Mordel's Bar & Grill
ranking dilemma
 Pages (2): « [1] 2 »
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Mordel's Bar & Grill Forum Index » General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Major


Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611

PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 03:52    Post subject: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

Just for the hell of it the other day I was sitting down to work on the TO&E for my custom nation and I've run into a bit of a problem.

I wanted the ranks to be equal across the branches, as in an Ensign leads a platoon, armor lance/mech lance/air lance. With Lt. as company execs and Captains as company commanders.

But in the infantry unit I have this problem. You see I've never really liked the standard Btech infantry platoon. In mine the squads are 14 men, 3 4-man fire teams, a Sgt. and a Lance Corporal. Platoons are 3 squads, a 3 man mortar team, a 2 man SRM team, a LT., a Master Sgt, and 2 medics for 51 men total plus 3 APCs with 12 crewmen. All under the command of the most junior of officers.

For one of my companys its 3 platoons and a weapons platoon with Company HQ element that comes up to 256 infantry, 14 APCs, a tank lance, and a couple of light mobile arty guns just because I can. 6 of those men are officers plus 1 more for the tanks and arty.

Now while I do like the units as I've organized them, the number of officers seems low. I can add a few staff officers to the company HQ, but a mech inf platoon of mine is close to being 2 btech platoons and an armor lance. While one of my companies is worth a btech battalion.

And having all those APCs makes me ask the question, should there be APC lance pr company officers? With 14 per company surely one or more of them has an officer for a vehicle commander? And if so who commands the platoon, the infantry or APC officer?

So now what I'm wondering is, should the Ensign be my 2nd Lt and the only officer in the platoon? Or should the platoon have an LT with an ensign to assist him, as in the 1800s British army where an ensign was really an officer cadet in the field.

And beyond that should the 3 APCs have an officer and if so which one is the unit CO? After all, my APCs are considered medium tanks in firepower so if there are no APC officers, that would mean that an armor officer in my army has half the chance of command or promotion as does an infantry or battlemech officer while APCs sgts have little chance to be promoted up to officer.

Anyhow, its 4 in the morning here and before I finally go to bed I figured I'd bounce this off of somebody since these questions have been bouncing around in my own head since before dinner.

For instance, how do APCs work in the US army? no one but Sgts commanding them, or are there APC platoons with APC specialising officers like there are tank platoons and armor officers?
_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
Back to top View profile Send site message Send e-mail
Seraph
Blighted Sun Battalion
2nd Company
"Seraph's Slaughter"
Major
Major


Joined: 11-Mar-2004 00:00
Posts: 1744

PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 06:44    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

Well...that was a screen full.
In a mechanized inf platoon, the CO is a grunt not a tanker.
You could have 3 grades of LT's...1st LT, 2nd LT, and LT JG(junior grade). And don't forget that there are a few grades of NCO's in the inf groups. Master SGT, chief, master chief,etc..
Also in most btech forces the Mechwarriors out rank the grunts and tankers unless they are an officer.
In today's forces APC CO's are in a seperate TO&E unless in a battle situation, carrying troops. Then it's usually the grunt in charge but it also depends on ranks and chains of command.
_________________
If ignorance is bliss, then why are you so miserable?
Back to top View profile Send site message
Nightmare
Lyran Alliance
Kommandant-General
Kommandant-General


Joined: 03-May-2002 00:00
Posts: 2214

PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 09:48    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

An APC with the firepower of a medium tank is surely a tank unit with attached infantry.

As for promotions, well, what's so hard about it? There's only a certain number of higher posts and everyone can't possibly qualify. If you want to help the tankers working with infantry, just say it's a requirement for higher command. An officer should be familiar with other branches anyway.

_________________
A tree fall in the forest, and no one is around, and it hits a mime. Does anyone care?
Back to top View profile Send site message
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Major


Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611

PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 11:22    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

True, in the house books, mentioning who commands what level of infantry unit is usually an afterthought, some of them seem to have sgts at company level for anything that's not a mech. But what I wanted was to create a force structure where the ranks are socially equal. If you have 3 captains, 1 mech, tank, and infantry. It isn't the mech Captain who commands, but the senior Captain. Just like I have buck Sgts for tank commanders, pilots, mechwarriors, and squad leaders.

