the operational decisions faced by the field commanders. Thus for him, the OOBs should be
as close to the actual OOB even if this means a rigid counter mix that completely rules out using the Production system to 
create a non historical OOB for any of the major combatants.  I, on the other hand, want to straight-jacket the inputs 
for production rather than the outputs.  
 
I don't know exactly how WIE should encorparate this, but it seems obvious that Production/Arms points do not represent something that could just as easily make up an AirPoint as a 10-8 or IRP.The Germans didn't make more Armored Divisions because their tank production wasn't big enough;   Rather than having a counter limit, I would have maximum build guidelines--that is, between date X and date Y the axis can produce no more than N SURFS, M 10-8s, etc.     
BOB in Louisville 
_________________________________________________________________
How well do you know your celebrity gossip?
http://originals.msn.com/thebigdebate?ocid=T002MSN03N0707A
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.halisp.net/pipermail/warineur/attachments/20080327/a6b38438/attachment.html