[SG] Leader placement

Just wondering how everyone assigns their leaders.

I would assume the platoon commander (captain?) is assigned to a squad within
a platoon.

What about the leader directly above him, assuming multiple platoons. Would he
be in a squad in a platoon or should he be on his own or be attached to a
squad responsible for keeping him alive that is external to the platoons under
his command?

> Roger Books wrote:

I put my Lt in a squad in the platoon. I have 3 regular squads and a command
squad.

> What about the leader directly above him, assuming

The company Cpt. is put in his own squad that is external to the platoons.

Seems to me that a sort of Company Command Section usually pops up for this.

Eli
> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 10:01:46 -0500 (EST)

So you get something like this?

Company Command Squad
 |  \_Company Commander
 |   \_Rest of Command Squad
 |______________________________
 |              |              |
Platoon        Platoon	     Platoon
 |
 |__________________________
 |                         |
Plt Command Squad      2nd Squad
   \_Platoon Leader         \_Rifle
    \_Rifle                  \_Rifle
     \_Rifle                  \_Rifle
      \_SAW                    \_GMS/P

-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
http://www.ftsr.org

On 28-Mar-01 at 12:57, Bell, Brian K (Contractor)
(Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil) wrote: > So you get something like this?
> Company Command Squad

That makes sense. I know many here prefer 8 man squads, does the Company
Command Squad get the full 8 men? I have come to the realization that if you
make the 'Captain' part of a platoon it rather limits his use of transfering
actions.

Hi Roger,

> Just wondering how everyone assigns their leaders.

I usually set it up similarly to the way others' have mentioned. In my regular
platoons (and PA platoons) the platoon commander is in a squad. For my NAC, I
run it with a 6 model command squad (including an EW trooper model, though not
always used as such) and a separate 2 model medic unit. I treat the medics as
a separate "squad" though there are only two of them, and they get to run
around the platoon area helping out with treating wounded as necessary (and
occasionally helping out with their rifles... it's amazing how effective two
troopers with just rifles can be if used at the right moment to dump down a
supression). At the company level, (well, I only have one company size
formation of SG figures, and that is my NAC
-
other stuff is all single platoons only) I have a company command squad (appx
6 models, including EW, etc.) that represents command staff, commo guys,
attached FOs, etc., and an additional 6 model "security" squad that
is beefy - two SAW gunners and a Plasma Gun trooper - to protect the
commander and his staff. Then I have an attached squad of three mortars
(I
guess a mortar battery?) that is also a "company level" asset.

Some people (Tom Barclay is a proponent of this, I believe) like to have the
platoon commanders running around as single figures sometimes. I
understand why - it is more in keeping with what "real" platoon
commanders do in most western armies. I'm happy keeping the game a bit more
abstracted, and letting the platoon commander stick with the riflemen who are
assigned to him.

Yes, What I would object to is if someone organized the company as follows:

Company Commander (Independant Figure)
  |
Company Command Squad
  |  \
  |   \_Rest of Command Squad
  |
  |_____________________________________________
  |                             |              |
 _|____________                _|_            _|_
Platoon Leader PL PL
(Independant Figure)           -+-            -+-
 -+------------                 |              |
  |                             |              |
Platoon Platoon Platoon
  |
  |__________________________
  |                         |
Plt Command Squad 2nd Squad
    \_Rifle                  \_Rifle
     \_Rifle                  \_Rifle
      \_Rifle                  \_Rifle
       \_SAW                    \_GMS/P

If not obvious, this would give an extra level of command.

---
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net ICQ: 12848051 AIM: Rlyehable The Full Thrust Ship
Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
---

[quoted original message omitted]

In message <NFBBJACGGLFJHGBEMHHBMEEPCBAA.bkb@beol.net>, "Brian Bell" writes:
> Yes,

Actually, this doesn't give an extra level of command, it simply gives the PL
an extra unit to activate. It's similar to assigning the PL to a normal squad,
and letting it activate itself. It *could* be a used as a bit of gamemanship,
but not really that bad.

My command squads are typically smaller, say 4-5 people, because for
whatever reason that's what feels realistic to me. It's pretty much the PL and
a few riflemen to protect him. It's not so different than

> On 28-Mar-01 at 22:25, Andy Cowell (andy@cowell.org) wrote:

I had wondered what people are using to protect their leaders. Wouldn't you be
better off with soldiers with close combat weapons? Neither is going to help
with a sniper or long range shots, but the pistol packing troops are much
better in close combat. I guess the should really have both.

> on 3/28/01 21:19, Andy Cowell at andy@cowell.org wrote:

> In message <NFBBJACGGLFJHGBEMHHBMEEPCBAA.bkb@beol.net>, "Brian Bell"
writes:
> Yes,

Ah...but it does all what is basically the platoon HQ people to activate
separately from the PL which permits the PL to transfer actions without having
a negative effect on the rest of the platoon HQ.

