Company, Battalion, Division, Corps ... Yikes!

[quinns]

I agree with Keygen on this one, Thor. There is no way we can be historically accurate with a consistent naming convention of groups of military units for hundreds of nations over a period of 7000 years. I think it is important to remain "consistent" with our names, though, throughout all the ages, in order to minimize confusion.

I go along with most of Keygen's suggestions. And you're right Keygen, of course, people can call them whatever they like, but it would be good if at least "allies" can talk to each other in the same language.

Here is my amended proposal:

Army:
1 unit = 1 Battalion
3 units = 1 Brigade (3 Battalions)
9 units = 1 Division (3 Brigades )
More than 9 units = Corps or Army depending on the size of the entire army a player has, as something like this happens in the true world. (Small armies do not have corps where big armies do.)

Air Force (including Space units):
1 unit = 1 Air Squadron
3 units = 1 Wing (3 Air Squadrons)
9 units = 1 Air Division (3 Wings)
More than 9 units = Air Command

Navy:
1 unit = 1 Ship (Submarine, etc.)
3 units = 1 Naval Squadron (3 Ships)
9 units = 1 Task Force (3 Naval Squadrons)
More than 9 units = Fleet

[King Thor]

I DONT CARE!! My civilizations are not signatories of any agreement that compels them to obey any standard.

Our military counsel states that 1 unit = 1 division is the best convention to use.

.....

I like the last version proposed by quinns and will stick to it. ..... more or less. I still feel that I am at liberty to call my phalanx DIVISION a division. It just doesn't sound right to me to call is a battalion. Doesn't have the right ring to it.

My warrior Battalion ... My warrior Division.

MArine Battalion sounds good.

What about Paratroopers? Paratrooper battalion???

Cool. I think we havea standard

[Lung]

Oops! I was wrong. Quinns not just a mere rookie, he's an OLD rookie!!

Don't underestimate the Great TweetyBird, either. I know a formidable foe when i see one Not to mention the Donster. He nearly pulled off the coup of the century by nearly coming back from a seemingly hopeless situation against me in Lungmatch 1.1, not that i'm that hard to outsmart

As for King Thor, thou looketh forward to meeting thee in battle, so thou shalt have thy honour of seeing thee fall by many divisions at once! Ain't it better to just lose a few battalions than a few divisions in one battle?

Oh, and no self-respecting warmonger would call their fleet a "Task Force"! A "Death Force", maybe, but Task Force screams WUSS!!! Also, i think that unless you have a large Navy, a fleet could be as little as 7-9 ships.

[quinns]

Of course, King Thor, you can call them whatever you like! I only ask that if you happen to be my ally in a game, and you tell me that you are sending a Division of Warriors for support, I hope that NINE Warrior units show up, not ONE!

Thanks for your support, Thor. I am sorry to have proposed a system that doesn't have the right historical "ring" to it, but I think it will be helpful in regards to operational communications.

Paratroop Battalion? What's wrong with that? See below partial command structure of the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division:

82nd Airborne Division

Commanding General: John R. Vines
Chief of Staff COL Jay W. Hood
Division Staff
G-1 - LTC K. Heaney
G-2 - LTC T. Kiely
G-3 - LTC J. Huggins
G-4 - LTC K. Stein

1st Brigade - 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment

Commander - COL Leo A. Brooks, Jr.

1st Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment

Commander - LTC Richard E. Bloss

2nd Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment

Commander - LTC Rennie M. Cory Jr.
...

[This message has been edited by quinns (edited December 07, 2000).]

[King Thor]

Ummm...... I don't SEE no Paratrooper Battalion in there!! :-/

[St Jon]

I agree with Thor that an Army is an entirely abstract concept in the same way that a 'Front' or an 'Army Group' is. You also have the added factor of the way in which Armoured and Artillery Units are organised. Armour follows, in the British Army, the old Cavalry protocols and you do not have Artillery Divisions or Brigades as they are solely used as 'attached' Units. Even Brigade or Division vary according to circumstance and Regiment is a purely ceremonial term and individual Battalions from the same Regiment will see service in many different Brigades.

Time also alters things a huge amount as you have to look at the number of men under arms that composed these different An Army in the days of Alexander was nothing but a reconaissance patrol in WWI terms.

I regard an Army as being sufficient to give Lung a good kick, an Army Group as being sufficient to take anything he has from him and anything more as just a way to hasten the inevitable!

[quinns]

That's what the the 1st of the 504th means. It is the First battalion of paratroopers of the 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment. (It is really the 1st battalion of the 1st brigade of the 82nd airborne division, but they still use the regimental numbers for designation.)

