Unit Focus: Headquarters (Aug 2)

[Heinz57]

Two types of Headquarters Icons are represented in TOAW - one is represented with a checkered box and the other by "HQ" (as shown on page 41 in the manual).

The Checkered HQ is typically used to represent higher headquarters - Corps HQ, Army HQ, Army Group and Front Headquarters. They may or may not have units directly subordinate to them, which will show in their Formation Report. In most cases the units assigned to them will be support units (artillery, various engineers).

The standard HQ icon, as designated by "HQ", is most frequently assigned to division and brigade level formations. Units of a division are either directly subordinate to their Division HQ or modelled to demonstrate specific deployment doctrines, advantages or limitations - reflecing in Formation Support Levels (Internal, Army, Force or Free).

Both types of Headquarters may serve several functions:
1. All HQ's provide a supply bonus to adjacent friendly units with which it cooperates (per formation support levels). If Support Squads are included in its TO&E (Unit Report) - it's effectiveness in supply distribution is measured according to the number of Support Squads it has in relation to what it is authorized to have.
2. Frequently, HQ's will include Command Groups in their TO&E. In these cases, HQ's also serve a Command & Control function. HQ's that are attacked and lose its command groups may be force its entire formation into reorganization - effective in the next turn.
3. Frequently, HQ's will include artillery in their Unit Report. In such cases, HQ's serve the same role as a unit with the artillery icon - providing combat support to cooperating units within the range of its artillery. It is useful to examine the types of artillery present as the range of each type of artillery may vary.
4. HQ's also frequently include engineering assets. In most cases, the engineering ability of a HQ will be less than a regular engineer unit, owing to number of assigned engineer squads. Railroad repair and ferry engineers may be present further expanding their engineering capabilities. Where present, and where really needed, HQ's can apply their abilities to build bridges or use its ferry engineering ability to help units cross a river - reducing movement costs.
5. HQ's may include military police squads. These help reduce the costs of movement of units through overstacked hexes.

In addition to these possibilities, HQ's have "Rear Guard ability". Units moving out of a hex within an enemy Zone of Control (i.e. adjacent to an enemy unit) may suffer a "disengagement attack". However, you can use a HQ to move into the hex you want to evacuate, move the first unit out and follow it with the HQ, and both units will avoid the disengagement penalty. The important note on this is to ensure that a) the HQ has the movement points needed to get back to a safe area, and b) that the HQ is the last unit to evacuate a hex and that it moves directly into a hex with a friendly unit.

-------------
Everyone's welcome to add more information or ask questions!

[Heldenkaiser]

I have a question on this - but I am not sure it's directly related. Feel free to tell me to move it to a different thread, if necessary.

Here goes ... Am I right in understanding that the OOB in TOAW is essentially "flat" in that there are only two levels of command - "unit" and "formation". A "unit" is a single map counter, and a "formation" is a group of such counters that becomes highlighted when selecting a counter from that group. The counters of such a group all cooperate with each other, regardless of their "support" definition.

Now, there are assets like higher HQs and units that form a formation together with them, such as artillery, AA etc. These assets, in 2WIN, always seem to have an "army" support scope so that they can cooperate with everyone else with the same icon colour. Correct so far?

Now the question ... aside from "formation" on the one hand and support scope on the other hand, there is nothing else that would define cooperation. The actual OOB has no significance whatsoever, is that right? In other words, other than my wargamer's sense of historical accuracy, there is nothing that would induce me to use the divisional HQ (and supporting assets) of Panzer Lehr to actually support Panzer Lehr teeth arm units instead of, say, units of the 6. Fallschirmjäger or some sedentary infantry division. The division, at the scale of 2WIN, has no meaning whatsoever. Nor has corps, or army. Panzergruppe West HQ is nothing but "some HQ" - with army support scope, to be sure. But so is any divisional HQ on the map.

Am I right or wrong? Thanks! :rolleyes:

[Heinz57]

Now the question ... aside from "formation" on the one hand and support scope on the other hand, there is nothing else that would define cooperation. The actual OOB has no significance whatsoever, is that right? In other words, other than my wargamer's sense of historical accuracy, there is nothing that would induce me to use the divisional HQ (and supporting assets) of Panzer Lehr to actually support Panzer Lehr teeth arm units instead of, say, units of the 6. Fallschirmjäger or some sedentary infantry division. The division, at the scale of 2WIN, has no meaning whatsoever. Nor has corps, or army. Panzergruppe West HQ is nothing but "some HQ" - with army support scope, to be sure. But so is any divisional HQ on the map.

