On Patriot again ...

[Bryan]

One tank in this game, means one tank.
There is no abstraction of numbers or levels like in a tabletop wargame, so that being said, the whole campagin "Battalions/Regiments whatever" scale is completely wrong. So you cannot use that to prove that we command divisions in game and hence you cannot claim that we are entitled to out of scale assets.

That is a joke. This entire game is scale abstracted from terrain to the forces that support you. Even infantry are abstracted to walk as fast as a truck because it was horrendous working with real 30kph and 300m range AT. No battalion would have direct command of anything past Strela trucks and MANPADs if the size of the force was supposed to represent an faithful unit. It just doesn't.

Ok, show me where it says that one tank is = one platoon. Where does it say that one howitzer = one battery? I would be very happy to see something that says it is actually the case.

The unit's amount is completely seperate from the abstraction of unit's abilities. In this case only the abstraction of a unit's abilities is present.

If you play tactical. Then that would be platoon level at best.

An American rifle platoon is roughly a 4 stack. You can start the fight with half a company in just 160 points according to the actual numbers.

Fair enough.

[PzAz04Maus]

Ok, show me where it says that one tank is = one platoon. Where does it say that one howitzer = one battery? I would be very happy to see something that says it is actually the case.

The unit's amount is completely seperate from the abstraction of unit's abilities. In this case only the abstraction of a unit's abilities is present.

If it was battalion scale, at minimum there would be a much bigger emphasis on the supporting arms of an infantry company. Infantry Mortars alone are organic Battalion assets, infantry TOW launchers would be a major part of the gameplay, there would be heavy machine gun platoons, and so on so forth when you're talking about 3 companies of 3 infantry platoons + 1 weapons platoon each for a full battalion. Even recon LAVs have their infantry contingent abstracted into a spotting bonus.

If you were a battalion commander, you would be dealing with the wartime problems of your constituent companies, their weapons, the weapons on their transportation options, and company scale specials like designated marksmen, grenade launchers (The US, despite being one of the biggest users of them, doesn't even get them on more than... 3 transports, 1 recon humvee, 2 helos?). None of that is particularly evident. Indeed, they've struggled to add recoilless rifles in the game. You cannot expect to just put all your focus on a three stack infantry company and consider that the majority of your forces. Then there's the whole special forces bit where a Battalion commander somehow just gets two companies of Spetsnaz without jumping through some incredible hoops like a Special Forces Specialization? Not likely.

Infantry mortars, weapons companies, and a helluva lot more infantry choices would be out there to make up for the fact that your M109 would take the place of ATACMs. There would be so much more emphasis at the lower end that it's not even funny.

[Drang]

Honestly? With a microterrain system, and better infantry, then focusing on the smaller scale would be fantastic.

[PzAz04Maus]

Honestly? With a microterrain system, and better infantry, then focusing on the smaller scale would be fantastic.

I would like a wargame like that, actually. I was always annoyed at how there's no M2 Infantry MGs or anything you could attach to a company for a while. No bonus like a free weapons squad for stacking units. What I was saying Wargame isn't does sound like a Close Combat-esque barrel of fun.