[Cross]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

The CDO platoons (AKA half sections) would probably be best with 4 rifle sections, and a 5th as an engineer class (for their obstacle clearing ability) with SMG, satchel bombs and other CQB stuff.

Andy

This would work. I assume you mean that one of the four rifle 'sections' would also be the HQ section?

Originally Posted by Marek_Tucan

But these are regular infantry, we're discussing commandos here, IOW units that had to fight often outnumbered, in small teams etc. - to reverse the argument about LMG being gone, if you have one large squad suppressed, it's gone, if you have "Assault" and "MG" elements separate, one can support the other, the same in assault - it would be likely that in the absence of heavy weapons, you'd want the LMGs to provide fire support while maneuvering elements go close to the enemy. So I would say that for spec. troops, such division would be justified.

(just for record, tried a battle in similar settings using USMC company in "Squad organisation" and "Fireteam organisation" - while fireteams were fragile if taken isolated, they were huge bonus when suppressing the enemy as more weapons fired and they were harder to suppress.)

I don't see much difference - in SP - wether the section are Light Infantry, Ghurkas, Calvalry, Engineers, PzGren, Ski Troops, Paras or Commando. The standard section should fight as a section in a 50M hex.

Sensible exceptions are made for scouts, snipers, AT teams, MGs etc. But these exceptions are 'support', and are consistant.

Why should Commando sections be the only ones split into fire teams and the disadvangtages - in SP - that incurs; and also have the disadvantage of only being able to purchase a 'platoon' (Troop) with tons of support baggage already attached?

Surely Commando troops should be more flexible, not less flexible?

We must remember the scale of the game. Fire and movement is done on the platoon level in SP not the squad/section level.
So one whole section supports another as it moves forward.

Support units, especially MGs, can still be purchased and used for supression; just as you may with regular infantry.

I agree with you that smaller fire teams are more vulnerable/fragile in SP. And agree that there are some circumstancial exceptions to this.

The current SP Army Commando Troop is not historically accurate.

I guess my thought is that by transforming the basic Commando Troop to a more typical SP infantry platoon, you are making it more historical and a more effective fighting force. Currently, I wouldn't use a Commando Troop for anything other than a scenario build.

Seperate smaller support units would be available to 'add on' as the situation requires.

We should also remember that Commando Troops fought in the line alongside regular infantry. Their daring raids got all the press attention, but these units often had to fight like regular infantry on the front. But better equipped no doubt.

cheers,
Cross