Am I right or wrong?

Best to tackle this first. Essentially, you are correct. Aside from historical accuracy in the OOB, there is nothing to prohibit the grouping together of different units which cooperate with each other. In example, you could take 6th FJ, add LXXXIV Corps and its artillery, and 1/22nd Panzer Bn and you have an authentic Kampfgruppe. While 6th FJ is on Internal Support, everything else is on Army Support - everything has the same background and icon colors, and so no one suffers any penalties on the attack, or defense.

More to follow shortly...

[Heinz57]

Here goes ... Am I right in understanding that the OOB in TOAW is essentially "flat" in that there are only two levels of command - "unit" and "formation". A "unit" is a single map counter, and a "formation" is a group of such counters that becomes highlighted when selecting a counter from that group. The counters of such a group all cooperate with each other, regardless of their "support" definition.

Now, there are assets like higher HQs and units that form a formation together with them, such as artillery, AA etc. These assets, in 2WIN, always seem to have an "army" support scope so that they can cooperate with everyone else with the same icon colour. Correct so far?


Correct. A number of permutations are possible, but the effect is essentially the same.

Divisions (and most units) can be represented in three different ways:

A) A Division can be a single unit combining all elements of the division in one counter;
B) A Division can be any number of units all in the same formation;
C) A Division can be represented by multiple formations - which is how it is represented in Two Weeks in Normandy.

Units within a formation may benefit from any friendly, cooperating headquarters; but they are only adversely impacted by the loss of their own immediate parent headquarters (if they have one). They are not impacted by what happens to the Corps HQ, the Army HQ, or Army Group HQ.

The relationship of different formations in the OOB is for historical purposes, or the purposes of the designer. But one formation does not wield influence over another.

[Heinz57]

It is appropriate to note that there is a maximum of 32 units possible in a formation; it is best to never use more than 31 as using all formation slots can produce weird things...

[Heldenkaiser]

The relationship of different formations in the OOB is for historical purposes, or the purposes of the designer. But one formation does not wield influence over another.

That was my understanding. Thanks for clarifying. :)

Could a designer intending to encourage players to keep higher formations together in the game use different counter colour schemes for corps (or divisions) and use "army" support scope, so that only units of the same corps would cooperate? :rolleyes:

[Heinz57]

Yes - that is largely how the allied forces are structured in Two Weeks in Normandy The Americans and British for example have different background colors; and even the Americans landing at Utah have a different color scheme than those landing at Omaha.

Just a generic example:

Army and higher level support units can be any color and set to Free Support.
Corps HQ + Support Units: White Icons on Olive Background on Force Support
Division + Support Units: Black Icons on Olive Background on Army Support
Regimental Combat Teams: Black Icons on Olive Background - Internal Support

Functionally, almost any structure and cooperation level can be modelled in TOAW.

[Heldenkaiser]

Yes - that is largely how the allied forces are structured in Two Weeks in Normandy The Americans and British for example have different background colors; and even the Americans landing at Utah have a different color scheme than those landing at Omaha.

Now that you mention it ... I noticed there was a multitude of colour schemes on the other side of the hill. :o

So this scenario makes it easier for the Germans than for the Allies to mix units from different formations (in the general, not the TOAW sense).

[MarcA]

Are the co-opertaion relationships between unit colour schemes hardcoded or are they set by the scenario designer, with idea that units with similar colour schemes should be set up with some level of cooperation just being an accepted guidline?

[Heinz57]

Cooperation between unit color schemes is hard-coded. The scenario editor has a fairly wide range of background colors to select from, each with several variants of icon color.

[Hank2]

I tried to comprehend all this but i have to ask: So, there is a benefit to keeping a Corp level HQ that has influence or free support functions for a group of divisions close to these Divisions? ... I guess that's retorical or t/f

If so, it would be nice if when you select a Corp HQ that all divisions and units under its control (or influence) would highlight. (i.e., Kursk: the II SS Pz Corp had the 1st, 2nd and 3rd SS Pz Divisions under its command (Hausser); I would like to see all these units highlight if I selected Hausser's icon). ... another 2cents

[Heinz57]

The principal value of a Corp level HQ is as a supplemental presence in lending a boost to supply to adjacent friendly/cooperating units not adjacent to their parent HQ.

You don't necessarily want divisions attached directly to a Corps HQ. When you examine the historical corps affiliations of infantry divisions in WW2 - you will see in an overwhelming number of cases, that divisions became part of one corps for a matter of a few days before being assigned to a different corps, sometimes to a third corps, back to the first and around and around it goes. It may not be problematic for short scenarios, but it is impossible to model historically with any exactitude for longer scenarios.

