US Infantry Company 1:1

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

The Company First Sgt ('Top') is the senior Company NCO. Sgt Major is a much higher US NCO.

Which is what Michael said.

The US 1st Sgt equates (roughly) to a Company Sergeant Major (CSM) in CW units. He is the senior soldier in the Company and the OC’s adviser.

The US Bn Command Sergeant Major equates to (again roughly) the Regimental Sergeant Major (RSM) in in CW units. He is the senior soldier in the Bn and the CO’s adviser.

There is a heap of subtle differences in terms of one have the Monarch‘s Warrant and their status etc. But in terms of job role they are similar.

CW Sergeants fall somewhere between US Staff Sergeant and Sergeant First Class in terms of their jobs (2IC of the platoon).

CW Corporals roughly equate to US Sergeants in terms of their jobs (Section commanders).

CW Lance Corporals roughly equate to US Corporals in terms of their jobs (Section 2ICs).

[dalem]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Maybe its because I am not a grog (really

Where are the heavy HMG's?

Where is the .50 cal HMG team?

Maybe this "kind" of company did not have Bazooka's or HMG's?

Just curious

thanks

-tom w

.50cals were generally part of the AA battalions or mounted on vehicles (for AA work) and many TO&Es therefore do not list them. Some do. But in general, the .50cal was not a standard issue for rifle battalions. Some few might be "acquired" over the life of a unit, especially if occupying a defensive position over time, but that's about it.

The bazookas are 100% issued in relatively large numbers to rifle battalions - about 9-18 per, divided amongst the HW platoons and various HQs and the battalion AT section. U.S. Armored infantry battalions had one as standard issue in every halftrack, so it is safe to assume at least 1 per Arm Inf Squad, around 30 or 40 per battalion on paper. I think German Panzergrenadiers also had 1 schreck per SPW251, but maybe it was only in the platoon HQ track for them - I don't remember.

-dale

[Soddball]

.50 cals rocked. They made a really cool noise and put holes in stuff. Why would they not be included as a standard issue?

[dalem]

Originally posted by Soddball:

.50 cals rocked. They made a really cool noise and put holes in stuff. Why would they not be included as a standard issue?

Heavy. Very heavy. Also, I suspect that Jamoomba decreed it so.

-dale

[MikeyD]

1:1 brings up a question that the earlier games do not address. How big a 'footprint' on the ground would a squad have in the game?

Admittedly, if they're all shoe-horned into a halftrack or APC its a pretty small area. But should we expect to see a 1:1 platoon spread across both sides of a city street and down the block? Spread out at significant intervals when crossing an open field? Two squads (24 G.I.s) squeezed into the first floor of a 'large building' would look like a Shriners convention!

Obviously, BFC's ability to produce a 1:1 game is significantly better than my ability to imagine it.

[YankeeDog]

Actually, on same the website that started this whole thread, there are TOEs for the whole division:

100th Infantry Division TOEs

If you sift through the various formations, you'll find .50 cals here and there.

Most notably, they do exist as part of the rifle battalion HQ Company (2), as well as other places. I don't know if the original purpose of the .50 cals in the Bn HQs was for AA defense, but I doubt by mid-1944 they were being used much for this purpose.

You'll find them other places, too. There's several in the AT Company, for example.

AFAICT, the 100th Div. did not have a dedicated AA Battalion anywhere on its TOE. Of course, it is always possible (likely, even) that non-organic AA assets were attached to the division at various times.

Cheers,

YD

[Dook]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Where are the heavy HMG's?

Where is the .50 cal HMG team?

That particular TO&E shows the .50 cals in other locations and not organic to the infantry companies.

According to that TO&E, there were 140 .50 cal HMGs in an infantry division. Most of them, however, were in units other than the infantry regiments.

Each infantry battalion had 2 .50 cals listed under the battalion HQ. There were also 3 in the antitank company (1 per AT platoon) and 3 in the cannon company (1 per cannon platoon). Total .50 cals in an infantry regiment = 12.

In contrast, divisional artillery had 89 .50 cals assigned: 5 for the divisional HQ battery and 21 for each field artillery battalion (5 in bn hq battery, 4 in service battery, and 4 in each field battery).

Engineer battalion had 12 - 3 in HQ company, 3 in each engineer company.

Recon troop had 3. Quartermaster company had 13 - 1 in HQ section and 4 in each truck platoon. Ordnance company had 5. Signals company had 6.

Note that I just added all the .50 cals shown on the TO&E, located here. I make no claims as to its accuracy. From what I have read, US troops tried to attach a .50 cal to any vechicle that would take one.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Soddball:

.50 cals rocked. They made a really cool noise and put holes in stuff. Why would they not be included as a standard issue?

I suspect you've never had to carry a .50 cal tripod. Google the weight of the .50 - and its ammo. Should be self-evident, even for you.

[dalem]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

Actually, on same the website that started this whole thread, there are TOEs for the whole division:

100th Infantry Division TOEs

If you sift through the various formations, you'll find .50 cals here and there.

