re-thinking PBI

[Peterloo]

this is just a thought for the future - an interesting idea - I love the game and play it on a weekly basis , Ok "its PBI but not as you know it Jim" but its PBI.

Infantry fight in sections , that make up a platoon.  A section(commanded by a corporal or lance corporal) pretty well stays together, certainly it stays within 60yds, splitting up any further and you've lost them, troops go to ground and your section becomes fragmented and no longer under your control. Soldiers once they lose sight of their mates, stop and tend to fall back.

so with that principle in mind I divided my platoon into sections, - lets say british, you have a platoonHq+Light mortar+1rifle
3 sections of 1lmg+2rifle

so each section occupies a square and must stay in base to base contact - or all stay in the  square.

if you put 2 sections in  square in clusters it. more than 5bases in a square super-clusters

casualties move and stay with the section.

if a section is reduced to 1 base it may be amalgamated with another section but you lose 1vp per section destroyed.

The upshot of this idea is you have less scattering of troops, and it forces the player to keep his organisation more historical.
Its harder to cover the whole front as , as a platooncan only cover 4 squares in effect.

we are fightingearly war were sections were larger - a French section was 2lmg+3rifles (motorised troops) but it works well.

It applies to ATguns as well but not to armour as they have radios (unless your French then we play them as platcom+sections which need to be motivated)