[King Thor]

I'm not sending parachutes to fight by themselves, I need people attached to them!
Those are battalions of Parachutes, what good are they gonna do!!!
=========
jokes apart, Quinn, honestly look at how they put it too. They too dont like the sound of Paratrooper Battalion, so they say 1st Battalion, of 504th Paratrooper Infantry regiment.

I told you. Paratrooper battalion just doesn't sound right.

Also, Quinns a word of advice. If I say a division of warriors is coming to help, its gonna be a battalion. Somehow I just dont like the sound of. "Yes Yes.. my I will dispatch a phalanx battalion to help you defend your city" .. Doesn't sound BIG.

I mean half the time I just use big military terms to make matters sound more official and large scale.

I mean in the World Scenario, when I "completely Annihilated the Assyrian Northern Army" . In reality, I had just killed a 6 pile up. No biggy!. It just Happened to be their only pile up in the north and the only one they sent against me. Therefore, it was their northern army. Made it sound like a decisive battle. It was to some extent, but it didn't cripple the Assyrians to the extent that it made it sound. The Assyrians weren't exactly covering in their beds, they probably had some good defense left, but no offense.

[This message has been edited by King Thor (edited December 07, 2000).]

[quinns]

HA! I see that Lung has insulted more people than just me! Lung obviously enjoys insults being flung back and forth. Well, at least he's honest. This is, after all, a WAR GAME FORUM, not a SELF HELP FORUM! (Though, Lung could use one of those! )

[King Thor]

Hey Lung: "I AM The King!"



We'll battle soon. For now, I believe your war with St Jon requires your urgent attention.

[quinns]

And there you have it. Standards set. Now what was it that we decided?

[King Thor]

Quinn I think your last suggestion sounded pretty good. However, entire Fleets , Armies and Air Commands should not have size restrictions since sometimes a country can have a small navy, a small Army, a small air force and still have it be their entire Fighting force.

Basically, I think if we just modify it to say that "Army, Fleet, Air command" can be equal to anything provided the navy is small enough.

ie. My country has 5 ships. That is its Fleet.

But If my country has 30 ships. I cannot call a grouping of 3 or 8 ships a fleet. Its either a Naval Squadron or a Tast Force.

The reason I gave an example of 8 ships was to deal with numbers that are not multiples of 3. . The closest approximation can be used.

So. You could have a naval squadron of 2,3,4,5 units. Or a Task force of 6,7,8,9,10,11,12 units. Fleet of 8,9,10,11... units.

Same goes with Air and Land units.

What do you think?

[quinns]

Sounds pretty good, Thor. As that's very close to reality. As long as we are "close" in numbers. So if someone talks about a Brigade sized force crossing the border, I can understand that it is more than 1 but probably less than 6, (like you said 2 to 5). Good enough! At least we won't think that maybe it is just one unit or maybe it's 27 units, (27 platoons, from someone who calls one unit a platoon!) I could understand disinformation from enemies, but not from allies. The enemy is going to lie and bluff anyway, so wrong information from them is expected.

[Keygen]

I must admit that using those terms for ancient unit is not effective. It would be better to refer to those units with it's name. Phalanx, Legion etc. Don't forget that a Legion was an ancient formation and not a single unit. But I think it's rediculous to use the term division for a single unit even if the size of an army is small (no offense Thor ). I'll stick with quinns latest proposal but the numbers should not be strictly restricted to the proposed. Meaning that a brigade could have two or four battalions, etc. Also regarding the term "army" my opinion is that - as suggested from the most - should be used also to describe the whole army of a nation regardless of size or nation's important army formations also regardless of size.

Finaly quinns those terms would be better to be used just for historic realism and fun!
And it's better, when mails come and go , when alliances are created and secretly contacts are made to refer to units and to its type and not battalions and etc as it would be really confusing

And Thor if I ever hear that you have sent an entire division to kick my butt I will just ...laugh my head off
Just joking

[This message has been edited by Keygen (edited December 08, 2000).]

[quinns]

Point taken, Keygen. Yes, for fun, but also it makes it a little easier to talk about. As in, "I have a Division defending my northern border." As opposed to, "I have 3 Phalanxes, 2 Warriors, 1 Mounted Archer, 2 Knights, and a Diplomat defending my northern border." It's comfortable to talk in general terms, sometimes, without being too misleading or too detailed.

As far as the historical ring to the game, I would recommend the use of the term "regiment" as opposed to battalion, division, or army to refer to a single non-descript unit or group of units, (so as not to get confused with the conventions stated). That is, a "regiment" could be pretty much anything less than about 9 units, including a single unit. For example: Warrior Regiment, PARATROOPER REGIMENT (just for you, Thor )

So much for my two cents worth.

[This message has been edited by quinns (edited December 12, 2000).]