Why teams instead of squads?

Why teams instead of squads? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat – The Bloody First

Message

darkpatriot -> Why teams instead of squads? (6/15/2018 11:41:48 AM)
I apologize if this has been answered before. I tried to use the search function to find an answer but I don't think it is working for me. Why are teams the basic Infantry element instead of squads? I have 2 issues with this. 1.) You will need be able to command a lot more units in order to have a company or the unit you are commanding will actually be more like a platoon or two rather than a full company. You will also have to keep track of and issue orders to twice as many Infantry units as you had to in previous installments. 2.) It is ahistorical. At least in regards to the US Army. One of the findings of the 1946 Infantry Conference at Fort Benning after WW2 was that despite the doctrine being for Infantry squads to be able to utilize fire and maneuver at the squad level with separate fire and maneuver elements, this rarely happened in practice and the squad was generally the smallest infantry element capable of maneuvering. Primarily because the squad leaders were not generally able to control separate elements well enough to achieve effective fire and maneuver even with an assistant squad leader. Especially given the high casualty rate among Infantry which resulted in a lot of squad leaders (and other squad members) being relatively inexperienced at that role.

sepp3gd -> RE: Why teams instead of squads? (8/31/2018 3:50:09 AM)
www.matrixgames.com/products/686/details/Close.Combat.-.The.Bloody.First I am looking at this photo and it looks pretty much right on par with what has been presented to us in the past in one variety or another. Cross of Iron and A Bridge Too Far were different and allowed for command of many more forces at once - and was still not a negative; this looks very simple in contrast. Maybe this will clear things up? https://www.thebalancecareers.com/u-s-army-military-organization-from-squad-to-corps-4053660 http://secondworldwar.co.uk/index.php/army-sizes-a-ranks/86-army-units-a-sizes https://www.thirteen.org/blog-post/u-s-army-units-explained-from-squads-to-brigades-to-corps/ (Yeah it is Vietnam but it still gives the break-down of the sandwich, even if the calories may vary from deli-meat particular, deli-cheese, and bread, it is bread, cheese, meat, lettuce, tomato, mayo, mustard.. etc. I think that you will have to get over your issues and move forward.

GrdAdmiral -> RE: Why teams instead of squads? (9/10/2018 8:23:22 AM)
I much prefer the old A Bridge too far or Russian front setup where you choose all your teams individually. I’m not a fan of the way that Gateway to Caen has it locked to specifc battlegroups and only support is chosen. But I’m hoping with progressive units that TBF allows individual units to be chosen vs the battle group setup of GTC.

Destraex -> RE: Why teams instead of squads? (9/11/2018 9:50:39 AM)
Sections in the British army.

CGGrognard -> RE: Why teams instead of squads? (3/7/2019 10:42:13 PM)
Is the option to rename the units still intact? I ask because I try to keep the units within their squad.

shadepiece -> RE: Why teams instead of squads? (3/12/2019 4:11:38 PM)
I like the team level if I'm honest. I have definitely read that the U.S. Army would often break squads into a move/assault element, and a base of fire element. So a BAR element combined with a rifle team seems to be the perfect fit. There's a lot of times where moving one team of four or five is more advantageous than moving eight or nine men.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.203125