"Bradley Platoon Organizations" Topic

I posted this as a reply in another thread but I thought that it might be of general interest to TMP'ers since it deals with such an important unit in the US army: the Bradley rifle platoon.

Below are three different TO&Es from official US army field manuals. They show the Bradley dismount platoon in three different configurations:

A. two rifle squads (each with 3x M249 SAWs) and an MG squad of 2x M240s

B. three rifle squads with the usual 2x M249s per squad and no extra M240 MGs

C. three rifle squads with the usual 2x M249s per squad AND 1x M240 per squad.

It's possible that B and C are in fact the same TO&E with optional loadouts for a few soldiers expressly indicated in C (ie the Javelins and M240s).

In game terms A and B, with three belt-fed automatic weapons per 9-man squad, generate a lot of firepower for their size. US marine squads also have 3x M249s but they're also 50% larger at 13 men (ie three fire teams to the US army's 2 fire teams per squad).

In our upcoming rules we define standard US army and marine rifle stands as SAW elements/sections (1:1 ratio of fireteams to SAWs) and the Bradley organization with the extra 240s as a SAW-MG element/section. IIRC British Warrior dismounts also carry an extra belt-fed weapon in addition to their fireteam SAWs.

You can also see the difficulty of cramming 9-man squads into IFVs designed to carry 6 and then, later, 7 soldiers.

And it's interesting to note the division of the platoon into two sections, especially with respect to the vehicles. This makes a lot of sense given the difficulties of trying to control 4 vehicles on an individual basis under combat conditions. Our research shows that vehicle platoons are better handled as sections of 2-3 vehicles each (a leader and one or two wingmen) or as a single entity with individual vehicles taking their cues for positioning, maneuver, and fire control from the leader.

Note that these are all images taken from official US field manuals.

Here's the Stryker platoon for sake of comparison. Each Stryker carries 9 dismounts + 2 crew. What's interesting here is that you have carrying capacity of 36 spread across 4 Strykers but you also have…39 dismounts! Yikes, clausterphobes need not apply to mech infantry! :-)

I am sure this will help a lot of people.

Back in the 90s when I was building up some 1/300th US forces this had me scratching my head. A lot of the nitty gritty stuff was coyly kept 'secret' and not covered in the easily found sources.

VIS,

Wow, I'm more confused than ever! Typical Army ;)

The first one seems to show four BFVs with their squads (broken into two teams each, one of leader and BFV crew, one of dismounts), but then the dismounts are lumped into two rifle squads, And then the platoon has an MG squad (called section here, for a total of 40 men in the platoon). What vehicle do those guys ride in? And I thought FOs had their own vehicle (FIST)?

The second one looks to show four BFVs with crews, carrying three rifle squads of dismounts, with the dismounts cross-loaded between three vehicles. I think I understand this, but I thought the Bradley squads were set up to be a two teams: one is the leader with crew, the other team is the dismounted element. So, you have nine guys in a vehicle, with two being the crew (gunner and driver), and the rest can hop out (the leader can stay with the vehicle or with the dismounts, as the tactical situation calls for). Also 40 men in this platoon.

The third one looks to me a lot like the first one, without the 'extra' MG squad, and Section A's BFV 1 being down a dismount (presumably that's the Plt Cmdr?), and without the FO and his RTO.

I will say these are all mentioning M-240s (for the dismounts) and Javelin, so these are modern and not Cold War. Well, the 3rd one at least says Javelin; the 2nd doesn't seem to mention AT weapons at all, while the 1st one has two anti-armor specialists with a "CLU", and a third anti-armor specialist with an M-16 (trust me, that's not gonna work against tanks ;) ). From what I can tell "CLU" is command launch unit, which I've only seen associated with the Javelin, not the Dragon or TOW (though I'm not an expert on such things).

Thanks for posting, and I look forward to some helpful replies.

V/R,
Jack

Living in Georgia I've had the opportunity to meet a few Bradley guys and their consistent story is that they almost were never at full strength but when they were they made the new guy sit in the dreaded 7th seat squeezed near the turret (if I had been in the military there is no way I could have survived getting squeezed into an APC/IFV).

As for where guys rode there is an official dismount procedure in a field manual and it makes no sense to me that anyone could expect it to be followed in combat conditions.

