FM: Federated Suns - "Commando Regiment"

[Hellraiser]

Combat Engineers
2 platoons of troops (Green)
lance of vehicles
1 Company


Artillery
2 lances of Mobile Thumpers
1 lance of Mobile Long Toms
1 Company
 & also Part of HQ Battalion using the 4SW Atlas TO&E templates)


SAR
1 Lance of High Speed Ground Vehicles (mix of wheel and hover)
1 Lance of VTOL
2 Platoon of Troops
     1 Medical (Green)
     2 Security Regular
1 Company


Military Police
3 Platoon of Motorized Inf (2 Green) 1 Regular
1 Company


Rangers
1 Company of Light Inf with specialized training Regular to Vet
1 Company


2 Lances of VTOL
1 platoon of Scout/Sniper Teams (5 member 2 S/S and 3 security) Vet to Elite
1 Company



Logistics
1 Lance of VTOLs
3 Lances of Transport Vehicles
2 platoon of motorized Inf (Green)
Support
1 lance support vehicles (2MASH, 2 Mobile Kitchen)
1 Lance of AA Units
1 Platoon of Inf (Green)  
Part of HQ Battalion using the 4SW Atlas TO&E templates)
But maybe a bit more than a normal sized HHB detachment

Made a couple notes above.

Based on what is included with the "HHB" detachments that are part of each Mech/Vee/Inf regiment using the 4th SW Atlas examples.....
I would say you can actually grow this a bit bigger, but, also might want to scale back a couple things.

Your total amount of Artillery/AA I think is more than a typical regimental HHB allotment, but, also might be less than the HHB & a dedicated "Line Battery" combined.

You might consider giving those charts a glance if you have them & then can slot in some of that stuff into the HHB & fill in the main 3 "Line" battalions with "specialties".
For example, Engineers,  MPs & SAR might combine 3 companies into a single battalion.

Meanwhile the remaining Rangers, AA, Extra Artillery might go into a more Vehicle oriented battalion with a single infantry company.

The Logistics/Support can probably be combined into HHB when you check out those templates which have detachments for "Security/Scouts/Logistics/Artillery" all in the HHB.

Which leaves you a full battalion or so of added troops of some specialized types.

You might also look at how the FC organizes its units.
Specialist infantry like Spec Ops but also I think maybe Engineers are in 4x4 v/s 3x3, so you could do 3 Platoons & 1 Vehicle Platoon per Company for several of your Infantry listed. (Probably not MPs)

[DOC_Agren]

I will take the input into consideration.  Not like I have been play campaign games for years now.

I will be honest I was as a player well invested in combined arms forces.   So my forces were never short Arty.. of course my AA guns were often Pikes or AC carriers

[Calimehter]

When I clicked on this, I really wanted it to be about a regiment that had a SNAFU with the uniform procurement process, and ended up with no underwear issued.

Anyway, carry on with the serious discussion!

[Arkansas Warrior]

When I clicked on this, I really wanted it to be about a regiment that had a SNAFU with the uniform procurement process, and ended up with no underwear issued.

Anyway, carry on with the serious discussion!

Ye're thinkn' o' the Argyle Lancers, laddie, an' we can assure ye it wasnae a SNAFU.

[PsihoKekec]

[Bagpipe noises intensify]

[BrianDavion]

that raises an intreasting thought, the Davions actually are of Scots ancestory, why does the fedsuns have no highlander regiments? etc? you'd think there would be SOME leaning into that

[AlphaMirage]

that raises an interesting thought, the Davions actually are of Scots ancestry, why does the fedsuns have no highlander regiments? etc? you'd think there would be SOME leaning into that

Are they?

I don't think there's much to actually back all of that up. It could very well be that the origin name was something like De'Avion, a town in France, (or of the airplane which is actually pretty cooler and helps explains their daring and willingness to embrace Aerospace at times), that has been corrupted over the centuries to Davion.

Also there are Highlander Capellan Regiments so they might be something against that.

[Arkansas Warrior]

The old Hosue Davion Sourcebook says

A 16th-century Frenchman, Jean-Baptiste d’Avion, was the first of the line to use a recognizable form of the family name. Family records claim that d’Avion was born in the village of Avion in Gascony, the bastard son of the Count de Foix. With a romanticism typical of the Davion family’s long history, d’Avion supposedly turned his back on his father’s noble birth, enlisted in the French army as a common soldier, and was selected to be among the bodyguard that accompanied Mary Stuart back to her homeland when she became Queen of Scots. Service in her defense was usually rewarded with lands in the border country of Scotland. Later Davions would claim to be of Scots rather than French blood.

I won't quote more because I don't want to run afoul of Rule 10, but it goes on to say that they fought for Charles I in the Civil War, and the Stuart Pretenders during the Jacobite risings, and had distinguished records in the World Wars.

[Minemech]

 I think the general trends are meant to show Davion units as either knightly or defensive. The Scots do in fact have a tradition of knighthood, but the French are often taken as the model.

[BrianDavion]

I think the general trends are meant to show Davion units as either knightly or defensive. The Scots do in fact have a tradition of knighthood, but the French are often taken as the model.

none of their regiments are partiuclarly french eaither.

[Terminax]

Auxiliaries were first introduced in the Galtor Campaign book via one of the unattached Davion Guards units that was assigned to the fake SL depot. It was a mixed regiment with infantry, armor and artillery IIRC.

[mikecj]

Maybe it was intended as a reference to the Auxiliaries of the Roman Legions?

[Alan Grant]

Maybe it was intended as a reference to the Auxiliaries of the Roman Legions?

The Davion use of the term auxiliary is actually pretty well defined in canon examples. They do have their own formula for its own, and it's not the Roman formula. I covered the canon examples we have in a long post on Page 1 of this thread.

The nutshell version is that we most often see it as mixes of combat engineers and artillery put together in one unit. Or as post-battle/campaign assemblage of surviving assets of different types (i.e. armor, infantry) smooshed together to create a unit with some command integrity but it's a mix of the survivors. Thrown together until such time as the proper units can be reconstituted and rebuilt.

[thesilverback]

The reality of a combat auxiliary regiment has to many problems due to the various and wide range of service and support needed for the different kinds of units that would make this up. IMHO support should be place in independent battalions of a specific type such as Field Artillery or Engineers.  Then group other elements with similar duties in Ad Hoc Battalions.  These elements could then be placed in Task Force or Support Group.