> My command squads are typically smaller, say 4-5 people, because for

I tend to go with a slightly smaller HQ unit as well. I can't see having
the PL completely separate as he/she should have some support staff as
well (besides I plan a fair amount of WWII skirmish and all the PL have
support personnel so it's also a familiarity thing for me).

I guess that here is where I would call "cheese". I would argue that a unit
cannot reactivate itself. So if a Platoon Leader (PL) is part of a platoon,
the PL could not reactivate the platoon (i.e. itself). Reactivating the
platoon should only be done by the company commander (1 level up).

Also, if you set the PL as a seperate level in the chain of command the
Platoon could get 3 activations (it's own, and 2 from the PL).

-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
-----

> -----Original Message-----

In message <2A5C49585B46EC42BB99D3000F725D4707471F@col1smx01.dscc.dla.mil>,
"Be
> ll, Brian K (Contractor)" writes:

The platoon would be made up of individual squads, one of which could possibly
get 3 activations in either of these two mechanisms. In the first, with the
individual Platoon leader, there's simply an additional optional squad which
could do this.

Under normal SG2 TO&E, IIRC, the PL is part of the platoon, but still the head
of the platoon, and the PL squad can activate any other squad in the platoon.
This is normal. The company commander could activate

> --- Roger Books <books@jumpspace.net> wrote:

> I had wondered what people are using to protect

Lieutenants don't rate that much protection.

Company commander--his convoy in Kosovo usually had 2
M16s and a SAW, plus his M4.  Minimum, of course--he
frequently had more.

--- "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
> <Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil> wrote:

I'm confused.

How could the platoon leader not be part of the platoon? And how could the
platoon leader reactive himself? I don't understand what you're driving at.

> On 29-Mar-01 at 15:36, John Atkinson (johnmatkinson@yahoo.com) wrote:

He is somehow assuming the platoon gets activations. The platoon never gets an
activation. Squads get activations. If your platoon leader is inside the
platoon he can activate any two of the squads he is not in on his activation.
If he is outside he can activate any two of the squads in the platoon. The
difference being he is not in one he cannot activate.

> --- Roger Books <books@mail.state.fl.us> wrote:

Lieutenant. Very rare to have a captain in charge of a line platoon. SF forces
are different.

> What about the leader directly above him, assuming

A company commander has a few flunkies--radio
operators and drivers and such. That's all I give him. He shouldn't need extra
protection.

> --- Roger Books <books@mail.state.fl.us> wrote:

Lieutenant. Very rare to have a captain in charge of a line platoon. SF forces
are, as always, different. They have captains in charge of squads.

> What about the leader directly above him, assuming

A company commander has a few flunkies--radio
operators and drivers and such. That's all I give him. He shouldn't need extra
protection.

Hi,

Just for interest sake,

> Just wondering how everyone assigns their leaders.

> Lieutenant. Very rare to have a captain in charge of

Yep. But also depends on which army you're talking about. British and
Brit-descended forces (ie Canada) have a slightly different rank : unit
organization structure. For example, in the US military, Captains are
typically company commanders (in, for sake of discussion, the infantry). In
Canada, company commanders are Majors, with the company 2ic and the "battle
captain" being Captains. Also, certain platoons will certainly have a Captain
as the platoon leader. Recce platoons, every platoon in our Airborne forces
(such as they are), I think the Assault Pioneer platoons, etc. Regular line
infantry platoons are commanded by Lieutenants.

I'm not sure why the Brits and Canadians do this, doctrinally. I think the
idea is to keep experienced leadership at a lower level for longer (ie, not
promote guys who get good at leading troops to staff positions quite so
quickly). Or something like that. Maybe it's just simple tradition.

Maybe someone else has an insight.

Either way, John is quite right, and a *typical* line platoon has a Lieutenant
as boss.

********************************************

Sorry, I was being confusing.

If a platoon has 2 units (a command squad and a 2nd squad), it seemed cheesy
to me to alow the Platoon Leader (PL) to use his action to reactivate both the
2nd squad and his own squad giving it (and through it, himself) another set of
actions (move, fire, communicate, command?).

Now, if you use common sense and disallow reactivation of a squad to which you
are a part, then the PL only has 1 squad on which to spend command activation.

If you state that a figure may not reactivate himself, but may reactivate his
squad, then his squad is limited in thier actions because they cannot move out
of unit integrety.

Which is the proper way to read this?

-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
-----

> -----Original Message-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Bell, Brian K (Contractor) wrote:

> Sorry, I was being confusing.
another
> set of actions (move, fire, communicate, command?).

If you're using the PL CDR as a seperate individual, he could get to
reactivate either squad, but...

> Now, if you use common sense and disallow reactivation of a squad to

... since he's a seperate individual he would not profit from said
reactivation?

At least, that's how I would read it.

> If you state that a figure may not reactivate himself, but may

I thought individuals did not have to adhere to unit integrity? Isn't that the
whole point of individuals?

Cheers,