One example is for the 79th Infantry Division, a little on the extreme side but not untypical of several divisional progressions:

29 May 44 - VII Corps, Third Army
30 Jun 44 - Floating, Third Army
1 Jul 44 - VIII Corps, Third Army
3 Aug 44 - XV Corps, Third Army
26 Aug 44 - XV Corps, First Army
29 Aug 44 - XIX Corps, First Army
7 Sep 44 - XV Corps, Third Army (edited typo)

There are numerous disadvantages to large formations - including the potential for the entire formation to go into reorganization as a consequence of heavy losses of parts of its formation; very substantial drops in proficiency for the whole formation in the event its parent HQ is eliminated. Equally, I think the PO performs better with more detailed orders for smaller formations.

Conceptually, corps level formations as x infantry divisions + y support assets is not really an entity that lives in such a clearly defined form for very long. The design requires formations, and if the base unit is the division, then it does make sense to have the divisions subordinate to a corps HQ/formation. However, if the base unit is a brigade, regiment or battalion, than the sense is for them to be subordinate to a divisional level HQ/formation.

At 2.5 km per hex, we are talking about battalions, as a rule - and with up to 15 battalions per division, and usually 3 or more divisions per corps, plus artillery assets - all those units simply wouldn't fit in one formation, nor would one really want them too.

[Heinz57]

Adding something that might help clarify the role of a Corps HQ, at least as I understand it. Corps are assigned areas of operation, and individual divisions within that area of operation are subordinate to the directives of that Corps commander - for everything from lodging to routes of travel, etc. That switches over to another Corps upon entering a new area of operations.

Most elements of a division will tend to remain the same more than the elements of a corps.

[Heldenkaiser]

Adding something that might help clarify the role of a Corps HQ, at least as I understand it. Corps are assigned areas of operation, and individual divisions within that area of operation are subordinate to the directives of that Corps commander - for everything from lodging to routes of travel, etc. That switches over to another Corps upon entering a new area of operations.

Most elements of a division will tend to remain the same more than the elements of a corps.

That is usually true and has been ever since the static warfare in the trenches in WW1. On the German side at least it became so that a corps HQ was permanently assigned a sector of the frontline. Divisions on the other hand would be rotated into the frontline and back out of it to rest or shifted between sectors of the front as the need arose. So the n-th corps in sector such-and-such might have divisions A, B, C assigned this month, A, C, X next month, and then X, Y, Z in the month after that ... but its boundaries and location would remain the same.

In WW2 I seem to recall there were occasionally such things as complete corps HQ's kept in reserve behind an invasion force for free use with divisions yet to be found when the operational need arose ...

The British after WW2 developed this system to perfection and extended it down to the brigade level. If they needed an overseas intervention force somewhere, they would more often than not build if from scratch from individual elements, say an infantry battalion from Cyprus and another from Hong Kong, an AC squadron from Arabia, a battery from the UK, then add a brigade HQ from Kenya ... and there you go, a perfectly good brigade group for sending it to Kuwait or some other place. :smoke:

[Heldenkaiser]

3. Frequently, HQ's will include artillery in their Unit Report. In such cases, HQ's serve the same role as a unit with the artillery icon - providing combat support to cooperating units within the range of its artillery. It is useful to examine the types of artillery present as the range of each type of artillery may vary.

I have a question on that (rather late) ...

How are HQs with artillery employed? Should they be added to an attack, or should they show up in the "support" panel of the attack planning window?

Does this change any if the artillery range is 1 (as in division scale scenarios)?

Thanks. :)

[Telumar]

I have a question on that (rather late) ...

How are HQs with artillery employed? Should they be added to an attack, or should they show up in the "support" panel of the attack planning window?

Does this change any if the artillery range is 1 (as in division scale scenarios)?

Thanks. :)

Treat them just like a normal artillery unit in this case. It works all the same.

[General Staff]

How are HQs with artillery employed?

Does this change any if the artillery range is 1 (as in division scale scenarios)?
It's a scenario design decision. I hate HQs with arty (I think it should be totally separate) and in fact won't usually play scenarios with them. This obviously reduces the scale of scenarios I play but I believe that's where TOAW should be.

HQ's I believe should have command and supply squads (plus a few other elements as historical) and that was a later (IMO good) development in the system.

2WIN is perhaps a little old in the teeth but I think generally regarded as a classic and in some (or many respects) maybe represents what happened on the day or plus, and I think that's true.

