My Next Project: A Poll

[typhoon]

Shouldn't guessing correctly on Ecuador and Paraguay's victory over itself be enough to recoup your losses?

Originally posted by fairline
Yeah, the old cliche about a game of two halves really applied in the England v Paraguay game; England were all over them in the first half, then a combination of a massively improved Paraguay, a tired England and Sven's 'inspired' choice of substitutions almost caused an upset. What the hell was Eriksson thinking: take off your main striker, replace him with your best winger and then substitute him as well ?? Jesus...

THE SUN WAS GETTING INTO HIS HEAD

[curtsibling]

@Patine:

Do you want this thread renamed, or do you want to start a new Korean war thread?

[Patine]

@Curt: Renaming this thread, say to 'Korean War Development Thread' or some other artistically inspired name would do greatly. Could you also get rid of the poll. I left it indefinitely open, but I think it's more than answered my question.

@Case, Tanelorn, and fairline: Certainly good information to base armored unit stats and generation on. About how many battalions or regiments of each of T34-85's, JS-2's and JSU-III's did the North Koreans and Chinese have? And, given the build-up beginning in Europe, how much military power could the USSR spare to Korea if they were hypothetically activated, roughly?

[fairline]

Look here:

http://www.paulnoll.com/Korea/War/NKPA-forces.html

In 1950 there were 3 armoured regiments in the single armoured division plus 2 independant armoured brigades

There's a bit more detail on the Global Security site:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/dprk/105ad.htm

Seems it was more a Brigade than a division, at least initially; comprised 3 T34-85 Regiments (battalion strength really, ea. 40 tanks), a mech. inf. regt and a regiment (bn) of SU-76's

[tanelorn]

As for deployment, virtually all the NKPA forces were deployed to attack (order east to west), thus:

Grossly oversimplified, ideal and NATO-centric=
XX stands for division (usu. 3 X III), X for brigade (usu. 2 X III) III for regiment (usu. 3 X II), II for battalion (usu. 3 X I), I for company i=infantry, a=armor

The 203 armored regiment (III a) was deployed along the 1st and 6th infantry divisions (XX i) poised to attack down the Kaesong-Seoul road, against the 1st ROK XX i on the 38th parallel.
The 107th IIIa paired with the 4th XXi and the 109 IIIa with the 3rd XXi against the ROK 7th XXi down the Uijongbu corridor.
The 2nd XXi against the ROK 7th IIIi in the mountain town of Ch'unch'on
The 7th XXi in the Soyang-gang area, heading towards the Tabaek mountains
The 5th XXi against the (dispersed) ROK 8th XXi, down the east coast road.
Various ROK units were tied down in anti-guerilla operations in the Sobaek mountains.

Reserves:
NKPA: 10th, 13th XXi and armor (the rest?) in Pyong Yang
15th XXi at Kumsong, halfway between Wonsan and the Hwachon reservoir.

ROK XXi sized force in Seoul
ROK XXi in Taegu, Taejon
ROK IIIs in Kwangju,Chonju,Kumch'on, Kunsan
Still looking for more details

[Palaiologos]

Originally posted by typhoon
Shouldn't guessing correctly on Ecuador and Paraguay's victory over itself be enough to recoup your losses?

All three results had to come up in order for me to win. They were at the same coupon(?).I hope it makes sense.


I guess i must find something relevant to say about Korea before i post again.

[fairline]

It's called an accumulator. Must've been good odds for all three results to come in....

EDIT: as Jimmy said, spellchecker isn't working...

[Palaiologos]

How about answering an e-mail for a change?


I have already finished the map and most of the rules.txt for that
victoria era thingy btw.

[Jimmywax]

I believe I remember reading a book some time ago pertaining to armored units during the Korean war. One of the biggest points it made was that most of the U.N. and communists forces new bigger, badder tanks were rendered some what ineffectual by Korea's terrain. Harsh winters and mountains everywhere are not a tankers friend. Another problem they had was that most of these tanks, such as the M-26/M-46, needed paved roads to manuver effectively. Larger numbers of post WWII tanks had been sent to Japan but were never deployed after it was found that they lost some of their efectiveness in Korea's undeveloped countryside. My memory may be a bit fuzzy on this since it has been several years since I read that book (published by Osprey I believe).

P.S. this sites subscription to spellchecker has expired.

[Addled Platypus]

something different - A Speculative Solar Revolution

[tanelorn]

I agree with Jimmywax. However this is TOT, so mountains and broken terrain can be made impassable to armor, to reflect this situation -infantry can have the impassable flag on. Just a suggestion.
It appears that the Brittish also made use of the Cromwell light tank. There is a Cromwell turret in the Athens war museum, btw. Looks more like an ugly little toy.
-edit-
I found it's not a Cromwell, its that crappy 6pdr Centaur (with the Nuffield Liberty engine instead of the Rolls Royce Meteor) we got 52 of for our latest civil war.

[fairline]

I'm guessing the Cromwells and Comets used in Korea were OP, command and recce tanks. Certainly the single full-strength armoured regiment attached to 1st Commonwealth Division was equiped with Centurions, the 'extra' British squadron had Churchill VII's and the single Canadian squadron had M4A2E8 Shermans.

[Patine]

I do agree with the possibility of using impassable terrain to restrict armored vehicle movement. That should somewhat represent the armor situation in Korea. I'm not sure how to represent UN unit reconstruction, though. That'll be tricky.

@Herresson and Platypus Rex: Fear not! Ideally, in the fullness of time, I do plan (barring becoming blind, brain-dead, quadripalegic, or dropping dead, knock on wood) to do all four options above. The poll was for a priority to what to focus on first.

[Jimmywax]

Whenever I batted around the idea of a Korean war scenario (several times with little more to show than outdated units), I always planned on making the U.N. forces, minus the R.O.K. forces, events based reinforcements. Then have any of the local forces (ROK, NKA, or PRC) be able to be built in the local towns. Thinking about it now though the PRC forces would have to be events based too.

P.S. any plans for some "HONDO's", I am thinking that is what U.N. pilots called the soviets flying for the North.

Edit: Scratch that, just read through thread a second time. Most of what I said has already been said.

[tanelorn]

I had tried to make a Korea scenario for MGE too, but this is exactly where it got stuck
This is ToT though, and I've had the time to think af a way out of the loop.
Suppose you have a UN unit die in battle

@IF Unitkilled
Unit= USarmy
attacker= Reds(or anybody, if the PLA is a separate civ, or a different event for PLA)
defender= UN
@AND
delay= X (as many turns as you like, it takes time to build up)
@THEN
Text
A full US army regiment was anihilated by the Communists! Replacements are on the way
CreateUnit
owner= UN
Unit= Usarmy
veteran=No
homecity= NONE (or Pusan, your logistics base)
locations
(Wherever the port of Pusan is in your map. You could add a couple of other ports up the map, northest first, to allow for reinforcements to take advantage of any UN breakthroughs)
endlocations
Changemoney
receiver= UN
ammount= (minus the cost of the unit, transportation, paperwork, public relations etc.)
@ENDIF

You may substitute Randomize for the Delay modifier, if you wish to add a realistic element of uncertainty. On the other hand, this is 1950s America with almost unlimmited resources and confidence. It's up to you.

Randomturn is a trigger word, so this can't work in MGE

I had initially thought of a combination of GiveTechnology- TakeTechnology scheme for building reinforcements but this is simpler and makes more sense. US units weren't built in situ.

More details about the macro language in macro.txt in the ToT main file