PTO Here we go!

Moderators: Laffe, Vis Bellica

User avatar
Teufelhunden
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2014 11:22 pm
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by Teufelhunden »

Hi Rich,

The '41-'42 USMC looks good. Thanks for doing this. Just a couple of comments.

The Satan tank was not used until 1943. There may have been some one-off attempts to use man-portable flame throwers out of the firing ports, but a dedicated flame tank was not fielded until 1943 (USMC Tanks of WWII - Osprey, and Rottman).

On Support List 2, there is a line to upgrade a BAR to an LMG. I believe this should just be a straight LMG with 5 crew (Gunner, Assistant, 3 ammo bearers), without the need to use a base squad member. The Company Weapons platoon consisted of 2 M1919A4 LMG teams at this time (along with 2 60mm mortars). It bumped up to 5 LMG's in April of '43 (along with 3 60mm mortars), and became a MG platoon in May '44 with 6 M1919A4 and 6 1917A1 (with the 60mm mortars going to the Company HQ) (Rottman and WW2Gyrene website).

About the only other comment would be the pistol armed Platoon Leader. I've seen them listed with a pistol, SMG, or carbine (Bayonet Strength website and Rottman). I'm just thinking that they would have been fighting with something other than a pistol.

Here is the Hyperwar Site from the Historical Branch of HQ Marine Corps: http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USMC/I/index.html#index

Other sources would be the Orders of Battle series by Osprey written by Gordon Rottman. I actually don't have the Osprey series on the Marines as I have the book US Marine Corps WWII Order of Battle by Rottman, but I do have the Osprey series on the Japanese by Rottman, and it has a lot of good info.

Here is another site to explore http://www.ww2gyrene.org/

Steve

Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:50 am

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by Richard »

Hi Steve

Satan: Noted

LMG: So this would be an attachment, as opposed to swopping the BAR for the belt fed LMG? The more I read about this, the more confusing it became.

I wasn't persuaded by Bayonet Strength for the USMC. Not sure why, but it seemed one of the weaker sections. I think I prefer a carbine for the officer, so I will go with that.

Rich

Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:50 am

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by Richard »

Steve

I'm going to put the LMG on list 3. It fires with 8 D6, as opposed to the M1917 which has 10D6, but it is more portable and much more flexible. I think making it list 2 would create a monster.

Rich

User avatar
bvera
Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:51 am
Location: Madrid, Spain

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by bvera »

Any plan for some beach landing optional rules?
Benito
...and visit my blog! http://mylardiesgames.blogspot.com.es/

User avatar
Derek H
Posts: 1252
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 10:50 pm
Location: Musselburgh, near Edinburgh, Scotland
Contact:

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by Derek H »

Derek H wrote:Theese PTO draft lists can be downloaded from https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eu6yxhtvr56n ... H9lfa?dl=0
Lists have been updated.
All the Lard News in one place - Lard Central http://www.netvibes.com/lardcentral
Pimping my blog - Dereks Wee Toys http://dereksweetoys.com/

Nick B
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:46 am

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by Nick B »

Rich,

Just to clarify on the List 3 Bunker - is you intention to limit its use to specific teams such as HMG etc. Clearly as the Japanese cannot split sections into teams this means you could not deploy a section in a bunker.

Would it be an idea to include a higher cost, larger, section bunker?

Cheers

Nick

User avatar
Teufelhunden
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2014 11:22 pm
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by Teufelhunden »

Hey Rich,

Yep, the LMG as an attachment vs. a swap. List 3 is okay by me. So, the 1917 will go to list 4, and the .50 will go to list 5 as is the US list in the book?

I agree on Bayonet Strength. I think it is a great quick reference, but like to have some other support. I think the carbine is the way to go for the Platoon Leader. Admittedly, I'm thinking Guadalcanal more than Wake or the Philippines, but of the three options (pistol, SMG, carbine) to put on a list, the carbine seems the most reasonable.

Steve

edleland
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:18 pm

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by edleland »

Two potential additions to the 1943-1954 Japanese would be:

Type 1 47mm AT Gun
Type 97 Shinhoto Chi Ha Tank (Late Production with the same 47mm Gun as the type 1 above)

The Shinhoto Chi-Ha was used at Saipan, Guam, Iwo Jima, Imphal and Luzon according to this site:

http://www3.plala.or.jp/takihome/

Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:50 am

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by Richard »

Steve

Agreed. I'll try to get these tidied up today.

Ed, yup, that's good. Got those.

Thanks to all!

Rich

Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 7:50 am

Re: PTO Here we go!

Post by Richard »

Benito

Yes, but that will come in some kind of supplement. That said, the later lists for LVTs will include movement rules.

Rich

Post Reply