Hope this helps and aside from a good player and some excellent Qs- not to mention your English- I look forward to your first scenario.;) 2Win+?

[Heldenkaiser]

Hope this helps and aside from a good player and some excellent Qs- not to mention your English- I look forward to your first scenario.;) 2Win+?

Geez ... wish I knew how to say Vorschusslorbeeren in English. :shy: :o

<embarrassed silence>

Now on the HQ/arty question - is your objection that the command/supply function requires the HQ in a different place (behind the front line but adjacent) than the arty function (location depending on the range, from 1 to 10 hexes and more). Is that it? Because I believe that's also what causes my confusion. :rolleyes:

[Heldenkaiser]

Treat them just like a normal artillery unit in this case. It works all the same.

I believe G.S. said something about arty with range one better not to be used in a direct fire role - but then I don't think my HQs show up in the support panel, so I am really not sure how to use them in the arty role (at range one hex that is, in division scale scenarios). :rolleyes:

[Telumar]

I believe G.S. said something about arty with range one better not to be used in a direct fire role - but then I don't think my HQs show up in the support panel, so I am really not sure how to use them in the arty role (at range one hex that is, in division scale scenarios). :rolleyes:

You're beginning to confuse me.. Don't use HQs and artillery units with range one artillery in direct support. No, no. Was that what you asked?
When i have HQs with artillery incooperated i use them like a normal HQ directly behind the line to have the supply boost they offer in addition to the fire support.

Vorschusslorbeeren = vielleicht übersetzbar mit to take advance credit for sth.?

[Heldenkaiser]

You're beginning to confuse me.. Don't use HQs and artillery units with range one artillery in direct support. No, no. Was that what you asked?
When i have HQs with artillery incooperated i use them like a normal HQ directly behind the line to have the supply boost they offer in addition to the fire support.

I am probably confusing you because I am so utterly confused ... :shy:

"Don't use them in direct support." Zu Befehl! But then how *should* I use their artillery? :rolleyes:

[Telumar]

I am probably confusing you because I am so utterly confused ... :shy:

"Don't use them in direct support." Zu Befehl! But then how *should* I use their artillery? :rolleyes:

Artillery with range 1 will support any unit adjacent on the defence. When you need their fire support for the attack, put them in the frontline in reserve mode or dig them in. But under no circumstances in direct fire support.
Alle Klarheiten beseitigt?;)

[Heldenkaiser]

Alle Klarheiten beseitigt?;)

Yes! Clear words from an old Frontschwein is what this newbie needs. :D

[Silvanski]

Artillery with range 1 will support any unit adjacent on the defence. When you need their fire support for the attack, put them in the frontline in reserve mode or dig them in. But under no circumstances in direct fire support.
Alle Klarheiten beseitigt?;)

Tactical Reserve will do the trick, genau? Or maybe better to dig'em in so they don't start moving all around the battlefield?

[Telumar]

Tactical Reserve will do the trick, genau? Or maybe better to dig'em in so they don't start moving all around the battlefield?
Tactical reserve is best used if you plan to move your unit after the combat round(s), but dig it in when it comes to the turn's end so that it wouldn't move around on your opponent's turn.
With Range 1 artillery it's the best to put it in the frontline on the attack in reserve mode and in the case of failure move it back one hex and dig it in again.

[General Staff]

Geez ... wish I knew how to say Vorschusslorbeeren in English.
<embarrassed silence>

Now on the HQ/arty question - is your objection that the command/supply function requires the HQ in a different place (behind the front line but adjacent) than the arty function (location depending on the range, from 1 to 10 hexes and more). Is that it? Because I believe that's also what causes my confusion. :rolleyes:

1) I'm guessing here but I'd say 'A last beer before you are shot' or maybe in English it could be 'A last cigarette', with maybe some decorum and flourish in both cases. The end result is usually the same.

2) On HQ/Arty, since it's often been regarded as the King or Queen- take your pick- of the battlefield I'd argue that arty should be separate. I use it that way and believe HQs should just have supply and command functions with some infantry/AA support- or whatever was historical. It also depends on scale given range, but I believe 'operational' is the game level, and that is a limiting factor.

And that I also think is the way the TOAW system was/has developed.

Hope this helps.

[General Staff]

Yes! Clear words from an old Frontschwein is what this newbie needs. :D
I apologize and am trying to help. But I am speaking to a specific scenario- 2WIN. Tactics- and even strategies- will differ dependent on scale. If you are trying other scenarios, what works here may not work or even be totally disastrous there.