You see I figure for a professional combined arms military force the leader ranks have to be each other's equal regardless of what weapons they have. To do otherwise would mean it isn't one army but several armies each specialising in a different weapon type who are sometimes forced to reluctantly work together under battlefield conditions.

On the other hand, in my army a Mech Captain commands 11 people and maybe some techs, a tank Captain has a few dozen people, while an Infantry Captain commands over 300 including a Btech battalion worth of infantry, 18 armored vehicles and 2 mobile Thumper guns (plus no doubt a modest collection of jeeps). Hell I've even thought of giving that infantry company a light mech lance and a QM platoon too.

Seems like a guy who tells 300+ soldiers what to do would have more standing than the one who only commands 11 troops.

So even if I say that the officers are all really good because they all had to be sgts before they could become officers, this still leaves me thinking the infantry unit officers are getting spread kind of thin.
_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
Back to top View profile Send site message Send e-mail
Rarich
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Leftenant General


Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 991
Location: United States
PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 11:23    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

The infantry commander is The CO. The AFV/APC commander is the XO. Or the opposite, if your goal is unity of command, that is how to do it.

Any combined arms should automatically be run by a captain. The XO, a Lt. , and an ensign as a troop commander. This way you solve the learning curve and get more of the officer "wedge" you are looking for? The Ensign is fresh out of school and runs around in the mud with the XO, as a learning experience before moving into the XO slot. The XO now has time to get his cross training with the Ensign handling the "housekeeping" of the troops. The Co or Capt. is now a well trained professional with Infantry and Armor combined arms experience.

_________________
Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side & a dark side, and strings also lie under it all.

Life is a sexually transmitted terminal disease.
Back to top View profile Send site message
Alexander
Heavy Horse Merc Brigade
Commanding Officer
Commanding Officer


Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 828
Location: Canada
PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 21:04    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

I'll give you a bit of info on the Canadian system... (the only one I really know.)

A Lt. commands a tank troop or an infantry platoon. That's either a 2Lt or full Lt. Really, it's only a matter of experience when it comes to differences in that rank. Now, a tank troop is 12 to 16 men (or more if Armoured Recce...) while an infantry platoon is 30-ish (or more if APCs are included.)

Here, we include APCs into the totals for the platoon, with each eight man section getting it's own APC plus crew.

So.... A tank troop is four tanks, while an Infantry platoon is four sections (one of them being HQ and weapons), and 4 APCs.

Now, up a level, is an Armoured Squadron or Infantry Company. In Canada, a Major commands a unit of this size. A Captain is the 2IC, and there are various other Captains in staff positions in HQ. An Armoured Sqaudron consists of four troops of 4 tanks, plus SHQ (Sqn HQ) of three tanks. There is also a large support troop of trucks, and Ambulances, and Recovery vehicles, etc... commanded by the Squadron Sergeant Major, bringing the Sqn totals to 19 tanks, and about 25 other vehicles... A fair chunk of resources.

An Infantry Company is also commanded by a Major, with a Captain as number 2. There are three platoons of 30-40 people, plus a small support unit, (smaller than that used by a Tank unit as Infantry doesn't use up supplies at as great a rate.) In the end, both units run between about 100-150 pers.

The next level up is Infantry Battalion / Armoured Regiment. They equal out as the same sized unit, but Armour just calls this size formation a Regt, (Old Brit tradition.)... This unit is commanded by an LCOL, with a major running in second spot. There are three Armoured Squadrons and a Recce Squadron in an Armoured Regt, while there are three line rifle companies, and a support company (Recce pl, pioneer pl, mortar pl.) in an Infantry Battalion. Also, each has a unit called HQ Coy / sqn - which, oddly enough isn't really an HQ at all, but a support and supply unit.