This goes to the whole issue of sub-unit articulation in platoon and company-level combat. Yes, fireteams and squads exist, but we gamers probably give them too much emphasis as the platoon seems to be intended to function as a cohesive, organic whole and NOT 4 to 9 individual elements whizzing off in all directions. At most you might have a two or three functional elements (eg assault group and base of fire with the MGs positioned carefully in support) but not much else under combat conditions. Too easy to shoot your own guys trying to maneuver 6 fireteams and 2 or 3 MG teams on an individual basis!

As for AT weapons I've heard and read lots of different stories. It varies by period and conflict and war vs peace. Sometimes AT-4s are handed out like candy (e.g. urban fighting in Iraq) and other times they're considered rare and too expensive.

All of this makes the Bradley organization a nightmare for game designers. For example, if you're based for fireteams (eg FoW) then you face the problem of having fireteams spread across multiple vehicles since each Brad carries about 1.5 fireteams and can't fit a full squad of two fireteams (doh!).

For our upcoming rules we decided to abstract things a bit to avoid that problem while also adhering to the real-world practice of treating the platoon as an organic whole with functional/tactical maneuver elements (eg assault and base of fire) rather than trying to figure out why the US army built 6-man transports for a force with 4-man fireteams and 9-man squads! :-D

Not to diminish what you are working on with rules but the 1.5 squads made me think about how Chain of Command might handle something like that. Having to use a die to reform the squad… I think it actually would represent decently some of the disorder after the dismount as the teams reformed.

Thank you for posting this up. Its a lot to digest and will definitely need to be bookmarked.

As far as the trouble with the multi basing and teams go I can't offer much other than I'm less inclined to bother with multi basing. I base my 15's on small washers with magnets and can use steel movement trays as needed. Such as this:

Thanks for that.

I was just pondering this the other night, to figure out options for squad and/or fireteam figure basing, so having all the options together will be very helpful.

Now, to tack the Soviet BMD-1 and BMD-2 team differences. Both carry 8 men, but the Wiki sites say the BMD-1 has a crew of 2 and 6 dismounts, while the BMD-2 has a crew of four and 4 dismounts. I suspect the info for the latter may be off a bit, since I can't really see the 30mm cannon armed variant needing two extra men in the vehicle crew.

Now, to tack the Soviet BMD-1 and BMD-2 team differences. Both carry 8 men, but the Wiki sites say the BMD-1 has a crew of 2 and 6 dismounts, while the BMD-2 has a crew of four and 4 dismounts.

The crews are actually the same. Two of the dismounts (the SL and MG gunner) do double duty as crew. So you have 4 rifles, 1 MG (who also mans the vehicle MGs) and the SL (who is also the vehicle CO) who dismount. The gunner and driver stay with the vehicle. Wiki got it right with the BMD-1, but explained it badly for the BMD-2..

I didn't think there were any M240s or Javelins in the Bradley platoons, they have the Bradleys to supply MG, cannon, and ATGM fire.

[Edit] – Actually, IIRC the M240s and Javelins/TOWs are for totally dismounted operations. Think they come from the vehicle crews.

Thanks coastal2.

That's what I figured, since a dismount team of four men would be hardly worth producing and using the vehicles. 2 men to stay with the vehicle makes a lot more sense.

Here's some info on the Bradley scout platoon organization, proposals:

PDF link

My understanding of the first based on our reading of the Manual was that the point of the Bradley platoon was the mix and match i.e. task organised. You selected the weapon you needed for a task. Extra MG's or Javlins depending what was required. So the extra MG's came at the expence of the rifles in the platoon.

One thing of note is that really the MG's can't stray far from the vehicle as the ammo will be an issue for sustained fire with only 2 crew. Its a bit wargamers tend to ignore.

As for fire teams going off in diffrent directions that sounds like a rules failure. The teams are there to in effect allow fire and movement. If they all go off in diffrent directions how are they to do that? You need the automatics generally as a base of fire and rifles for the attack/counter attack as/when close enough.

Many thanks!

As for fire teams going off in different directions that sounds like a rules failure. The teams are there to in effect allow fire and movement. If they all go off in diffrent directions how are they to do that?

Agreed.

Which begs the question for we gamers: if fielding a company+ or more per side then why model the individual fireteams and even squads if they're intended to operate in the context of the platoon anyway? At most you want the platoon divided into a couple of functional elements (base of fire and assault) perhaps with the MG squad as a separate element for a modicum of detail.