This is a relatively small unit engagement compared to something like Operation Barbarossa. As Telumar indicates I also never use arty at 1 hex range because it is essentially an assault by arty men- not a direct fire bombardment- aka as an 'Ascension Day' Parade.

Also bear in mind different scenario designers' concepts of how the TOAW system should work and some unit compositions will differ.

[Heldenkaiser]

1) I'm guessing here but I'd say 'A last beer before you are shot' or maybe in English it could be 'A last cigarette', with maybe some decorum and flourish in both cases. The end result is usually the same.


Very literally, it means something like "advance laurels" ... "premature praise" would probably explain it. :shy:

[Heldenkaiser]

Thinking about your various replies, Gentlemen ... this is my understanding on the artillery at range 1 problem:

- Should not be used in a direct fire role, because the engine doesn't handle that well (G.S.).
- In the attack during my turn, it needs to be in the frontline, because the combat takes place in the enemy hex.
- On the defence (during my opponent's turn), it can be (needs to be?) one hex behind the frontline, because any combat would take place in my hex, i.e. where the artillery can cover it from one hex away but where it would be found vulnerable if it were there. (These two points are my interpretation of Telumar's advice.)

Am I basically correct? Thanks. :rolleyes:

(Grateful also because I am just using range 1-2 arty again at Tannenberg. :) )

[Secadegas]

Thinking about your various replies, Gentlemen ... this is my understanding on the artillery at range 1 problem:

- Should not be used in a direct fire role, because the engine doesn't handle that well (G.S.).
(...)
(Grateful also because I am just using range 1-2 arty again at Tannenberg. :) )

Nothing to do with the engine...
Artillery at range 1 will "assault" instead of support if commited on direct combat.
It's reasonable to keep artillery at reserve/dig-in status in this case (same with HQ units with artillery strenght)

[Secadegas]

Am I basically correct? Thanks. :rolleyes:



Yes, very correct...

[General Staff]

Very literally, it means something like "advance laurels" ... "premature praise" would probably explain it. :shy: Apologies, but I thought I had it literally right. I did a year in German at a 'gymnasium' but it was a long and believe me long time ago.

In English I don't think there is an equivalent. That's surprising because it's a fairly versatile instrument and I can usually find one. Especially from German I am surprised.

But I'd suggest 'Don't rest on your laurels', 'Don't count your chickens before they hatch', 'You're doing very well' and 'Keep going'. ;)

[Dicke Bertha]

We'd say something like 'don't assume victory in advance' but I think it is quite alright to sell the skin before the bear is shot! Now the first one to find the French equivalent wins a StuG battalion!

[General Staff]

Grateful also because I am just using range 1-2 arty again at Tannenberg.
Here I'd look at unit specifics- equipment range and work from there.

As Secadegas says it will 'assault' (i.e. literally haul the pieces out and about) at 1 hex range and I think that's a problem with the game engine at this scale. But that's just my opinion.

In larger scale scenarios, I'd totally agree with Secadegas and not use 1 hex ranged arty or in with HQs in direct mode, because it will again 'assault'. That's why I tend to avoid these scenarios.

Hope this helps.

[General Staff]

We'd say something like 'don't assume victory in advance' but I think it is quite alright to sell the skin before the bear is shot! Now the first one to find the French equivalent wins a StuG battalion!
LoL. There's also in English 'Don't take it/anything for granted'.

Now I'm sure Nemo is out there somewhere with his linguistic expertise in French et al, though I doubt he would want a StuG Battalion.

[Telumar]

LoL. There's also in English 'Don't take it/anything for granted'.

Now I'm sure Nemo is out there somewhere with his linguistic expertise in French et al, though I doubt he would want a StuG Battalion.

He would be pleased with a waterproof laptop i think. :D But he's on vacation for the next two or three weeks.

[Benbur]

Geez ... wish I knew how to say Vorschusslorbeeren in English. :shy: :o

<embarrassed silence>

Now on the HQ/arty question - is your objection that the command/supply function requires the HQ in a different place (behind the front line but adjacent) than the arty function (location depending on the range, from 1 to 10 hexes and more). Is that it? Because I believe that's also what causes my confusion. :rolleyes:

Hi Heldenkaiser,

Vorschusslorbeeren IMO is roughly translates into: "Telling someone they did a good job before they did it, but knowing that they would do a good job." or " Giving credit before credit is due".

Or maybe I'm just totally daneben? :nuts:

[Heldenkaiser]

Or maybe I'm just totally daneben? :nuts:

No, you got it. :cool: