I was wondering if anyone had played around with Platoon Leaders and Platoon
Sergeants in SG2 to replicate realistic platoon formations.
I've been reading the U.S. Army's Rifle Platoon and Squad manual
(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/7-8/ch2.h
tm).
I see that, according to this model, the Platoon Leader and the Platoon
Sergeant are often physically separated from each other. They are almost
like two command squads for the same platoon. SG2, of course, has these two
functions in one unit.
I was wondering if anyone has tried to model this. The options I came up
with were:
1. Don't model it. Assume that the SG2 platoon command unit is an abstraction.
Although it may contain the Platoon Leader and Platoon Sergeant, assume that
they are, in reality, separated and the unit is an
"average" position for the command unit.
2. Model them as two command units for the platoon, each with the ability to
transfer one action.
3. Model them as two command units for the platoon, each with the ability to
transfer up to two actions.
4. Model them as two command units for the platoon, but give the Platoon
Sergeant the ability to transfer only one action to a squad.
I was just wondering if anyone had tried to model this level of detail in SG2.
4. Model them as two command units for the platoon, but give the Platoon
Sergeant the ability to transfer only one action to a squad
That's the way John A and myself have run all our games, I forget where the
optional rules came from off hand, but I have them here somewhere.
This is one area that has made it hard to get playing SG. Based on my own
experience the PSG should be modeled better. Based your message I think that a
second one transfer command squad would work.
Mike
[quoted original message omitted]
> At 12:02 PM -0800 1/21/05, Katrina Brown wrote:
Or more accurately, the Lt has one action and the PSG has two.
Sgt, what do you think we should do? Well, Lt, in my experience we'd be best
served by putting our weapons team here and there with the bulk of our force
along this and that street in the buildings.
Or more accurately,
"Sgt Major!"
"SAH!"
"Deploy the Men please"
"SAH!" *Stomp*
"Right you lot, 1st platoon up there on the hill, Second platoon, you're right
here with the Major, third platoon, come with me!"
> 4. Model them as two command units for the platoon, but give the
In a message dated 21/01/2005 20:15:20 GMT Standard Time,
> rmgill@mindspring.com writes:
Or more accurately,
"Sgt Major!"
"SAH!"
"Deploy the Men please"
"SAH!" *Stomp*
"Right you lot, 1st platoon up there on the hill, Second platoon, you're right
here with the Major, third platoon, come with me!"
That sort of suggests that there is just one command squad. It just happens
its the one with the Sgt in it, not the one with the Lt.
John
Actually the PSG's input is before the battle (OPORD stage). During he is
usually taking control of some sub element (usually the base of fire support
or the Vehicles in a Mech Platoon).
Mike
[quoted original message omitted]
> 1. Don't model it. Assume that the SG2 platoon command unit is an
I don't like this approach, because you've got specific figures for
the squad leaders, specialists, and so forth--why should you abstract
the PL / PSG? As far as whether the PSG and PL an transfer a total of
two, three, or four actions, I'd say either one each, or one and two. Although
I wouldn't be opposed to having it vary by nationality, or even vary somewhat
per platoon.
> At 9:05 PM -0500 1/21/05, WJAL21@aol.com wrote:
Or more likely, a command platoon for the company and a command squad for each
platoon.
> At 8:44 PM -0800 1/21/05, Katrina Brown wrote:
Depends on how things are hitting the fan. Senior NCO's that know their
business are worth their weight in gold. Any good officer knows this.
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 01:30:23 -0500, Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com>
wrote:
> At 8:44 PM -0800 1/21/05, Katrina Brown wrote:
On the other hand, the Platoon Leader is the Platoon Leader. In a platoon that
works correctly, you have one platoon leader, not a platoon sergeant that
thinks he's the platoon leader. You are exaggerating the role of the NCO
Corps, as unlikely as that sounds coming from a CPL(P) on the list to make SGT
on 1 FEB.
> On Saturday, January 22, 2005, at 03:13 AM, John Atkinson wrote:
> On the other hand, the Platoon Leader is the Platoon Leader.
Leaders lead...NCOs execute.
Which leads me to say you should create a command squad which includes a
Platoon Leader, SGT, and attached assets.
Damo
> I was wondering if anyone had played around with Platoon Leaders and
Tom Barclay wrote about this back at the end of 2001. Take a peek his articles
at:
http://www.stargrunt.ca/rules/sg2_platoon_sergeants/sg2_platoon_sergeant
s.htm
and
http://www.stargrunt.ca/rules/sg2_leaders_as_individuals/sg2_leaders_as_
indi viduals.htm
He suggests a modified version of the "2 and 1" method.
