Tactics Question.

[Mongoose Pete]

Assuming the situation isn't so bad he needs to take control, most platoon sergeants would rather see their lieutenants take the second or third best course of action swiftly and aggressively, than they would see them waiting on advice and encouragemnt.

Precisely. Swift, decisive decisions are paramount!

In reality once an engagement starts, the commanding officer (at least at the platoon level) doesn't have the time or concentration available to liaise Tactics with his sergeant. He will already be handling enough incoming situational information from each of his squads - and with better technology, that information flow can become an overwhelming flood.

The whole purpose of the Sergeant or Corporal is to handle squad level tactics. Its the Lieutenant's job to handle the 'bigger picture' of platoon level tactics.

Of course, as yet we have no specific rules mechanism to reflect the difference between the two different jobs, or to give bonuses from the commander's tactical skill to those of their subordinates. So the way I'd play it is that either the squad takes the default Tactic's bonus from the Lieutenant, or they use their squad's own (currently present) Sergeant or Corporal if his tactical skill is better. Or perhaps the overall commanders of each side should roll against their tactics and whomever gets the better result, gives a +1 bonus to the tactical skills of all their squad level leaders.

The Lieutenant who debates tactical decisions whilst his men are being shot at, or refuses to allow his men to use their own initiative will either end up being relieved of his command, or 'unfortunately' KIA. Take the Marine LT from the movie Aliens as a prime example of how quickly command indecision can wipe out a unit...

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Absolutely agree. I would say use the Lieutenant as the default for the plantoon or the highest Tactics within your squad, whichever is higher.

This is going to be fun to run, the GM is going to have to make some decisions about how much the Sargeant would be able to be involved in the Platoon level Tactics during the combat. I agree, that in most circumstances the sargeant is only going to be able to help his squad.

 

[Sturn]

The whole purpose of the Sergeant or Corporal is to handle squad level tactics. Its the Lieutenant's job to handle the 'bigger picture' of platoon level tactics.

What he/they were speaking of is a Platoon Sergeant, not a Sergeant or Corporal. Platoon Sgts have nothing to do with running a squad (sergeant) or team (corporal), they are like a more experienced assistant to the platoon leader (lieutenant) who is normally pretty green. This is even reflected in Traveller rules where Lts are only Rank 1 (possibly only a term), but a Platoon/Gunny Sergeant is Rank 5 (5 terms or more).

In my military experience, the platoon-level sergeant seemed to run the show in the field when a new lieutenant showed up straight out of ROTC/Academy. After the lieutenant lost his newbness (equaled the platoon sergeant in tactics perhaps in Traveller terms), the platoon sergeant would then take a back seat and become the "beans and bullets" guy. Good lieutenants realized the typically 12+ year platoon level sergeant had lots to teach.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

I think things are still OK though. Once the fire fight starts, you could make an argument that the squads are not in continuous communications and each squad has it's own Tactics bonus.

Also, there are situations where a subordinate will take over the tactical operation in the heat of battle when the superior is not performing or "Freezing" It can get you Court-Marshalled, or get you a medal or both, but it does happen. Sure, the superior is no longer seen as the leader, but that is a roleplaying issue after the fight.

If the Lieutenant stands there dumbfounded and the Sargeant yells commands to everyone to drop, move squads around to provide flanking fire and generally takes over, the people will follow the Sargeant at that time. LATER, the Sergeant and the Lieutenant will have words.

sometimes they will be similar to the Following:

LT: Sergeant, My tent.
...
Sgt: Sir?
LT: Good job there. Thanks. But can we wait to advance 'til I give the go next time?
Sgt.: Yes, sir.

But it depends upon the officer, the NCO, and the higher command's awareness, too.

Sometimes a gun would be involved....

We loose more good Lieutenants that way.... :wink:

 

[-Daniel-]

Wow, lots of interesting thoughts here.

First thanks for the input guys. Helps me figure out what I want to do in my game until they elect to either leave it to me or clerify the rule in the rules.

After thinking on it for a while I believe I am leaning toward the idea that the Tactics score that is used is the stated leader first (higher or lower).

Daniel

 

[Deniable]

Given that we're talking about two second increments here, I'm leaning to making it the leader only.

That being said, if a player has a good idea for something else then I'm willing to talk it through. (As long as it's outside the game or a quick discussion.)

 

[Marachai]

I was reading the section on tactics within the combat chapter, and its constant reference is to the units initiative.

Excuse my ignorance , but I assume say, 2 people would be enough to qualify for the tactics to work ?

mara

 

[Deniable]

I was reading the section on tactics within the combat chapter, and its constant reference is to the units initiative.

Excuse my ignorance , but I assume say, 2 people would be enough to qualify for the tactics to work ?

mara

Think sniper / observer or units that break down into pairs. It should work.

I'm more worried about the upper limit as one guy tries to give his tactics bonus to 50 people.

 

[SableWyvern]

I'm more worried about the upper limit as one guy tries to give his tactics bonus to 50 people.

I'd be inclined to look at real world military organisations, where effective fighting forces for the bulk of the last century have been grouped around the section/squad of 8-12 people as the basic fighting unit, and place the limit at that point. It's worth noting that a squad/section leader has direct command of more men than any other rank in the military.

Given the close interdependancies within a platoon, I'd then allow either:

Section commanders to gain a +1 if their platoon commander has a higher tactics value.

Or

Allow the platoon commander to apply his value (to one, some or all sections) on a successful skill check.

On the matter of pairs gaining a tactics bonus, that works fine for me.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Agreed.

Sounds like Mongoose Steele has addressed some of this kind of stuff in the Mercenary book.

At higher TL, it may be possible to expand the size of unit that can be encompassed by the Tactics skill.

I also assume that the Tactics skill could be in a unit as small as 1 person (you and your tactics skill). Does anyone read that rule differently?

 

[-Daniel-]

If nothing else was learned by this thread is that the skill/rule needs to be spelled out much better then it is in the document at this point. :wink:

Daniel