Soviet OOB 11: miscellaneous observations

[Griefbringer]

1.) Carry capacities for some vehicles

a.) Unit 16 (M3s) has carry capacity 12. This should probably be 13, like other medium tanks.

b.) Unit 162 (IS-II) has carry capacity 13, even though being mine clearing tank. Should probably be 0.

c.) Unit 655 (T-26 Dozer) has carry capacity 6, even though it is engineer tank. Should probably be 0.

d.) Unit 224 (T26 M1933) has carry capacity 3. Should probably be 6, like other T-26 tanks.

e.) Unit 339 (T-27) has carry capacity 103, while classed as artillery prime mover. Considering the small size of the vehicle, this might be realistic, but makes the vehicle relatively useless as artillery tractor. Giving it carry capacity 106 would allow it to haul various light guns around the place.

f.) SU-85, SU-85M and SU-100 (units 33, 34, 193, 194, 195, 652) all have carry capacity 6. Considering that these vehicles were all built on T-34 chassis (like SU-122), I think it would be reasonable to give them carry capacity 13.

[Griefbringer]

2.) Ammo loadout inconsistencies for some MG units

a.) Maxim HMG units have different ammo loadouts for main weapons as follows:
- Unit 57 (Maxim HMG[2]) ammo 120 per MG
- Unit 443 (Maxim HMG[3]) ammo 90 per MG
- Unit 610 (Maxim HMG[1)] ammo 90 per MG
I would suggest setting these all to 90.

b.) SG43 MMG units also have different ammo loadouts:
- Unit 58 (SG43 MMG[2]) ammo 120 per MG
- Unit 442 (SG43 MMG [3]) ammo 90 per MG
- Unit 612 (SG43 MMG [1]) ammo 90 per MG
I would suggest setting these all to 90.

c.) DT AAMG units also have different ammo loadouts:
- Unit 192 (DT AAMG[1]) ammo 120 per MG
- Unit 441 (DT AAMG{3]) ammo 90 per MG
I would suggest setting these both to the same value, though I am not sure whether that should be 90 or 120.

[Griefbringer]

3.) Support weapon placement in some infantry companies

a.) Formation 106 (Guards Mech Co) has support assets (MG section, two anti-tank teams and two halftracks) attached to the third platoon, rather than to company HQ.

b.) Formation 290 (Mountain Co) has MG section attached to the third platoon rather than to company HQ.

[Griefbringer]

4.) Comments on some AT formations:

a.) Formation 72 (Rgt Inf-AT Co) has currently a rifle squad as company HQ. However, according to Zaloga's Red Army Handbook the company HQs for these formations were pretty spartan, e.g. just four men in December 1942 TOE. Thus, I would suggest changing the company HQ to a scout squad, as is the case with platoon HQs. Gamewise, this would also make company HQ size 0 like the rest of the company.

b.) Formation 73 (Inf-AT Sec/M) is probably misnamed, and should be called platoon (Pl) instead of section (Sec). The HQ unit seems to be rifle squad, this could be changed to scout squad like for the foot AT rifle platoons. Finally, the three trucks are all attached to the third section, they could instead be each attached directly to a different section.

c.) Formation 180 (Hvy AT-Gun Bty) and formations 181-183 (Hvy AT-Gun Pl) have currently six guns per battery and three guns per platoon. However, the historical strenght for such formations was four guns per battery and two guns per platoon (according to Zaloga's Red Army Handbook).

[Griefbringer]

5.) Comments on some artillery formations:

a.) Formation 217 (Guards IG Sec) and 218 (Guards IG Pl) should have same size as non-guards infantry gun units: 2 guns for platoon, 1 gun for section.

b.) Formations 53 (Guard Mortar Bn), 109 (Guard Mortar Pl) and 110 (Guard Mortar By) seem to be stronger than the actual historical formations. According to Zaloga, such a battery should have four launch-vehicles (currently eight), which makes a platoon two vehicles. Battalions consisted of two, or in some cases three, batteries. (Please notice that those formations only apply to the vehicle-mounted versions, ground-mounted launchers seem to have different organisation though Zaloga does not provide much detail on it.)