Anyhow, that's the basic organization of a Canuck unit. I didn't get into the fancy stuff, just the basics. Hope it helps.

Alexander

_________________
War is God's way of teaching geography.

*******

Commanding Officer, North West Armoured Cavalry
Back to top View profile Send site message Send e-mail
-Mud
ex-Jade Falcon
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter


Joined: 04-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1082

PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 21:27    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

Fewer officers is a good thing; they mostly just get in the way.
Back to top View profile Send site message
-Mud
ex-Jade Falcon
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter


Joined: 04-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1082

PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 21:30    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

Ah, but if those eleven happen to be the most powerful...remember, this is not 20th century military politics, but 16th century military politics
Back to top View profile Send site message
-Mud
ex-Jade Falcon
Bounty Hunter
Bounty Hunter


Joined: 04-Nov-2003 00:00
Posts: 1082

PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 21:33    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

he forgot to mention that promotion is done solely on the basis of hockey skill
Back to top View profile Send site message
Alexander
Heavy Horse Merc Brigade
Commanding Officer
Commanding Officer


Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 828
Location: Canada
PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 21:48    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

And beer drinking... oh, and the ability to make igloos for winter survival.

Alexander

_________________
War is God's way of teaching geography.

*******

Commanding Officer, North West Armoured Cavalry
Back to top View profile Send site message Send e-mail
Alexander
Heavy Horse Merc Brigade
Commanding Officer
Commanding Officer


Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 828
Location: Canada
PostPosted: 21-Mar-2004 21:52    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

What I would suggest is breaking up your infantry company a little bit, and having it more specialized. Have a Motorized rifle Company, with integral APCs. Then, have a support or Weapons company with you Thumpers, and other bigger stuff. Then Have a supply company to look after this BATTALION that you have created. It's a light battalion, but, add another Mech Coy, and viola, you have the makings of a strong Inf Bn.

Alexander

_________________
War is God's way of teaching geography.

*******

Commanding Officer, North West Armoured Cavalry
Back to top View profile Send site message Send e-mail
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Major


Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611

PostPosted: 22-Mar-2004 03:12    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

I've thought about reducing the platoons to 2 squads or the company to 2 rifle platoons and 1 weapons platoon, but it just doesn't look right. You've got to have threes, 2 on the line, one in reserve.

I've decided that even though I don't really like it, I'll stick with the one officer per platoon with ensigns as the most junior officer and LTs as experienced platoon leaders and company staff officers and XOs. If I made it 2 officers, then what is the platoon sgt. for? And the APC leader will be a Master Sgt. like the platoon sgt. I can't use Staff Sgt. since I already decided that rank is an expression of experience, senior squad leaders get to be Staff Sgts. and get paid a little more.

And it looks like the company is going to get a QM platoon with some trucks, not so many since all those APCs will have fusion engines and each APC is built to carry 28 men, not 14, leaving room for extra supplies to be carried. But enough to carry some spare food, ammo, and spare armor and parts even though the tech support is at battalion or regt level.

Putting a Major in charge of the infantry company is tempting, but I'm stuck on doing it American, where Captains have companies and Lt. Colonels have battalions, and Majors are the XOs and fill out staff positions. Though for armor and mechs, Majors can have battalions and the Lt. Colonels will be the senior battalion COs and the regiment XO.

There's still a question of academy vs. mustangs. But if I say that all officers must first be sgts. that means academy graduates start as sgts., which opens the question of how do the corporals get promoted with all those academy boys taking up the open sgt. slots? Since Mechwarriors will all have to be academy trained, they will have an edge even though they all start as Sgts. (standard MW rank). A MW will be the only acadamy graduates that don't necessarily have to become officers, they could become career MW NCOs, since there will be 2 Master Sgts. and a First Sgt. in a battlemech company (the lance seconds).

Hmm.. MW officers start as Sgts, a member of a lance, while infantry and armor officers take longer in training but start out as Ensigns unless they were sgts who went mustang, in which case officer training is shorter (mustangs already know how to shine their shoes). Say the academy is the same length for all, but the green cadets go through some kind of basic training before getting mixed in with the mustangs for officer training.

I don't want to turn the company into a betech battalion with a weapons company. A weapons unit is not meant to stay together, but to be broken up and spread around to where more firepower is needed. At the batt. level the support fire to be spread around will be tanks, VTOLs, long range artillery, and a mech lance or two, not guys with SRM2s, MGs, mortars, and portable recoilless rifles.

The inf company has a weapons platoon to break up and send where needed. I made it 2 squads, each with 3 SRM2 (2 man teams), 1 MG (2 man team), and 4 rifleman to look after them or get sent to the platoons as replacements all carried in their own APC, to be sent to the platoon that needs them. Then a 3rd squad with 4 mortars, better ones then the platoons have, 12 men total, and a 4 squad with 3 recoiless rifles (4 men each) that I think will be 3 or 4 damage point weapons with nice long range firing from a fixed position. I think I may use converted Savannah Masters to carry each mortar or recoilless team so they can be sent to support platoon individually.

I threw in the 2 Thumpers because I figure a company of this size ought to have some arty under the Captain's direct control and a little off-map support fire. For heavier stuff he'll have to call on the battalion arty battery, which is where the Arrow missiles and Marksman guns will be found. I threw in the tank lance, lights or mediums, for the same reason, to give the Captain some reserves he can use where needed to back up the platoons since his company is large enough it will often be broken up and operating over widely seperated distances.

I will have mech infantry with APCs as described mostly, hover APCs in the cavalry units which are all jump and hover capable. Really the only infantry unit that will always operate as a full company will be the jump infantry, who will have jump packs and also transport VTOLs. I may do a garrison infantry company too, base defense with AT guns instead of so many APCs?

The infantry units are still way larger than the average Btech unit, but I like it that way. An infantry battalion of mine can take out anyone else's regiment. And there is the element of surprise when engaging an enemy who doesn't know my army very well. His idea of an infantry company will badly underestimate my idea of an infantry company.

Of course I still need to get heavymetal aero and make the dropships. Because I get into such detail I need ships that can carry the whole unit, not just the combat vehicles. I never liked how an Overlord carries the mechs, but not the techs and the support train those mechs need in the field. You can't always operate in walking distance of the ship that brought you, your support elements have land together with your combat elements.

Landing one of my infantry companies will do most of the time for conventional forces. And my battlemech battalions are going to have a platoon of mech infantry integral to them just like my infantry company has a tank lance. One of my combined arms battalions, mech, tank, and infantry companies with battalion support forces (including a VTOL squadron) will be a strong force on campaign, stronger than just about any btech conventional regt. I've seen in the books.

I don't want to specialise the companies, if I did, they would not need to be the size they are. And I want to stay well away from the standard Btech type unit, all laser rifles or all SRMs, real platoons and real squads just aren't like that. But I will need to figure out a variety of battalion types.

I want some pure units, mech battalions, tank battalions, etc. But I also want combined arms battalions, they sound fine for planet garrisons or independent commands. So I will need to figure out some names to call a variety of battalions and regts. and also think on what kind of dropships should carry them. Don't want to have whole classes of dropship that carry only 1 particular type of unit for the most part, when fighting a familiar enemy he'll just say "hey, X class ship, with X unit aboard." At least half the dropships need to be somewhat flexible in what sort of unit thay can carry.
_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
Back to top View profile Send site message Send e-mail
Seraph
Blighted Sun Battalion
2nd Company
"Seraph's Slaughter"
Major
Major


Joined: 11-Mar-2004 00:00
Posts: 1744

PostPosted: 22-Mar-2004 04:57    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

The most dangerous thing in warfare is a 2nd LT with a map and compass.

AS for your dropships, try:
Seeker class- can carry 48 light vehicles, 4 mechs, and 120 troops.
Triumph class- can carry 45 heavy vehicles, 8 light vehicles, and 135 troops.
Condor class- can carry 20 light vehicles and 336 troops.
Intruder class- can carry 2 fighters and 90 troops.

The Seeker, Triumph, and Condor are all combat transports, the Intruder is an assault ship.

Total units carried:
681 troops
68 light vehicles
45 heavy veicles
4 Mechs
2 fighters

Hope that can move you.
_________________
If ignorance is bliss, then why are you so miserable?
Back to top View profile Send site message
Alexander
Heavy Horse Merc Brigade
Commanding Officer
Commanding Officer


Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 828
Location: Canada
PostPosted: 22-Mar-2004 23:04    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

Quote:


I've thought about reducing the platoons to 2 squads or the company to 2 rifle platoons and 1 weapons platoon, but it just doesn't look right. You've got to have threes, 2 on the line, one in reserve.



I think you may have misunderstood me a little bit. I wasn't trying to suggest going to two sections, or anyhting like that. Iwas kinda suggesting have three sections, or squads if you will, per platoon, plus a HQ/wpns section, with each squad having it's own APC. Then at company level, going to three platoons plus a HQ/wpns section, and a supply/tpt (transport) section attached.

Quote:

I've decided that even though I don't really like it, I'll stick with the one officer per platoon with ensigns as the most junior officer and LTs as experienced platoon leaders and company staff officers and XOs. If I made it 2 officers, then what is the platoon sgt. for? And the APC leader will be a Master Sgt. like the platoon sgt. I can't use Staff Sgt. since I already decided that rank is an expression of experience, senior squad leaders get to be Staff Sgts. and get paid a little more.




I agree here. One officer per platoon is already too much as far as I'm concerned. But, to have more is only inviting trouble. There should be a platoon Warrant Officer (or platoon Sgt, to stick with your US theme), and then your section commanders (Sgts, or whatever), and section 2ICs (Master Corporals or buck Sgts to stay American). Vehicle commanders would be the common E-5 (MCpl or US Sgt), and be under the command of the Section Commander for when the section's are mounted, and under the platoon Sgt / Pl Ldr when the sections are dismoutned.

Quote:


And it looks like the company is going to get a QM platoon with some trucks, not so many since all those APCs will have fusion engines and each APC is built to carry 28 men, not 14, leaving room for extra supplies to be carried. But enough to carry some spare food, ammo, and spare armor and parts even though the tech support is at battalion or regt level.




I definitely agree here. You need integral Ambulances, and maintainers to keep your troops and vehicles on the go. Plus bin-rats to keep your troops in boots and bullets, etc... And have them co-ordinated back to Bn, or Regt. level for their own supply needs.

Quote:


Putting a Major in charge of the infantry company is tempting, but I'm stuck on doing it American, where Captains have companies and Lt. Colonels have battalions, and Majors are the XOs and fill out staff positions. Though for armor and mechs, Majors can have battalions and the Lt. Colonels will be the senior battalion COs and the regiment XO.




The reason we put majors in charge, is:

A. Experience.

B. They are qualified Combat Team commanders. That's a unit which is a joined Infantry Coy and Armd Sqn (usually the smallest level unit we send into battle), with the largest unit (or terrain/mission depending) in command.

C. We don't have to pay Captians as much to be staff officers as we would Majors!

Quote:


There's still a question of academy vs. mustangs. But if I say that all officers must first be sgts. that means academy graduates start as sgts., which opens the question of how do the corporals get promoted with all those academy boys taking up the open sgt. slots? Since Mechwarriors will all have to be academy trained, they will have an edge even though they all start as Sgts. (standard MW rank). A MW will be the only acadamy graduates that don't necessarily have to become officers, they could become career MW NCOs, since there will be 2 Master Sgts. and a First Sgt. in a battlemech company (the lance seconds).

Hmm.. MW officers start as Sgts, a member of a lance, while infantry and armor officers take longer in training but start out as Ensigns unless they were sgts who went mustang, in which case officer training is shorter (mustangs already know how to shine their shoes). Say the academy is the same length for all, but the green cadets go through some kind of basic training before getting mixed in with the mustangs for officer training.




