Larger RF companies....

[Krieg-pants]

The skewed ratios in the rules as written seem a little pointless, they work perfectly well with even ratios across the board. So why have biased ratios? very odd thing for a 'historical' rules set.

[mausmann]

The skewed ratios in the rules as written seem a little pointless, they work perfectly well with even ratios across the board. So why have biased ratios? very odd thing for a 'historical' rules set.

Just the way they saw it when they wrote them I guess? For sure they have worked well these past 20 years or so.

Equally so there is nothing wrong with putting your own preferred interpretation into the rules too. Either way they seem to work fine.....

[Richard B.]

Sorry if this is out of context as I only use a much bastardised form of the RF system and we play one level down - your companies are our platoons but -

I change the size of units based the date/nationality.

Late German & British platoons are only 9-10 figures both nationalities were short of actual bodies by late `44/45 whilst the best Russian formations were given lots of replacements (10-12 figures per); the Yanks actual get a whole extra platoon in our rules to cover for the plentiful (body-wise) support weapons platoons and transport elements which accompanied their fighting troops.

As examples -
German Kompanie Sept `44 - April `45
HQ - CO, 2IC, NCO, RTO 2-3 runners
3 platoons off 10 figures (inc 1 x LMG, 1x Panzerfaust)

German mortars, MMGs, AT guns, Panzershrecks etc were from my reading battalion/regimental assets and only doled out to kompanies on a mission to mission basis.

US company Sept `44 - end
HQ - CO, 2IC, NCO, RTO + 4 men, Jeeo
3 x rifle companies with: 12 figures (inc 2 x BAR, 1 x grenade rifle) + truck
Support company with Bazooka team, 60mm mortar team, .30cal MMG team, NCO, sniper, 4 men & truck

US armoured infantry companies also get a 57mm AT gun at until late `44 when mostly they were "lost"

I hope this makes sense, sorry if it has little actually to do with RF

[Alanmccoubrey]

Different ratios for AFVs and Infantry aren't unusual, for example in Fire and Fury the infantry stands represent more men than the cavalry stands, it has to do with that old nugget, "how much space" each would occupy. If you reduce the ratio of AFVs to one model represent 15 then the tanks will literally be represented sitting mudguard to mudguard.
What I mean by that is that a squadron of 15 real tanks will take up very much more space on the battlefield than 15 infantrymen, yet you would have us represent both on our table with a single model.

[Krieg-pants]

The skewed ratios in the rules as written seem a little pointless, they work perfectly well with even ratios across the board. So why have biased ratios? very odd thing for a 'historical' rules set.

Just the way they saw it when they wrote them I guess? For sure they have worked well these past 20 years or so.

Equally so there is nothing wrong with putting your own preferred interpretation into the rules too. Either way they seem to work fine.....

Indeed.

[laurence strong]

So....for reasons I don't remember I once painted up 4 251's to represent the Inf in a PZGdr Bn. Recently I have played a couple games with 4x9 man Coy to the Bn instead of 12 men per Coy.....it does reflect the actual German layout and has offered a couple different options on the table by having the extra unit...


Cheers
Larry

[Bluewillow]

My early war all have larger companies, Dutch have twelve for example and Belgians ten.

Late war my Germans are smaller, depending upon the scenario.

Cheers
Matt