"Platoon Sized Engagements" Topic

Gearing up for more Chain of Command games, and I find myself lacking good written records (either by the participants or by historians). I'm reading The Americans In Normandy and it has absolute loads of accounts of "a few guys" doing something and a lots and lots of discussion of companies and battalions making attacks.

Lots of it doesn't seem particularly gameable at the Platoon w/ Support scale that everyone plays. Lots of whole companies charging across fields and the like. Or three or four guys separated and fighting. Not tons from the LT perspective of ordering his men around.

So I want good examples of platoon's fightinf, and how the squads/sections within acted.

Would love Normandy, Italy, or 45 Germany focused stuff.

Stuff I've read/am reading:

Band of Brothers
The Americans in Normandy
If You Survive
(the free sample on Google Play Books of ) With the Jocks (the urban fighting descriptions were great).

I've heard 18 Platoon recommended before. It's pricey but is it worth it for detail?

Any others? Or good sources of actual AARs at company level that could be mined for scenarios?

Or is the whole idea of "a platoon goes and takes a farmhouse from an enemy section or two" just a gamer's fantasy?

I also prefer skirmish/platoon-sized games for 20th – 21st century games, but I lean toward the ideal platoon vs platoon action being more of a game convention. Similar to DBA with perfectly balanced ancient armies.

I can recommend "Night Drop" by SLA Marshall for a number of platoon-sized battles, but even these frequently have a platoon on defense vs a company attack. One that I've wanted to game is Neauville au Plain where Lt Turner Turnbull's platoon (82nd Airborne) is ordered to defend a crossroads. The US platoon is attacked by a company of Germans from the 352nd Division supported by a few old French tanks.

Another engagement from the same book, The Manor at La Fiere, has the reverse situation. The farm is defended by a German platoon from the 352nd Division against attacks by scattered elements of the 82nd Airborne wandering in from various directions.

The Oprey "tactics" books are hard to beat. Good text and nice illustrations.
Try Elite 105 to start.
Search on their site: tactics.

I've got the Squad/Platoon and Company/Battalion Tactics Ospreys, and I've also read period manuals from the US, UK and a translated German one.

Hoping to find actual accounts of combat. It's pretty clear what they trained for, I want to see how it happened in reality.

Yes, 18 Platoon is good but Jay has a very singular point of view about infantry tactics. An interesting contrast is I Bought a Star by Douglas Firbank.

Company Commander by Charles Mcdonald is excellent, and gives a real feel for infantry fighting.

I think the sad fact is that you hit the nail on the head in the OP, an isolated platoon taking a farmhouse from a couple of sections is, in the main, a Wargamers fantasy. Lining up and walking forwards slowly behind an artillery barrage is perhaps more common.

For some reason tankers seem to write a lot more troop level memoirs than infantry Lts wrote platoon level ones. Life expectancy for infantrymen was quite low of course.

The reason you don't see a lot of platoon level stuff is because platoons were generally not employed as independent tactical units. Unless your platoon is literally the end of the line, there is going to be a platoon on your left/right and maybe rear, and company weapons can be set up to provide assistance to multiple platoons as the situation dictates. Map out a company level engagement, and pick one portion of that to put on your table.

It does seem that if you collect a full platoon plus decent supports you probably have enough for a "actual strength after a week or two on the line" company.

@79thPA didn't companies frequently operate "1 forward, 2 back"? That's the kind of thing talked about in the manuals that I'm looking for. In the stuff I'm reading there's lots of whole companies moving together, but I assume that's more a matter of scale (the writer not caring about individual squads or even platoons) while they definitely moved tactically on their own.

The reason you don't see a lot of platoon level stuff is because platoons were generally not employed as independent tactical units.

"1 forward, 2 back"?

Depends on the terrain and situation as always.

E.g. We'd run Plt size patrols in the jungle. And again it's mission dependent. I.e. a Plt size Raid or ambush. But generally squads did the Recon Patrols.

E.g. Movement to Contact, you want to make contact with a smaller sized element. Locate the enemy, and develop the situation from there. I.e. maneuver the other elements in the unit. And call in supporting fire once the enemy is located, etc.

an isolated platoon taking a farmhouse from a couple of sections is, in the main, a Wargamers fantasy.