For us, you can join up directly as an officer (Officer Cadet), which is the equivalent of Private, while you go to school, or do your degree in university. Once the schooling requirement (University Degree) is completed, the officer becomes a 2Lt. This is still a training rank, and is not often given a command, instead being placed under the command of a senior Lt. or experienced WO/Sgt. (In an Armoured troop, a 2Lt is usually made a gunner for a troop leader for a year.) At this stage, a 2Lt goes on course, learning how to be a soldier first, then a leader, then a troop/platoon leader. Once this is done (usually taking between 1 and 3 years), the soldier is promoted to 1Lt.

The Lt. is a qualified troop / platoon leader.

Now, if the soldier in the ranks decided to become an officer, a few things can happen. As a Master Corporal, I can skip most of the stages, and become a 2Lt right off the bat, and skip half of the course requirements (Basic, Leadership). As a Sgt (Crew Commander qualified), I can become a 2Lt, and skip a few more course bits (Crew Commander portion), needing only a few weeks of troop leading in the field (running the four tanks, or running a few platoon). As a Warrant Officer (or MSGT) I can go right to full Lt, as I have already taken all the courses required to be an Lt (troop / Platoon ldr). NCOs higher than WO (MSGT) can commision directly to Captain (but not Coy or Sqn Comd - as they're not yet qualified to that level - further necictating the Coy / Sqn Comd being a Major).

Quote:


I don't want to turn the company into a betech battalion with a weapons company. A weapons unit is not meant to stay together, but to be broken up and spread around to where more firepower is needed. At the batt. level the support fire to be spread around will be tanks, VTOLs, long range artillery, and a mech lance or two, not guys with SRM2s, MGs, mortars, and portable recoilless rifles.

The inf company has a weapons platoon to break up and send where needed. I made it 2 squads, each with 3 SRM2 (2 man teams), 1 MG (2 man team), and 4 rifleman to look after them or get sent to the platoons as replacements all carried in their own APC, to be sent to the platoon that needs them. Then a 3rd squad with 4 mortars, better ones then the platoons have, 12 men total, and a 4 squad with 3 recoiless rifles (4 men each) that I think will be 3 or 4 damage point weapons with nice long range firing from a fixed position. I think I may use converted Savannah Masters to carry each mortar or recoilless team so they can be sent to support platoon individually.




What we do here, is have a special company with an Anti-Armour platoon (8 - 12 TOW vehicles and dismounted AT weapons), a Mortar platoon (either vehicle mounted in an APC or foot-borne), a Recce platoon with five to seven recce vehicles (often dismounted), and an Assault Pioneer platoon (Engineers). There is one per battalion, and it is often split up to make best use of it's assets. For example, 2 TOW vehicles make up a det, which can be attached directly to a platoon which is expecting enemy Armour, or they can be sent off in pairs to protect flanks, set up ambush positions forward, provide Rear-Area Security, or whatever.

In the platoon, the weapons det gets a Heavy MG, a light mortar, and a 84mm rocket launcher. Each section in a rifle platoon gets two Light MGs (M-249 SAW), two M-203 under C-7 (M-16), and a handful of LAWs.

Quote:


I threw in the 2 Thumpers because I figure a company of this size ought to have some arty under the Captain's direct control and a little off-map support fire. For heavier stuff he'll have to call on the battalion arty battery, which is where the Arrow missiles and Marksman guns will be found. I threw in the tank lance, lights or mediums, for the same reason, to give the Captain some reserves he can use where needed to back up the platoons since his company is large enough it will often be broken up and operating over widely seperated distances.




This kinda ties in with my Weapons Coy. You have a Mortar (really Arty) platoon, and an Anti-Armour platoon.

Quote:


I will have mech infantry with APCs as described mostly, hover APCs in the cavalry units which are all jump and hover capable. Really the only infantry unit that will always operate as a full company will be the jump infantry, who will have jump packs and also transport VTOLs. I may do a garrison infantry company too, base defense with AT guns instead of so many APCs?