Most notably, they do exist as part of the rifle battalion HQ Company (2), as well as other places. I don't know if the original purpose of the .50 cals in the Bn HQs was for AA defense, but I doubt by mid-1944 they were being used much for this purpose.

You'll find them other places, too. There's several in the AT Company, for example.

AFAICT, the 100th Div. did not have a dedicated AA Battalion anywhere on its TOE. Of course, it is always possible (likely, even) that non-organic AA assets were attached to the division at various times.

Cheers,

YD

Technically no U.S. infantry divisions had organic AA battalions. Same as the Tank and TD battalions, the AA battalions were meant to be doled out from a corps pool as needed. In practice it ran the gamut from very short attachment times to effective permanent attachment to the division.

-dale

[YankeeDog]

Thanks. That is what I suspected, but I didn't know for sure.

... And to follow up, does anyone have a late war US AA Battalion TOE? I'd be curious to see how much the US Army was actually relying on single-barrel .50 cal AA mounts late-war.

Cheers,

YD

[Wartgamer]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

1:1 brings up a question that the earlier games do not address. How big a 'footprint' on the ground would a squad have in the game?

Admittedly, if they're all shoe-horned into a halftrack or APC its a pretty small area. But should we expect to see a 1:1 platoon spread across both sides of a city street and down the block? Spread out at significant intervals when crossing an open field? Two squads (24 G.I.s) squeezed into the first floor of a 'large building' would look like a Shriners convention!

Obviously, BFC's ability to produce a 1:1 game is significantly better than my ability to imagine it.

The more I think of it, the more problems that seem to come up.

Take, for example, a German squad that has its troops spread along a hedge in weapons pits/foxholes. Reaistically, there is a dug out with overhead cover in the center of all the positions. They take arty fire. IRL, they would all duck inside the dugout, or low crawl to it as fast as they could.

Can the 1:1 modeling do this? Will the game model the behaviour of each soldier so it makes smart decisions?

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Soddball:

.50 cals rocked. They made a really cool noise and put holes in stuff. Why would they not be included as a standard issue?

I suspect you've never had to carry a .50 cal tripod. Google the weight of the .50 - and its ammo. Should be self-evident, even for you. </font>

[Wartgamer]

US 35th Division

26 December

The division, part of III Corps of Gen. George Patton's 3rd US Army, is assigned to attack across the Sure River on 27 December. The division assembled near the town of Holtz, then moved north to the III Corps area, to take up positions in the tenuously-held gap between the 4th Arm Div at Bastogne and the 26th Inf Div to the southeast. It was hoped that the division's attack would break out to the Lutrebois-Harlange road, which fed into the Arlon-Bastogne highway, and proceed thence abreast of the 4th Arm Div. The ultimate objective of the division's attack was to secure the Longvilly-Bastogne road.

Daily Strength and Casualties:

Beginning Strength: 16,092

Replacements: 1

Returns-to-Duty: 0

Total Casualties: 7

Total Killed: 0

Total Wounded: 0

Total Captured/Missing: 0

Total Sick/Non-Battle Injuries: 7

Daily Major Inventory Levels (excluding MG/personal weapons):

Infantry Weapons

Bazookas: 336

57mm AT Guns: 54

60mm Mortars: 81

81mm Mortars: 54

Artillery

105mm Howitzers: 36

155mm Howitzers: 18

Vehicles

M-8 Armored Cars: 13

M-20 Armored Cars: 30

M-10 Tank Destroyers: 31

M4 75mm Sherman Tanks: 0

M4 76mm Sherman Tanks: 0

[Wartgamer]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Soddball:

.50 cals rocked. They made a really cool noise and put holes in stuff. Why would they not be included as a standard issue?

I suspect you've never had to carry a .50 cal tripod. Google the weight of the .50 - and its ammo. Should be self-evident, even for you. </font>

[flamingknives]

Absolutely. So unless you want to wake up next to a sheep's head, you'd better toe the line, m'laddo

[JonS]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

I don't know if the original purpose of the .50 cals in the Bn HQs was for AA defense, but I doubt by mid-1944 they were being used much for this purpose.

FWIW: the US AB Divs that dropped into Normandy each had an AA-AT Bn, with the AA half (two coys) using 50-cals. One of the 'lessons learned' from that campaign was the need for these companies to be equipped with ground-mounts for the 50-cals, to allow them to be used efectively against, well, ground tgts. They got bored waiting in vain for the GAF to turn up , and the AA-mounts weren't much chop as a field expedient ground-mount.

Jon

[Wartgamer]

The 50 cal policy was sort of like the TD policy.

The TD policy imagined fleets of Panzers roaming everywhere.

The 50 cal policy imagine Luftwaffe twin engined ground attack every 20 minutes or so.

The US made many 50 cals and bullets. But the Luftwaffe, like the Panzer Fleets, never seemed to make the show.

