Logic behind admin commands? (Assault and Anti Tank)

[HawkerT]

Brothers of CM:SF

I am trying out the various possibilities with the admin commands and have a few questions or observations regarding the logic behind the admin commands for squads.

Assault Team:

The way I understand the manual on this is that the squad should be split into a supporting element with heavy sustainable fire weapons and a 'light' fast striking element.

When looking at the two teams after the split, I am having difficulty telling which team is which. I see one team of four with a SAW and the sniper MOS grunt, and another team of five also with a SAW. I would expect both the SAW's and the sniper MOS grunt to be in the supporting element. And what about the squad leader and the assistant leader ... what would be the natural element for each to lead? What would normally be the striking element ... the smaller or the larger?

Anti Tank team:

The way I understand the manual the small two man AT Team should be the one with the best AT weapon.

When looking at the AT element after AT splitting a squad without Javelins I see the sniper MOS grunt and the assistant leader in the AT element carrying one of the two standard disposable AT-4's while the big remaining element retains the AT MOS grunt and the other of the standard AT-4's. Why is the AT MOS grunt not in the small AT team and why is the team only carrying one of the AT-4's?

I know it is probably just my glaring lack of knowledge into the matter but I am simply unsure about the team compositions?

Please discuss.

All the best

Frans

[Sergei]

The assault/support split I haven't used that much, but the AT team has worked for me as intended. So it's curious that you get it behave that way.

[HawkerT]

Hey Sergei

Thank you for replying!

Here is a shot of the AT team just after doing the split:

[ARRPEEGEE]

splitting a squad without Javelins

That's the issue-The AT section, I believe is supposed to build a team around 'heavy' atgm's.(Jav/Rpg29)The AT4/RPG18 aren't really the sort of weapon that is seen as an AT priority. As long as you get an AT4, I'd find it managable..Now an AT squad with no AT4 would be a bug.

That being said, there are really some puzzling equipment choices when it comes to equipping AT weapons..In the usual cases I see, not only does the Non-AT MOS guy equip the javelin/AT4, it's usually the SAW gunner!! I don't think I want one trooper having all my squad's firepower, now...

On the Assault split, I dunno, It looks as if it breaks the squad into two fire teams, which would be doctrinally correct for US teams..

[ August 01, 2007, 06:26 AM: Message edited by: ARRPEEGEE ]

[HawkerT]

On the Assault split, I dunno, It looks as if it breaks the squad into two fire teams, which would be doctrinally correct for US teams

Thank you for your reply ARRPEEGEE!

Two fireteams? So my logic of having one supporting team with the SAW's and sniper MOS grunt and one assaulting team with fast light grenading mothers is faulty?

Anyway that is how I interpret the manual. Here are the teams after an assault split:

A-Team

And B-Team

[ARRPEEGEE]

yep, that's two standard US fireteams, I've never really heard of a US formation with massed SAW's, but who knows? I think the idea is that both fireteams have equal firepower (1saw/1gl/2rfl)effectively equalling their value as maneuver units.

The odd thing about that is that the squad leader is on A, and both fire team leaders are on B..odd

I didn't read that section in the manual, though.

[HawkerT]

I think the idea is that both fireteams have equal firepower (1saw/1gl/2rfl) effectively equalling their value as maneuver units.

Roger that, thank you.

But why then have this assault split command? I mean if equalling firepower for two maneuver units is the goal for the assault split then what is the goal of the standard split?

Teams after standard split for completeness sake:

A-Team

And B-Team

[ARRPEEGEE]

I think (assuming) 'assault' comes from the 'assault' movement command, where the squad bounds by fire teams. At least that's how I understand it.

As to the goal of splitting, well..I suppose that depends on the tactical problem at hand.

[ August 01, 2007, 07:17 AM: Message edited by: ARRPEEGEE ]

[ARRPEEGEE]

Ahhhhh-now I get it.

I looked at MOUT squads in the editor:

On a 'standard' rifle squad, you'll split into fireteams (which is correct)

On a 'MOUT' squad, you can split into 3-3man teams(split), OR an 'Assault' team of 3 door kickers with all the C4 charges, and a 6 man base of fire (Assault)

That's pretty darned cool..So, the manual is somewhat correct, there IS an assault split, it's just that you need MOUT units.

[HawkerT]

I haven't looked at how the MOUT units split yet..There's probably alot of kooky groupings for those guys.

MOUT units you say? I was unaware that such a beast existed in the game but I have barely scratched the 'unit pool' yet so I have only seen regular US Stryker squads.

Anyway here are the relevant snippets from the manual:

Assault Team

Splits a squad into two independent teams - a heavily armed security

element which usually retains all heavy weapons such

as machineguns and rockets, and a maneuver element with

small arms and automatic weapons, handgrenades and other

equipment useful for close quarters battle.

Restrictions - same as for Split Teams.

Example - we want to clean out a building suspected to be occupied

by the enemy. Sending forward guys with light automatic

weapons and keeping the heavy equipment back reduces possible

casualties from first contact and provides security for the

moving team.

Anti-Tank Team

Orders the squad to detach an Anti-Tank element, usually consisting

of two or more soldiers armed with the best anti-tank

weapon(s) that the unit has at its disposal.

Restrictions - only available if squad/unit has anti-tank weaponry

available.

Example - we split out a two-man RPG team from the main squad

and place it in a different location, issuing a Hide command to

them to wait for a good shot, while the rest of the squad engages

and distracts the enemy by fire.

I am simply having a bit of difficulty matching the manual with the splitting in the game and generally understanding the logic behind the splits themselves and the chosen troppers (weapons and MOS's) for each team.

I also am simply interested in what the real life splits would look like?

Btw. I just tried the 'wide angle view' (the c key) and it gives a very nice broad view to really let you see the battle and makes it easier to maintain situational awareness. Nice feature!

All the best

Frans

[HawkerT]

Arhhhhh beautiful!

We posted at the same time!

Makes much more sence now (the assualt split that is) Thank you for helping out!

All the best

Frans

[Dirtweasle]

Interesting thread, fleshes out something I was confused by too.

...and since I 've noticed the same sort of thing as well I can only imagine others besides us have too.

So, waz up with this BFC?

[ARRPEEGEE]

the MOUT/Assault squads are really cool. the split function gives you two breach teams (tl/gl/rfl)and one fire base (sl/2saw)..That's alot of assault options in one little squad...The assault pairing puts one of the saws in the breach team-that must be a morale booster!

[HawkerT]

Looking forward to using them bad MOUT mothers :cool:

Anyway since the commands in the command window are context sensitive i.e. dependant on unit type and it's current situation then maybe the assault split should be greyed out (made unavailable) for standard rifle squads since it is equal to it's standard split.

I am still a bit pussled as to why the AT MOS Grunt is not the natural pick for the AT Team though, and why the SAW gunner would be the one sporting the Javelin?

All the best

Frans

[ARRPEEGEE]

play Al Amrah for some good MOUT infantry action!

Well, I haven't checked it, but I'd assume that with regular squads selecting an assault split probably divides the breaching charges and other special weapons, so, it probably does have a use.

About the AT gunners, I'd say that was just a bug-I'm sure that will get squared away sooner or later. I just wish it wouldn't take my saw away!

[Battlefront.com]

Argh... I thought we got these fixed. I'll speak with Charles about swapping two guys around for the AT split:

Designated Marksman swapped out for AT Specialist

The Assault Split should have the Assaulting team with:

TL - Team Leader

GR - Grenadier

DM - Designated Marksman

AT - AT Specialist

This puts the light weapons in one group and the heavy weapons in the other. Remember, a Designated Marksman is *not* a Sniper. He's a Rifleman that can shoot better than the rest (in theory) and has a better equipped weapon for accuracy. A soldier such as that would be an asset to have in a close quarters engagement because he can theoretically drop targets faster and with more precision.

Sorry about the confusion!

Steve

[ August 21, 2007, 09:27 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[ChrisND]

Shameless plug: My Aleppo International Airport scenario uses MOUT units. You can download it in the Scenario Design forum. :cool:

[Battlefront.com]

One clarification about the Assault split concept. It is conceptually different from the MOUT organization in that the MOUT arrangement is specifically for clearing buildings and not for general environment use. There are also extra men assigned to a MOUT Platoon, which offers more flexibility in organization. Splitting a regular Squad to have an Assault element is more general purpose, with Team A acting as heavy fire support and Team B acting as a flanking/flushing/close quarters element.

Steve

[HawkerT]

Excellent Steve!

Thank you very much for digging out this thread and answering questions! Your support and answering rate on this here fine forum is really top notch! Spitzen klasse! nothing less!

The splits makes much more sense then. Also the fact that the DM carries a SAW seems ok through my foggy lay man glasses.

The only thing I can not gather from your answers is wheather or not it is correct for the DM (SAW gunner) to sport the Javelin, as is the case in 1.01 and 1.02? The lay man in me feels that the right guy for the job would be the AT MOS grunt regardless of the squad splitting or not. Simply said ... when aquirering the Javelin stuff the AT MOS grunt should grab the Javelin CLU and maybe a missile or two and his designated helper(s) should grab the rest of the missiles! Right?

If doing an AT split then the assistant leader (single star guy) should carry whatever missiles the AT MOS grunt can not carry himself and together they should scurry off and aim to perform some nasty Uri Geller metal bending tricks on the enemy armour. Right?

I am sure ARRPEEGEE feels the same, or at least this is how I interpret his posts.

Again thank you Steve for your most excellent support.

All the best and may the CMx2 engine spin off more of those tense 'männer gegen panzer' moments than we can handle.

[HawkerT]

Originally posted by Normal Dude:

Shameless plug: My Aleppo International Airport scenario uses MOUT units. You can download it in the Scenario Design forum. :cool:

Cool man :cool:

Looking forward to finally be playing one of them Normal scenarios Dude

[Battlefront.com]

HawkerT

I made a typo in my post so I corrected it. Basically, the Designated Marksman that is in the AT Team should in fact be the AT Specialist. Seems obvious, but indeed the game has them flipflopped!

The DM does not get a SAW. There are no weapons swappings going on at all, in fact. Just guys being shuffled between Teams.

Steve

[HawkerT]

Steve, thank you!

Sorry for not making my points clearly, I'll have to work on that. Please bear with me one more time.

The Designated Marksman issue.

The reason I was confused with regards to the sniper/designated marksman thing was the fact that the manual calls the MOS in question 'sniper' and not 'designated marksman', please see picture below:

So from this point on I will refer to the MOS depicted with the scope and the small + as the DM MOS.

The AT Split issue.

As you clearly state, all it takes is a swap between the DM MOS grunt and the AT MOS grunt and the current AT Split is home free and good to go. Excellent!

The Assault Split issue.

Your explanation on how the assault split should work for standard US rifle squads says:

The Assault Split should have the Assaulting team with:

TL - Team Leader

GR - Grenadier

DM - Designated Marksman

AT - AT Specialist

This puts the light weapons in one group and the heavy weapons in the other.

If we look at the current assault split for a std. US rifle sqd. with in-game pictures (cut from my pictures at the start of the thread) then we see the following:

The assaulting team

The heavy weapons (supporting) team

Before understanding the DM MOS issue I compared your explanation above with the pictures I posted earlier in the thread and thought that both a Sniper MOS grunt and a DM MOS grunt was present in the sqd. and that therefore the SAW depicted as number three from the top in Team A had to be the DM MOS grunt. But that is history.

Okay! To have the actual split allign with your explanation the following personnel swap is needed:

</font>

• The SAW gunner from team A must swap with the DM MOS grunt from team B.</font>

This will make Team A the assaulting team as per your explanation and will make Team B the heavy weapons (supporting) team. This is exactly what I was getting at in my starting posts where ARRPEEGEE talks about 'massing SAWs'. It makes perfect sense to me to have the two SAWs in the supporting team and it fits your explanation perfectly. After all the SAW is a support weapon and more suited for that than assaulting up stairs and into rooms.

So it seems that all it takes is a swap between the SAW gunner from Team A and the DM MOS grunt and the current Assault Split for a std. US rifle sqd. is home free and good to go.

The "who's sporting the Jav" issue.

I am at work and can thus not support my words with an in-game picture. However as stated in the starting posts, when acuirering the Jav stuff my virtual troopers gives the Jav CLU to one of the SAW grunts. This is completely unrelated to any splitting issue and is simply a matter of 'who should sport the Jav?'.

My observation seems to be experienced by others as well:

ARRPEEGEE writes

... That being said, there are really some puzzling equipment choices when it comes to equipping AT weapons..In the usual cases I see, not only does the Non-AT MOS guy equip the javelin/AT4, it's usually the SAW gunner!! I don't think I want one trooper having all my squad's firepower, now ...

and

... About the AT gunners, I'd say that was just a bug-I'm sure that will get squared away sooner or later. I just wish it wouldn't take my saw away!

Is this a bug? Should the AT MOS grunt not sport the AT weapons (including the Jav CLU) by default?

[Edited to add pictures as I have gotten home from work.]

Here is the pre- and post Jav acquire pictures to support the above.

Pre Jav acquire:

Post Jav acquire:

SAW gunner weapon graphics glitch issue

Again I wish I could support my claims with in-game pictures. But as stated to KwazyDog in another thread the fact that the SAW gunner sports the Jav CLU stems a small graphics glitch when he switches back from the Jav CLU to his SAW. After switching back to his SAW it floats ½ a meter above his hands. It simply might be the fact that the SAW is then placed in the position the CLU had (the Jav CLU and missile combined being a bigger weapon and carried/fired higher right?).

[Edited to add picture as I have gotten home from work.]

Here is a apicture of the glitch.

However I also noted that the issue goes away the first time he fires his SAW afterwards. It is then repeated if he swaps back to the Jav and back to the SAW. So definitely a small small small issue. Save it for a rainy day!

End of post

Sorry for the long post but I hope my explanation was clearer this time around. Please disregard if it still does not make sense! I know full well that you have bigger fish to fry at the moment.

Thank you and all the best

Frans

[ August 22, 2007, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]

[tc237]

Excellent thread, thanks for explaining things Steve.

I have a few questions and comments and maybe a Dismounted/Infantry type can answer them (I'm just an old tanker).

1)I would think that the SAW would be included in an assault team.

It is more of a full-auto M4/M16 then it is a LMG (M240).

It seems to be an ideal weapon for CQB, with a high rate of fire, light enough to be fired from the shoulder, etc.

It would provide the team with a Hallway/Room sweeping capability.

2)I don't think a Designated Marksmen has any advantage in CQB.

Most engagments are within 5m and are more "reflexive fire" then "aimed fire".

(It comes down to who can get their weapon up and pull the trigger faster).

[HawkerT]

Shameless BUMP for added pictures to my last post.