Ok, we played a few games today of SG and my PA was classed as a bit over the
top.
PA Squad: Heavy, Fast
1 command figure (Advanced Assult /w gl)
1 trooper (Advanced Assult /w gl)
2 troopers (Advanced Assult /w gl & MLR)
1 SAW gunner (Gatling SAW)
Total die: D6 (FP) D8 (MLR) D8 (MLR) D10 (SAW) + Quality
or if you can only shoot 1 MLR per squad instead of per figure (I assume only
1 per figure and that multiple in the squad can shoot together)
Total die: D10 (FP) D8 (MLR) D10 (SAW) + Quality
On second complaint, how many platoons do people generally have on the board
before they put on an over all commander aka company commander.
On Sun, 01 Apr 2001 18:39:42 -0700, Jaime Tiampo
<fugu@spikyfishthing.com> wrote:
> Ok, we played a few games today of SG and my PA was classed as a bit
Okay, so far so good...
> Total die: D6 (FP) D8 (MLR) D8 (MLR) D10 (SAW) + Quality
Well, the MLR is a support weapon. So, if your guys are going to use MLRs they
can't use their assault rifles. So, that would make them:
D6 (FP) + D8 + D8 (MLR) + D10 (SAW) + Quality. Or, D8 (FP) + D8 (MLR) +
D10
(SAW) + Quality. This isn't out of place. It's actually pretty close to
what Jon has in the rulebook. In fact, you're one figure less than what Jon
has in the NAC TO&E. I wouldn't have a problem with it.
However, how many of these puppies do you have? Jon has them at 3 PA squads
and a command squad per PA platoon, and 1 platoon in a company, along with 3
platoons of regular infantry. I found this to be about right. Specific
scenarios have had more (one of my scenarios had one side with nothing but PA,
but they had to boogie pretty quickly, only had plasma guns, and only 4 per
squad).
As long as half your company isn't PA, or you aren't bringing one platoon of
PA and a couple squads of infantry (unless the scenario requires it) I don't
see this as being cheesy.
> On second complaint, how many platoons do people generally have on the
Typically I'd figure you had to have a majority of the platoon on the table.
It depends on the scenario. If you have a company of three infantry platoons
and one PA platoon, I'd say you had to have at leat three of the four platoons
on the table before the company commander is present. I can see a scenario,
though, where an enemy unit has crashed through the lines and is hitting a
company command area. You could have little more than a reinforced platoon
protecting the company commander, but the company commander is on site to
help. (If I was creating this kind of scenario, I'd probably have some sort of
scenario rule to see if the company commander has to deal with any
interruptions from the rest of the company, maybe with some sort of test when
it activates).
Again, it depends on the scenario. However, if this is a "design a TO&E and
bring your figures" type engagement, I think your group needs to put in some
ground rules. Perhaps only allow a company commander if there's an entire
company on the board. Or, only if there is a majority, as mentioned above. I
think you need to have the TO&Es figured out ahead of time and checked out for
validity.
SG2 doesn't do this kind of thing well, without an understanding amongst
players, because it has no point system. I would suggest limiting each side to
a total number of squads or platoons. PA should count as two infantry squads,
and count as 1 for the purposes of deciding if the company commander is on the
table. For instance, say you are going to field 3 platoons and that you have
to have a majority of platoons in a four platoon company in order to bring in
the company commander. You could choose one infantry and one PA platoon
(equivalent to 3 infantry platoons) but you'd lose the chance to have the
company commander. Or, you could put 3 infantry platoons and get the company
commander as you have 3 out of 4 platoons on the table.
Another option is to give your TO&E to your opponents and let THEM select your
forces. Likewise, you would select theirs.
> Allan Goodall wrote:
> D6 (FP) + D8 + D8 (MLR) + D10 (SAW) + Quality. Or, D8 (FP) + D8 (MLR)
+ D10
> (SAW) + Quality. This isn't out of place. It's actually pretty close
Actually that's what I had listed above except you got the firepower on the
second one wrong. 3 x 3FP is 9FP and in the book it says to round up on that
giving it a D10 FP instead of the D8.
Yeah I run squads of 7 regular infantry and 5 PA. Still working out how big to
make my command (platoon and company) squads. Thinking of dumping their heavey
and support weapons.
> However, how many of these puppies do you have? Jon has them at 3 PA
I run, as a company, 3 platoons infantry (3 squads and command squad)
and 1 platton of PA (3 squads and command squad) + 1 company command
squad. If I don't have a full platton of PA on the board I attach them to the
highest commander.
> As long as half your company isn't PA, or you aren't bringing one
I always have more infantry then PA. Usually 1 squad per platoon on the board
untill it's its own platoon.
> Typically I'd figure you had to have a majority of the platoon on the
Right. I think that's what's come out of it. YOu have to have 3 platoons on
the table to have a company commander.
Now my question is who is the over all commander? If you only have 2 platoons
on the table who gets to be in charge? and if you select one of the platoon
commanders at the over all commander shouldn't he be able to activate the
other platoon commander?
> -----Original Message-----
[snip]
> >On second complaint, how many platoons do people generally have on
[Bri] I would agree here. I would suggest that at a MINIMUM you have 2/3
of
your company squads on the board (counting the command squad/platoon or
3/4
not counting the command squad platoon).
> Again, it depends on the scenario. However, if this is a "design a
[Bri] I have often seen PA selected as roughly equivilent to 2 normal
soldiers. Has anyone toyed with the idea of making command worth more in this
rough firguring? An untested example would be to make Leaders = 1 soldier x
command level. So it would be: Squad Leader x2 soldier, Platoon Leader x3
soldier, Company Commander x5 soldier (then 10x, 20x, 40x...).
Or Leader = 1 + 0.10 (round up) of the forces he leads (PA count as 2).
So a
Squad Leader would be 1 + .10 * 3 soldiers = 2 soldiers. Platoon (8)
Leader
would be 1 + .10 * 7 soldiers = 3 soldiers. A PA Platoon (6) Leader
would be
2 + .10 * (2 * 5 soldiers) = 3 soldiers. A Company Leader (1 PA Platoon,
3
Rifle Platoon, 1 Command Squad (4)) would be 1 + ((.10 * 6 * 2) + (3 *
(.10
* 8)) + (.10 * 3)) = 1 + 1.2 + 2.4 + .3 = 4.9 = 5 soldiers
So taking a Company of 1 Command Squad, 1 PA Platoons and 3 Rifle Platoons (34
soldiers) would count as 44.
> Another option is to give your TO&E to your opponents and let THEM
[Bri] What level of TO&E would you have to design out to? How would this
work? I.e. If your TO&E only goes to the company level, it would do no good to
have your opponent choost a company from the TO&E. I imagine that the TO&E
would have to be made out at least 1 level up from the level you are going to
field. This could also be done randomly (to hid the exact composition of your
forces). I.e. You have the TO&E for a Brigade. Each of your companies are
numbered. You roll to see which company you field (or roll x times to
determine the companies that you field).
[Bri] I also saw a suggestion, somewhere, that you field the units that
you desire, but then randomly remove 10% of the individual figures from the
forces (represents loses from previous combat)[Company of 43 would loose 4
soldiers picked at random - I suggest using d% to select]. This could
remove a Leader, or leave a "platoon" of 4 soldiers, depending on which random
figures were removed.
> Allan Goodall awg@sympatico.ca
My comments above marked by [Bri]
---
Sorry the company would be roughly equivilent to 50 soldiers. I forgot to
double the PA cost.
Company Commander 5
3x Cmd Squad 3 3x Plt Leaders 9 21x Plt Troops 21
1x PA Plt Leader 3
5x PA Troops 10
--
50 Rough Comparison Points
---
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
http://www.ftsr.org/
---
-----
> -----Original Message-----
> "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" wrote:
> Platoon (8) Leader would be 1 + .10 * 7 soldiers = 3 soldiers.
? - 1 + .10 * 7 = 1.7 = 2, surely ?
> A PA Platoon (6) Leader would be
This is a small company!
A squad / section is generally around 6-8 figures, a platoon is 3-4
squads (so 24-32 figures / platoon).
This would make your SL worth 2 (1.7) for an eight man squad and PL 5
(4.1) for a 4-squad platoon. Company commander could then be worth up to
17 or so points if the company is large (say 3 regular 32-man platoons,
1 24-suit PA platoon, 8 man company command squad).
So an example ToE could be:
Rifle Squad - 9 pts (2 for SL plus 7 grunts @ 1pt)
Platoon Command Squad - 12 pts (5 for PL plus 7 grunts @ 1pt)
Rifle Platoon - 39 pts (Command squad + 3 rifle squads)
PA Squad - 13 pts (3 for SL plus 5 suits @ 2pts)
PA Command Squad - 17 pts (7 for PL plus 5 suits @ 2pts)
PA Platoon - 56 pts (Command squad + 3 squads)
Company Command Squad - 24 pts (17 for CL plus 7 grunts)
Company - 197 pts (Command Squad, 3 Rifle Platoons plus PA platoon)
> Tony Francis wrote:
Just a thought - there's no account of heavy weapons here (so a squad
with 2 SAWs is worth the same as one with only 1). Adhering to the KISS
principle of this system, how about +1 point for each heavy weapon in a
squad (which include suits GLs in a PA squad). Or +1 for a SAW, +2 for a
PIG or GMS/P (I haven't played enough SG2 yet to know if these justify
different costs).
