German Paratroopers 1943+ squad

Status
Not open for further replies.

sebosebi

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
198
Reaction score
379
Location
Rome
Country
llItaly
Hello,

Fallschirmjager 1943 re-organization provided two MG34/MG42 per squad, rather than the usual one, plus they have more MP40 than normal plus they use one FG-42 per squad.
This squad should be represented as a 658, and maybe also with Assault Fire! At least for the first two FJD and for 1.-7. FJR. I doubt that 548 representation is appropiate in this case.

Which are your thoughts about it?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
17,707
Reaction score
4,317
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
My view is that designers are pretty much free to use whatever squad type(s) they want when designing scenarios.

IIRC, e.g., 6-5-8 were used in a scenario in an Action Pack (#11, IIRC) to represent non-SS Wehrmacht troops who had more automatic weapons than usual.

EDIT: AP105 Cota's Last Stand was the one I was thinking about.
 

gorkowskij

Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
35
Reaction score
112
Country
llUnited States
Hello,

Fallschirmjager 1943 re-organization provided two MG34/MG42 per squad, rather than the usual one, plus they have more MP40 than normal plus they use one FG-42 per squad.
This squad should be represented as a 658, and maybe also with Assault Fire! At least for the first two FJD and for 1.-7. FJR. I doubt that 548 representation is appropiate in this case.

Which are your thoughts about it?
Valid question. I think 5-4-8s with more LMG than usual is an efficient way to handle this with minimal fuss. The 5-4-8/LMG combo is ferocious and fun to play.
 

skarper

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
488
Reaction score
113
Location
Vietnam
Country
ll
All the MMC are wrong to a greater or lesser extent.

Should have redone them all when they switched from SL - ASL. All the effort spent on armour factors when ASL is supposed to be an infantry game beats me.

Maybe it was too much of a leap to take? Or maybe the research was not so widely available?

Anyway.
 

Actionjick

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2020
Messages
2,310
Reaction score
1,443
Country
llUnited States
All the MMC are wrong to a greater or lesser extent.

Should have redone them all when they switched from SL - ASL. All the effort spent on armour factors when ASL is supposed to be an infantry game beats me.

Maybe it was too much of a leap to take? Or maybe the research was not so widely available?

Anyway.
The intent may have been for SL/ASL to be an infantry game but that went by the wayside pretty early on. Up Front was closer to an infantry/squad level game but armor crept in there too. Chrome is just too appealing.
 

Tesgora

Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Messages
89
Reaction score
25
Location
Wawaland
Country
llCanada
Hello,

Fallschirmjager 1943 re-organization provided two MG34/MG42 per squad, rather than the usual one, plus they have more MP40 than normal plus they use one FG-42 per squad.
This squad should be represented as a 658, and maybe also with Assault Fire! At least for the first two FJD and for 1.-7. FJR. I doubt that 548 representation is appropiate in this case.

Which are your thoughts about it?
The ASL FP representation includes not only the infantry weapons but also the squad size. I don't have the references at hand; but I thought the 658 squads used to portray the late-war prime Waffen SS units was taking into account also a larger squad size. I am not sure the Luftwaffe FJ units necessarily had the same squad organization/size irrespective of an equivalent ratio of automatic weapons. Furthermore, the squads FP representation also needs adjustments due to many units not fighting at full strength as a campaign or war progresses. In that respect, for example, FJ units deployed in Italy over long periods may have seen their strength vary. Overall, I find the 658 representation to be in need of further backing through research in contrast to the conventional 548 and 447 combination (with variable SW allocation) to represent the FJ squads.
 

sebosebi

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
198
Reaction score
379
Location
Rome
Country
llItaly
The ASL FP representation includes not only the infantry weapons but also the squad size. I don't have the references at hand; but I thought the 658 squads used to portray the late-war prime Waffen SS units was taking into account also a larger squad size. I am not sure the Luftwaffe FJ units necessarily had the same squad organization/size irrespective of an equivalent ratio of automatic weapons. Furthermore, the squads FP representation also needs adjustments due to many units not fighting at full strength as a campaign or war progresses. In that respect, for example, FJ units deployed in Italy over long periods may have seen their strength vary. Overall, I find the 658 representation to be in need of further backing through research in contrast to the conventional 548 and 447 combination (with variable SW allocation) to represent the FJ squads.
From my sources, in 44-45 SS squad the presence of the second MG gunner and assistant reduced the riflemen from 5 to 3. The same thing happened in FJ squad, where there were more MP40, two to three. And one Kar 98 could be a FG42.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,573
Reaction score
2,483
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
How often did the FJ actually manage to meet their KStN?
 