[Griefbringer]

6.) Comments on some off-map artillery formations:

a.) Formation 55 (Lt Howitzer Bn) contains currently 4 batteries. Pretty much all the light artillery battalions feature 3 batteries, the only exception being a 2 battery version (which formed one third of the battalion in infantry divisions for a while, see also next comment). So I would suggest changing this formation into three battery format.

b.) Formation 58 (Artillery Rgt) contains 8 batteries. Infantry division indeed fielded such formations (consisting of 5 batteries of 76.2 mm guns and 3 batteries of 122 mm howitzers, and organised into three battalions) but only for part of the war. I would suggest changing the availability dates for this formation to be from 4/42 until 12/44.

[Griefbringer]

7.) Comments on anti-aircraft formations:

a.) Formations 111 (AA Gun Battery) and 19 (AAA platoon) contain currently 6 and 3 guns, respectively. While 6 gun batteries indeed existed for a while in infantry divisions, 4 gun battery structure was continously in use through the whole war. In either case, platoons were 2 guns each.

Possible suggestions:
- Changing formation 19 from three to two guns (and maybe re-naming it as "AA Gun Platoon" for the sake of consistency)
- Changing availability dates of formation 111 to be from 8/41 until 12/42
- Introducing new AA gun battery formation with four guns, available from 9/39 until 12/46

b.) Formations 18 (SPAA section) and 20 (SPAA Platoon) currently contain two and four vehicles, respectively. While I have no hard evidence, I would presume that SP AA guns would follow the same organisational model as regular AA guns (4 guns per battery).

However, truck mounted AAMGs seem to have employed different organisational model, being typically organised into platoons of three vehicles. These could be found attached to a number of formations (such as infantry regiment), or organised into companies (with two, three or even six platoons per company).

If you want to take into consideration the difference between SP AA guns and SP AAMGs, this will require using different unit type and formation for each. My suggestions in this case would be as follows:

- Formation 18 is renamed "SPAA Platoon" and availability dates adjusted to be from 1/42 to 12/46 (matching availability of unit 40 (GAZ-AA-37).
- Formation 20 is renamed "SPAA Battery" and availability dates adjusted to be from 1/42 to 12/46 (matching availability of unit 40 (GAZ-AA-37).

- Units 39 (GAZ-AAMG), 133 (GAZ-DShK AAMG-3) and 590 (Gaz DShK AAMG) are adjusted to a new unit class, such as 181 (AA Truck).
- Furthermore, unit 590 (Gaz DShK AAMG) should have its availability adjusted in order not to leave gap. Based on Zaloga it seems to me that this unit could be set to be available as early as 9/39.
- And finally, a new formation (SP AAMG platoon) should be added, with availability from 6/37 until 12/46, and containing three vehicles (unit 39).

I am afraid that this is quite a lot of fiddling, but I think that moving the SP AAMGs into their own formation would be useful, especially since these sort of AAMGs platoons tend to pop up as part of a number of other formations. However, if you feel this is too much work for limited gain, feel free to ignore this part.

[DRG]

The issue with moving AAMG's to their own class is unless the picklists are adjusted the AI will never pick them......right now it will

[Griefbringer]

I must admit that I had not considered AI picklists. Probably quite important when it comes to Soviet forces, where AA-weapons are quite rare outside dedicated AA-units.

(This is quite a doctrinal difference from e.g. US approach, where AAMGs were liberally sprinkled to vehicles all over the place, including a portion of trucks and jeeps.)

[Griefbringer]

8.) Conscript co (formation 115) has morale modifier of -10, while Conscript Pl (formation 134) has morale modifier of -8. I presume both should be the same.