> -----Original Message-----
Sorry Yes PL would be 2.
I was using a Company as follows: 1 Command Squad (not Platoon) of 4 3 Rifle
Platoons Platoon = 2 squads of 4 1 PA Platoon PA Platoon = 1 squad of 6
I was thinking, somewhat, of what I could field with the figures I purchased.
I could field a company of: 1 Command Platoon of 8 3 Rifle Platoons of 8 2 PA
Squad of 4 1 PA Command Squad of 4
So it would have a RCC of
Rifle Squad 5 pts (2 for SL + 3 grunts @ 1)
Platoon Command Squad 5 pts (2 for PL + 3 grunts @ 1)
PA Squad 9 pts (3 for PASL + 3 PA @ 2)
PA Command Squad 11 pts (5 for PAPL + 3 PA @ 2)
CO Command Squad 10 pts (7 for CL + 3 grunts @ 1)
Rifle Platoon 10 pts (1 PL Command Squad + 1 Rifle Squad)
PA Platoon 29 pts (1 PAPL Command Squad + 2 PA Squad)
CO Command Platoon 15 pts (1 CO Squad + 1 Rifle Squad)
Company 74 pts (3 Rifle Plt + 1 PA Plt + 1 Cmp Command
Plt --
44 figures)
My company has 44 figures, yours has 136 figures. Another reason why terms
like "company" or "squad" need further investigation for balancing.
Using your figures I would be able to field...what...A mixed Platoon? 1
Command squad of 8 rifle 3 Squad of 8 rifle 2 PA Squad of 6 PA
So PL would be worth 7 (1+.10*(31 rifle + 12 PA))
And the cost of the mixed platoon would be 67 (27+26+14). So there is a
7 point difference in the way my squads would be organized (represents the
loss of 1 command level).
And yes, if you have a larger organization, the leadership values increase.
This represents (somewhat) the power of command activation. The more soldiers
you can command activate (directly or indirectly), the higher the Rough
Comparison Cost of the leader.
Anyway, it is untested.
> "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" wrote:
I can see what you're getting at - my quibble is that the force you're
fielding is probably a little too small to justify the 'company' tag and
the associated extra command level (and the _huge_ advantage that
confers in additional activations).
> My company has 44 figures, yours has 136 figures. Another reason why
Agreed. However, IMHO 44 men is still a little small to be called a company.
In real world forces the sizes of squads and platoons does vary
but the overall size of a company ends up being about the same - there
just ends up being more small squads, or fewer large ones (I'm prepared to be
corrected on this one by those with real military experience).
> Using your figures I would be able to field...what...A mixed Platoon?
I'd call it a reinforced platoon.
Just thinking about it in terms of activations available, my organisation
would have one activation per squad (6) plus another two possible by using the
PL to activate squads (although that would mean that the command squad itself
couldn't do anything). So the maximum number of squad activations is
effectively seven.
In your organisation, each rifle squad could activate itself, then the PL
could activate itself and the other squad in the platoon. That's three squad
activations per platoon (12 in total). Then the CL could activate two of the
PLs who then activate themselves plus their other
squad - another four squad activations. And then the command rifle squad
gets its own activation. So your organisation could perform 17(!) squad
activations per turn, activating 2 squads three times, 4 squads twice and
three once. Only the company commander's own squad wouldn't be activated since
he's busy telling everyone else what to do!
7 points probably isn't enough to represent the advantage of having this extra
comand level. How about costing the command figures in terms of the number of
activations they can potentially create? Make one activation worth 5 points,
so an SL is worth 6 (1 for the man and 5 for
his command level). A PL is worth 11 (1 + 10 for his ability to activate
two squads). A CC is then worth 21 because he can effectively cause four
squads to be activated by passing to PLs who then pass activations down to
squads. This is roughly what the leaders are worth in my full size company,
but would bump your mini company up to:
Rifle Squad 9 pts (6 for SL + 3 grunts @ 1)
Platoon Command Squad 14 pts (11 for PL + 3 grunts @ 1)
PA Squad 13 pts (7 for PASL + 3 PA @ 2)
PA Command Squad 18 pts (12 for PAPL + 3 PA @ 2)
CO Command Squad 24 pts (21 for CL + 3 grunts @ 1)
Rifle Platoon 23 pts (1 PL Command Squad + 1 Rifle Squad)
PA Platoon 44 pts (1 PAPL Command Squad + 2 PA Squad)
CO Command Platoon 33 pts (1 CO Squad + 1 Rifle Squad)
Company 146 pts (3 Rifle Plt + 1 PA Plt + 1 Cmp Command
Plt)
As a reinforced platoon with one platoon command squad (18 pts), 2 6-man
PA squads (17 each) and 3 rifle squads (13 each) it would be worth 91 pts.