But it happened in the movie "A Walk in the Sun," so it MUST be realistic!

Platoon size actions happened all of the time, big if you want to read about them you'll need to read first hand accounts, not general histories. General histories tend to focus on the whole battle, first hand accounts on an individual's experience.

donlowry,
Your comment regarding "A Walk in the Sun" got me thinking about that old flick – made in 1945?.

If I recall correctly, the platoon'd task is to advance inland from the Salerno beachhead and eliminate the German strong point. On the way they get strafed by a fighter, attacked by a German recce detachment, and leave a couple of Italian POWs to fend for themselves.
Finally they live out the Wargamer's Fantasy by storming the farmhouse.

It struck me a few years ago that one realistic aspect of the movie was how the platoon is equipped: only 1 Thompson SMG, the NCOs carry Garands, 2 .30 cal. MMGs, 2 bazookas with only a few rounds for each, an indeterminate amount of BARS (I recall one for certain,but there may be two more in the platoon). At least one MMG crewman carries a M1 carbine. This is much better than the usual portrayal of US infantry with plentiful Thompsons, etc.

I tend to look at a platoon sized engagement as a portion of a wider battle. You are playing out the engagement as one platoon experiences it. That's why rule systems like Chain of Command include non-platoon assets like barrages and engineers, these represent the platoon as part of a larger engagement. Their mission may well be ‘take the farmhouse', while platoons to left and right have similarly small objectives. It's often said a large battle is really hundreds of small battles, which is certainly how the men at platoon level would experience it.

Platoon level memoirs like Jary's ‘18 Platoon' or Peter White's ‘With the Jocks' give you this narrow view of a larger action. Company level memoirs like McDonald can often give that perspective too. I particularly like the Battleground Europe series and in particular those by Tim Saunders, these give a great view of the small battles for objectives like crossroads, farms and small bridges, but place them in the wider context of a bigger engagement.

The "After the Battle" magazine is well worth tracking down, the combination of then and now photographs and the commentary can give a very good look at the small battle for a cluster of buildings etc as part of the bigger battle.

In the context of playing Chain of Command, playing across the wide side ends up being 240 yards of possible frontage for a platoon (6ft across). Counting the patrol phase and usual deployment strategies, the actual frontage ends up being closer to 100'-150'. Between that and the time scale (whole game is maybe 25 minutes) means some of the "less gameable" elements (heavy barrages) have less influence.

That's probably small enough to fit a single platoon's operation, even if it's part of a company attacking in line. To say nothing of being the forward force for the company. The size of the table in effect zooms in for you where you don't see the other platoons. And hey, maybe there's a farmhouse along this platoon's given sector ;)

I'm still having trouble finding good low level accounts that aren't just "I took a few guys and we raided the enemy position" or "the whole company charged across the field and got mauled by MGs" but I'm obviously realizing platoon sized groups operated in the field and not just as big massed companies.

From what I've read, there are usually two platoons in a company in the front line, and one in reserve. Same goes for companies in battalions.

For German battalions, with four companies, the could either go with two in the line and two back, or three and one, depending upon the situation.

Not sure "the whole company charged…..". Usually, one company at a minimum would provide a base of fire for another/other companies to advance, just like in platoon tactics, and squad tactics too.

As I said, Depends on the terrain and situation as always.

Platoon size actions happened all of the time,

Yes, I was both a Rifle PL and later a Mech Co Cdr. Plts had the ability to operate independently or as part of the Company.

And sometimes a Plt could be in a Support by Fire position in a Company attack. Or again, a Plt could run an ambush, raid, etc. Based on the Co. Cdr or even Bn Cdr's orders.

So been there, did that, got the t-shirt …

From what I've read, there are usually two platoons in a company in the front line, and one in reserve. Same goes for companies in battalions.

Generally yes … The saying was "2 Up … 1 Back … Cav in the swamp …"

Lots of whole companies charging across fields and the like.

