Help support TMP


"Finnish Sissi troops - how good were they?" Topic


5 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the WWII Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset

Modern Rules


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Commando Kelly

Do you recognize this set?


Featured Workbench Article

Deep Dream: Can It Map?

Can artificial intelligence create useful maps for wargamers?


Featured Movie Review


554 hits since 24 May 2025
©1994-2025 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Korvessa24 May 2025 11:29 a.m. PST

They were quite famous at Hit & Run type tactics – especially during the Winter War. I only have a couple of WWII rules, so am not sure, but FoW rates them as elite.
On the other hand, the Osprey books on the Winter War call them second class troops.
As I understand it, they were normally raised from local reservists and served in their home area. This would give them a huge terrain and local knowledge advantage. Of course, any rural Finn of that time would be an expert skier.
As guerilla fighters, they would normally (hopefully) be deployed against rear echelon types, or at least against troops not prepared for or expecting them.
I also know that during the desperate times of the Winter War, commanders would be pressed to throw any available troops into the line – even if that was not their specialty.
So how should they be rated in a miniature game? Operationally, they were very good at hit and run type stuff. But that strikes me as something that is more dependent on scenario design, rather than table-top quality. On the game-map, should their fighting quality and morale be any better than normal Finnish troops?

robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP24 May 2025 5:17 p.m. PST

I don't think there's an abstract "good." If you want stats for an RPG/skirmish game, they might be rated very differently than if you're asking a company or battalion of them to dig in and hold a section of the line.

What level are you gaming at?

Korvessa24 May 2025 10:20 p.m. PST

28mm skirmish, using Nuts!

Griefbringer25 May 2025 2:46 a.m. PST

On the game-map, should their fighting quality and morale be any better than normal Finnish troops?

As regards ability to shoot, I would not rate them any different from normal Finnish troops.

The same in regards to morale: operating behind the lines might require a bit of nerves, but they were prepared to scoot off to fight another day if their attack did not go the way they had expected.

That said, this sort of behind the lines action requires more initiative than just manning a trench line, so you might want to give them some bonus to represent that. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with Nuts! rules, so cannot say how to represent things in that case. Also, I would consider Finns in general as being quite capable of showing initiative, both in civilian and military life, so you might want to take that into account for Finnish forces in general (though being a Finn myself, I might be a bit impartial here). On the other hand, the Red Army forces in Winter War are not generally well reknown for individual initiative.

Also, the troops engaged in hit and run tactics might be expected to act a bit more aggressively, so you might want to give them some slight benefit in close range combat to encourage player to use them more aggressively, even though there might not be direct historical evidence for such advantage.

Operationally, they were very good at hit and run type stuff. But that strikes me as something that is more dependent on scenario design, rather than table-top quality.

Essentially yes. Being able to launch a surprise attack, at a time and place of your choosing, possibly in familiar terrain, against an unprepared opponent, should be a great advantage in a game, and this should be reflected in a scenario design.

However, getting into a position to launch such an attack is not trivial, and requires time, preparation and planning (good intelligence and familiarity with terrain helps). To make the most of the subject in gaming terms might require some sort of a game mastered campaign, where the two sides would behave rather unsymmetrically.

For example, heavy Soviet forces might be largely limited to operating along roads and open areas, while the Finnish opponent would have a number of light forces that would be much better able to travel through forested areas to strike at rear area targets. However, the Soviet side should have numerical advantage to begin with, and could receive more reinforcements as the campaign proceeds.

Korvessa27 May 2025 4:32 p.m. PST

Thanks for the reply Griefbringer
(A great name for a sword by the way)
In spite of the name I use here on TMP – I am not Finnish
(It's a comment on where I live – California mountains).
But I am a dedicated Finno-phile!

My thought was that they should be about as effective as regular Finns, but not as elite as say the Jääkkärit.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.