This difference would more accurately reflect the huge advantage in command
structure that your company organisation has.
> And yes, if you have a larger organization, the leadership values
Sound idea in principle. It should reflect the worth of commanders in SG2.
Their worth shouldn't be understated, however.
> Anyway, it is untested.
Understood; it's an interesting idea and worth pursuing.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Bell, Brian K (Contractor) wrote:
> Sorry Yes PL would be 2.
I'm sorry, but a platoon of 8 figures striks me as rather silly. It gets you
the benefits of extra activations at a really low level.
Squads of 4 are small to my liking, but I know other people like using
them that way. Platoons of only 2 squads strike me as _really_ small,
especially with such small squads.
Are you suffering the same disease that affects most SF movies, command
structure inflatism?;)
As an option, make squads of 8 figures, and use the alternate detachmant rules
to make the two fireteams?
Cheers,
> --- Jaime Tiampo <fugu@spikyfishthing.com> wrote:
> Right. I think that's what's come out of it. YOu
Question: Suppose you're deliberately running a short company? Of course, that
would be a scenario
thing--especially if you're running a worn-down force
(the company has been hammered so badly that they broke up 3rd PLT to fill out
1st and 2nd, or some such).
I'm also interested in the "more regular infantry than PA" comments. Does this
mean you would have a problem with an TO&E that consolidated scarce suits of
PA into a single unit and stripped them out of everywhere else? NRE doctrine
consolidates all PA and Grav Armor
into one Corps which is the 'counter-attack corps',
where the more defensively oriented units are all
regular infantry (albeit combat-armored) and tracked
vehicles. So a Tagmatic infantry company is 3 platoons of powered armor and a
command squad.
Of course, I also can't imagine running a scenario
where I'd _need_ more than a platoon of troops. The
only time you'd catch NRE PA away from their vehicles would be the drop
infantry units and they are
generally veteran/elite. Which means I still don't
need more than a platoon.:)
> Now my question is who is the over all commander? If
You've always got _someone_ who's senior except in the
worst of situations. But I probably wouldn't let them activate other PLs.
No. I'm suffering from small budget. Since I am going to try to introduce SG2
locally, I purchased what I thought would be enough for 3 "nations". I decided
to go 15mm (partly from cost, partly because of the discussions on the list).
I purchased 4 Standard and 2 PA groups for 3 powers (NAC, NSL, KV).
I had a misconception of what a "platoon" consisted of.
Thanks to the members on the list, I will reorganize the forces into a
"Reinforced Platoon" (2 Levels of Command).
By the way, if you want to see a scan of the 15mm Kra'Vak, you can look at the
following. Shown is front and back of each of the 15mm Kra'Vak packs.
All http://www.ftsr.org/images/sg2/sg15-k.jpg (239k)
SG15-K1 http://www.ftsr.org/images/sg2/sg15-k1.jpg (95k) Line
SG15-K2 http://www.ftsr.org/images/sg2/sg15-k2.jpg (113k) Cavalry
SG15-K3 http://www.ftsr.org/images/sg2/sg15-k3.jpg (85k) Power Armor
The scans are "as arrived" (not painted, inked, or even cleaned of flash).
---
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net ICQ: 12848051 AIM: Rlyehable The Full Thrust Ship
Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
---
[quoted original message omitted]
> I was using a Company as follows:
Hack, spit! A platoon has to (by definition) have multiple squads. And 4 men
isn't a squad, it's a fire team (now, if these are SAS, then this is different
story--but it always is with elite forces). By my
count you've 34 bodies. That's a goddamn platoon in any army in the world.
Rename your platoons to squads. Rename your squads to fireteams. And call the
goddamn thing a platoon.
> I was thinking, somewhat, of what I could field with
That's still not a goddamn company. It's now a reinforced platoon.
> My company has 44 figures, yours has 136 figures.
Further investigation? If you'd just look the bloody term up in a dictionary
you wouldn't have this problem.
> Using your figures I would be able to
YES. That's what you've got.
