Infantry Field Guns, how do you feel about them?

[StoneRhino]

In a BV based game how do you feel about their use? I have played against people that have whined about BA and conventional infantry being used in a game. I'm talking about maybe 3 squads of BA or 3 jump platoons, so I suspect that there are those who would literally cry if someone used a platoon armed with field guns.

I find that Battletech seems to be this strange environment and community where the weakest units seem to be considered a legal means of cheating, yet the most powerful units in the game are in no way considered being cheesy. A unit that could be hit with a machine gun, inferno missiles, fragmentation LRMs, artillery, bombs, AP gauss, plasma rifle/cannons and be wiped out is some how cheating. Yet, that 3k clan assault mech is perfectly fine to use and in as large a number as your BV cap permits. One is basically dead if hit with the right weapon and takes double damage in the open while the other is able to soak quite literally 100s of points more before its death is likely possible, much less it death is assured. One requires people to simply breed, get a basic level education to provide the manpower while having the tech and manufacturing base to build the guns that the other unit type has in large numbers. The other requires far more to produce.

Okay....with that off my chest about the nonsense that is the strange world of BT and it's playerbase, where a pre-space flight unit type is somehow cheating while the SL+era clan assault mech is fully accepted as legitimate, I find the field gun to be rather amusing. I have been using them in Megamek games with some friends and have had some questionable results at first, but the past few games the field guns have been performing rather well.

Yes, the are slow. Yes, they are easily killed, with the right weapons. However, if they are properly screened and the opposing artillery is kept occupied with far more intimidating battlemechs, the field guns have been able to move into position to defend the rear of my armored units. In the last game an opposing mech weighed in at a bit over 4k, which was a clan assault with an improved pilot. That mech was deployed on the eastern map and decided to chase a few medium mechs of mine that I had move forward towards the middle of the 3x3 map then pulled them back and to the west. This slowed the other side's push and caused them to split up. The clan assault then crossed from east to west on my side of the map which allowed 3 AC2 platoons and 1 ac5 platoon to fire at it for several turns.

Strangely the opposing players had a mech with several AP gauss rifles on it, but it did not commit to crossing onto my side of the map with the assault mech. It was a 2 v1 game so the opposing players clearly did not think the field guns were an issue, or one of them decided to do his own thing. The result was several turns of fire on a clan mech that had no response with its er ppc, lbx20, and I believe a gauss rifle. Against a mech it had the advantage, but against field guns manned by infantry? Nothing. The turn before the mech cleared a series of hills and could fire at the rear arc of all of my mechs and vehicles, the field guns scored a second gyro hit leaving the mech unable to see anything that it could seriously damage. The next turn I planned on dropping a smoke round on it from my field artillery unit to eliminate the assault mech's ability to fire at anything for the rest of the game. Before the round landed the other side's units were either killed, knocked out, or knocked over.

There was one turn where the player in control of the 4k assault turned his artillery, a 0/7 arrow 4 demolisher, on my field artillery and one of the field guns. That shifted back to my armored units who soaked the damage with ease, which condemned his assault to be shot by my field guns. Had the crits not happened it would have been backshots for several turns with the field guns on the assault.

Personally, I like them and will be using them on a normal basis. I have only used AC2/5s, LBX2/5s, and a LAC5. Their pile of ammo allows for special munitions while having enough standard rounds to finish a 20turn MM game. However, I have been wondering about using larger guns because their shorter ranges requires that I get them closer to the fight, or work harder to drag targets to them without appearing to big of a threat that the other player will decide chasing units near them is not worth the risk. Additionally, their much smaller ammo allotments removes the potential for special munitions. Of course, just the threat of a pair of low BV ac20s firing for up to 5 turns has it's uses. >:D

[dgorsman]

Try some RAC-2's.  Light enough to get several per platoon (3 or 4, can't remember which).  And even moderately dialed up that's a lot of plinkage for many rounds.

