New Finnish OOB

[Zipuli]

Koh said:
I must say, this is quite impressive. You've clearly put a lot of work in this and as far as I can tell the formations are way more accurate than in the standard OOB. I was thinking of doing one of these myself so I wouldn't have to change things manually every time I create a scenario for myself to enjoy, but with this I don't have to. Just a few questions and suggestions for the hopefully upcoming new version:

- Special Jaegers are classed as commandos, which is of course accurate, but given how they are also para trained would paratroops be a more appropriate classification? I mean as far as I know, commandos don't get the "less casualties while paradropping" bonus. And the commandos bonus for passing difficult terrain is, from what I've experienced, really not that useful.

- The infantry and jaeger (90, not 05) formations have radios way too often. The only radios they have are the FO radios and a few others in a company. Now I keep seeing radios on individual squads way too often. Is this a balancing issue?

- 95 S 58-61M platoons should actually have four apilas patrols. And speaking of APILAS patrols, the amount of APILAS and KES seem to be reversed. Shouldn't they be carrying 3 APILAS and 6 KES? Again, this seems to be a balancing issue as 6 HEAT seems to be the standard load for anti tank patrols, but wouldn't the KES rounds compensate for this?

- Also on the topic of 95 S 58-61M, I read that you are planning on adding laser range finders for 95 S 58-61Ms. However even if they would be issued those, it would be one per platoon. Both mustis having them would be somewhat wrong. But then again, most of the possible target areas would probably be pre-sighted before the battle so that wouldn't actually be so wrong.

- Infantry and Infantry Bn AT Companies lack their AAMGs. Infantry company has two, AT Company three. Adding them shouldn't upset the balance too much and would also give them some of the much needed close range anti air defence.

And as a final note, I really enjoyed the scenarios you made for this OOB. The terrain and usage of troops was amongst the most realistic ones I've seen in scenarios involving Finland.

And Jaeger Business really, really reminded me an awful lot of an attack excercise we did in the army. My money is on you based this on something you yourself did once.

Looking forward for the next version
- Koh

Thanks, I really have put some time and thought on this one...

-Good point about the specjgrs... I really haven't used them so they had less attention from me
-The makers stated that "radio" is used not only for the radio itself, but also to represent certain leadership attributes... So the current numbers are there to "simulate" good leadership instead of having a radio in your back. In one of the first versions I had realistic radio numbers, but changed when I read about the full meaning of "radio"
-About APILAS -patrols, yes, it's a balancing issue. All finnish infantry RPG -numbers are what I find best balance between "what they really carry" and "what they have with them". I think an example is needed here: An APILAS patrol usually would actually carry 3 APILAS and 3 KES, as more than that quite well immobilizes you. But the rest of the weapons are somewhere close by where you will get them quickly -> in attack they are in the APC/IFV or truck that moves with you, or with the company's supply-platoon (that the game doesn't model) that moves with the company's attack. In prep defence there are the ammo "foxholes" and so on. So a patrol has more ammo ready in few seconds than they actually carry on their backs. I use 6 APILAS and 3 KES as it's the APILAS that is the main weapon and KES would be most likely in the sections rather than the "mules" carrying them APILAS and AT-mines etc.
-About the Musti LRF, it adds a lot to the price of the unit (my current version in development has them) but also makes first-shot hit propability a lot higher - as it should be as those weapons are not (anymore) used in attack but rather in prep defence where ranges are pre-measured either by the weapon crew or the supporting FOs. Also now that Musti is making a come back in the training I suppose LRFs are not out of the question. Anyways they also can be understood more of the defence preparations than physical LRF in hand of the weapon commander...
-True about the AAMGs, I've added and deleted them every now and then because I cannot decide which is the best way, as especially the jaeger formations (org 90-91) do have them, but wether they are installed on the Pasi's or mounts depends on mission, leader, situation etc. -> I will look into this
-"My money is on you based this on something you yourself did once." Money well placed

After a longer pause again, now that v.4.0 is out, I will update the OOB with some stuff, including anything v4.0 has added - I haven't yet installed the newest version... Downloading now.

Zip

PS. I will also take a critical look at the radios, again as I noticed while playing that there is a big change in how the game now plays!

[Koh]

When you put it that way, the amount of APILAS does make sense. I had something like that in my mind when I was trying to justify a two-man patrol carrying six APILAS in the standard OOB.

On the topic of laser rangefinders, they definitely are not out of the question at least. The Musti companies currently trained have one LRF assigned to them. Giving them to both Mustis would probably be the only reasonably simple way to simulate their use in pre-sighting targets. The older Musti units would probably have to do without LRFs.

Oh and one more thing about Mustis. The OOB currently has their max range as 700 meters which is probably what it was in the standard OOB too, while mil.fi lists the effective range as 1000 meters.

And a few words about XP/morale bonuses. This probably doesn't affect gameplay too much, but PzJaeg/Mech seems to be missing the standard +2/+1 bonus you've given to operational units. Also sissi troops have a bonus of +10/+3 while recce units have +3/+3. Given how the sissi and recce guys are pretty much identical in training, maybe they'd deserve a similar bonus? And then there's the Coastal Jaegers who according to themselves at least are some sort of an elite unit. And apparently according to regular navy infantry are quite the opposite

And for some reason the Artillery Bn and Artillery Bty have a +5/+5 bonus. This was present in the standard OOB too and I have no idea what it is supposed to represent.

