German and US Tank platoons in WW2 were 5 tanks strong. This gave the unit obviously more depth. I am trying to organize my walkers into platoons, either 3 or 5 Walkers. The 5 vehicle platoons of WW2 were strong, but I think the walkers address the problems the tanks had, so I am considering reducing a platoon to 3 vehicles OR keeping it at 5 walkers and letting it be a mixed unit, or even 3 mixed. So you could have a Pounder, a Hot Dog, and a Honey all in one platoon.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? I am going to paint the proper insignia on the hulls, and cant decide what is best. Perhaps someone has found good lethal combos??

I like it! Right now I have my walkers in pairs for mutual support but want to expand them to three vehicles each.

I think it would probably be 4 walkers. Depending on purpose of the platoon, it would be either 1 pounder and 2 hot dogs (1 ludwig, 2 luthors) or 2 hot dogs and 1 pounder (1 luthor, 2 ludwigs) with support from 1 medium walker (recon, rearguard, etc).

They would further be supplemented by 1 heavy walker in times of need.

Don't forget that platoons were almost never up to strength. Use what you want.

Five on paper, which meant if one had been knocked out or deadlined for maintenance, you still had two pairs to go hunting. Even with two or three out, you still had a useful unit. It was all about redundancy.

I think warfare based on walkers would have to be revised quite a bit. If they're as mobile as the game suggests, which means basically as slow-moving as infantry, they would probably be used to clear out objectives and to defend infantry. I.e., as an armored supplement to infantry. Not as an armored contingent on its own. Sort of the same function as the Sturmgeschütz (StuG) assault gun originally had.

Besides: wouldn't a whole bunch of walkers take up a lot of space on the nine-square board?

If walkers are both slow moving, as we can think they are, and elite, they should be transported by trucks at least. Or specially built halftracks. Such machines would work in close collaboration with elite infantry, specially trained to work close to walkers.

Those combined arms formations would be a sort of mechanised (close) assault units. Their particularities would call for small units so platoons could be four or five strong but in my opinion should not exceed three. After all these should be uncommon units...

Just my 2 cents...

I am waiting to move OFF of the 9x9 boards soon. I want to field large engagements, and I really hope the new rules can cover this.

The more I look at it, the better the 3 walker platoon seems to me. It will make numbering them with the Dust decals much easier

As far as their movement is concerned, they might have a mode where they move faster at the expense of combat ability.

Get more troops and more game tiles, make up bigger games.

For squad strength I'd go with five on paper and three on the board in keeping with the realities on the ground. Some would always be out due to mechanical failure or battle damage/destroyed. Though keep in mind that part of the german principle of schwerepunkt would be maximising the unit/squad strengths at the point of assault and theres no reason to assume the SSU/Allies wouldn't do the same. I guess it would all depend on how they were being deployed and on the scenario.

In the source book they seem to be pretty mobile, in fact the very first one built was too mobile and uncontrollable by human crew, and had to be reengineered to accomidate the slower human crew. They also keep pace with sdkfz 251s and katzchen (fully tracked APCs). Considering the Vk energy source their range should be signifigant too.

i use 3-5 "Pounders" to represent a medium walker platoon with "Hot Dog" and "Steel Rain" added as support units.

BigDogg said:

This is the sort of thing I feel makes the most sense, having a strong core of 3 dedicated walkers and adding support walkers. This would also follow the late german doctrines of creating units in an ad hoc manner, either from smaller dedicated units, or from lack of larger formations.

I currently organize mine the same as real WWII armored formations, so 3-5 walkers per platoon as others have stated. I suspect (though I may be off base) that walkers battalions are slotted into armored formations.

-Will

wminsing said:

Both sides are up to the Kampgruppe/RCT method of organization, so yes, slotting things in like that would work well if we had regular troops to go with them. By the fluff, we are looking at maybe a short division at best of VK tech troops. Now the troops from the original core, other than the Laser Grenadiers, were pretty much better armored (and better armed?) regular troops, so a lot of those with a few heavy troops and any walker could simulate a reinforced situation. Of course, with the body count in the campaigns published means that the attrition rate among the high tech units attacking hard targets has been brutal in casualties.

Have not seen this in the fluff that has been published but I think the regular troops and tanks are still fighting in the other theaters in more large scale actions ... and Dust gives us the elite troops and the high tech walkers that are involved in a smaller covert war.

madmaxknick50 said:

Yep, but you don't always throw your big punch where the enemy has the best defense. Also, the first use of walkers was the Lothar/Loth in Stalingrad and IIRC, there have been a couple of other strikes of elites vs regular troops.

Algesan said:

I also think that Victory Bridge near Southampton isnt very covert.

There was also direct mention of once fielding zombies with normal troops but they had to change that tactic as the normal german troops reacted poor too it.

Both sides (or all three sides) would be foolish to only employ this new tech against other new tech and not against normals. And I havent really seen anything stat wise that makes me think "hmmm yes, with Walkers we would no longer need ordinary treaded tanks!"

Peacekeeper_b said:

And there would also be the officers trying to work out innovations to deal with walkers. Right now the world is kinda "stuck" at 1947, but IMO, by 1950 most troops on the front would be armor 2 since that is just an upgrade flak suit. Of course, if you hit some in garrison....

Algesan said:

I agree, but not al troops would have laser guns, phaser rays and super duper walkers! Tanks and jeeps shuld still be available, even if they are VK'd up some.

It seems to me that the manpower reserves of the powers are thin to the point where even if walkers are more expensive than tanks, the manpower for tanks might not be there any longer. I mean, you have a Feldwebel Lara Walters out there, so the Axis and the Allies are both using whom ever they can to fight. The days of the 3 or 4 man tank are probably gone.

Grand Inquisitor Fulminarex said:

LOL! The Germans had a _lot_ more problems with manpower than the Allies did. So their one person tanks make more sense, but have you actually considered the Allied walkers? Fairly sure they are crewed by four soldiers, but at a minimum there are two given the placement of the machineguns and the driver's hatch.

While Walker Platoons may satisfy some personal desire or theme, in game terms it only matters on how you position your walkers to 1) shield each other and 2) support each other.

It would be neat to see some rules for how walker platoons could/woudl work in Dust Tactics/Dust Warfare.

I put together an Allied walker platoon ... two Mickey, two Pounder and one Hot Dog ... now to see how they actually play.