[Sartris]

i love them. it's more how i envision infantry interacting with heavy armor on the battlefield.

now if only we could make field missile batteries...

Try some RAC-2's.  Light enough to get several per platoon (3 or 4, can't remember which).  And even moderately dialed up that's a lot of plinkage for many rounds.

my absolute favorite visual in battletech is imagining a motorized platoon towing seven LAC/2s entering a building and driving up to the roof.

[Shin Ji]

my absolute favorite visual in battletech is imagining a motorized platoon towing seven LAC/2s entering a building and driving up to the roof.

ANd you thought that getting that one couch into your buddy's apartment was tricky!

[Elmoth]

Always hire professional help to move furniture

[Crimson Dawn]

Use the HVACs just to be able to say "see there is a use for these things".

[Daryk]

Field Guns are cool... BV is useless.

[Retry]

Use the HVACs just to be able to say "see there is a use for these things".

Just got to use them on a unit type that filters out the bad quirks for some arbitrary reason and all the sudden it's not the worst gun in the game anymore.

[Sartris]

BattleTech Law of Unequivalent Exchange - any “progress” in technology must be saddled with crippling drawbacks

[Simon Landmine]

Always hire professional help to move furniture

 ;D

[Simon Landmine]

a 0/7 arrow 4 demolisher

That sounds like something much more cheesy to me than a couple of field guns. Wasn't there some guideline about how far apart G and P scores should be?

[Sartris]

never learned to drive the damn thing, sir. too busy blowing shit up

[RifleMech]

 :smitten:  love them

[Nav_Alpha]

Love them and love fighting against them. Seriously, I love looking at a field problem that involves dug in PBIs with field guns and thinking “how do I murder all these sons of birches?”

Field guns add a level of realism to infantry and gives them a bite they deserve

[dgorsman]

never learned to drive the damn thing, sir. too busy blowing shit up

"Engine?"   ???  "Sir, we just get out and push."

[Hellraiser]

ANd you thought that getting that one couch into your buddy's apartment was tricky!

PIVOT..... PIVOT...... PIVOT

[Hellraiser]

Wasn't there some guideline about how far apart G and P scores should be?

Nothing in the rules, but, I know our local GM often uses a "Must be within 2" house rule to avoid that kind of cheese.

Myself I prefer "must be within 3" myself just because we have several canon examples of pilots that are 0/3 or 3/0 or 1/4, etc etc.

Plus because the "typical" stats are already 1 apart you get issues where you can only do 1 gunnery improvement but can in turn do 3 piloting improvements & still be "legal".

[Daryk]

Vehicles have crews, and it's totally reasonable to have a green driver with more experienced gunners.

[Sartris]

Possible. I don’t know about 0/7 being responsible  ;D

We have the finest tank crew in the army. They can drop an arrow iv into someone’s house through the dryer exhaust. Unfortunately the only driver we could find was this literal chimpanzee

[Daryk]

Heh... that happens when the most grizzled gunner makes a deal with the Top to take the next new guy...  ^-^

[Maingunnery]

Possible. I don’t know about 0/7 being responsible  ;D

We have the finest tank crew in the army. They can drop an arrow iv into someone’s house through the dryer exhaust. Unfortunately the only driver we could find was this literal chimpanzee

I see two options.
1. Empty shell hit the driver in the head
2. Bob sold some engine parts on the black market.... again

[Hellraiser]

In a BV based game how do you feel about their use? I have played against people that have whined about BA and conventional infantry being used in a game. I'm talking about maybe 3 squads of BA or 3 jump platoons, so I suspect that there are those who would literally cry if someone used a platoon armed with field guns.

One thing that should be mentioned with something even as simple as 3 BA squads or 3 Jump Platoons is "Initiative Sinking"

If everyone has infantry, fine, if no one does, fine........But if one guy brings 2 companies of infantry & 1 less mech.  Its a serious mismatch.