So if you're commanding a company and maneuvering platoons then the most appropriate level of granularity below that point is the functional elements of the platoons rather than individual fireteams. It also simplifies the rules for that level since you don't need to worry about things like cover status for multi-stand units (eg if shooting at a squad or platoon and some teams are in cover and some are out or at different ranges then how do you resolve combat, morale, etc.?)

That being said, in a "platoon per side" game modeling teams would be totally appropriate and, to your point, you'd need mechanics that encourages and rewards the coordinated effort of teams within squads or at least under the direction of an NCO.

I think the key then to modelling the Bradley platoon is level of command relative to level of granularity. If using fireteam-sized multi-figure bases you're sort of hosed. For example, a modern US squad in FoW terms would be 2 stand of 4 and 5 figures respectively. If your vehicle ratio is 1:1 you're hosed as far as loading those guys on to a Brad. You're going to have 6x of those stands plus perhaps a command stand to divide among 4 vehicles. It gets weird for grognards squeezing a full 9-man squad into a single Brad when 7 is already tight.

Doesn't bother me personally as I see it as an abstraction. With four Brads you put the command team in one and two fireteam stands in each of the three remaining Bradleys. Technically/historically incorrect but I don't see another solution beyond changing figure ratios (eg each Bradley model represents multiple Brads and stands are simply parts of the platoon) or base figure individually so you can get the distribution right.

When I did my Bradley mech coys I based my 6 figures as 3-2-1 per base. Fiddly in 6mm!

Then I could rearrange them as 7 man squads or I suppose group them into larger 9 man squads.

But as I say above we knew next to nothing about how they were supposed to work – which in fact may have been the case in the US Army at that time!

Andy,

When I first got into WWII and moderns I did something like that. I based everything in 3 and 2-man stands.

So a modern American squad had 3 stands. Two stands had a SAW and M203, the third was just rifles to represent the extra guys in the squad.

A WWII German Grenadier squad had 1x LMG stand and 2x rifle stands. Panzergrenadiers had 2x LMG and 1x rifle.

The approach didn't follow fireteam organization but it was really flexible with respect to vehicle transport and was perfect for platoon-level games.

Now we game at company level and each transport model represents about 3+/- vehicles and an infantry stand is about half of a platoon or so. That level of abstraction feels right for company level actions (command one level down, etc.) and makes transport issues a lot easier.

Yeah – my WW2 infantry were on 2-5 man stands. It seemed more flexible and it worked up to a point. I like being able to zoom in when it matters but mostly it doesn't. Players tend to over micromanage so making it impossible and forcing them to stay in role at the level they are supposed to be makes a lot of sense.

It really depends what kind of game you want.

Another TMPer, twawaddell, has provided an amazingly detailed TO&E document for modern US Brigade Combat Teams. It can be found here:

PDF link

Page 105 shows the Bradley rifle company. In this version, published in 2012, the 9-man rifle squad has the standard complement of 2x M240 SAWs and 2x M320 grenade launchers. No mention is made of access to an additional M249 within the platoon or company (and since the document lists gear available but not assigned to specific soldiers this looks definitive…for example it shows an engineer squad as not having any SAWs specifically assigned to a given soldier but there is 1x M240 available to the each squad stored on the track).

Furthermore, it shows each squad as having a dedicated Javelin gunner and Javelin assigned to him. No mention of AT-4s.

The document covers Infantry, Stryker, and Armor Brigade Combat Teams down to night vision goggles, individual small arms, comms gear, CBRN gear, etc. and all vehicles and special gear like detection systems. A treasure trove for those researching modern TO&Es!

Many thanks to TMPer twawaddell for his find!!!

Good Intel VIS ! They are still using the same GI graphics that they did in my old FMs ! And yes, as I mentioned on other threads … you very rarely have squads at 100% …

Sick, lame, lazy, on leave, God forbid WIA & KIA …

No mention of AT-4s.

You won't see AT-4s as part of the TOE. They'e issued out as a fixed munition as needed.