Depends what you mean by a company. Easy Company 506th PIR consisted of 39 guys IIRC on D-Day. Winters took just 12 men with him to assault the artillery battery at Brecourt Manor, plus 3 guys as a flanking force. Later they were reinforced by Spiers and some guys from D Company.

rvandusen:

Actually, the combat parts of that movie didn't seem very realistic to me (not that I've ever been-there, done-that):

1. A lone platoon, all by itself, is sent a mile or more inland from the beach to blow a bridge and take a farm house used as a defensive position to guard the bridge. Seems unlikely to me that a platoon would operate alone that far from support.

2. Along the way inland the platoon is attacked by a German recce detachment. You don't see the initial fight, between the bazooka men (sent ahead) and the ACs, it takes place off-screen, but you learn that all the bazooka ammo is used up and one armored car (actually a U.S. M3 halftrack with a MG turret) breaks through to attack the main body of the platoon, which eventually knocks it out by everyone lining the road (exposed) and throwing grenades at it until it runs off the road and gets stuck in a ditch.

3. A few men try rushing the farmhouse and get shot up by MG fire (which I have no problem with), so they send one section to blow the bridge (off screen) while their MMG (I think they just had 1) keeps the defenders in the farmhouse busy. When they hear the bridge blow, the rest all jump a stone wall and rush the farm house, which they take with a few casualties, despite HMG fire (which I thought should have been bloodier).

The real fun of the movie is the dialogue among the various characters as they move from the beach to the farm house.

It was an all-star cast. Dana Andrews, as a section leader who inherits command of the platoon, is the top bill (the LT having been wounded by mortar fire before even leaving the landing craft, and the platoon sergeant having had a nervous breakdown after inheriting the command), but Richard Conte, as the machinegunner, steals the show. Others include Lloyd Bridges as another section leader, Huntz Hall (of Bowery Boys fame), Sterling Holloway (the voice of Disney's Winnie the Poo), and John Ireland.

Actually, the combat parts of that movie didn't seem very realistic to me

Basically most movies/TV shows rarely get it "accurate", right, etc. We all generally have accepted that.

Seems unlikely to me that a platoon would operate alone that far from support.

As I said it depends on the terrain & situation. Plus in some cases not all leaders did/do things that are considered to be "good" tactically or operationally … But again that should be no surprise either …

That being said, I loved "Kelly's Heroes" ! They at least tried to use "Tigers". I.e. T34/85s "converted" to look like Tiger Is. Not M48s with and Iron Cross painted on the side.

Yes, need to find some narratives written from the perspective of an individual as he'll write about possibly his platoon, or even his squad in combat.
I was lucky enough that my Father-in-Law was the Weapons platoon sergeant in the 35th Infantry Division all the way from landing in Normandy till he mustered out at the end of the war. He probably had a better understanding of the Company objectives and where he was to be stationed to support the advancing Platoons, for a base of fire, and mortar support from that sections under his command. I was able to gleam lots of info based on our talks.

Still laugh when he finally realized Kelly's Hero's was based on his Division!

Hated "Kelly's Heroes," as the characters were obviously more from the '60s than the '40s.

That was what was funny about it … e.g. Oddball was more like a '60s guy than a 40s. It was a comedy. I give comedies a little slack with that sort of stuff. "Woof ! Woof !"

Of course Big Joe telling Mulligan his mortars are not hitting the Nazis but falling on his own troops was probably pretty realistic.

Kellys Heroes was Vietnam era comedy heist movie set in WW2, hence many of the anachronisms. It is still funny.

I thought 'A Walk in the Sun' was great, but films based on novels are usually pretty good.

Another interesting period film is 'Attack' by Robert Aldrich, it stars Jack Palance and Eddie Albert with Stuarts standing in for Tigers. Some platoon/company level stuff, set during the Bulge.

I guess from a film makers pov, platoon level is an easier level to focus on (even in BoB you never see the whole of Easy Company assembled), Battleground took a similar approach, and in 'The Way Ahead', David Nivens platoon seems to consist of about six blokes!

From a film maker's perspective they want character interaction.
Infantry need to be bunched up so they can have characterful chats.

They want everything and everyone in shot. Meaning those aircraft bunching up very close whilst flying dramatically low.

The "heroes" should also be doing significant stuff. The viewer needs to be invested in the characters and care about them – they must learn the characters back story. All of which means a small force.

Kellys Heroes was Vietnam era comedy heist movie set in WW2, hence many of the anachronisms. It is still funny.

Yes, very much so … Woof ! Woof !

E.g. on a related note, movies about Gen Custer varied his portrayal based on the time frame/era it was made. E.g. in the '40s or '50s he was portrayed as a "Hero". Verses in the movie e.g. "Little Big Man" made around the time of Vietnam. Custer was made to look incompetent, etc. The truth is probably somewhere in between.

So…back closer to the topic. I've found that the Army's official histories (the CMH series 5, 6, and 7) have quite a few descriptions of platoon's engaging in combat. But of course that's all the say.

"A platoon of C Company was dispatched to go around the flank. They encountered stiff resistance from a German strong point, and fell back under small arms, mortar, and machine-gun fire." That's a made up example but there are a great many like that. They also get in more detail of each DSC and MoH winner and how they won it. They can all be found for free in PDF format here link

Best part of the PDF is you can search for "Platoon" or "Farm" or similar and see reuslts. The Pacific one have tons and tons, but the Med and Europe ones have their fair share as well.

So it's not exactly what I wanted but serves the same purpose of giving me tons of plausible platoon sized scenarios.

I can recommend "Night Drop" by SLA Marshall for a number of platoon-sized battles, but even these frequently have a platoon on defense vs a company attack. One that I've wanted to game is Neauville au Plain where Lt Turner Turnbull's platoon (82nd Airborne) is ordered to defend a crossroads. The US platoon is attacked by a company of Germans from the 352nd Division supported by a few old French tanks.

It is a good scenario: this is my attempt at it here: link from a scenario in an old Miniature Wargames magazine.

Another engagement from the same book, The Manor at La Fiere, has the reverse situation. The farm is defended by a German platoon from the 352nd Division against attacks by scattered elements of the 82nd Airborne wandering in from various directions.

There is a good scenario for this one too. The US attacks were so uncoordinated that they could actually be done as separate platoon attacks. All one would have to do is 'fix' a proportion of the German defenders facing the directions of the non-active threats.

Another engagement from the same book, The Manor at La Fiere, has the reverse situation. The farm is defended by a German platoon from the 352nd Division against attacks by scattered elements of the 82nd Airborne wandering in from various directions.

@Swammeyjoe,

Have you tried the Lardies' pint-sized campaigns for platoon-sized battles?

Regarding 18 Platoon, there are some situations in there which can be gamed as platoon actions, plus some stuff for company actions.

Even as part of a Company, a Plt may fight and be engaged while the rest of unit is not. And as I said, Plts can run missions on their own. As in some cases 1 Plt may be all that is available, for a number of reasons. Or a Plt is maneuvering while another is in a Support by Fire position, etc.

@Legion 4, yep. That is the conclusion I've come to from reading all these tactical histories. Many cases of single platoons or small battlegroups off doing things, or being all that's left.

Couple Other Sources:

History of the Third Infantry Division in WW2 – richly detailed look at one division
dips down to talk about platoons or individuals fairly often. Download PDF from

link

36th Infantry Regimental AARs:

link

The 141st Infantry is quite detailed.

Anyone know of good sources of British Battalion AARs?

@Legion 4, yep. That is the conclusion I've come to from reading all these tactical histories. Many cases of single platoons or small battlegroups off doing things, or being all that's left.

As I said, I was a Rifle Pl in the 101, and later a Mech Co. Cdr with a Sep Mech Bde of the 18th ABN Corps. And of course, a student of history, before, during and after my time in the Army. Serving in 4 Inf Bns – 1 Air Assault + 3 Mech. So yes I believe your conclusion is valid, based on my training and experience, '79-'90 … Operating all over the US including swamps and desert, Panama, the ROK and West Germany. And my overall study of military history.

Anyone know of good sources of British Battalion AARs?

This kind of thing?

link

link

link

link