What 3 companies should I buy If I want to be as accurate as possible?

[Griefbringer]

In general, the core structure for an infantry battalion TOE (Table of Organisation and Equipment) from WWII onwards looks something like the following:


1 Headquarter company
0-1 Combat support company (AKA heavy weapons company)
3-4 Infantry companies (AKA rifle company)

Headquarter company contains administrative, signal, logistical and maintenance elements. While most of these are not displayed in game, ammo carrier section/platoon might present part of the HQ company ammunition platoon. Still, the men of the HQ company do have small arms for defense should the situation get desperate (and thus could be displayed eg. as reserve platoons in scenarios).

Combat support company contains platoons of various heavy weapons, such as mortars, machine-guns and various anti-tank weapons. It might also contain an engineer platoon and/or reconnaissance platoon (though the later might also be found in a HQ company). In battle, these could be held in reserve or deployed to the for to support individual rifle companies.

Infantry companies are your usual line companies, typically containing 3 infantry platoons and 0-1 heavy weapon platoon. Typical battle deployment would involve one of the companies being held in reserve.


Reconnaissance companies are something that you would not normally find in an infantry battalion - they are likely to be higher level elements (eg. part of divisional reconnaissance battalion).

I am afraid I cannot point any specific websites for modern TOEs, but the following website is excellent source for WWII battalion organisation, and would probably form a good guideline for immediate post-WWII period too:

http://www.bayonetstrength.150m.com/

Griefbringer

[Marcello]

Globalsecurity is a good source but there is a lot stuff if you do not know exactly where to look at.
Here is a list of current US Army field manuals.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../fm/index.html

Some of them deal with battalion/company operations and organization. You can find them using the seach function in your browser (try "company" or "battalion" in the query).
FM 3-21.11 THE SBCT INFANTRY RIFLE COMPANY offers for example a very detailed breakdown of a Stryker brigade from the brigade level down to the single infantryman

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...m#sectionii1_5

That being said paper organization is one thing and reality is an other. For a start the practice is to raise ad hoc task forces on the basis of what is needed or available for a specific task. Therefore to make a real world example from the Iraq war a tank company might get attached to a Stryker battalion to stiffen it up.
Then attrition takes its toll.Again in Iraq a tank or two in a platoon might break down and the crews get issued armored cars and are used as infantrymen.
These are only two examples I remember but the point is that the combination of the mix & match system and attrition would produce a wide range of non standard formations.
I would bet for instance that there is not a single pure paper strenght Abrams battalion in the entire iraqi theater.

[Marek_Tucan]

Also good idea is to pass through FM-100 OPFOR composition manuals. Not accurate in many cases, but give a nice insight into ex-eastern block organisation.

[PlasmaKrab]

One big problem I can see if you try to stick to the books with the US organization, is that battalions are specialized.
In other words, if you buy only these three companies that one actual Lt.Col. is supposed to command according to TOE, you would end up with 1)three identical infantry cos, 2)three identical tank squadrons, 3)three identical whatever without much variety even in the supporting units.

That's also not counting the cross-attached support units from division level (arty, air defense...). As far as I've understood the old FMs, the tank and mech battalions within an armored/mechanized division were rarely used as such and mainly mixed and matched as battalion-sized task forces.

In my opinion that'd be the way to go to be as realistic as possible (and that's important) with regard to the books as well as actual field practice. Since you're at GlobalSecurity, you can try FM 7-20 about infantry battalion command, they should have something to tell about cross-attached support and task forces.

To get a balanced force, I'd advise sticking to only 2 of your core unit type (say infantry), one company-size group of another branch (say armor), and three to six platoon-size support units (arty, recon, AAD, engineers).

Or you can always get a balanced battalion-sized US force by buying you a heavy Cavalry squadron, but not if you want to be original!

[thatguy96]

Originally Posted by PlasmaKrab

That's also not counting the cross-attached support units from division level (arty, air defense...). As far as I've understood the old FMs, the tank and mech battalions within an armored/mechanized division were rarely used as such and mainly mixed and matched as battalion-sized task forces.

This also happens in battalion sized actions involving entire individual battalions in the whole of the WWII to the Present history of both the US Army and US Marine Corps. Battalion sized units have often habitually had platoons and companies of specialized troops attached to them, which have been habitually attached from Divisional Units to Brigades and Regiments, and are now an integral part of the Brigade Special Troop Battalions at least in the US Army's new Modular System.

It gets complicated as all hell very quickly. TOEs are a starting place, and can be helpful in organizing purchasable units for OOB construction. For creating "accurate" units for play, it can easily get to a "flavor of the day" kind of situation the more histories you consult.

[Griefbringer]

Originally Posted by PlasmaKrab

That's also not counting the cross-attached support units from division level (arty, air defense...). As far as I've understood the old FMs, the tank and mech battalions within an armored/mechanized division were rarely used as such and mainly mixed and matched as battalion-sized task forces.

One WWII US armoured division practice that I am familiar with was to take a tank battalion and mechanised infantry battalion, put them under a specific combat command, and then having them switch one company with each other (medium tank company to mech. inf. company) to form light and heavy task groups. Not sure how permanent formations these were, or if the cross-attached company got rotated sometimes.

AFAIK artillery (of the indirect sort) is not really cross-attached as such, but assigned to provide direct support to specific formations (ie. they would only answer to calls for fire from that formation) as opposed to general support.

If you are playing campaigns, then one approach would be to start with a full strenght battalion of a given type, and then use the auxiliary forces to represent whatever support you get from the regiment/brigade/division/corps for that particular battle.

Campaign play also nice introduces the possibility of having understrenght formations (if you do not have enough repair points after a battle) or the possibility of the unit obtaining additional equipment.

Griefbringer

[PanzerBob]

Good day all,

A lot good advice here.

For my 2 cents worth: The rule of thumb I use for campaigning against the AI depends on which country I am, timeframe, and my potential enemies (which I always in MBT try to make reasonable alliances real or imagined)

I usually command a Task Force (usually meaning a force designed to the Task, hopefully well rounded) with support elements attached to counter the type of threats my enemy is likely to present.

A typical Task Force could be:

2 Battalions minus each with-

2 Companies-

1 Battalion is my heavy metal

1 Coy being Mech INF with tracked APC/IFV's
1 Sqdrn (sometimes minus) of MBT's-usually not the top end (I upgrade later)

The other Battalion is my fast metal

1 Coy being Mech INF with wheeled APC/IFV's
1 Sqdrn (sometimes minus) of MBT's, Lt tanks or other fast anti armour vehicles- usually not the top end (I upgrade later). This Sqdrn TO&E is very much dependant on the threat I envision and the terrain being fought on, and even it's brother Inf Coy could change transportation if there is little or no roads.

As for support elements:

If I can and it's viable I like to attach 4 to 6 Attack Helos and at the start of the Campaign I will sacrifice Arty to afford these if necessary. But normally I can swing.

2 Sections plus or minus Mobile Recce.

2 Sections SPAAA
1 Section SPSAMs

2 Batteries of Arty 152/155 preferred with precision munitions if available.

Plus ammo supply for my Helos and other arty.

Support elements and upgrades are usually what I spend victory points on.

Recce I like purchase with support points and Campaign dependent I buy Recce from the country I'm defending. (It's their land they should know it best!) Some arty support and fast air of varying mixes (a whole other topic, I'd say.) Extra AA maybe.

Generally speaking my 2 Battalions usually only change in power and effectiveness not in TO&E. I also try and stay within reasonable unit sizes for support units as well. Which is fairly easy to do since my TF is usually near the 200unit limit, especially once into the 70's, 1950's era games it is sometimes possible the squeeze in another Battalion minus of expand the other Battalions but again this is very dependent on the three main variables.

From my experience and what I’ve read over the years, this is not unreasonable Force and is usually fairly well suited to all manner of combat. It can also be cut down by a half and still be well balanced and supported, maybe even a ¼ if careful.

Hope this is of some help.

Bob out

[Mobhack]

The Soviet organisation used from the 60's on is a quite useful battalion organisation (not just for the Soviets).

A Soviet formation is based on 3 "type" formations, and a supporting formation. The support formation normally gets split and a third is added to each "type" formation.

So a mech battalion of a mech brigade/regt will get a tank company added. The tank company is then usually broken down and a platoon is added to each mech coy as a supplement.

In SP terms that would be, roughly:
Mech bn core:
- HQ
- mech mortar platoon (SP or towed)
- mech bn AT platoon (saggers and SPG-9 RCL)
- mech bn MG/AGL platoon (80s onwards)
- 3 of the already supplied in the OOB BTR or BMP coy + tank platoon(4)
attached down from higher command:
- a recce scout car platoon
- a battery of 6 arty (on map SPs or off map to taste) under command from regt
- 2-4 AA sections (2 each ZSU or SP-SAM)
- (option) a BRDM-type SP-ATGM platoon
- (option) An engineer platoon

Tank Bn core:
- HQ
- 3x10 tank coys with attached mech (usually BMP) inf (in the OOB)
attached down from higher command:
- a recce scout car/PT-76 platoon
- a battery of 6 arty (on map SPs or off map to taste) under command from regt
- 2-4 AA sections (2 each ZSU or SP-SAM)
- (option) a BRDM-type SP-ATGM platoon
- (option) An engineer platoon

All tanks and APC to be of the same type, of course.

Should you decide that your battalion is the lead element
- the attached recce element may be a company
- the under command Sp/offmap arty may add another 1 or 2 btys
- If a tank bn core - you may also have all (or some) of the split-up supporting mech bn's support coy (Mor, AT, MG/AGL pls)

Allow one Forward Observer in the core after about 1970 unless the entire arty bn is fielded - then you can allow another. Post about 1990, you can allow 1 per battery (including the infantry mortars). Before 1970 - only allow a FOO if you have fielded the entire regimental arty battalion (3 batteries).

This applies to the Soviets, and probably to current day conscript forces. The modern Russian era use of some professional long-term contract troops probably means that any formations based on these will be more "mix and match" company level task forces like NATO than the old "cookie cutter" fixed attachments.

Cheers
Andy

[narwan]

Maybe these can help. They're postwar battallion TO&E's for the US.

Narwan

[thatguy96]

Narwan, did you compile those? They're very detailed and generally helpful.

I have noticed one nitpick, and also looking through these brings up an interesting set of questions. Firstly the M114A1E1/A2 didn't enter service until 1969 (its listed in the TO&E for 1965 ACAV Squadrons). The 1965 TO&E for units not in Vietnam should be just 4 M114/A1. In Vietnam these were replaced with M113s with the ACAV kit.

Also, the TO&E here notes 2 2-man scout sections (and I believe, though I don't have the game in front of me now) that this is also represented in game with 2-man cavalry scout sections. The issue I'm starting to have here is that the Scout Sections at least in the 1965 TO&E for the ACAV Troop had a grand total of 12 guys, split between two squads, each with two tracks, each with a crew of 3. These crew members were a Scout Observer and Scout Driver, and while they could dismount if necessary, critical functions of the vehicle would be unable to function (movement and/or weapons). To get to the point, though not looking at it right this second, I believe the setup in WinSPMBT allows for tracks with essentially 5 crew instead of 3 (an additional two dismounts).