In the bocage, they were just too immobile and targeted too easily. They really need a weapons carrier to be mobile.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Soddball:

.50 cals rocked. They made a really cool noise and put holes in stuff. Why would they not be included as a standard issue?

I suspect you've never had to carry a .50 cal tripod. Google the weight of the .50 - and its ammo. Should be self-evident, even for you. </font>

[Wartgamer]

Back to the US Infantry Company:

The Weapons Platoon also had a 1st LT and was probably another candidate for taking over a lost butterbar position in one of the platoons. Evidently, this may have been a stepping stone to becoming an XO.

The designer should address the Command Post issue brought up earlier. Some units had forward command posts and rearward command posts also.

[Battlefront.com]

This is going from memory... HMGs were part of the Battalion's HW Company and Bazookas were listed with the Battalion TO&E. For the most part these AT type weapons were not assigned to specific men but rather made available to formations as an extra tool for their tool chest. The Germans were generally like this, but there were some exceptions (early war ATR Teams and late war Volksgrenadier AT Battalion for example were specifically crewed).

Steve

[Wartgamer]

The Heavy Weapons Company is very similar to the German unit. Possibly used in the same manner. It, like the infantry companies, has a number of men in its HQ. Overall, there are more officers than an infantry company.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Wartgamer:

Back to the US Infantry Company:

The Weapons Platoon also had a 1st LT and was probably another candidate for taking over a lost butterbar position in one of the platoons. Evidently, this may have been a stepping stone to becoming an XO.

The designer should address the Command Post issue brought up earlier. Some units had forward command posts and rearward command posts also.

A company command post consists of a company commander, his signaller, perhaps a runner, maybe the company sergeant (whatever he is called dependent on the army), and his comms equipment. Usually sitting in a ditch, hopefully dug in, sometimes with overhead cover. Often he will be wired in to battalion headquarters, though if on the move and the signallers haven't been able to lay cable, he will be relying on radio/runners.

I remember the Itaeleri et al "command post" model kits with sandbags and corrugated iron and crates and impedimenta. Having lived in a company headquarters on a couple of occasions myself (and having much more equipment in 2001 than in 1944), I can say they are pretty spartan.

There is also the question of how badly do we really want/need to simulate cooks and clerks. I'd say not at all. I can't recall any instances of company cooks in CW accounts being anywhere near the shooting, though I don't doubt it may have happened on occasion. I suspect their own SOP would be to head for the hills?

[Wartgamer]

Reposting this as it was editted

The Company HQ may actually be broken up into three groups.

1. One is the actual CO, Senior NCO and runners/commo(mobile wireless). It may be 4-6 people actually.

2. The other main group is the XO led group who represent the actual static HQ position. The nerve center setup.

3. The remaining group is the Cook NCO and Cooks plus Armorer/Ammo people and all assorted pots/pans/ammo-dump/spare parts plus vehicle park. This is typically further back but not always off map given the size of the maps.

CMX1 ignores actual 'Headquarters' (the place) in that the physical location of this actual frontline unit's location is NOT the same as the Company/Battalion HQ units that are dipicted. The CO could be in the Headquarters 'billet' (bunker typically) or he could be out and about. In his absense, the XO (top LT.) is running the show.

The static HQ position is the placement of much of the commo in that landline wire communications from Battalion and above connect to this spot. Large wireless radios are 'benched' here. Much of the tactical maps, photos are 'tabled' here.

Its a battlefield reality.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

... Bazookas ... For the most part these AT type weapons were not assigned to specific men but rather made available to formations as an extra tool for their tool chest.

Any thought towards handling Bazookas and PIATs (et al) similarly to the way rifle-grenades and panzerfausts are now - i.e. not as a particular unit, but as a section/squad weapon, with a certain number of rounds, that may or may not be there, and can be adjusted for by a scen designer?

Jon

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

1:1 brings up a question that the earlier games do not address. How big a 'footprint' on the ground would a squad have in the game?

Obviously, BFC's ability to produce a 1:1 game is significantly better than my ability to imagine it.

Oh YES!

"Obviously, BFC's ability to produce a 1:1 game is significantly better than my ability to imagine it."

This whole 1:1 thing has been beaten to death (and then some) so we don't want to start all over here (which is what I am NOT trying to do).

But just like MikeyD I can't imagine how when I play it it will make me not just completely tear my hair out because while I KNOW I don't want control of every soldier I also KNOW I don't want to see them all running all over the place like a collective bunch of chicken's with their heads cut off.

SO what are we left with?

WE don't want control of every man and we are not going to get it.

SO Steve says (and I paraphrase) "Have a little faith baby, trust us we have not done you wrong in the past and that 1:1 Tac AI (miracle) bridge is going to be there!"

SO What other choice do we have

AND no this is not another unofficial 1:1 representation "why it won't work" post or thread.....

I just like this quote the first time I saw it :

"Obviously, BFC's ability to produce a 1:1 game is significantly better than my ability to imagine it."

-tom w