sebosebi

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
198
Reaction score
379
Location
Rome
Country
llItaly
How often did the FJ actually manage to meet their KStN?
Yes ok, but you could say the same thing for all the Heer / SS / Luftwaffe units in many moments of the late war years. It seems that only few FJ regiments met those KsTN and for short periods, mainly in after-Tunisia 1943 FJD1 and FJD2 regiments. So, beginning from Primosole Bridge and "Piana di Catania" front until Cassino, maybe excluded. Those units suffered a lot of casualties in 1943. I was wondering if it could be reasonable to make some FJ squad as 658 in that period, with ELR 5.
 

skarper

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
488
Reaction score
113
Location
Vietnam
Country
ll
Whenever you question MMC values, you are going to provoke a lot of fudging. Design for effect is invoked. People will say the units are under TOE....etc.

For some reason, German FJ don't get their own MMC when US Marines get 4? kinds of MMC.

ASL struggles with units with mixed small arms. The general approach is to average it out, adding 1-2 FP and knocking off 1-2 range factors. Assault and spraying fire get added to jazz it up a bit. It's not really satisfactory but there is no easy solution.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,573
Reaction score
2,483
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
For some reason, German FJ don't get their own MMC when US Marines get 4? kinds of MMC.
I thought the 5-4-8 was generally always used to portray the FJ.

In the context of the original series, it seems to make a bit more sense why certain things got welded into the system.

In SL you got two types of squad for each nationality - a 1st Line, and an Elite which represented things like paratroops, marquee formations, etc.

In COI you got Conscripts added to the mix.

In COD you got 2nd Line troops added in.

In GI:AoV you got ELR (but only for certain formations, generally ones expected to deteriorate under enemy fire)

ASL had to consolidate all these types and extend them out to the existing nationalities (which didn't include USMC at the time).
 

The Purist

Elder Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
2,844
Reaction score
1,334
Location
In my castle by the sea, Trochu, AB
First name
Gerry
Country
llCanada
Yes ok, but you could say the same thing for all the Heer / SS / Luftwaffe units in many moments of the late war years. It seems that only few FJ regiments met those KsTN and for short periods, mainly in after-Tunisia 1943 FJD1 and FJD2 regiments. So, beginning from Primosole Bridge and "Piana di Catania" front until Cassino, maybe excluded. Those units suffered a lot of casualties in 1943. I was wondering if it could be reasonable to make some FJ squad as 658 in that period, with ELR 5.
A 658 w/ ELR 5 would be far too much FP for such squads considering the condition of most Falsch. units after the summer of 1943. As mentioned above you may want to add an extra LMG or two to the scenario OoB instead. As unit strength declined the squad sizes began to shrink and this is where the extra machine guns became of use. There was very little 'rifle' fire and more reliance on the MG and mortars to hold positions (and German para infantry made very good use of their mortars).

The 658 is best used to represent the SS in their prime (late 43 to mid 44). Even so, after Jul 44 the 658/ELR 5 should become rare except in certain specific situations as unit performance fluctuated wildly.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,852
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
Be careful about adding LMG to reflect a 2nd squad LMG. I would strongly recommend only adding 1 LMG per 2 squads for 2-X LMG or 1 LMG per 3 squads for 3-8 at most. The LMG counters represent something above and beyond squad inherent LMG; a platoon reserve crack LMG team or an extra allocation of ammo along with an extra LMG. They are not normal.
 

skarper

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
488
Reaction score
113
Location
Vietnam
Country
ll
Something I think is an error is allowing LMGs to lay fire lanes. I just don't think there is enough ammunition on hand or a stable enough platform available to make this a realistic action.

If you disallow LMGs to use firelanes, you can allocate a more realistic proportion of LMGs to squads.

If a 4-6-7 has a single inherent l.MG 34/42 then a squad with 2 should logically be a 6-6-7.

