Concept: ORBAT and group management

[fer]

I've been asked to write a text explaining the folk platoon, so have drafted the following. Please can you let me know your thoughts? This is going to be posted in this forum and the F2 wiki (which is public):

Is this going to be another question and answer thing?
Kinda, but less snappy and with more text; and possibly some lists and diagrams. Oh God, here comes the text wall!

What is the folk platoon constructed from?
There are 3 basic element types within the platoon:

• Leadership element
• Fireteam element
• Attachment element

Tell me about leadership elements
There are 2 in each platoon: the commander (CO) element, and the deputy commander (DC) element. These are 2-person elements, with the CO/DC accompanied by a medic. Or personal physician. Whatever. I think he has some bandages.

Tell me about fireteam elements
Up to 6 in each platoon (although you can have more if you're feeling greedy), each consists of 4 players:

• Fireteam leader (FTL)
• Automatic rifleman
• Assistant automatic rifleman
• RPG rifleman

The fireteam is the basic building block of the platoon, and is patterned on the fireteam concept described in Dslyecxi's excellent TTP2.

Tell me about attachment elements
These are 2-man elements that can be used to add a specific type of special weapon to the platoon, such as:

• Medium machinegun (MMG)
• Medium anti-armour (MAT)
• Sniper team (ST)

Not every mission will feature these attachments. You can also invent other types of attachment: vehicle crews, mortar teams, civilian affairs outreach teams with Hello Kitty stickers on their helmets (even).

How is the platoon organised?
This is the tricky/smart bit: the platoon's structure is dynamic, and changes depending on the CO's plan. During the briefing process, the CO must assign each fireteam and attachment to 1 of 3 possible states:

• Under the direct command of the CO
• Under the direct command of the DC
• Independent (under the indirect command of the CO)

What does that mean for FTLs under the direct command of the CO?
Fireteams under the direct command of the CO effectively form a squad, with the CO as its squad leader. The FTLs will still be expected to provide leadership to their fireteams, but they can expect to be working closely with other FTLs also under the direct command of the CO.

And the FTLs under the direct command of the DC?
Exactly the same as those under the direct command of the CO, except under the DC. Think of this as a second squad. The DC is her/himself under the indirect command of the CO.

What about the independent fireteams and attachments?
As the word independent suggests, these elements will be working alone, but under the indirect command of the CO. Examples of this include a sniper team which is tasked with providing overwatch for the whole platoon, or a fireteam sent off to patrol by itself (because it is unloved).

What does this mean for TeamSpeak 2?
During the mission the channel you need to be in will depend on whether your element is under the direct control of the CO, DC or independent:

• Under the CO: Primary Channel 1 (ALT + NUM 1 if you are using the folk keybinds)
• Under the DC: Primary Channel 2 (ALT + NUM 2 if you are using the folk keybinds)
• Independent: Another primary channel, as assigned by the CO during briefing

How do CO, DC and independent leaders communicate?
Using TeamSpeak 2's Channel Commander feature.

What about markers?
The CO and DC have map markers, as do each fireteam and attachment (if present).



So does this mean a folk platoon has irregularly-sized squads?
Yes, it can; but the CO can choose to structure the platoon in lots of different ways. Here are a few examples:


Example 1: Here, the CO has formed a squad under his command consisting of the Alpha and Bravo fireteams; this squad will use TeamSpeak 2 Primary Channel 1. A second squad, consisting of Charlie and the MMG attachment, is under the DC, and will use the TeamSpeak 2 Primary Channel 2. Lastly, the sniper team will act independently, and can use TeamSpeak 2 Primary Channel 3.


Example 2: Here, the DC is not used at all. Instead, the CO has formed a squad under his command consisting of the Alpha, Bravo and Charlie fireteams; this squad will use TeamSpeak 2 Primary Channel 1. The MMG attachment will act independently, and will use TeamSpeak 2 Primary Channel 2. Similarly, the sniper team will act independently, and will use TeamSpeak 2 Primary Channel 3.


Example 3: Here, the CO has formed a small squad under his command consisting of just the Alpha fireteam; this squad will use TeamSpeak 2 Primary Channel 1. A second, much larger squad has been formed under the DC, consisting of the Bravo, Charlie and Delta fireteams, and will use TeamSpeak 2 Primary Channel 2.

Why have you done things this way?
Primarily, the folk platoon is about flexibility. The nature of folk means that its missions must cater for varying playercounts, and having squads of a fixed size becomes quite challenging if you cannot be sure of having enough [sobre] players to fill all roles. The dynamic structue allows COs to use multi-element formations with low playercounts.

But the way that the Army / Marines / Jehovah's Witnesses organise their platoons is better!
They have way more people than folk. Also, that level of organisation makes us afraid.

[Housemaster]

Yeah that's clear enough, it explains the DC's role which is a fairly new concept to me. I also hadn't thought about the indirectly controlled fireteams and attachments at all either.