> I see that, according to this model, the Platoon Leader and the Platoon
> Sergeant are often physically separated from each other. They are
> two functions in one unit.
In "all infantry" games, I normally don't bother with this level of detail. I
figure that, as John Atkinson pointed out, there is usually only one Platoon
Leader and that person is giving the orders. The Platoon Sergeant is
implementing them, and the whole process is abstracted into the way the rules
work as written.
I've used a version of this, however, when playing games with heavily
mechanized platoons. I use vehicles as separate units, so if I put a mech
platoon on the table, I can end up with 8 to 10 "units" within one platoon
(for example - command squad, medics, 3 rifle squads, 4 vehicles = 9
units). Having that many units under one platoon commander dilutes their
command ability. So, I tried playing it with the platoon sergeant taking
command of the vehicles. One of the vehicles will be designated as the Platoon
Sergeant's unit. That unit gets its two actions per activation as normal, and
can transfer ONE of the actions. But, it can only transfer an
action to reactivate the other vehicles - not to the rifle squads in the
platoon. The platoon commander can transfer both actions as normal, and to
everyone INCLUDING the vehicles.
This has worked just fine in the games I've used it.
> The GZG Digest wrote:
> Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 05:06:59 -0500
http://www.stargrunt.ca/rules/sg2_platoon_sergeants/sg2_platoon_sergeant
s.htm
> and
http://www.stargrunt.ca/rules/sg2_leaders_as_individuals/sg2_leaders_as_
indi
> viduals.htm
That would probably work. Thanks, Adrian!
> In "all infantry" games, I normally don't bother with this level of
The only thing that bothers me about abstraction like this is that you don't
get squads deploying within platoons like you do in real life. I was wondering
about rules to help enforce realistic squad dispositions.
> --- Allan Goodall <agoodall@att.net> wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone had played around with Platoon Leaders and
(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/7-8/ch2.h
tm).
> [quoted text omitted]
You can find the manuals for the new Stryker organizations at the Army Digital
Training Document Library SBCT Platoon and Squad:
http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/atia/adlsc/view/public/297083-1/fm/3-
21.9/toc.htm
note that the 4 strykers have capacity for 44 persons and the platoon has 46
members:) SBCT Company:
http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/atia/adlsc/view/public/297084-1/fm/3-
21.11/toc.htm
SBCT Battalion:
http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/atia/adlsc/view/public/297085-1/fm/3-
21.21/toc.htm
the same 7-8 manual as at GlobalSecurity:
http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/atia/adlsc/view/public/296993-1/fm/7-
8/toc.htm
and the new M2A3 Mech Infantry Platoon and Squad manual:
http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/atia/adlsc/view/public/297088-1/fm/3-
21.71/toc.htm
others can be found through the search engine:
http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/application?origin=librarysearch.jsp&
event=bea.portal.framework.internal.portlet.event&pageid=RDL%20Services&
portletid=LibrarySearch&wfevent=selectlists&docGroup=official the Armor branch
and some Artillery branch manuals are restricted but the Infantry and some of
the Cavalry ones are unclassified. Many are available as both html and pdf if
you want to save a copy and
have a high speed connection (20,000-60,000k each pdf), just click on
the yellow circle with the down-pointing arrow
> I see that, according to this model, the Platoon Leader and the
Yes.
> 3. Model them as two command units for the platoon, each with the
but we play with fireteams rather than squads and each support weapon team as
a seperate unit, so that the 3x rifle squads and 1x weap squad
(in light/ranger/abn/stryker) are 6 rifle teams and 2-4 weapon teams
(and USMC units would have 9 rifle teams). Platoon medic and FO are also
seperate units. So there are a lot of SG2 "units" and the command
reactivations are diluted.
Special rule for Platoon Sergeant (PSgt): When activating units within the
platoon the PSgt counts as the same command level as the PL for the
communications roll, but when communicating with higher command (such as
requesting company or battalion mortars) the PSgt counts as 1 level below the
PL.
J
> The GZG Digest wrote:
> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 09:49:19 -0800 (PST)
Thank you!
> but we play with fireteams rather than squads and each support weapon
I've been toying with the idea of modeling fire teams for a while and I think
I have them where I want them. At least, in theory... Using a Platoon Leader
and a Platoon Sergeant as separate command units makes a lot of sense in this
regard. I had intended on having each of these units transfer an action to a
specific squad, but if I allow each to transfer a single action to a squad (or
up to two actions to two different fire teams), it preserves the "one command
unit can transfer two actions, total" rule.
> Platoon medic and FO are
Good idea.
> Special rule for Platoon Sergeant (PSgt):
I like this rule! I'm going to steal it. Hope you don't mind! *S*