I've seen people do it plenty, in a 1-6 units battle, they bring 2 assault mechs & 4 infantry platoons.   Well you can guess what 2 units moved last every turn.

Its cheese and I say that loving infantry rules, but mismatched #s of units isn't cool as a "tactic".

[Retry]

One thing that should be mentioned with something even as simple as 3 BA squads or 3 Jump Platoons is "Initiative Sinking"

If everyone has infantry, fine, if no one does, fine........But if one guy brings 2 companies of infantry & 1 less mech.  Its a serious mismatch.

I've seen people do it plenty, in a 1-6 units battle, they bring 2 assault mechs & 4 infantry platoons.   Well you can guess what 2 units moved last every turn.

Its cheese and I say that loving infantry rules, but mismatched #s of units isn't cool as a "tactic".

If possible, I'd look into houserules that could alleviate the pain from such cheesy initiative manipulation, or eliminates 'em entirely.

Online, MegaMek's "Infantry Moves after other units" option is a life-saver IMO, I'd probably ask to apply that if someone wanted to go very infantry-heavy.

[Sartris]

when i was running campaigns i'd use the "infantry last" rule (along with unconscious mechwarriors and stunned vehicle crews)

[Greywind]

I see two options.
1. Empty shell hit the driver in the head

[Cannonshop]

Possible. I don’t know about 0/7 being responsible  ;D

We have the finest tank crew in the army. They can drop an arrow iv into someone’s house through the dryer exhaust. Unfortunately the only driver we could find was this literal chimpanzee

that's actually an optimal setup under the rules, At least, with tanks.  the setup in TW heavily favors parking your tank stationary and leavign it parked over moving it.

[Sartris]

sure. there are also relatively few circumstances where a big tracked vehicle needs to worry about driving skill rolls. i just don't minmax like that

[Elmoth]

So a la ce on lance is all cool, but a raid by mech on a facility protected by infantry and a few mechs (a staple of BT) is total cheese on the part of the defenders.

Allow me to groan about that statement.

[Shin Ji]

Having Infantry isn't cheese, but using them to win init with your important units every time is. There are a bunch of rules that deal with that issue tho. I love field guns. They give mechs a reason to pay attention to Inf. They are why I field Mechs with Arrow Iv - nothing says loving like area effect in the oven!

[Colt Ward]

Trying to remember, but IIRC tracked mechanized negates some of the anti-infantry weapon damage that motorized would take but opens them up for a slight increase to damage from other weapons.  I remember having a enemy VTOL transport buzz my field gun platoon one game, whole reason I used the motive type I did was b/c MGs would not wipe them out . . . but the platoon got into a MG duel with the VTOL.

Under normal rules, Ultra & RACs are the best field gun options . . . because they do not jam.  I prefer using Class 5s b/c I can get the best range to damage to trooper ratio IMO- I expect once I start tapping on someone's nose I am going to lose troopers which means the loss of a gun.  Not a big deal b/c the lost gun's ammo can go to feed the other guns who are rapid firing.  With the Class 5s I am getting good hits along with good range to offset their slow movement . . . then again, my forces are rarely Lyran Wall of Steel who would not feel as bad with that speed.

In fact, with the RAC/5 platoon, I was actually having to be careful with the ammo until I get in a better range- you have 3 turns to go full rock'n'roll.

I dislike the MM optional rule about forcing when someone moves a specific type of unit- for one thing, as a Clan player I am usually bringing Elementals to try to balance the initiative options.  Company vs Star is 2-2-2-3-3 pattern which really hurts when trying to get the position, Company vs Nova is better with just the last two turns having the IS side move a extra unit.  I still prefer initiative to load the middle, make the side with more units to move operate like a bell curve.

[Hellraiser]

I think the easiest house rule would not be to Front/Back load at all since really that is just a different kind of broken.

Just require mixed forces to move 1 of each movement type till all are gone.

So for Colts example of 12 mechs v/s a Nova.

