Vinnart Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I was playing recently, and saw for the first time the company first sgt. when the company XO got hit. Is there a sgt. major as apart of Battalion XO section? And the big question; Why no platoon sgt. attached to platoon HQ sections? I just had a platoon leader get it, and noticed a PFC took over HQ section. That doesn't seem right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I note that Sergeants (and Captains) in general seem to be fairly thin on the ground. How can the units even function at all ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I was playing recently, and saw for the first time the company first sgt. when the company XO got hit. Is there a sgt. major as apart of Battalion XO section? And the big question; Why no platoon sgt. attached to platoon HQ sections? I just had a platoon leader get it, and noticed a PFC took over HQ section. That doesn't seem right. Mighty fine question. Interested in any inside response. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 It was decided that these guys (along with Brit RSMs, CSMs, SSMs, etc.) wouldn't be depicted. The basis is that they didn't want to start having to include all the admin / exchelon bits and just focus on the war fighters. So yes there are people "missing" (anyone seen a SQMS or CQMS recently?) but I think these guys might get back in for CM:SF2. There have been discussions about replenishment, soft skin vehicles in armoured units, etc. but I can't promise anything (note it says "Beta Tester" in the job description, not "Owner"). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Thank you Gibson for the inside view. Yeah, it'd be nice to see some of these included in CMSF2. Pretty much all the combat reading has these guys getting involved- especially in big ops' except of course CQMS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Yes I also miss all the HQ elm. A Tk SHQ is a bit more than just the gun tanks. Then there’s no Admin Tp either. But on the “small” maps currently available. stuff like echelons would tend to be a bit too far fwd anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Especially in campaigns it would be great to have the B echelon involved, even the possibility of an ongoing battle so to speak. Something like you finish the current map, do a reorg, resupply etc then move to an exit area that kicks off the next map with your force in the condition it was when you entered the exit zone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Well I’m trying to get “battle replens” in. You know half the Tp continues the engagement, half jockies off into dead ground, the echelon resupplies them, they re join the fight. I’ve had more than one engagement where I’m pretty much running out of ammunition on one vehicle but at 75% on another and need to be able to either cross load or bomb up during the course of a given scenario. But this is just one item on a personal long list of “stuff” I’m hoping we can get stuck into once the “Normandy sideshow” is done with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 "the “Normandy sideshow” is done with." LOL My thoughts exactly ! And what is the timeline for the Aussie module ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Um, never AFAIK. Unless Army gives them some cash to include ASLAV, Bushmaster, etc. But in any case no TCP/IP WEGO (i.e. no replay feature to critique a Trainee‘s decisions) means it currently can’t be used as a training tool (which is the only reason why Army might spend $ on it). I don’t think they’d spend $ on the RT version either because it would mean Trainees could instantly adapt their plans to react to changes so it wouldn’t reflect the control PL and COY commanders actually have (and the delays involved). We use other tools at the soldier level which is where the RT bit might be useful. But at that level its more about counting your rounds and changing magazines, etc. which CM:SF doesn’t do. This then becomes a circular argument with BFC saying “Give us the money and we will develop feature X“, while Army says “Show us feature X working and we will give you money to develop it” 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Sure, I wasn't suggesting that the ARA would adopt CM2 as a training aide but they do have Tacops ? (after my time so I am not sure what they use it for). I always did wonder tho' given that the Dutch and Canadians were in the NATO module it would not be too much of a leap to have an ARA module. Especially since nearly everything you need is already in the game in the various nationalities, only the Bushmaster is totally unique. I guess it comes down to, as always, a marketing and economics not sure if there is a really big market in Australia, just you and I so far but I am sure there are others. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Well there are a bunch. I recently ran a CM:BN preview here in Sydney and had a few starters. However we aren’t in NATO so it would be a long bow to pull to include us under that. As for training tools, we now ten to use “Steel Beasts” for AFV / mech stuff (or say PL +) and VBS2 (which is a military version of Flashpoint) for Section / PL stuff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Sure I know we are not in NATO but we are deployed along side NATO forces in Afghanistan, the Dutch for a time anyway. What I was really meaning was that BF have a few of the "also rans" in the NATO module which really does have a feel for including some of the main players currently deployed in Afghanistan then extending that to the ARA is certainly conceivable in the future CMSF2. Steel Beasts looks impressive, pity it is "only for the pros" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 And the big question; Why no platoon sgt. attached to platoon HQ sections? I just had a platoon leader get it, and noticed a PFC took over HQ section. That doesn't seem right. Your "big" question kind of got missed. AFAIK, the platoon leader's mate is generally his RTO. And in combat, isn't the platoon sergeant usually attached to one of the squads? (there's also a designated squad leader, but the platoon sergeant likely calls the shots depending on the situation). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 In my experience the Pl Sgt generally moves with PHQ but does have other roles to perform depending on the situation, resupply being a big one but yes often assisting a junior section commander. I can't imagine that the Pl Sig would ever take command of the Pl HQ. I guess it would be difficult to game the Sgt being elsewhere and then returning to Pl HQ on the demise of the Lt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Steel Beasts looks impressive, pity it is "only for the pros" It isn’t. There’s a “Personal Edition“ which is about 80% of the feature set of the military one but it is a bit pricey (but buying one copy of it gives you a similar variety of vehicles, etc. to CM:SF + all the modules so on a “non bundle” basis its similar). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Your "big" question kind of got missed. AFAIK, the platoon leader's mate is generally his RTO. And in combat, isn't the platoon sergeant usually attached to one of the squads? (there's also a designated squad leader, but the platoon sergeant likely calls the shots depending on the situation). Yes they basically decided that his admin role precluded him. Same logic applied at each level to: PL Sgt (First Sgt) CSM (Top Sgt) RSM (CSM) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Come to think of it, having an additional single man unit in the platoon would come in handy now and then -- running up to rooftops to take a quick looksie for example. Or staying behind to provide buddy aid in the absence of a dedicated medic without needing to keep a whole team back. Kind of an all-purpose Sergeant Rock. The commander of the US Army humvee Escort platoon is the only single man BLUE unit, (RED has Combatant Snipers and Spies) and I've used him for those purposes. Of course, you probably want to have him convey some kind of in-game leadership to troops he was leading, and I don't know whether/how that would work within the existing chain of command. This is all programming spaghetti for Charles. And before anyone stomps on me, I'm NOT asking for this or whingeing about its absence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Ah yes, when I read it now I see it is for " Military professionals and hard-core simulation fans" I only read the "Training on a soldiers PC bit" It looks like a first person sim? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 Removed because it was: 1. Too far Off TOpic, and 2. Spoke about another product. PM sent to “Magpie_Oz” instead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnart Posted March 17, 2011 Author Share Posted March 17, 2011 If they have included the 1st Sgt. as part of the company XO section, then I can't see why they did not include the Plt. Sgt. as part of the platoons HQ's sections second in command. The platoon. Sgt. is a key figure in the platoon. He should be taking over the HQ section if the 2nd Lt. dies not a PFC. The platoon sgt. should not be considered anymore admin than the company XO, or the 1st. Sgt which are in the game. Sorry, but this troop should have been included. When I was in the army in what seems like another lifetime ago I recall seeing the platoon sgt. out in front of the formation quite a bit. Perhaps things have changed? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibsonm Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 If I raise that they will just make it consistent by removing the 1st Sgt too (thought they already had). The decision was to have none of the senior NCOs for the “admin focused” reasons mentioned above. You may or may not agree, but I’m certain it wont be on the list for the “last hurrah” 1.32 patch. And as I say putting them back “in” is on my list for CM:SF2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 If I raise that they will just make it consistent by removing the 1st Sgt too (thought they already had). The decision was to have none of the senior NCOs for the “admin focused” reasons mentioned above. You may or may not agree, but I’m certain it wont be on the list for the “last hurrah” 1.32 patch. And as I say putting them back “in” is on my list for CM:SF2. That's the thing though. Some of these admin guys are not just admin in CMSF scenario. Taken to absurd but like the buggle plattoon are not buggles on ops. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Now that's a name I've not heard in a long, long time.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 I think the key is admin "focussed" The duties of the senior NCO's (PlSGT and CSM) on ops is very much an admin/support type thing. Making sure the platoon and Company, have water, ammo, food etc also that the needs of the troops are met as well, discipline etc. It is only the Platoon Sergeant however who could conceivably end up in charge of his subunit. A CSM would be well down the list to run a company and similarly the RSM for a Battalion. Form that perspective there is a gap of sorts given that the Sgt is not in the Pl HQ element, but the other side of the coin is that the HQ would become larger than it practically should be if the Sgt was added. But I have to agree, having the Pl Sig running the platoon is a bit odd. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.