The infantry units are still way larger than the average Btech unit, but I like it that way. An infantry battalion of mine can take out anyone else's regiment. And there is the element of surprise when engaging an enemy who doesn't know my army very well. His idea of an infantry company will badly underestimate my idea of an infantry company.




Really though, when you look at it, your Company isn't really a company... it's a bit bigger. You really have a short Battalion sitting there, even though you have it organized a bit smaller. No beefs though, if you feel your men can handle the added burden of the extra personnel in your sections, and what have you. A ten man section is hard on a Sgt and Master Corporal, because they have to tend to all the supply, admin, pay, discipline issues, and then command the soldiers in garrison and the field. It's very hands on at the lower levels, and (in my experience) anything more than 8 soldiers and the two seniors is a hard task. But, that's also with some very junior soldiers, and new recruits...

Quote:


Of course I still need to get heavymetal aero and make the dropships. Because I get into such detail I need ships that can carry the whole unit, not just the combat vehicles. I never liked how an Overlord carries the mechs, but not the techs and the support train those mechs need in the field. You can't always operate in walking distance of the ship that brought you, your support elements have land together with your combat elements.




Too true.

Quote:


Landing one of my infantry companies will do most of the time for conventional forces. And my battlemech battalions are going to have a platoon of mech infantry integral to them just like my infantry company has a tank lance. One of my combined arms battalions, mech, tank, and infantry companies with battalion support forces (including a VTOL squadron) will be a strong force on campaign, stronger than just about any btech conventional regt. I've seen in the books.

I don't want to specialise the companies, if I did, they would not need to be the size they are. And I want to stay well away from the standard Btech type unit, all laser rifles or all SRMs, real platoons and real squads just aren't like that. But I will need to figure out a variety of battalion types.

I want some pure units, mech battalions, tank battalions, etc. But I also want combined arms battalions, they sound fine for planet garrisons or independent commands. So I will need to figure out some names to call a variety of battalions and regts. and also think on what kind of dropships should carry them. Don't want to have whole classes of dropship that carry only 1 particular type of unit for the most part, when fighting a familiar enemy he'll just say "hey, X class ship, with X unit aboard." At least half the dropships need to be somewhat flexible in what sort of unit thay can carry.



We use Combat teams as our minimum manueover unit. An Armour Squadron with atleast 1 platoon of infantry (but hopefully more), or vice versa, with a few Recce callsigns attached from higher, one or two FOO parties, with a battery (6 guns) in tow, and Engineer support whenever possible.

Doing this, all we do is attach and detach sub-units to create our battle forces, instead of creating totally new units. Is it the best thing? Not neccessarily, but it does work.

Alexander (hoping this helps a bit more).

_________________
War is God's way of teaching geography.

*******

Commanding Officer, North West Armoured Cavalry
Back to top View profile Send site message Send e-mail
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Major


Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611

PostPosted: 23-Mar-2004 16:24    Post subject: RE: ranking dilemma Reply to topic Reply with quote

Yeah, it is a bit large, but at each level I could not make it smaller without feeling like I was skimping.

I've never liked the standard Btech infantry platoons and companies. A Btech infantry company is just 3 or 4 groups of 21-28 men who either all have rilfle or all have anti-mech weapons. (And no rules about how a bunch of guys with SRMs made for mech shooting might have trouble in close range with a bunch of guys with rifles or lasers).

I started out with just the squad, with that as the basic unit of movement on the map. The squad is 14 men, The Sgt. Lance Cpl., 2 rifle teams (4 each), and a 3rd team with an SRM2 and light MG 2 men each. Since there would be no SRM platoons, I solved that question of anti-mech firepower by giving everyone but that 3rd team a pair of one-shot toss-em SRMs. The company level weapons teams have mech MGs (I think I'll make it 2 of those per squad)

Since I also never liked how Btech stuffs 30 men into an underarmed tin can and calls it protection, I made a real APC with serious weapons, and then made it capable of carrying 2 squads in a pinch. This alone means one of my platoons can take on a whole Btech infantry company, since their whole outfit will be stuffed into 3 or 4 Goblins at best.