You treat the Nova as 5 "Units" but at each "Turn" you move a Mech & an a BA.

This way some mechs are still in the back of the list but some are still in the front.


************

And if we expand on that option & stick with the Nova but change the IS force to be 2 Lances/Platoons of tanks each & a company of 4 infantry platoons we would get the following.

8 to 5 "unit-groups"

IS would be Mech/Tank/Inf till all infantry done, then just Mech/Tank.
Clan would still be Mech/BA every turn.

And being 8 to 5 the "groups" would move in the following order, assuming clan won initiative.

IS - Clan - IS - Clan - ISx2 - Clan - ISx2 - Clan - ISx2 - Clan

The first 4 IS Groups having Infantry in them gives you a total unit count of moves that would look like this.

IS - Mech, Tank, Inf

Clan - Mech, BA

IS - Mech, Tank, Inf

Clan - Mech, BA

IS - Mech-2, Tank-2, Inf-2

Clan - Mech, BA

IS - Mech-2, Tank-2

Clan - Mech, BA

IS - Mech-2, Tank-2

Clan - Mech, BA


The more I look at this the more I like the way it sets up.

Normally a force of 8+8+4 v/s 5+5 = 20-10 = 2-1
And it can be front/back loaded in broken ways.

This way the rotation is actually very odd looking but I think would be balanced.

3-2-3-2-6-2-4-2-4-2

It still allows the infantry & immobile mechs/vees to move "first", but, only in their specific unit type so they are spread out through the list.

Then there is that big batch in the middle where other clan units now move after those.

Its not ideal but I like the overall way it functions.

A person can still move slower units then faster units or smaller then bigger or whatever they want, but only inside their specific bracket.

So your Field Gun parked platoon can stand still & your Vtol recon infantry can move later.

I also like that since the way initiative works you have more units moving at the end, BUT, with this method those "last turns" units will only be for unit types that are the most numerous.

So the infantry units can't also jump on the last phase & inflate those #s as moving late.


***********

Actually I think I've discovered a problem, & that is what if you WANT some infantry to move last, like say for a swarm attack.

Maybe the best option would be to divide by smallest unit count of type & move as groups.

So we already have the Nova as 5 "groups"
So the IS force would be 4 "Groups" of 2 mechs, 2 vees, & 1 infantry each.

Hmm,  I see an issue there if you have a really low unit count of like 1 platoon of grunts so its all "1 group"

This is going to require some thoughts & tests.

[Colt Ward]

I think the easiest house rule would not be to Front/Back load at all since really that is just a different kind of broken.

Just require mixed forces to move 1 of each movement type till all are gone.

So for Colts example of 12 mechs v/s a Nova.

You treat the Nova as 5 "Units" but at each "Turn" you move a Mech & an a BA.

This way some mechs are still in the back of the list but some are still in the front.

Why?  The Nova is more balanced, and a Elemental point (Laser 447) is roughly the same BV as a basic Locust (3M is 522, most less) or lighter tank (Vedette is 475) and deals with one of the game structural problems of balance for a Clan player.

Your first example is 'backloaded' initiative, its just the 'back' is so full it is 60% of the turn.  If you moved the IS levels up 1 move it would be better, 1-2-2-2-1 and reflect the value of winning initiative.

But this was about field guns . . . and honestly, for open field battles where they can be seen they are fire support.  And most players I know move their fire support first because they have the range and can produce a bubble of where you wish to discourage (or encourage via bait) for your opponent to move.

[Cannonshop]

Having Infantry isn't cheese, but using them to win init with your important units every time is. There are a bunch of rules that deal with that issue tho. I love field guns. They give mechs a reason to pay attention to Inf. They are why I field Mechs with Arrow Iv - nothing says loving like area effect in the oven!

this goes to a very, very, very old discussion/debate, Shin Ji.  You would not believe how old, but it begins with how the asymmetrical initiative is officially structured.