It's called packing them in like sardines. I always had a good chuckle when an infantry platoon deployed from their Bradley's it reminded me of the clown cars in a circus. For Scout Plts we only had 5 at most 6 guys on a Bradley including the crew. As for weapons we had a 2 or 3 man dismount. 1 SAW Gunner, another with a 16/203 if there was a third extra man he either carried a 16 or a M60. I was In 3 different plts. In three different organizations, Armour Bn, Inf Bn, and Cav Bn(Heavy) all three platoons were different. I think the Inf Bn Scout Plt was the only one that stuck to official TO&E but it was a CONUS unit and Infantry as well. (Infantry types are just weird that way) The Cav unit was the one with the Bradley's the other two were 3x M113's and 3x M901 ITV's. We operated in either 3 sections of two vehicles (M113 & M901) or 2 sections of 3 vehicles, Light section of 2x M113 and a M901 and a AT section of 1x M113 and 2x M901.

Thanks Dan, that's great information! Our upcoming rules have vehicles operating in sections of 2-3 vehicles (dedicated transports usually operate as 4 vehicles for simplicty's sake). so each vehicle model represents a section of 2 or3 vehicles in general. You're yet another vet who has mentioned that's how vehicle platoons function in practice.

Your comment about "official TO&E" is also very interesting.

Game designers need to meet players' expectations which should be based on real world practice where that practice is "knowable". In most cases that starts with paper TO&E. Beyond that one can research field practice. Then the question becomes how to capture those elements in a game.

For example, it's well known that units in sustained combat rarely operate at full strength. But it would be madness to use that teduced strength as a game's baseline since fresh units do enter combat and units do get replacements. So you gotta start with full, paper strength TO&E and allow for players to field reduced strength.

As another example, everyone knows that soldiers form fireteams which form squads which form platoons which form companies. But should the player, as company commander, be responsible for managing individual soldiers and teams? Probably not. At most he should manage sections or functional portions of platoons which don't always correspond to squads (eg when platoons fight as assault and base of fire elements).

To your point about TO&E, how much did your gear vary from what the manuals said?

You won't see AT-4s as part of the TOE. They'e issued out as a fixed munition as needed.

Yes, just like LAWs, Hand Grenades, Claymores, etc. … they are expendable …

It's called packing them in like sardines.

Oh yes, the same is true for the M113. And I've been in Stryker,(at the county fair of all places, for recruiting, etc.). It's pretty cramped too !

Does anyone know status on the M7 Spider? Looks really neat, just can't find info on actual deployments.

Based on Legion's comment and coastal, am I ok if allowing a Bradley rifle platoon to have access to the following as gear options:

- Javelin
- AT4
- M72 LAW
- Claymore

For game purposes I allow a section to field their usual gear such as the M320 and a special weapon or two such as a light AT weapon. So the player couldn't field ALL of those options in a single platoon for game purposes, just one or two at most.

But should the player, as company commander, be responsible for managing individual soldiers and teams? Probably not. At most he should manage sections or functional portions of platoons which don't always correspond to squads

Generally a Co Cdr, manages Plts. And anything smaller as needed. Like in the "J" series MTO&E, my Mech Co had a 2 vehicle M901 ITV Section. But generally my AT Sgt had that under control, he was very good. The PL and PLTSG manages Fire Tms, and Squads.

Of course, when one of your troops get on the MP blotter after a night of drinking, etc., fails a test, etc. … As a Cdr, you are managing individual soldiers. Fortunately that rarely happened …

Based on Legion's comment and coastal, am I ok if allowing a Bradley rifle platoon to have access to the following as gear options:

- Javelin
- AT4
- M72 LAW
- Claymore

I would think so. The Co Cdr can modify that type of ordinance issue based on mission. Like you may want to be packing more AT ammo than Claymores in some ops. Depends … again on terrain and situation.

And remember everything that is issued … has to be stowed and carried. A soldier might be able to carry 2 M72s or one Javelin. But not if he's packing an MG/SAW or even GL, etc. …

As already noted, the "book" TOE (or what my plt SGT called "the wish list") could be one thing while the "real", in the field TOE was quite another. In my M60A1 plt, we were supposed to have M85 HMGs (one per tank mounted in the TC's cupola). Rarely did we have more than 2 actually functional (and more often, none). (The M85 was, without a doubt, the poorest excuse for a weapon ever foisted off on tankers.)

We were also supposed to have 1 (2?) M3 grease guns assigned to each tank. In all the time I was with my unit (a NG Tank coy), those stayed locked in the armory and were never issued (or even check fired).

Not sure about Bradley guys having Javelins, what with the TOW missiles stowed inside the vehicles. But otherwise, yeah, pretty much anything you can see in the US inventory might show up.

You can't dismount the TOW for dismounted patrols. Or carry it very far if you did !

Patrolling is one of the basic skills Infantrymen should master, or at least be very good at. Day and night …

Not sure about Bradley guys having Javelins, what with the TOW missiles stowed inside the vehicles.

Nope, they'd have 'em. You're not always going to be close by your Brad when dismounted.

Exactly … Hard to be stealthy on a night patrol with an AFV moving along with you …

LOL! Aw, c'mom, Legion, we're not THAT noisy (sez the ex-M60 driver…). (And, yes, we ARE that noisy! )

Yeah … not that nosy … compared to a helicopter !

noise while moving is one of the big tactical advantages of wheeled vehicles.

You can't dismount the TOW for dismounted patrols. Or carry it very far if you did !

I'd be surprised if the Brads didn't have the CLU and tripod stowed inside. But point taken about the weight of that setup.

Nope, they'd have 'em. You're not always going to be close by your Brad when dismounted.

Point. It just seems kinda absurd to be packing TOW reloads plus Javelins in the same vehicle.

Wonder how long before the Warhammer Brad (w/ Javelins instead of TOWs) becomes standard?

I'd be surprised if the Brads didn't have the CLU and tripod stowed inside. But point taken about the weight of that setup

Nope. The TOW cannot dismount. As for the CLU, not sure (I was in Tanks, not Mech).

Wonder how long before the Warhammer Brad (w/ Javelins instead of TOWs) becomes standard?

Probably never. At least until the Javelin's operational range (2500m) can match the ITOW's (3750m-4200m).

"Hard to be stealthy on a night patrol with an AFV moving along with you".

Not if you are using those lovely, German, Luchs 8-wheeled recon jobs apparently.

Supposedly, they're so quiet that the BW troops on exercise were prohibited from sleeping out on the ground in many areas, so they wouldn't get run over during night patrols.

I'd be surprised if the Brads didn't have the CLU and tripod stowed inside. But point taken about the weight of that setup.

I wouldn't doubt it either. We trained on the TOW mounted on the Tripod while at the Infantry Officer Basic Course. It's too heavy … to have to luge around on a dismounted patrol … But since I was Mech with M113s and M901s. Not M2 Bradleys, I can't say for sure if the TOW can dismount.

It just seems kinda absurd to be packing TOW reloads plus Javelins in the same vehicle.

Not really, each weapons system serves a different use. One mounted … one dismounted. But as always stowing all that ordinance can be very hard if not impossible.

Of course, if you have read many of my posts. I loved to pack as much firepower in my Mech Company that I could. I like heavy weapons !

Probably never. At least until the Javelin's operational range (2500m) can match the ITOW's (3750m-4200m).

Have TOWs been used at their extreme range in combat? Seems like they might have in desert combat. Rolling, broken, and urban terrain would seem to make the range difference not that important.

FWIW the paper range of the Javelin is 2500m but a memoir by a recon unit reports kills vs T-72s at around 3,000m+.

noise while moving is one of the big tactical advantages of wheeled vehicles.

Not if you are using those lovely, German, Luchs 8-wheeled recon jobs apparently.

Supposedly, they're so quiet that the BW troops on exercise were prohibited from sleeping out on the ground in many areas, so they wouldn't get run over during night patrols.

Being stealthy during a dismounted night patrol is more about just sound. Infantrymen can hide, etc., and go places AFVs can't go.

And an AFV on a night patrol/recon … is not a dismounted patrol. It's a motorized or mounted patrol. Two different types of patrolling. As an Infantryman we never did mounted patrols. We did everything on foot. For the reasons I mentioned and others. It's as much about technique and fieldcraft as anything else. And an AFV can't sneak into an HQ tent and steal maps, etc. …

Have TOWs been used at their extreme range in combat? Seems like they might have in desert combat.

I wouldn't doubt it with a range of @ 3750m +. In the desert you may get those long range LOS/FOF. In German/Europe, in many places, TOWs could fire from village to village. Some vills were only 2000-4000m from each other. But other places your LOS/FOF was very limited. But regardless, short or long range a TOW is still be deadly.

FWIW the paper range of the Javelin is 2500m but a memoir by a recon unit reports kills vs T-72s at around 3,000m+.

I wish we had Javelins instead of the M47 MAW Dragon. The M47 MAW had a max range of only 1000m. And believe me an AFV can traverse that distant fairly quickly based on terrain. In open or mixed terrain an MBT can move much faster than you can on foot. Of course, again, AFVs can't hide as well as Grunts. Or cross a swamp, etc., … like Infantrymen can.

From an Infantryman's POV, you can't have too many weapons systems on hand to kill AFVs. An AFV does not even have to shoot you … they can just run you over !

Coastal a lot of units tried to not us the grease guns. One unit I was in the NAintenence guys had M3s as thier weapons. none of them liked shooting anyway, and certainly not an M3. So, I was in a position to hang out with them, and qualified on the M3 for several of them. Having the opportunity to shoot several thousand rounds out of them I finaly got where I could hit something out to 50 yards or so regularly.

I am sure some bean counter somewhere would have been horrified to find 1 troop qualified for a whole BNs maintenece section, but i never liked those guys anyway. Not like Maint was likely to shoot anybody anyway.

Owen

Yeah, our M88 crews had M3s …

Both the M150 and M901 carried the Tripod and the CLU. When I attended the TOW (11H) transition course, we had to perform an Air Mobile operation.

My M901 section had everything except the thermal optics.

M576 crews also carried M3 grease guns in the early 80's. This back when a Mech Company had it's own maintenance shop, and each company had an M576 assigned, as well as a 5 ton wrecker.

I would be surprised on the other hand if the M2 Bradley carrier a Tripod and CLU. Space in the Bradley is extremely limited. Your already carrying TOW reloads, and small arms ammunition.

The company probably carried Tripods and CLUs on the supply truck in the event they were needed. I could be wrong on this, I have never crewed a Bradley. I have been in a Bradley, and they are cramped inside.

I was on M-113's, M-150's, M-901's M-2A1's and M-3's Bradley's.

Yes the M-901's carried everything Tripods CLU's and the Thermal Optics.

When we went to the M-3's there was no dismounting the system.

And when we went to the gulf we drew M-2A1's (even though we were a Cav unit) and there was no way to ground mount off of the M-2.

In E Trp, 2/2 ACR we had the M113/M901 until we transitioned to Bradleys in 87.

The platoon structure was very unwieldy.

Each Cav troop had 3 platoons of 9 vehicles each.

4 M1ips
2 M901s
2 M113s with the dual Dragon/M2 50cal mount
1 M113 for the 2LT

The 4 M1ip's that was run in the field with the Platoon SGT running them (2 pairs),

The 2LT usually ran the Scouts, with the 2LT in a M113 and 2 scout sections each of a lead M113 with the dual Dragon/M2 50 cal mount which would do the bounding and a M901 that provided overwatch.

--------------------------------------

When we transitiond to Bradleys, our troop organization changed to a 4 platoon structure.

1st platoon- 6 Bradleys
A Section- 2 Bradleys operating as above with usually 1 that performs the bounding and the other usually tagged with overwatching.
B Section- same as A section.
C Section- the command section with the 2LT in 1 Bradley and the Platoon SGT in the other Bradley.

Sometimes you had them run as A in 1 sector, B in another sector, and C in reserve.

Other times you had A in 1 sector, B in another sector and C split up between the 2.

2nd Platoon was 4 M1s running in 2 pairs.

3rd platoon was mirror image of 1st and 4th was mirror image of 2nd.

-----------------------------------------

Basically you had the buddy system where they were paired off and worked together…

Frank

In the M901s we had the Hammerhead on top of the vehicle and the TOW ground mount and launch tube strapped to the inside.

…but you only had 1 set of sights (day sight and night sight) (which 99.9999999% of the time was mounted in the Hammerhead for obvious reasons)

About the only time you would unstrap the ground mount, launch tube and sights and set it up would be for dog and pony shows :D

Very, very rarely would you dismount it out of the vehicle.

Frank

"zaevor2000" We were runing the same line up of veh and numbers when I was in 1/4 Cav in 1st ID from 83-84, except replace the 4 M-1ips with M-60A3's. And yes, "The platoon structure was very unwieldy."

Frank,

That's how we designed our next release covering WWII to today. Each vehicle model represents a section of leader and wingman (or 2 in a few cases). Puts the player in role of compant commander maneuvering platoons and sections instead of individual vehicles.