Locarnus Addon 2025-08, for Battlefield Europe, Afrika Korps and Grand Campaign East

[PeteMitchell]

You could reduce the movement to 1 hex per turn for these infantry units... still not very mobile... and maybe lower stats... I just wouldn't freeze them... it reduces options on what to do and how to play the mod... eventually there will be less and less choice... because many things are pre-set...

[McGuba]

I think it would be nice for that unit to have a limited "local area of influence" and being able, for example, to move one or two hexes to finish off a depleted enemy unit (a partisan unit, for example) who has previously attacked it.

It looks like there was no large scale conventional partisan war in France until the Normandy landings:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Resistance

Before that the partisans (or the maquis, as they were known) were mainly involved in sabotage acts, assassinations and preparation: organizing themselves and gathering weapons. It was not the same as in Yugoslavia or in the east where there were large partisan groups occasionally engaging in conventional battles with the occupiers. So this aspect of the mod should be changed. Even though in the mod it is already much more quiet in France until 1944 than in those other areas. But it should be tuned down even more. I think there should only be a few passive immobile partisan units with camo trait which may appear on railroads randomly blocking unit movements. And even these should only appear from mid 1943. From the wiki article:

In June 1943, a sabotage campaign began against the French rail system. Between June 1943 – May 1944, the Resistance damaged 1,822 trains, destroyed 200 passenger cars, damaged about 1,500 passenger cars, destroyed about 2,500 freight cars and damaged about 8,000 freight cars.

By that time most, if not all German static infantry should be activated anyway. Also from the article above:

Until the end of May 1944, SHAEF[clarification needed] had a "Block Planning" policy for the Resistance under which the Resistance would lie low until Operation Overlord was launched and then afterwards, the Resistance was to launch a full blown guerilla war in all of the French provinces one by one.
At the end of May 1944, Eisenhower changed his plans and instead wanted a nationwide guerilla war launched in all of the regions of France with the start of Overlord.

And even this plan was mainly aimed at blocking the transport and supply system and not on actively attacking regular German units:

The plans for the Resistance in Operation Overlord were:

Plan Vert: a systematic sabotage campaign to destroy the French railroad system.[162]
Plan Rouge: to attack and destroy all German ammunition dumps across France.[162]
Plan Bleu: to attack and destroy all power lines across France.[162]
Plan Violet: to attack and destroy phone lines in France.[162]
Plan Jaune: to attack German command posts.[162]
Plan Noir: to attack German fuel depots.[162]
Plan Tortue: to sabotage the roads of France.[162]

Moreso:

On 9 June 1944 Eisenhower reached an agreement recognizing the FFI was part of the Allied order of battle and that Koenig was to operate under his command.[137] On 10 June 1944, Koenig ordered the Resistance not to engage in insurrection nationale like those attempted on the Glières plateau or at Mont Mouchet, instead ordering: "Keep guerilla activity below its maximum level... Do not mass together... Form small separate groups".

Nevertheless, after the Normandy landings the partisan war became more wide spread and the Resistance started to ambush German units on the roads as they moved to Normandy. Which indeed significantly hampered German unit movements. So I think French partisan units with active movement should only appear after D-day. By which time all static German infantry units should be activated.

You could reduce the movement to 1 hex per turn for these infantry units... still not very mobile... and maybe lower stats... I just wouldn't freeze them... it reduces options on what to do and how to play the mod... eventually there will be less and less choice... because many things are pre-set...

I do not really see what would be the point in having units with movement 1 which cannot even embark rails when there will be no partisans around to attack. It would take 50 to 100 turns for them to reach the frontline in the east at this speed. Besides, it would only affect a couple German infantry units which will be changed to regular infantry sooner or later. Some of them after only a few turns in autumn 1941. So that they can reach the frontline by Nov 41-Jan 42. But I am pretty sure that in this case many players would try to move these units to the east anyway 1 hex per turn, to shorten the distance they will have to travel, which would only cause frustration for them.

[McGuba]

Here is a list of the affected numbered infantry divisons which were based in the west in June 41 and were later sent to the frontline:

Inf. div. no. - Based in June 41 - Redeployment

1941

81. - France - 41 (late) East
342. - France - 41 Sept Yugoslavia
223. - France - 41 Nov East
215. - France - 41 Nov East
212. - France - 41 Nov East
88. - Germany - 41 Dec East
227. - France - 41 Dec East

1942

246. - France - 42 Jan East
211. - France - 42 Jan East
216. - France - 42 Jan East
225. - France - 42 Jan East
208. - Belgium - 42 Jan East
205. - France - 42 (early) East
83. - France - 42 Jan East
305. - France - 42 May East
323. - France - 42 May East
336. - France - 42 May East
340. - France - 42 Jun East
306. - Belgium - 42 Nov East
304. - Belgium - 42 Dec East
82. - Netherlands - 42 Dec East

1943

327. - France - 43 Jan Med
320. - France - 43 Jan East
321. - France - 43 Jan East
302. - France - 43 Jan East
332. - France - 43 May East
335. - France - 43 May East
333. - France - 43 May East

1944

715. - France - 44 Italy


Stayed in the west until D-day

708. - France
709. - France
711. - France
712. - Belgium
716. - France
719. - Netherlands
319. - Channel Islands


So basically by counting 3.5 actual infantry divisons for each PzC infantry unit these should be released/activated in this order so that they can reach the frontline on time (which normally takes 3-4 turns):

2 infantry units in autumn 1941 (1941 batch)
2 in late 1941 (first half of the 1942 batch)
1 in early 1942 and 1 in mid 1942 (second half of 1942 batch)
2 in late 1942 or 1 in late and 1 in early 1943 (1943 batch)
and 2 should stay there until 1944 and activate at the time of D-day

So that's the 10 infantry units which are currently in the west at the beginning of the scenario. The that fact now all these can be moved to the east or elsewhere immediately makes the Axis side stronger than it should be in 1941. Aimed at being a historical mod it should not be the case.

In terms of game balance this would of course make it somewhat harder to achieve an early victory with the Axis. On the other hand it would make it more accurate historically. And many players seem to be happy if the mod is getting harder with each release. At the same time this hardening will be compensated to some extent by the addition of a few more units which will appear in 43-44.

Currently it is also somewhat unfair with new players who do not know how many of these they should keep in the west as they are unaware of the level of partisan threat in France. For example if we check gooseman's youtube playthroughs it appears that he tends to keep too many of these in the west even though Pete keeps reminding him not to do so. I guess it could be the same with other players as well. But it leaves them in a disadvantaged position compared to those who played the mod several times and thus know that the partisan threat is fairly low in the west until 1944. And in the next version it will be even lower until then. So perhaps when these units are activated the player should be notified that he should move them to the front and don't worry about the partisans to make it more fair.

[Vano2004]

It may come in handy .
https://wwii.space/%d1%84%d0%be%d1%82%d0%be/

http://www.country-osi.narod.ru/germanutext_nomera.html
https://clck.ru/eoLRi
http://autogallery.org.ru/i/ynomde.htm

[PeteMitchell]

I agree on the historical reasons but it takes a lot of freedom and choice away from the player, i.e. on how to play the game...

[PeteMitchell]

You could let people choose, e.g. by putting 100 prestige to turn static inf unit to mobile inf unit...

[McGuba]

Hm, I do not think that a few less infantry units would greatly reduce the number of options. Besides, while re-checking another, more detailed OOB I found that there were several infantry divisions which were in transit between two theatres in June 1941 and as such these were not listed in any theatre's OOB at that point. These typically arrived in the east in July and August so I guess there will be like 3-4 infantry units which can be sent to the east immediately. And then the ones in France will start to activate as well. So in the end there should not be a huge change.

[Locarnus]

Thank you all for the very insteresting and fruitfull discussion, it is a pleasure to work with so much feedback!

Unfortunately with Easter and other rl stuff coming up (and an Addon update promised before that) I'm unable to contribute as actively as last week.

Regarding the "Jäger" units, I revised my plan and for now I have implemented a 3:2:1 ratio of Jäger:Gebirgsjäger: Fallschirmjäger plus an additional "Leichtgeschütz" paratrooper/mountain gun unit on Crete.
2 Jäger already on the eastern front, 1 in Belgrade
1 Gebirgsjäger on the eastern front, 1 on Crete (but this one now starts on the airport and is full strength), the half-strength one near Wien is removed
1 Fallschirmjäger also on Crete (which also has the light infantry movement)

For Norway I opted for 2 normal Inf and 1 security unit, also as a representation "in the aggregate". Though arguably those could have also been 3 normal infantry divisions, but then more experienced players would probably just ferry an Italian unit to Norway while transferring 2 of the 3 normal inf divisions to the eastern front. This way it is less work for the player while still being in "historical bounds".

Balkan changes are
1 Jäger in Belgrade
1 normal Inf in Salonika
1 security unit in Athens, to overall represent the four 7xx Balkan divisions in the aggregate
Patras is turned over to the Italians, with an Italian Inf as garrison

France/BeNeLux/Denmark: I'm still undecided how to best implement the gradual unit availability.
Good points have been made above and it will be a work in progress/first attempt anyway.
If special immobile or 1-movement/no-transport garrisons are used at first, they need to be distinguishable from the other units (including the normal security inf). Making them aux units would be suboptimal as well, since later on they will be turned into normal units. I could reuse my existing icon, which I temporarily used for the security unit (from the next update onwards the security units will use the new 2 figure icon by guille1434, thank you!). The red bands imho make that icon somewhat distinguishable from ordinary units and they use the existing "Bridge1" animation:



But their existence and special properties would need some explanation, ideally from turn 1 onwards. And there are already enough pop-up messages in the first 2 turns. The easiest "prototype" implementation would be to simply leave those units off the map until they are "mobilized". No confusion, no early explanation, no movement issues. Simply some more units that pop up during the game as so many others already do. And at that point there could be a message explaining where they come from. Not ideal, but a workable first step towards a realistic implmentation.

[guille1434]

Hello Locarnus:

Needless to say, but I am also following this thread with interest. Also, I am waiting eagerly for your next update!

I have a new suggestion for your additional "visually identifiable" icon for the immobile/lesser mobility garrison units: what about a two figure icon (they would still be generally understrenght units, I think) but with a rifle and another heavy, but antiquated weapon, for example a WWI vintage Maxim type machine gun? I think I could scratch-build one such unit like that. Being rearguard and relatively immobile units I think its logical they would br issued with heavy and old or captured weapons that are not suitable for frontline use. What do you think?

And (unavoidably) a request: would you consider to add one of my "pet units" to the game roster: the 8,8 cm Flak 18 (Sfl.)? It could be an interesting "cheap upgrade" from a regular heavy 8,8 cm AA gun unit...

Thanks for all your effort!!

[Locarnus]

It may come in handy .
https://wwii.space/%d1%84%d0%be%d1%82%d0%be/

http://www.country-osi.narod.ru/germanutext_nomera.html
https://clck.ru/eoLRi
http://autogallery.org.ru/i/ynomde.htm

That is a whole treasure trove of information, thank you!

Hello Locarnus:

Needless to say, but I am also following this thread with interest. Also, I am waiting eagerly for your next update!

I have a new suggestion for your additional "visually identifiable" icon for the immobile/lesser mobility garrison units: what about a two figure icon (they would still be generally understrenght units, I think) but with a rifle and another heavy, but antiquated weapon, for example a WWI vintage Maxim type machine gun? I think I could scratch-build one such unit like that. Being rearguard and relatively immobile units I think its logical they would br issued with heavy and old or captured weapons that are not suitable for frontline use. What do you think?

And (unavoidably) a request: would you consider to add one of my "pet units" to the game roster: the 8,8 cm Flak 18 (Sfl.)? It could be an interesting "cheap upgrade" from a regular heavy 8,8 cm AA gun unit...

Thanks for all your effort!!

That could be an option down the line. Though for this update the "no unit until mobile" approach is my favorite so far, also due to simplicity of implementation and my rapidly closing time frame for the update.
And then test that as well as the security unit implementation and adjust later on.

About the mobile 8.8cm, there is a similar Italian unit already in BE 2.3 (Lancia da 90/53). With their 90mm AA gun mounted on a wheeled truck. Though that one has both AA and AT capability. I actually exchanged an Italian Semovente gift in the "Second Offensive?" scenario of Afrika Korps for that Italian unit. To make more use of BE/Addon unit diversity.
As far as I remember, the German 8.8cm on halftrack was AT only, due to limited angles (and some arty use, but that is generally not implemented for those dual purpose heavy AA guns so far).
Implementing it as an AT only vehicle should be a matter of minutes, with the Italian vehicle as a guideline. The arty mode would take some more work and I would put that off for a future update (I want to take a closer look at all those 8.8cm - 12.8cm guns anyway). The angle of the gun in arty mode seems unconventional, what firing animation do you use for that?

[Locarnus]

Oh, nearly forgot, I would need a desert icon for that 8.8cm_Flak18 as well. (At least in AT mode for the first implementation).

[guille1434]

Yes, the Flak 18 on halftrack unit was not capable of making AA fire, besides the limitation on the elevation angle, the gun had all the AA fire control gear removed. I know that the 8,8 flak guns could and were used as artillery, since the times of the Spanish civil war (the towed version), but I could not find information about this use for the self-propelled unit. Its main function was to attack bunkers and fixed position with accurate, direct fire with 0° or nearly horizontal barrel elvation. Because of this, it was also called "Bufla" which was an abbreviation of the terms "Bunker Flak". But I like switches sooo much...

Here are the desert colored icon versions, and about the animations, I use two of the vanilla game ones, which I adjusted their coordinates. I tested them when I used to play PzCorps and worked well. I also attach a screenshot of the efx file for you to see...

[McGuba]

Regarding the "Jäger" units, I revised my plan and for now I have implemented a 3:2:1 ratio of Jäger:Gebirgsjäger: Fallschirmjäger plus an additional "Leichtgeschütz" paratrooper/mountain gun unit on Crete.
2 Jäger already on the eastern front, 1 in Belgrade
1 Gebirgsjäger on the eastern front, 1 on Crete (but this one now starts on the airport and is full strength), the half-strength one near Wien is removed
1 Fallschirmjäger also on Crete (which also has the light infantry movement)

Yes, I tend to agree with this. With the exception that I will stick to the Light Infantry option which will later get an autmatic upgrade to Jäger units. And that the 65. Light Inf. representing the 7xx infantry divisions should be in central/south Serbia and not in Belgrade. It looks like the HQs of these divisions were in Nis, Valjevo and Topola, south of Belgrade:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%B6he ... z.b.V._LXV
Also if this unit starts in a hilly terrain it will be more apparent that this unit type has a special movement for this type of terrain.

In Belgrade there could still be a normal German infantry unit which can be relatively quickly sent to the east. From the more detailed OOB it appears that there were several German infantry units in transit from the Balkans which arrived in the east in July/August.

Patras is turned over to the Italians, with an Italian Inf as garrison

Yes, it looks like it was in the Italian zone, I made a mistake back then. I also added Larissa to have another Greek city, also under Italian occupation. To further emphasize that most of Greece was in the Italian zone. Because in v2.3 it looks like it is mostly controlled by Germany. Also it is good to have more Italian units in the Balkans as there were no less than 30 Italian divisions there in June 1941. Although Italian divisions were smaller than German ones, with only 2 regiments instead of 3. So I think there should be 6 Italian inf units. And there should be one less Croat inf unit as it looks like there were only 5 Croat infantry divisions in 1941. However, several more were raised later so the "3. Croat inf" units should appear like in 42.

[PeteMitchell]

... and how about the Spanish Civil War?

[JanD]

... and how about the Spanish Civil War?

How about Afrika Koprs finished, as well as Allied Corps and Soviet Corps converted first

[JanD]

Hi Locarnus

Couldn't wait for the update so I started checking the efile for options for the "crazy challenge". By this I found that
- German SE infantry
- German SE tanks
- German SE fighters
have disappeared. However German and Italian SE tactical bombers are available. For Italy, it is the Ro 37 recon. The German SE tac.s have vanilla statistics.

Feature request: either/or
- update the German SE tac.s to Addon standards and add an Italian SE SM.79 version
- disable/remove the leftover SE units

[Locarnus]

Yes, the Flak 18 on halftrack unit was not capable of making AA fire, besides the limitation on the elevation angle, the gun had all the AA fire control gear removed. I know that the 8,8 flak guns could and were used as artillery, since the times of the Spanish civil war (the towed version), but I could not find information about this use for the self-propelled unit. Its main function was to attack bunkers and fixed position with accurate, direct fire with 0° or nearly horizontal barrel elvation. Because of this, it was also called "Bufla" which was an abbreviation of the terms "Bunker Flak". But I like switches sooo much...

Here are the desert colored icon versions, and about the animations, I use two of the vanilla game ones, which I adjusted their coordinates. I tested them when I used to play PzCorps and worked well. I also attach a screenshot of the efx file for you to see...

Thank you!
Implementation is a bit more complicated than I thought, since I want at least some sort of upgrade option between the normal 8.8cm Flak and the "8.8cm BuFla". (I think that is an acceptable compromise name for the unit, the long one is too long and "Bufla" is a bit too unkown).
On the other hand, this might then serve as an experimental unit implementation, with a switch between "tank mode" and "AT mode". Other similar units like the 3.7cm mounted on UE chassis could benefit from the experiment.
It is probable not well balanced in the first iteration (no time to test much) and thus usage will require some house rules.
I'll have to leave out arty mode for this first implementation, otherwise there will be no place left for the poor Panzerjäger I and Sturmpanzer I. With those 8.8cm BuFla beasts doing everything better, while also being more versatile so early in the war.

Yes, I tend to agree with this. With the exception that I will stick to the Light Infantry option which will later get an autmatic upgrade to Jäger units. And that the 65. Light Inf. representing the 7xx infantry divisions should be in central/south Serbia and not in Belgrade. It looks like the HQs of these divisions were in Nis, Valjevo and Topola, south of Belgrade:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%B6he ... z.b.V._LXV
Also if this unit starts in a hilly terrain it will be more apparent that this unit type has a special movement for this type of terrain.

In Belgrade there could still be a normal German infantry unit which can be relatively quickly sent to the east. From the more detailed OOB it appears that there were several German infantry units in transit from the Balkans which arrived in the east in July/August.

Good points, starting the unit with light infantry movement a bit south of Belgrade.

Yes, it looks like it was in the Italian zone, I made a mistake back then. I also added Larissa to have another Greek city, also under Italian occupation. To further emphasize that most of Greece was in the Italian zone. Because in v2.3 it looks like it is mostly controlled by Germany. Also it is good to have more Italian units in the Balkans as there were no less than 30 Italian divisions there in June 1941. Although Italian divisions were smaller than German ones, with only 2 regiments instead of 3. So I think there should be 6 Italian inf units. And there should be one less Croat inf unit as it looks like there were only 5 Croat infantry divisions in 1941. However, several more were raised later so the "3. Croat inf" units should appear like in 42.

Agreed! A bit more Italian presence in their self-imposed quagmire would be nice. Oh, don't forget Cyprus for your update. I added Limassol as a harbor on that island, since in BE 2.3 there is no way to extricate non-airmobile units from the island.

... and how about the Spanish Civil War?

How about Afrika Koprs finished, as well as Allied Corps and Soviet Corps converted first

While I would really love to play in Spain, it is very low on my personal to-do list. With my limited time, for now I'm much more focused on "tuning, improvements and the occasional experiment".

At least the losing path of Afrika Korps will hopefully be fully compatible with the next update, allowing for a "whole campaign playthrough".
Can't give any assurances beyond that. I encountered so many unexpected issues with that already, and general savegame compatibility issues with updates, that it should be taken as is.
I had to cut down on some stuff to "ensure" that existing campaign savegames are compatible with the coming update.

I'll have to spend some more time investigating the issues and potential benefits, before I can make any comments about future updates (and thus the "Winning Path" compatibility).

Hi Locarnus

Couldn't wait for the update so I started checking the efile for options for the "crazy challenge". By this I found that
- German SE infantry
- German SE tanks
- German SE fighters
have disappeared. However German and Italian SE tactical bombers are available. For Italy, it is the Ro 37 recon. The German SE tac.s have vanilla statistics.