1/1
1/1
1/2
1/2

in a 6 on 4 scenario.

notice something? That's right, the majority movement happens late.  thus, initiative banking.

there have been alternates proposed, and at least one was implemented in Megamek.

the one I have best familiarity with runs the following:

1/2
1/2
1/1
1/1

This is called "Front Loaded" initiative, and I encountered it in a discussion about Initiative back in 1997 or 1998 on the Old battletech forum.

Front loaded initiative has some issues, because it removes some of the battlefield control enjoyed by swarm players.

You will note, in the example above, that the larger force won that round of initiative-they moved last.

when they LOSE...

2/1
2/1
1/1
1/1

the claim given for why this wasn't considered at the time, was that it was unfairly penalizing to lose the initiative roll.

Note that under the standard model, and given how players behave, losing the initiative still provides a fairly heavy benefit for the larger side-possibly enough to actually counter the initiative loss.

also note this can happen just as easily with asymmetric layouts of all 'mechs, not just combined arms play.

Notably, front-loaded initiative has a slight bit more realism when you consider what Initiative MEANS and concepts of command and control-it is more difficult to get a larger formation to execute a change in plan on the fly, than a smaller one, because there are more heads, brains, and radios involved over (Presumably) a larger area.

in other words, it makes sense for a larger force to have more difficulty reacting to changes than a smaller force, because you have both more bodies to order about, and more rungs in the chain of command.

however, this is not 'stock' with Battletech, and has been rejected in the past by successive development teams, it didn't even make it into the advanced rules...

[truetanker]

... {snippity snip} ...

Cannonshop the Grognard has spoken!

I remember that debate...

Ye gads, we're old...

TT

[StoneRhino]

i love them. it's more how i envision infantry interacting with heavy armor on the battlefield.

now if only we could make field missile batteries...

my absolute favorite visual in battletech is imagining a motorized platoon towing seven LAC/2s entering a building and driving up to the roof.

I'd love some field thunderbolt launchers...just sayin >:D

[StoneRhino]

Just got to use them on a unit type that filters out the bad quirks for some arbitrary reason and all the sudden it's not the worst gun in the game anymore.

They aren't useless, risky, but not useless. Now if you could make use of the smoke..

[StoneRhino]

That sounds like something much more cheesy to me than a couple of field guns. Wasn't there some guideline about how far apart G and P scores should be?

Yes, there was. It used to be a 1 point difference, but it was recently changed to 2 points. I pointed it out to him, but I'm not sure if it was spotted before or after the game started since it was about a month ago. Either way, I've faced far worse, they lost pretty badly, I reminded them about the G/P difference and why its set that way, and will be checking before the next game.

It was annoying seeing his shells hitting every turn. It immobilized an AC5 Shreck behind a hill before it had a chance to do anything in the game. It ends up that the 4k clan mech was his and he was also being hit by that tank since it had nothing else it could see during the game.

[Greatclub]

The cheapest (non-space) elemental is the heahunter point at 300bv, the one after that is about 400. That's the price of a bugmech. Problem is when somebody spends that 300bv for 100 troopers, a clan infantry star of five points.

There is an obvious difference in the number you can buy, and therefore how big an abuse it is.

[truetanker]

The cheapest (non-space) elemental is the heahunter point at 300bv, the one after that is about 400. That's the price of a bugmech. Problem is when somebody spends that 300bv for 100 troopers, a clan infantry star of five points.

There is an obvious difference in the number you can buy, and therefore how big an abuse it is.

Wouldn't that be impossible?  5 Points equal a Star, 1,500 BV. You list 100 troopers, or four Stars : 6K BV.

TT

[Greatclub]

Clan (non-BA) Infantry points are 20 or 25, depending on the type.

https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Point

[truetanker]

I know...

I use them allot.

Nothing says ha-ha more than offloading and fielding loads from a Lion C... Watch their eyes when you land one next time, Fast Recon and Jump... along side of Foot. Then land another Lion, a WD version! Who needs mechs again?

Lol... :D

TT

[Greatclub]

20*5 = 100. That's five points, or one star. The good, advanced tech clan infantry is expensive, but the cheapest clan point megamek lists? 53 bv. There are [/i]slightly[/i] better ones for 60 bv though, and those are 20 troopers.

What, you think they're giving the good kit to solahma? That isn't what we see with Ter Roshak.

Code: [Select]

Clan Mechanized Wheeled Point (Flamer) Base Tech Level: Standard (Clan)
Level
Era
Experimental
2815-2899
Advanced
2900+
Standard
-
Tech Rating: E/X-X-E-C  BV: 53 Cost: 1,254,618.72 C-bills Source: Total Warfare - Succession Wars Role: Ambusher  Movement: 3/3  Soldiers: 16 (4/4) Armor: 2.0  Primary Weapon: Auto-Rifle (Modern, Generic) Secondary Weapon: Flamer (Man-Portable) (2) Damage per trooper: 0.535 
Weapons
Loc
Heat

Flamer (Man-Portable)
MEN
0

 
Equipment
Loc

Clan Armor Kit (All)
MEN


[Col Toda]

Dug in HVAC/10 in a heavy woods hex . Once it starts firing  at near er ppc ranges it becomes a very hard target . Dug in +2 , heavy woods +2  , light smoke caused by the weapon the previous turn +1 . Then range .  As infantry field gun ignores exploding on a 2 roll . The HVAC/5 and 2 have very long ranges so maybe minimum range issues,  I am not sure

[Kovax]

Dug in HVAC/10 in a heavy woods hex . Once it starts firing  at near er ppc ranges it becomes a very hard target . Dug in +2 , heavy woods +2  , light smoke caused by the weapon the previous turn +1 . Then range .  As infantry field gun ignores exploding on a 2 roll . The HVAC/5 and 2 have very long ranges so maybe minimum range issues,  I am not sure

I'd just set the woods on fire.  Problem moved or removed.

[RifleMech]

The HVAC/2 has a long range of 35. The HVAC/5 has a long range of 28. To burn them out, without getting hit yourself, you'd need an Arrow IV Launcher firing Inferno Arrow IV Rounds.

[Wolf72]

slight update: official now- HVACs do not explode when used as infantry field guns.

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=67473.0

HVAC repairman are still on call though! (hah, horrible joke/pun ... I need to call them in a few months to make sure my furnace is all clean for winter)

[Sartris]

another victory against rules-lawyering pedantry

[Cannonshop]

slight update: official now- HVACs do not explode when used as infantry field guns.

https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=67473.0

HVAC repairman are still on call though! (hah, horrible joke/pun ... I need to call them in a few months to make sure my furnace is all clean for winter)

You can't clean your own furnace??

[Sharpnel]

I pay pros to do all maintenance work as I am all thumbs past changing a light bulb. Change a filter, sure. anything more difficult than that it gets a pro.

[Wolf72]

You can't clean your own furnace??

it's 2 years old and they will do it for free (I think? maybe it was just once), plus they check out everything attached to it.

I replace my filter every 6 mos or so.  Plus, I'd never know if it wasn't working right until winter and we didn't have any heat.

It's clean and service ... so, yeah. basically getting it cleaned and checked out.  I get leery of some things. 

I have installed two ceiling fans (wait, 4 including previous house) -- but I wasn't at risk at blowing the house up.

Back on topic-ish: I guess part of the Field Gun MOS includes ammo handling, ammo jams, weapon cleaning between shots, etc.
 

[Crow]

If one had a 25 trooper Clan foot platoon, is it possible for those troopers to man *two* Arrow IV batteries? Or are platoons limited to one arty piece of any size?

[Talen5000]

How I feel is that if you need to give infantry a field gun, you give them a Gun Trailer instead.

