(03-01-2010, 02:54 AM)greg Wrote: Okyour right.

(03-02-2010, 03:42 PM)deathrider6 Wrote: Nice work putting all of this together. :bow:

My hats off to you.

BTW...The US Army Berlin Brigade was never flagged as the 199th Infantry Brigade. It was always just the US Army Berlin Brigade from its activation in 1963 too when it closed shop in 1994. The 199th Infantry Brigade was active from 1966 to 1970 when it was sent to Vietnam. It was also active a short while from 1991 to 1992 as a headquarters over the reminder of the 9th Infantry Division.:soap:

Cheers

(02-27-2010, 09:18 AM)tazaaron Wrote: HaHa, i knew what you were talking about, the problem lies in TOW/Milan launchers overall in the scenario, yes some had thermal for sure and yes some didnt have thermal and alot of times in the same unit, OVERALL theres no way to tell who had what and who didnt so to keeps things nice in even nobody gets them. That makes it simple because if i give them to someone somebody will ask why these other guys didnt get them.
Aaron

Quote:(The TOW2 missile itself did have better thermal quality's then the ITOW.)

(03-06-2010, 12:44 AM)JDR Dragoon Wrote:

(02-27-2010, 09:18 AM)tazaaron Wrote: HaHa, i knew what you were talking about, the problem lies in TOW/Milan launchers overall in the scenario, yes some had thermal for sure and yes some didnt have thermal and alot of times in the same unit, OVERALL theres no way to tell who had what and who didnt so to keeps things nice in even nobody gets them. That makes it simple because if i give them to someone somebody will ask why these other guys didnt get them.
Aaron

Ah, I see. That is certainly a consistent way to seperate between who gets or doesn´t get TIS, although perhaps a bit rough and ready and not really capable of much nuance :cool2:

With regard to your inquiry into the number of launchers in the danish army:

-Mid 1970s: Initial delivery was 28 launchers (of type M151 named "Raketstyr M/74") mounted on Ford MUTT M151 type jeeps. Most of these went to AT Company of the 1st Zealand Brigade. Later all of these vehicles were consolidated in the 1st and 2nd Zealand Brigades.

-Mid-late 1970s: Further delivery of another 56 launchers of the above mentioned type. This time mounted on APC M113 in the cargo hatch. AFAIK distributed evenly to all 5 AT Brigade Companies then in existence.

-Late 1970s-early 1980s: A further 78 launchers (this time mounted on Land Rover ½ Tons). Also distributed evenly to the Brigade AT Companies with some platoons being farmed out to Motorized Infantry battalions as well.

-Early 1980s: Brigade level AT companies abolished. All TOW vehicles farmed out to battalions as follows: Each Armor Btn= 1 platoon of 4 M113 w. TOW. Each Mech Inf Btn= 1 plt of 4 M113 w. TOW, 1 plt. of 4 light vehicles (Jeep/LARO) w. TOW. Each MOTINF Btn in the active structure=1 platoon of 4 TOW on light vehicles.

-This makes for a total of 162 launchers or a total of 40 platoons w. 4 vehicles each: 7 platoons w. M151 Jeeps, 19 platoons w. LARO and 14 platoons w. M113.

-This breaks down as follows:

56 M113/TOW:
-4 vehicles to each armor btn (5 armor btns in the army as a whole, one for each brigade)= 20 vehicles accounted for.
-4 vehicles to each MechInf Btn (9 of these in the army, 2 in each of the 5 brigades apart from the 2nd Zealand Brigade which has 1 MOTINF Btn and 1 Mech Btn instead of 2 Mech Btns)
-All 56 vehicles accounted for.

28 Jeep/Tow:
1st Zealand Brigade needs 16 (1 platoon in each of the MechInf Btns, 2 platoons as Brigade AT reserve

-2nd Zealand Brigade also needs 16 of these vehicles to cover its AT needs (1 platoon in the MechInf Btn, 1 Platoon in the MotInf Btn,2 platoons as Brigade AT reserve), but can only get 12. The last platoon (likely the one in the MOTINF Btn, II GHR) would have had LAROs.

78 LARO/Tow:
-2 of them likely reserves or at the Army Weapons School in Oksbøl.
-The MotInf Btn in the 2nd Zealand Brigade needs 1 platoon.
-Each of the 3 Jutland Brigades needs 4 platoons (1 in each MechInf btn, 2 at Brigade level as AT reserve).
-Each of the MOTINF Btns in the Jutland Battlegroup needs a platoon.
-Both MOTINF Btns in the Bornholm battlegroup needs a platoon.
-That leaves one platoon free. I suspect it would have been used to equip a MotInf Btn. Either II FLR (mobile reserve formation for the island of Funen) or III SJLR (4 Zealand Battlegroup, the only one of the Zeland Battlegroups that was semi-mobile).

-The upgrade program for the launchers (to upgrade them from M151 (M/74) to M220 (M/87), the latter capable of firing TOW-2) including Thermal Sights starts in 1984. It is finished in 1987 with the upgrade of all launchers to M220 status. An order is also placed for TOW-2 missiles at the same time, but I do not think a sufficient stock were built up of these before the early 1990s, so the main missile fired would likely have been ITOW. But all launchers had been upgraded to fire TOW-2 by 1987.

Quote:(The TOW2 missile itself did have better thermal quality's then the ITOW.)

Undeniably. The improved beacon in the tail of the TOW 2 made it much less susceptible to being lost by the thermal sights tracker when flying through dust, haze and fog.

A little observation I have done:

-Those austrian turrets have very high HA values and TIS. This means, that they will also have a very high VP value (129 VPs for each turret counter irregardless of strenght). There are a little over 25 of these counters in the game, making all the turrets worth about 3225 points. IN addition are the points to be gained from the infantry in the hex as well, so lets call it an even 4000 VPs to be gained here. This makes it possible for a wily WAPA player to target these structures and their occupants for destruction in a methodical manner, with the sole purpose of racking up a postive VP score. 4000 extra points to WAPA can make all the difference in a close run game.

An obvious solution might be to lower HA values for the turrets. These turrets were meant as blocking positions astride major lines of communication, not as the Maginot Line part 2. I am not suggesting you change anything drastically, but since you want objective hexes to matter more than losses, this matter about the austrian turrets might be food for thought?

(03-06-2010, 08:55 AM)tazaaron Wrote: As for the Austrian Turrets the downfall for the WP player to sit around and take them out one by one just gives the NATO player that much more time to get his reinforcements up and have even a bigger surprise waiting for the WP.

(03-09-2010, 11:29 PM)JDR Dragoon Wrote:

(03-06-2010, 08:55 AM)tazaaron Wrote: As for the Austrian Turrets the downfall for the WP player to sit around and take them out one by one just gives the NATO player that much more time to get his reinforcements up and have even a bigger surprise waiting for the WP.

Okay. But I could see a situation where WAPA might actually gamble on choosing the strategy option that denies NATO the italian and spanish troops in order to take advantage of this, in order to slowly, systematically and economically gobble up Austria in order to get ahead in VPs due to attrition postive to WAPA (most other NATO reinforcements will be occupied farther to the north and will likely not be able to reinforce a beleaguered Austria, much less prepare any surprises).

(03-10-2010, 06:57 AM)tazaaron Wrote: I never thought Austria would survive anyways, there was no plans for NATO to hold at the Danube except for maybe 2 days.

Aaron

(03-12-2010, 09:47 AM)Monter Wrote: Hi, is it normal that 5.Kp/Pionier 620 has 109 vehicles? (BoB 4.6.1)