Command Reactivation (some history)

3 posts ยท Mar 28 2001 to Mar 29 2001

From: Barclay, Tom <tomb@b...>

Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 15:05:31 -0500

Subject: Command Reactivation (some history)

Someone asked about Grey Day.

During Grey Day, the forces on one side were 2 KV clans under a joint
leadership and two human forces under a joint leadership.

The command structure of the humans (the one I recall off the cuff) (it is
missing a few units...)

NSL Colonel
   |
FSE Major (Hi Kr'rt.... this is the chick you sniped in the last turn from RB1
in hiding...)
   |
____________________________________________
|            |        |                    |
Vehicles    FSE Cpt  NSL Cpt		 NSL Lt
             |         |                   |
4 FSE Sqds 4 NSL Sqds 4 NSL Sqds

The Platoon Cmdrs could reactivate (with each action of their activation) up
to 2 subordinate units once each. Similarly, the higher level command
structure could reactivate up to 2 platoons. The XO I can't recall if I let
reactivate the platoons, but the NSL commander could (and did) reactivate the
platoon cmdrs (more effective than reactivating individual platoon units, due
to die roll penalties and due to the fact 1 reactivated platoon leader buys
you 2 reactivations in the platoon). I think if I was doing it
again, I'd probably let the XO+CO activate a total of 3 subordinate
element between them.

I also use platoon sergeants, but lets not overload you all at once.

I think the impact of command is a _key_ element in SG2. I like to limit
the reactivations the way Jon T just suggested because it mostly prevents
insanity with units activating 4 and 6 times.... I also like to attach
vehicles at a higher command level, because they can be quite nasty and

From: Andy Cowell <andy@c...>

Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 14:23:35 -0600

Subject: Re: Command Reactivation (some history)

In message
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A54D070@host-253.bitheads.com>, "Bar
> clay, Tom" writes:

I think this is usually how it's done in most modern forces, as well. I
*think* tank platoons are attached to infantry company commanders, but usually
not much lower. I *think* a battalion attachment is most

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 06:16:07 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: Command Reactivation (some history)

> --- Andy Cowell <andy@cowell.org> wrote:

> I think this is usually how it's done in most modern

In US practice, yes.

For attachments, they are usually attached where they should logically go.
Companies are attached to batallions. Platoons are attached to companies. The
only armor under the command of an infantry platoon leader are his own
Bradleys.