[Wolf72]

If one had a 25 trooper Clan foot platoon, is it possible for those troopers to man *two* Arrow IV batteries? Or are platoons limited to one arty piece of any size?

iirc ... nm Tac Ops:

Only motorized conventional infantry platoons or mechanized conventional infantry platoons with a Wheeled or Tracked motive type may be equipped with a single Field Artillery weapon or Artillery Cannon (per platoon).

emphasis added.

so just one, no matter type. 

[Colt Ward]

To be fair the typical platoon could not man two of them, since you require a trooper per ton of weapon to make it work . . .

 . . . now my 44 man platoons would be able to field 2 guns, but you cannot put more than 28 in a hex so . . . they get broken down into half-platoons for table top from their organizational 44 mech.  But even a few casualties would make the gun In-Op.

[Wolf72]

To be fair the typical platoon could not man two of them, since you require a trooper per ton of weapon to make it work . . .

 . . . now my 44 man platoons would be able to field 2 guns, but you cannot put more than 28 in a hex so . . . they get broken down into half-platoons for table top from their organizational 44 mech.  But even a few casualties would make the gun In-Op.

28? I thought it was max of 30; I like using 30 man platoons over the 28.

Clan Arrow 4 is 12 tons, by tonnage (other than "only 1 artillery!") you could fit two into a standard clan platoon.  (wait ... clan motorized gets up to 25 right?)

[Elmoth]

There are plenty of 21 man platoons. 2 "demi" platoons of 22 guys sound about right. ;)

[Hellraiser]

Now that is interesting.

44 men or 100 men, etc etc, is still 1 "platoon" and field artillery is 1 platoon.

So, CAN, you have multiple if your org is larger platoons?

Sure, they break down into "fake" platoons for #'s of 30 or less per hex.

But on a TOE its still just 1 platoon.

I don't have infantry rules in front of me but it seems like per the rules, you'd end up with 1 platoon w/ the Artillery Piece in it, and then the remaining 1-3 platoons would be w/o any artillery at all.

[Sartris]

depends. does the game, that treats each infantry unit as a separate playing piece, care about fluff ToE?

[Hellraiser]

The mention above of 44 man platoons seems to be a fluff reference.

Some folks clearly try to match the 2 together.

[Colt Ward]

My 44 man platoon (and check the Hansa, they have larger ones to IIRC) is the TO&E version and part of a choice in regards to strategic deployment of infantry units (3 is good for manuever, 4 is better for garrison) but if I really had the option I would be plopping down four 10 man squads & a 4 man command section (CO/PSG/2RO) but that starts causing problems with initiative.  For more normal play, the platoon is divided up to qualify for typical TW rules.  And IMO it does not matter what equipment they are assigned, usually- so foot infantry are 44 men and a weapons platoon equipped with field guns is 44 men.

[Hellraiser]

I get that.

The Marian's are 100 btw..
10 Man Squads
10 Squads / Platoon (Century)

They break down on the game board as 25 man = 2.5 squads per "Hex base".

My statement was that I don't recall from memory how the rules tell you to create those over sized "Platoons".
If its "create it as 1 platoon & then divide by 30 & round up to get # of "Hex bases"
or
If its Take total & divide & round, then create platoon based on Hex Base #Men totals.

Depending on how you read the rules you can end up with 2 very different things in regards to # of Support Weapons &/or # of Field Guns &/Or # of Artillery Pieces.

A 100-man "Century" could be 4 artillery pieces or 1 artillery piece depending on how the rules tell you to do it.

Or you could just "fudge" it & field it however you want.  But I'm pointing out that it would be "Fudging" it & not for sure be how the rules are written.

I don't honestly recall how it reads & don't have TM/TO on hand to check.

44 Man platoon can field a total of 5x AC5's, but a pair of 22 man platoons can only field 4.
44 man platoon can field One artillery piece, but a pair of 22 man platoons can field 2.

So how you read those rules will matter when it comes to the final stats if your going by the actual creation & conversion rules.

I hope that makes sense.