On foot, even with a weapons squad sent from the company, a light mech should still be trouble, but likewise the platoon will be trouble for the light mech too. With APCs, it better be a lance of mechs that try it.

My main APC has an LRM-15 w/Artemis to the front, and 2 med pulse lasers and 3 MG-X (custom gun, 9 hex range) on a turret. They also have vehicle TAG, which makes it real easy for Arrow missiles and arty to show up just about anywhere on that battlefield since most of my units, mechs or vehicles have TAG ability. Heh, plus each APC carries a portable TAG pack for the dismounted infantry to use if they want to.

But that squad is where things started snowballing. Once I had my squad settled on, of course platoons had to be 3 squads, companies had to have 3 line platoons, battalions 3 line companies, etc. And on top of that I couldn't leave out the other stuff like the tank lance, supply trucks, and the weapons platoon to beef up the other platoons.

Actually Alexander, I'm still tempted to throw in another tank lance and a light mech lance, put a couple of captains in there and put a Major in charge and call it a combat team. But so far I'm resisting.

What I may do is put a tank company at Batt. level and have 2 Majors as XOs who often lead independantly since the batt. will often be broken up and spread out over a wide area, defending or attacking more than one town at a time.

Battalions will have the tank company, 3 line companies, arty company (3 lances), Recon platoon, QM platoon/company, 2 MASH units w/ground and air ambulances, a VTOL company w/12-18 VTOLs, and the HQ company w/1 platoon worth of staff and 2 mech inf platoons and a couple of tanks to guard them.

I'm also thinking about throwing in a light mech company if I don't give the line companies any mech lances.

That would be 6-7 combat companies with Captains, a recon platoon, and a LT.Col and 2 Majors. So the unit in the field could be divided up into 3 "combat teams, each led by a field grade officer.

Actually this set up makes it kind of British as well as American. If I recall right, in Armor units US Majors often led Combat Commands in WWII. And in the British tradition there were regiments that were never more than a single battalion in the field, the other battalion was a stay at home training and recruiting unit.

So what my battalion really is, is a regiment that is called a battalion, led by a Lt. Col instead of a full colonel. In fact, I won't have infantry regiments, I'll call them Brigades with full Colonels.

Combined arms units will be brigades, groups of battalions, while the pure units, all mech or all tank plus basic security/support troops to guard the camp, will be the ones that have regiments.

The recon platoon just got doubled to 2 scout mechs and 6 vehicles, and the arty battery just became 5 lances, 12 marksmen and 8 arrow vehicles.

Which makes my battalion thus:

783 troops
45 APCs (equal to medium tanks)
12 light tanks (company lances)
14 medium tanks (tank company plus Batt HQ)
12 light/med mechs
2 scout mechs
6 scout vehicles
6 light arty (Thumpers)
12 medium arty
8 Arrow vehicles
18 VTOLS (1 Yellowjacket, 2 Warrior)
QM Company
2 MASH units with Savannah Masters and VTOL ambulances.

Thats 783 troops and 135 APCs/tanks/arty/MEchs/VTOLs under a Lt. Col. and 3 Majors.

Compare that with a standard Btech Infantry and armor regt. (Mercenaries Revised)

834 troops - no mention of support or APCs, but give them the platon carrying tin cans, 4 per company for callit 40 APCs (1 per platoon/command squad)
132 vehicles - Btech Armor regiment

And of course my mech or armor regts will be larger than Btech, they'll have support lances for arty and arrow, infantry units to guard the camp/dropship, and VTOLs, scouts, etc. I intend for very mech battalion to have a lance of Arrow mechs and maybe an HQ lance too.

I've decided to do a unit/rank comparason just because I can, but since this is getting long enough I'll start a new thread for that.


_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
Back to top View profile Send site message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Mordel's Bar & Grill Forum Index » General Discussion All times are GMT-04:00
 Pages (2): « [1] 2 »

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum