"Regimental and Division HQs" Topic

I am converting the Victory Games Panzer Command to miniatures. This is an operational level game where the basic unit is the company and the maneuver unit is the regiment/brigade (same level of scale as Rommel and Panzer Korps.) The goal of this game is each player commands a division or a divisional equivalent. I am wondering about how to show Regimental and Divisional HQ in a game of this scale. Specifically Germans and Soviet forces but other nationalities interest me as well. I have never really given much consideration to what higher level HQs look like because I have never played in games of that scale. Any suggestions?

For "Blitzkrieg Commander" I have a couple of command type vehicles on a circular stand for the regimental command groups. I will do something similar when I get around to the division level command groups.

You can see both a British and a German brigade/regiment command group in the first two pictures in this blog post: link

Jim

Yes, bear in mind that these would often represent 'advanced' HQs, i.e. a smaller subset of the full HQ staff that operated closer to the action for command, control and communication purposes.

Robert

With company sized units I usually do Regimental HQs as a radio truck or some other command vehicle (plus some figures). Div HQ is often a bit more grandiose, with a few vehicles.

Actual Div HQs are large units, thousands of men.

Div HQs are mostly a mass of Staff officers, vehicles, clerks, etc. Every nation tended to have some variant on a defence element. Armoured Divs do give the option for tanks as well.

RHQs similarly a small command group, with motor vehicles if they're lucky, though horses more likely for the Eastern combatants. British Brigade HQ quite small as well, though with Defence Platoon on hand.

Once you have decided on how you would like to portray the HQ on the table, how will you use them? How much emphasis will you place on the upward flow of communications from the subordinates to influence actions at that level? Will you have a mechanism for how long it might take to transform that communication into orders that would be acting under actionable intel? Just curious as I applaud your desire to wargame functions of HQ in your games.

HQ command in Panzer Command allows direct command to be given to units of the command. Better HQ can essentially speed up the sequence of events. Better quality HQ get more command points to spend in a turn and this allows units to be reactivated in the turn a 2nd time. This is supposed to reflect the HQ directing events. Division HQ has the ability to reactivate regimental commands more than once in the turn (but it has to be planned out a turn before hand.) This allows, for instance, an ability to show the German advantage in command while maintaining and respecting Soviet numerical advantages and sometimes equipment superiority.

I also like Panzer Command because it fully represents the power of artillery in WWII combat, something many games miss. It is a brilliant board game and I am translating it directly to a hex grid game mat with miniatures. The only problem I see with the game is that there is too much complexity, something was often the case in 70s and 80s game design. I am going to trim it back a bit.

@Marcus Brutus

Have you ever seen a copy of Campaign for North Africa?

Supply trucks and dumps, wagons, medical services (aid stations, field hospitals), field kitchens, etc., etc.

Why You Don't Want "Realistic" Logistics In A Wargame: YouTube link

Well worth a watch.

Have you ever seen a copy of Campaign for North Africa?

Is that the monster game put out a number of years back that included the pasta requirements of the Italian army?

Supply trucks and dumps, wagons, medical services (aid stations, field hospitals), field kitchens, etc., etc.

Why You Don't Want "Realistic" Logistics In A Wargame: YouTube link

Well worth a watch.

I will take a look at the video. There was a discussion on TMP a while back about logistics in WWII game systems. At what level of play do logistics of the type above enter into play?

Thanks to everyone who gave advice on depicting HQs. I think I have some ideas.

By depict do you mean what do you put on the board or what capabilities will the unit have?
For capabilities I'd assume all the REMF would bug out if combat got too close, so I'd look at the HQ security troops assigned and base my defense and mobility on that.
For what goes on the board I'd look at what equipment the division was assigned. Division commands could be horse-drawn, trucked or tracked depending on the division's OB and current status. Heck, some fortress divisions might have the HQ on foot.

How HQs could be depicted physically on the table top.

"At what level of play do logistics of the type above enter into play?"

Generally multiple divisions. My stuff based for Megablitz etc has Signals, medical units, repair units, engineers, AA, even some MPs for traffic control. But mainly lots and lots of wagons and trucks hauling supplies.

emckinney, That was a very interesting vidieo. Shame it stopped when it did I would have loved to see some "Wargame" suggestions.

Our own games really only cover maybe a couple of companies in defence, and each assumes a re-supply point perhaps 2 to 3 km to the rear, clearly that may be a bit much. However it does model to some extent the problem of roads, if you have a narrow road moving stuff in both directons give evene us wargamers an interesting headache.

For us the higher level function is about when to recover units to refule and when to send out replacements for units pulling out to re-fuel and re-arm. And of cource when to tell units to Larger up to be ready but not active as a fully fueld and armed reserve. "Cperations Clock Stopped" if you will.

"At what level of play do logistics of the type above enter into play?"

Generally multiple divisions. My stuff based for Megablitz etc has Signals, medical units, repair units, engineers, AA, even some MPs for traffic control. But mainly lots and lots of wagons and trucks hauling supplies.

That is what I would think as well. Probably also games covering many days of combat. So the II SS at Kursk over a couple of weeks. That would include the recovery of vehicles. At Kursk the Germans were very good at recovering damaged vehicles and getting them back into the front line. That would be another kind of tactical/strategic choice. As a Corp commander, do you hold back today with the understanding that your repair facilities will have returned many of your AFVs tomorrow or do you go forward in your current depleted state? A decision we rarely deal with in our tabletop games.

Rather than make the gamers account for all the thousands of items of support, I suggest the EFFECTS of logistical support be the focus. In example, A Corps Commander has a staff tasked with making the system work. All too often, shortages or other factors create problems that the staff cannot overcome (parts shortages, lack of recovered vehicles from the battlefield, shortages at higher than Corps level, etc.) For whatever reason if known, does not remedy the immediate situation. The effects of logistics should impact the Corps Commander's ability to function in some manner. Game that (which does NOT need to be in great depth) but rather the impact on sustaining (or having to modify) current operations should be enough!

As for visually representing Soviet divisional HQs, one way to make them stand out would be to add a Soviet red flag to the base – either held by a banner bearer on foot, or attached to a vehicle.

In actual battlefield situations, these flags might not have been quite as prevalent as they are in the Soviet propaganda posters of the era, but they certainly were available in some numbers and could even be flown by advancing front line units sometimes (possibly useful for limiting friendly fire incidents).