"Platoon" has a specific meaning to wargamers and to soldiers. If I say
"platoon" then what I mean is
"unit between 20 and 50 men, composed of 3-5 squads
and led by junior officer or senior NCO". If you define platoon as "whatever I
feel like putting on the board and getting extra activations for" you are
going to piss people off and look ignorant[1].
> At 08:35 2/04/01 -0700, John Atkinson wrote:
<snip>
> That's still not a goddamn company. It's now a
<snip>
> Further investigation? If you'd just look the bloody
<snip>
> YES. That's what you've got.
A platoon 1.a military sub-unit consisting to two or more sections being
part of a company. 2. a company or group of persons.
Perhaps John should go stand in the corner;) when he's calmed down he can come
back and play with the grownups.
> -----Original Message-----
[snip]
> > Using your figures I would be able to
-----End Original Message-----
I claim ignorance. I did try to find a more definitive term and got from
Webster's: Platoon:
a subdivision of a company-size military unit normally consisting of two
or more squads or sections. I went to Dictonary,com and got the same answer.
So I thought to my self, "OK, 2 squads to a platoon". Then I looked up Company
and got: a body of soldiers; especially: a unit (as of infantry) consisting
usually of a headquarters and two or more platoons.
> From Dictionary.com I got:
A subdivision of a military regiment or battalion that constitutes the lowest
administrative unit. It is usually under the command of a captain and is made
up of at least two platoons. I still do not know how many are in a squad, so I
try "squad" and get: The smallest tactical unit of military personnel. and a
small organized group of military personnel; especially: a tactical unit that
can be easily directed in the field
I tried to check Jane's (http://www.janes.com/cgi-bin/glossary.cgi) for
a better definition, but came up empty. Still no information. So I guess at 4
to a squad. So, I thought "OK, at least 2 platoons to a company. I have 4 sets
of reglar troops. That gives me 3 platoons and a command platoon. And I have 2
reinforcing platoons of PA." I then posted to the list, my idea.
> From the feedback, I got it wrong.
I have already stated that I planned to change the organization to that of a
reinforced platoon.
What COMMON* online source would have had the correct definition of
"squad"?
*Recongizable from the top level domain (www.____.com).
---
> On 2-Apr-01 at 14:13, John Atkinson (johnmatkinson@yahoo.com) wrote:
> Of course, I also can't imagine running a scenario
I have one I'm setting up. I've mentionned it here before, it's a star wars
scenario for my SW fanatic friends. It's set in a swamp. There are areas where
men and walkers can sink. The rebels have full area knowledge, the Imperium
has little. It
is a "time-limited" scenario, the rebels do not have to defeat
the Imperium, they just have to hold them off.
Rebels:
a squad has 4 men, blaster rifle (fp2) or pistol (fp1), d6 armour.
green-vet, leader: 1-3
Company Commander: Vet-1
2xplatoon each with 2xrifles, 2xpistols
IP, 4 squads dug in, all hidden if the owning player so chooses.
Imperium
a squad has 8 men, blaster rifle (fp2) or pistol (fp1), d8 armour.
average-vet, leader 2-3
Force Commander: Ave-2
1 platoon, 2xrifles, 3xpistols
1 AT-ST "Chicken Walker"
What I am trying to model is the Stormtroopers having the advantages of
numbers, training, and equipment while the Rebels have the advantages of
terrain and independance. The one thing I'm not sure about is how long the
rebels should be capable of holding out as I don't have a feel for how much is
accomplished in a turn.
Brian,
> I claim ignorance. I did try to find a more definitive term....
I had the same problem myself. Too often people who have learned things act
like once they know them we all should know them. People who act like that are
just asses.
As someone who did not serve in the military I had a very hard time finding
many of the "basic" pieces of knowledge. That is until I found a couple of web
sites. Let me share...
If (and I say if) you want to build your TO&E on an American model then check
out:
http://www-tradoc.army.mil/pubs.htm
and under "Command Publications" go to the "Field Manuals". Once there go look
at the FM7 series. You will find TO&Es as well as many tactical issues. After
that browse the whole site. Lots of info to be had.
Once you are done there then head over to:
http://www.doctrine.quantico.usmc.mil/
Click on "Marine Corps Warfighting Publications" and then look at
"MCWP 3-1 Ground Combat Ops" This will take you to many of the USMC
Manuals. Again Browse at will as there is a lot of great info here.
As for John Atkins, ignore his rant. Knowledge is more fun when it is shared.
Enjoy.
Thank you for the links.
