Attention, toothpick lovers: Finnish TO&E available

[Nabla]

Last spring I did a little Finnish TO&E research for CMBB. The deadline for the research was pretty tight because the info had to be incorporated into the game, so there was really no time for feedback. Also, I don't want to dwell in stuff like this during our beautiful summers, so this is why I'm pulling the rabbit out of the hat now.

In its current form, the purpose of the document is to cover Finnish TO&E from the level of the whole army down to the level of a platoon. The main reason for this scope is the fact that this is what I was asked to do. It was also a sensible limitation of scope because it's much easier to find high-level TO&Es than low-level ones. However, I've described smaller formations when I've found the information fairly easily, or when it has seemed particularly important. For example, the TO&E of the tank division is described in detail, which I'm sure you'll find pretty interesting. The document covers the time period of 1941-1944.

The TO&E is not complete - there are several important formations missing. However, the document is pretty self-explanatory in that the biggest problems are pointed out explicitly. I hope I'm able to complete the TO&E one day, perhaps even for earlier years and down to the level of squads. I don't even dream of getting it completely right without feedback from others. I also would not mind a bit of cooperation with some of the experts here. Doing stuff like this takes quite a bit of time, and I still have a life.

So, tell me what you think, poinpoint some of the errors I made, and if you feel like it, contact me in order to cooperate with me in further development.

Have fun!

Finnish TO&E 1941-1944: from divisions to platoons

[ September 23, 2002, 06:42 AM: Message edited by: Nabla ]

[Ari Maenpaa]

Nice work with a good bibliography. Thanks.

I'll try to give it a throughout look at some point later.

Also thanks for the excellent non-balanced scenarios in the Nordic tournament. I think the non-balanced scenarios with the Nabla scoring system are the way to go for getting the most out of CM.

Ari

[Tero]

Originally posted by Nabla:

However, I've described smaller formations when I've found the information fairly easily, or when it has seemed particularly important.

Any data on the variance of the small arms within squads/platoons ? So far I have never seen anything concrete other than the usual "more SMG's and LMG's per squad" and the like.

For example, the TO&E of the tank division is described in detail, which I'm sure you'll find pretty interesting.

The armoured divisions TOE has been described in detail ad nauseam over the years and in the latest books (Marskin panssarintuhoajat etc). Books by the fellow who wrote Veitsen Terällä are artillery heavy. It seems vanilla infantry has not been as sexy in the minds of the historians, especially lately.

[Chad Harrison]

Im not even finnish and it looks great! Thanks for the resource. Still waiting to see it in the game . . .

[Nabla]

Originally posted by Ari Maenpaa:

Also thanks for the excellent non-balanced scenarios in the Nordic tournament. I think the non-balanced scenarios with the Nabla scoring system are the way to go for getting the most out of CM.

Thanks. All the TB tournaments are using the scoring system now, but I myself am especially fond of the idea of non-balanced scenarios too. I hope that others will run tournaments with some really nasty unbalanced scenarios, but if they don't, I will.

[Nabla]

Originally posted by tero:

Originally posted by Nabla:

However, I've described smaller formations when I've found the information fairly easily, or when it has seemed particularly important.

Any data on the variance of the small arms within squads/platoons ? So far I have never seen anything concrete other than the usual "more SMG's and LMG's per squad" and the like.

Eh, perhaps I should have emphasized the "fairly easily"-part... So no, no data on that important issue.

Originally posted by tero:

For example, the TO&E of the tank division is described in detail, which I'm sure you'll find pretty interesting.

The armoured divisions TOE has been described in detail ad nauseam over the years and in the latest books (Marskin panssarintuhoajat etc). Books by the fellow who wrote Veitsen Terällä are artillery heavy. It seems vanilla infantry has not been as sexy in the minds of the historians, especially lately.

That's true, and we all know that armor is pretty sexy in this forum too. So although I'm sure that the TO&E of the Finnish armored forces is standard stuff to you, I think it may have some appeal to the non-Finnish non-historians.

[Tero]

Originally posted by Nabla:

Eh, perhaps I should have emphasized the "fairly easily"-part... So no, no data on that important issue.

Damn !

That's true, and we all know that armor is pretty sexy in this forum too. So although I'm sure that the TO&E of the Finnish armored forces is standard stuff to you, I think it may have some appeal to the non-Finnish non-historians.

Very true.

[Nabla]

One shameless bump for our friends on the other side of the big water.

[JPS]

Very interesting, thanks.

[Michael Dorosh]

Great start!

What is of interest to me - and doesn't appear to be addressed - are the typical ranks and responsibilities of men in a Finnish infantry company. For example, were squads led by senior NCOs or junior ones? Were platoons only commanded by officers (as in the British Army) or by NCOs as well as officers (as in the German Army)?

Did the company have the equivalent of the US Company First Sergeant, British Company Sergeant Major, or German Hauptfeldwebel (der Spiess)?

What rank was the typical company commander?

I'd like to compile this info for use with some campaign game rules - seems like there will be a lot of such rules, from Wreck and others, would be nice to marry up some historical data for those campaign elements revolving around personality.

EDIT - incidentally NABLA, what little info I do have on Finnish rank structure comes from Osprey's books, and is yours if you want it. I can provide some black and white artwork illustrating the various ranks, if that is something you want to include in your pdf - the artwork is original by me so there is no copyright problem. Let me know.

[ September 23, 2002, 01:51 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[GriffinCheng+]

Anyone working on Winter War scenarios, then?

[ September 23, 2002, 10:18 PM: Message edited by: GriffinCheng+ ]

[JPS]

Rescue from page 4.

[Nabla]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

What is of interest to me - and doesn't appear to be addressed - are the typical ranks and responsibilities of men in a Finnish infantry company. For example, were squads led by senior NCOs or junior ones? Were platoons only commanded by officers (as in the British Army) or by NCOs as well as officers (as in the German Army)?

Did the company have the equivalent of the US Company First Sergeant, British Company Sergeant Major, or German Hauptfeldwebel (der Spiess)?

What rank was the typical company commander?

I'd like to compile this info for use with some campaign game rules - seems like there will be a lot of such rules, from Wreck and others, would be nice to marry up some historical data for those campaign elements revolving around personality.

I've added this on my list of things to do when updating the TO&E. I'm pretty damn busy for the next week, but I'll try to start working on updates after that.

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

EDIT - incidentally NABLA, what little info I do have on Finnish rank structure comes from Osprey's books, and is yours if you want it. I can provide some black and white artwork illustrating the various ranks, if that is something you want to include in your pdf - the artwork is original by me so there is no copyright problem. Let me know.

Thanks for the offer, but I'm pretty close to the sources, so I don't think you need to bother.