Oh and one more thing. I'm not sure if you've heard about the somewhat new Special Frontier Jaegers. I guess adding them to the OOB would be somewhat problematic as their organization is probably not public at the moment. For more info: Raja.fi


Keep up the good work, I'm eagerly waiting for a new version for SPMBT v 4.0. I'm holding off updating the main game before I can get a new version of your OOB
- Koh

[Zipuli]

-Musti range is same as default OOB, this is also true to other weapons, such as APILAS, KES, etc. etc. not to "break" the game's "inbuilt balance" (french Apilas has same range as Finnish etc.)
-I have given the +2/+1 not to all operational units, but only readiness brigade units. Jaeger Brigades (90/91) are also operational units, as were the armoured brigades. I gave it only because readiness brigades have a lot higher amount of professional soldiers and also the troops are the youngest (=less time from conscript training period) and ought to be (knocking wood) most important troops in future refresher training
-I may tone down the sissi's bonuses to match recce, not the other way round... If I change something.
-Coastal Jaegers say they are an elite because they do something that no one else does, speak Swedish I really don't see a reason to promote them, maybe in modern times give them +2/+1 as they seem to adapt to similar system as the readiness brigades when it comes to troops' age and number of professionals...
-Arty bonuses came with the game, propably to represent the well known Finnish Artillery accuracy/firing method training (that has to do with the whole artillery system) - my OOB also brings the quite unique FO system to the game, at least in some sence...
-SFJ's, heard of them, seen them in action too... I think they go well under both sissi and spec jaeger, but do not deserve units of their own, as their organization is not public. They're same sort of special unit as Special Jaeger Battalion (except spec jaegers are NOT conscripts, like paras, divers and SFJ's), but instead of jumping out of perfectly fine planes and choppers, they may do more long range recce -oriented stuff?
-Don't hold your breath mate, next version may take a while. I am currently very busy with real life stuff and also (when I got time) trying to experiment with "realistic-radio-numbers" (tm) for the OOB and see how the game reacts to that. If you want to be of help, please do browse through the text files in the latest version and fix errors and typos, which are plenty , or give your e-mail address to me and playtest the current version I have now. That version has most of the stuff OOB-wise done (plus currently has the radio test going), but I have yet to test it and finish all the other stuff (texts etc.).

Zip

[Koh]

- I noticed that in the last version of your OOB only 05 Brigades had the morale/xp bonuses, but in the current version Jaeger Brigade 90/91s and Navy Jaegers have them too. From what you wrote I can only assume this was unintentional. The 05 Brigades probably deserve their bonuses, but what about infantry formations. In all honesty, most of them would probably deserve some penalties. While at least some of the intantry battlegroups are somewhat recently trained (I know a few guys who were trained to become an infantry BG last year during their conscript service), most of the infantry formations are probably +35 reservists with 2 professional soldiers/battalion.
- While the arty bonuses probably do represent the fast response times and accuracy of the Finnish artillery, it leaves me somewhat puzzled as Heavy Art Bn and Bty and all mortar formations lack the same bonuses that they'd probably deserve.

As much as I'd like to help more, I'm really busy myself with several exams coming up fast. I'm just going to have to settle with bothering you here occasionally
- Koh

[Koh]

I installed the new version and couldn't notice any changes. Are you sure you uploaded the correct file?

Also 298 RSRAKH 06? Wouldn't 227 RSRAKH 06 make more sense? I've also heard 227 RAKH 07 being used, but that doesn't sound correct to me.

- Koh

[Koh]

Nevermind, I just noticed that the new version is not quite out yet. But why on earth can't I edit my post. I know I edited it before, it even says so, but the edit post button has disappeared. So yeah, sorry for double posting. But the RSRAKH question still stands.

Huh, so apparently you can only edit your messages for 30 minutes after they have been posted. That's... impractical?

[Zipuli]

The info is from newest issue of Panssari -magazine. It appears the naming "298" comes from the diameter of the launcher tube, not the rocket. 06 due to it being purchased 2006, though the system arrived to Finland in 2007 (with 7 vehicles delivered to date).

Zip

[Koh]

I guess that makes sense. It's gonna take a while to get used to that, given how for the last two years or so people have been referring to it as some variation of 227 RSRAKH. Boy are they gonna run into trouble when they buy the ATACMS system for those. How on earth can they name a system that has two different launcher tubes for different kind of munitions

[Koh]

One possible suggestion for the next version. I've heard from a few second-hand sources that nowadays BV/Nasu equipped platoons have three Bandvagens or Nasus. Since you seem to have a lot of sources avalaible to you, maybe you could look into it.

At least one thing that would hint towards is that someone I know who served as a driver just recently had a refresher training exercise, and he was informed that there are new limits to transporting troops with the Nasu-vehicle. The limit of troops allowed in one vehicle during peace time was so low (ten, I believe) that at least in peace time it would be impossible to transport a jaeger platoon with just two of the vehicles.

[Zipuli]

Yeah, those new limitations really make some things difficult. But during war time I believe these limitations are again forgotten. The reason to believe this is that we haven't bought new vehicles to compensate the "lack" of transportation capability after these limitations were introduced. It's the same thing as with other things not allowed to do during piece time, but allowed during war - like firing an APILAS without flak jacket and active+plugs ear protection is a no no nowadays :S