As for Mr.Atkins, I am sure I caught him at a bad moment, or I failed to
insert into my E-mail the searching tone that I was feeling.
My response was meant as an explanation that I was not trying to game the
system, but the lack of information that I was able to find.
Again, thank you for the links.
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
-----
> -----Original Message-----
OK, I know we have a lot of folks here from around the world, so please pipe
up with how your country does these things.
I myself, live in the United States of America, and spent 8 years in the
United States Marine Corps. Here's how we break things down. Keep in mind I've
been out of The Corps for about 5 years.
FireTeam - smallest unit, comprised of 4 men. The
FireTeam Leader is usually a Lance Corporal. The Point Man and 2 Riflemen are
usually Privates or PFCs. (heavy weapon teams, called Gun Teams, have a Gun
Team Leader, A Point Man, and two heavy weapon Marines called 'Gunners'
labeled as 'A Gunner' and 'B Gunner')
Squad - comprised of 3 FireTeams and a Squad Leader,
for a total of 13 men. The Squad Leader is usually a Corporal or Sergeant.
Platoon - comprised of 3 squads, a Guide (usually a
Corporal or Sergeant), a Platoon Sergeant (usually a Sergeant or Staff
Sergeant), and a Platoon Commander (usually a 1st or 2nd Lieutenant) for a
total of 42 men. Reinforced Platoons usually have at least 3 Gun Teams (heavy
weapon teams), one for each squad.
Company - comprised of 2 to 5 Platoons, a Company NCO
(usually a Staff Sergeant or Gunnery Sergeant), and a Company Commander
(usually a 1st Lieutenant or a Captain). One will usually be a HQ Platoon in
which the various support personnel are based (motor transport, admin, etc.)
Battalion - (called a Battery if it is an artillery
unit) Comprised of 2 to 5 Companies, a Battalion NCO (usually a 1st Sergeant
or Master Sergeant), and a Battalion Commander (Usually a Major or Lieutenant
Colonel).
Regiment - comprised of 2 to 5 Battalions, Regimental
NCO (usually a Sergeant Major), and a regimental Commander (usually a
Colonel).
this is a rough ladder of how units are organized in the USMC. Keep in mind,
there are a million variations depending on the specialization of the unit,
but this is the unit breakdown for a basic Marine Rifleman Platoon. Also,
remember, you will NEVER have anything larger then a Platoon without
artillery, armor, and air support.
Let me know if this helps.
--- "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
> <Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil> wrote:
> On Tue, 03 April 2001, "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" wrote:
> What COMMON* online source would have had the correct definition of
Well, there are a number of sites on the web. However, I like this one as a
"layman's" site.
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/
It's a site for tips on writing military science fiction. There is a lot of
stuff here, distilled for combat sf writers and for wargamers.
The first place to check is under "Essays". Here is the URL for jumping there
directly:
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/essays1.htm
What you want to check out first is the page on organization:
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/organization.htm
Another good section on this site is Combat Operations:
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/CombatOperations.htm
...which leads to his Tactics section, which is very useful:
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/tactics2.htm
It's a good "one stop shopping" location, anyway.
The author of the site is an ex-Marine NCO. I'd be interested in seeing
how accurate his stuff is, but it seemed pretty good and reasonable to me.
> On Tue, 03 April 2001, "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" wrote:
> What COMMON* online source would have had the correct definition of
Well, there are a number of sites on the web. However, I like this one as a
"layman's" site.
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/
It's a site for tips on writing military science fiction. There is a lot of
stuff here, distilled for combat sf writers and for wargamers.
The first place to check is under "Essays". Here is the URL for jumping there
directly:
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/essays1.htm
What you want to check out first is the page on organization:
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/organization.htm
Another good section on this site is Combat Operations:
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/CombatOperations.htm
...which leads to his Tactics section, which is very useful:
http://web.qx.net/warcat/MilSF/tactics2.htm
It's a good "one stop shopping" location, anyway.
The author of the site is an ex-Marine NCO. I'd be interested in seeing
how accurate his stuff is, but it seemed pretty good and reasonable to me.
In message <20010403175714.889.cpmta@c001.zsm.cp.net>, agoodall@canada.com
writ es:
> The author of the site is an ex-Marine NCO. I'd be interested in
Yeah-- I wish he would attribute a lot of the facts he puts out.
> On Tue, 03 April 2001, Andy Cowell wrote:
> Yeah-- I wish he would attribute a lot of the facts he puts out.
Agreed. And his "Recommended Books" are heavy on sci-fi and very light
on reference material.