Feature request: either/or
- update the German SE tac.s to Addon standards and add an Italian SE SM.79 version
- disable/remove the leftover SE units

While various SE units are still in the equipment file, they are all non-active ("Karteileichen").
Which means they are not referenced in any compatible scenario and thus they do not find their way into the actual game. Keeping them around in the equipment file helps for making AK scenarios compatible, due to some editor error handling...
So for compatibility with the Addon, I decreased the potential SE unit numbers to 0 and increased the normal core slot number by the same amount. And as some form of compensation, I gift the players a few more minor units at the start of a campaign (especially with the next update).

[McGuba]

For Norway I opted for 2 normal Inf and 1 security unit, also as a representation "in the aggregate". Though arguably those could have also been 3 normal infantry divisions, but then more experienced players would probably just ferry an Italian unit to Norway while transferring 2 of the 3 normal inf divisions to the eastern front. This way it is less work for the player while still being in "historical bounds".

Another possible option would be to replace the 2 existing regular inf units in Norway with a new "ghost" Wehrmact Inf unit type, being made only for this purpose: it would be exactly the same as the normal Wehr Inf with the only exception that it would not be able to embark sea and air transports so that it could not be moved out of Norway. It could only embark rail transport for domestic movements within Norway.

Then those experienced players would not be able to transfer these occupation units to the front and replace them with weaker Minor Axis or security units. I think it would make sense from a historical point of view as Norway was seen extremely important for the safety of the iron ore shipments from Sweden and as such it is unlikely that its defense would have been given to those Minor Axis forces. At the same time it would still be possible to send there additional units if someone wants to strengthen its defenses for whatever reason.

In a way it would be similar to the already existing limitation of the Finnish units which cannot embark any transport to make it harder, if not impossible to use them elswhere other than the eastern front.

[PeteMitchell]

I always support historical accuracy and precision.

However, I also think there is a balance to strike between
1. the degree of historical accuracy vs.
2. the amount/freedom of choices a player can make

If you make the mod too prescriptive/pre-defined, it becomes less attractive. If you can play the mod in less and less different ways, it will eventually become boring... IMHO

[guille1434]

For Norway I opted for 2 normal Inf and 1 security unit, also as a representation "in the aggregate". Though arguably those could have also been 3 normal infantry divisions, but then more experienced players would probably just ferry an Italian unit to Norway while transferring 2 of the 3 normal inf divisions to the eastern front. This way it is less work for the player while still being in "historical bounds".

Another possible option would be to replace the 2 existing regular inf units in Norway with a new "ghost" Wehrmact Inf unit type, being made only for this purpose: it would be exactly the same as the normal Wehr Inf with the only exception that it would not be able to embark sea and air transports so that it could not be moved out of Norway. It could only embark rail transport for domestic movements within Norway.

Then those experienced players would not be able to transfer these occupation units to the front and replace them with weaker Minor Axis or security units. I think it would make sense from a historical point of view as Norway was seen extremely important for the safety of the iron ore shipments from Sweden and as such it is unlikely that its defense would have been given to those Minor Axis forces. At the same time it would still be possible to send there additional units if someone wants to strengthen its defenses for whatever reason.

In a way it would be similar to the already existing limitation of the Finnish units which cannot embark any transport to make it harder, if not impossible to use them elswhere other than the eastern front.

An idea I had, that it would be useful to achieve a balance between freedom of choice for the player and historical accuracy:

Instead of implemented "forced" regulations to the player about being able to move or not move his units, would it be possible to add a script that make the game engine to rest some prestige points per turn if the player don't keep a minimum number of units posted in some determined zone (i.e. Norway)? I think about something similar to the mechanics implemented to rest strength points to units positioned in the eastern front in winter. This way, the player could make the choice to leave a strategic territory without suitable defences to reinforce the front lines, but this decision would not be for free... Even, may be it can be also implemented that having less than the minimun number of garrison units in Norway, it could trigger, besides the prestige penalty, some enemy small harassment raids on selected points of the Norway territory (just the way it historically happened with raids launched by British commandos and Norwegian resistance forces on selected and sensitive targets).

This is a theoretical idea from me, I don't know if it is feasible from the technical point of view, or if it would be practcal from the relation of the work needed to be implemented and the perceived results on the game mechanics. But this is the way in real life that leaders have to evaluate facts before making decisions, any action has its costs and advantages, and nothing comes for free...
Just an idea...