The SS 6-5-8 is a nonsensical fantasy. As are the 8-3-8s for that matter.

But in the end there is only so much subtlety you can squeeze into the MMC model.

To return to the OP's question. 5-4-8s with an additional lmg per squad seems to be the way to go, as suggested by Gorkowskij above.

I think the FJ in a Cassino module had 5-4-8 counters with underscored morale and broken side morale of 9. Or am I misremembering?
 

T34

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2020
Messages
144
Reaction score
201
Location
Nans Sous Sainte Anne, Doubs
First name
Tim
Country
llFrance
Hello,

Fallschirmjager 1943 re-organization provided two MG34/MG42 per squad, rather than the usual one, plus they have more MP40 than normal plus they use one FG-42 per squad.
This squad should be represented as a 658, and maybe also with Assault Fire! At least for the first two FJD and for 1.-7. FJR. I doubt that 548 representation is appropiate in this case.

Which are your thoughts about it?
All German squads were assigned a MG34 or MG42. A LMG counter is considered an extra.

I would point to your question as an overall ASL player bias that the quality of German elite troops increased drastically after 1942. They did not. What happened is the quality of first line troops declined rapidly in the same time period. SS and Falschirmjaeger weren't supermen. They were simply volunteer formations that young German men joined in order to avoid becoming the cannon fodder that the Wehrmacht had become during that time period.

Stop glorifying the elite Germans. They were war criminals and their main superpower is that they had to fight to the death to avoid being charged as such.
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,852
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
A few years ago I analysed Squad parameters vs historical equipment and discerned a general guide for calculating FP, IE I back worked a set of rules/guide.

Rather than repeat the text I point to:

For a more explanation of my reasoning, read:

As an aside I only think the US 747 and German 838 are WTF.
The US para squad would be better represented by a 667, like what came with FW.
German Pioneers by 548 (early) or 648 (late).
 
Reactions: T34

skarper

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
488
Reaction score
113
Location
Vietnam
Country
ll
The US paratroops are indeed WTF units. They were supposed to have an M1919A4 [later A6] LMG, a bunch of riflemen and sometimes a few SMG armed men. No BARs in Normandy apart from a few with the 82nd.

Later, SMGs and M1 carbines were often swapped out for M1 rifles.

I also read somewhere the M1919A4s [a heck of lot were dropped on 5/6th June] were found to be less useful than imagined, and the crews were used as riflemen instead.
 

skarper

Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2009
Messages
488
Reaction score
113
Location
Vietnam
Country
ll
All BV and CoD Finnish units are total nonsense.

They had very few SMGs in the winter war. And the Lahti automatic rifle was also rare and not much better than a BAR.

FP should be on the low side. What advantages the Finns had would be better portrayed by special rules for close combat. 2XFP for close combat maybe 3xFP for SISSI units? HtH, Stealth, winter camouflage and skis are also pretty significant.

There is an element of 'design for effect' in that the Soviets in the winter war would really warrant a FP of 3 and an ELR of 2 throughout.

I gather some of the excesses in the Finnish OB were mitigated when they got their own module, but the original MMCs persist.
 
Reactions: T34

T34

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2020
Messages
144
Reaction score
201
Location
Nans Sous Sainte Anne, Doubs
First name
Tim
Country
llFrance
All BV and CoD Finnish units are total nonsense.

They had very few SMGs in the winter war. And the Lahti automatic rifle was also rare and not much better than a BAR.

FP should be on the low side. What advantages the Finns had would be better portrayed by special rules for close combat. 2XFP for close combat maybe 3xFP for SISSI units? HtH, Stealth, winter camouflage and skis are also pretty significant.

There is an element of 'design for effect' in that the Soviets in the winter war would really warrant a FP of 3 and an ELR of 2 throughout.

I gather some of the excesses in the Finnish OB were mitigated when they got their own module, but the original MMCs persist.
And whoever gave the Lahti ATR a ROF was a fool. ATR's had such a recoil that even a semi-automatic mechanism meant that they couldn't get off that many rounds per minute. Further, the whole point of an ATR was surprise, which meant firing a round and moving to a new spot. The Soviet PTRD (not semi-automatic) and PTRS (semi-automatic), both FAR superior weapons to the Lahti, show that a semi-automatic mechanism was a waste of time on an ATR.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top