On the other hand, he has a lot of positive responses in his guestbook,
several from military types. For the purposes of SF wargaming (oh, and he does
make reference to writers AND gamers) it does the trick.
I wouldn't use this as a thesis reference or anything, but his tactics section
seemed to make sense.
I just got this, first I read of the initial comments.
I just sent off a reply earlier with the breakdown of fireteams, squads,
platoons, companies, and regiments that we use in the US Marine Corps. Please
be aware that I was giving a textbook structure, and only for the USMC, it's a
bit different for every nation, but most follow the same basic structure.
I do want to say one thing.....John, you are really not being very helpful.
Flamming someone on this list doesn't solve anything. Being abusive to people
coming to this mailing list for help sure isn;t the way to improve everyone's
gaming experience. I am sure you had no intention of being abusive, but it
came accross that way. You might want to consider
re-reading you emails before you send them out. That
helps filter out momentary emotions.
> --- Derek Fulton <derekfulton@bigpond.com> wrote:
> --- Derek Fulton <derekfulton@bigpond.com> wrote:
> A platoon 1.a military sub-unit consisting to two or
And you can define a cow as "animal with four feet and a tail". And for a
resident of New York City that's perfectly adequate. But if you work with the
damn things you need to be more specific.
> At 03:56 3/04/01 -0700, you wrote:
> --- Derek Fulton <derekfulton@bigpond.com> wrote:
John
Your not wrong, neither are you correct.
Hooks him, reels him in, looks him over. A bit small really, wasn't really
worth the effort. Throw him back.
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, John Atkinson wrote:
> --- Derek Fulton <derekfulton@bigpond.com> wrote:
Um, iirc, you, John, told him/them to 'go look it up
in a bloody dictionary' (or words very similar to
that effect). Ya got what ya wished for... ;-)
He could, but then he would have to kill you...
Michael Brown
[quoted original message omitted]
G'day guys,
I personally like a good edam, so you've got to realise how much torture it is
to open my email and find that cheese actually means unit organisation.....;P
Seriously though, not all of us know correct unit organisation, so for those
who do actually want to learn the helpful pointers to resources and polite
explanations are very helpful. However, on the flip side as pointed out for
the UN discussion this is science fiction so I'd anticipate a little more
flexibility. This is one of the main reasons I usually play
aliens - it means people won't b*tch to me about the fact its not
"organised correctly". Come paying job time though I do intend on getting some
human figures, but as the supreme commander of the IAS I can tell you they
will be in 5 man squads and that will be 6 squads to whatever the next level
of organisation is called. There is no deep military reason behind
this other than I like each fig to be different and that's how many figs
I'll have;)
Having said that though I would understand if people were upset if I got a
more senior commander with each squad and so could reactivate everything 6
times over. It has to be a balance of tolerance and common sense. Derek is
going to have to tolerate seeing small squads on the board and I'm going to
have to be sensible about how many levels of command that reasonably
represents.
Just a thought
Beth
[quoted original message omitted]
> --- Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au> wrote:
> Seriously though, not all of us know correct unit
Platoon. And OK, that's not really a problem. But I can tell in "Real Life"
that the reason that
militaries adopted the '3-5 rule' on how many subunits
any unit can have is due to the limits of command and control. Give a
commander more than 5 things to worry about and it overwhelms his ability to
keep track of things.
And 5 man squads... It's your army, but you're going to start loosing combat
effectiveness quickly once you start taking casualties. I've considered taking
my
light guys to WWII standards--12 or 13 man squads.
> I personally like a good edam, so you've got to realise how much
Brie with butter, almonds and brown sugar, thanks
> Seriously though, not all of us know correct unit organisation, so
Well, kind of. However, there are going to be some basics which make some
versions more efficient and others less.
a. Guys bond, i.e. form teams, best with a relatively small
number--three to eight if I recall correctly. The military ("of one
nation or another", he weasels) has done studies on this kind of thing.
b. You need enough guys in a fire team to look after each other and
cover all directions.
c. You need to have enough subunits that your unit commander has
some maneuver choices--this is why most units have 3-5 subunits
instead of 2.
d. On the other hand, you need few enough units that your commander
can keep track of them--this is why most units have 3-5 subunits
instead of 8-10, most people can't keep track of more than 4-5 things
at a time,
Therefore you will have 3-4 soldiers to a team, two or three teams to
a squad, three to five squads in a platoon, etc. Higher units are usually
triangular or square, ie three or four major subunits, plus attached support.
--- "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
> <Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil> wrote:
Indeed.
I was a bit more snappish than the occasion called for and hereby publicly
apologize to Mr.Bell.
G'day,
John pointed out:
> Give a commander more than 5 things to worry
Mmm they need more mothers in the front line...;P
> And 5 man squads. . . It's your army, but you're going
I do see you point, especially if you use Allan's cumulative damage rules.
However given who organisational ratios have changed in many other fields over
the last 100 yrs I'd fully expect their to be more room for change in military
ones over the next 200 yrs...especially if fancy gadgetry or platoon pets
(drones etc) become popular (though there's not as much of that in SG).
Laserlight said
> a. Guys bond
....must be good.... ;)
> b. You need enough guys in a fire
I'm not disagreeing with the fact that works and that's why its used now, I'm
just saying that future developments or even constraints may see some changes
to that (at least in some cases) so there is room for flexibility when it
comes to scifi.
Cheers
Beth
> -----Original Message-----
IIRC the post psychological phrase is "primary groups"
> b. You need enough guys in a fire team to look after each other and
At home I have a book called "changing orders" which surveys the TOE's of
several nations (USA, West/East Germany, UK, Japan, Russia, France,
India, Israel at a couple others) from 1945 to 1995 mainly at the battalion
and brigade levels and goes into things like "command span" and tries to
tackle questions like "why did anyone think that the pentatomic division was a
good idea?" or "just how is a Russian regimental commander supposed to keep
track of all the units that were supposed to report to him?" IIRC 4
battalions, a recon company,
some artillery, some engineers ... about 7 - 8 units with a very small
staff. There is a reason that nearly every nation on the planet has 4 tanks in
a platoon.
Oh and just to confuse things - in British usage some units which other
people would call Battalions get called regiments such as Armour or Recon.
Rob, you are totally correct. A Company is called a Battery in Artillery
units, not a Battalion.
Sorry, I wrote this fairly late at night. Heh heh heh
I was a grunt (even worse...a landing specialist...I was the dead body on the
beach) when active duty......didn't know much about the arty boys until I got
in the reserves, then I was attached to the 14th Marine Regiment, which is a
reserve unit that functions as the active duty artillery unit for the 1st MEU.
So I only learned about artillery (other then calling for fire of course) my
last few years.
--- "Robert W. Hofrichter" <RobHofrich@peoplepc.com>
wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> Having said that though I would understand if people were
I think Beth has hit the perfect attitude here.
Well written Beth!
--- "Robert W. Hofrichter" <RobHofrich@peoplepc.com>
wrote:
> > Battalion - (called a Battery if it is an
I know in the Army, the cannon-cockers call their
companies "batteries" and their battalions "Battalions". Spent plenty of time
hanging out with
2/3 FA (the only other unit on post--which had almost
as many gamers as the Engineers).
> On 3 Apr 2001 agoodall@canada.com wrote:
> On Tue, 03 April 2001, Andy Cowell wrote:
Two books I've found recently that are worth a look: (sometimes I love working
in the library...)
- "Military Operations Other Than War" - LTC Keith E. Bonn, USA (ret) &
MSG Anthony E. Baker, USAR (ret); c. 2000 Stackpole Books, ISBN
0-8117-2939-7.
This is a technical operations manual, designed for the military reader. I can
only assume our public library got it for the navy types out in Esquimalt.
It's interesting, once you hack through the acronyms. Lots of information on
all aspects of military operations, usually from the
on-scene commander's point of view (company or battalion).
The definition of military ops other than war that they give is grimly
amusing: "operations that are not meant primarily to kill people or break
things - unless they have to."
It's given me some SG2 scenario ideas - restrictive ROEs are nasty!
The other book:
- "Soldiers of Diplomacy: The United Nations, Peacekeeping, and the New
World Order." Jocelyn Coulon; translated by P. Aronoff & H. Scott; c
1994/1998 University of Toronto Press. ISBN 0-8020-0899-2.
The 'new world order' bit will get some of our American listees excited, but
this is a good overview of UN peacekeeping, peace enforcing, and interventions
generally.
Not really directly related to GZG stuff - only a few scenario ideas -
but a good political science book on the UN's military activities.
===
The first of these has more direct gaming applications - if you can get
a copy on interlibrary loan it's worth some time.
> Yep, I 'tolerate quite a lot from Beth :)
How nice, I suppose that it does make for a much better...gaming atmosphere.
<g>
> At 08:09 4/04/01 -0700, you wrote:
Yep, I 'tolerate quite a lot from Beth:)
Brian,
I don't know if you missed this link I pasted at the end of the an email I
sent earlier, but it has a lot of very useful orbats.
http://www-solar.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~aaron/mod_org.html
Owen
> -----Original Message-----