Formal Organization of your Collection

[panzergator]

Do you formally organize your collection?

Mine are organized in accordance with the TO&E extant at the time the vehicle served. M60-series are organized under the 17H-series, except for M60A3s, which, along with M1s are organized under the 17J-series. Units are designated permanently according to the Combat Arms Regimental System in use from the mid-Fifties until the beginning of the '80s. Once I start M1A2 and its companions, I MAY go to the L-series for M1A2s, if I can figure it out. Units are also painted in appropriate camouflage patterns, USAREUR and MERDC for the 2nd half of the '70s, OG for earlier, and three-color NATO for mid-80s on. No sand color.

A Company has the left rear mudguard painted red, B Company white, C Company blue, and D or CSC company yellow. BN Hq is painted black.

I started with 3rd Armored Division, so my battalions are designated IAW those assigned to it. Each battalion is currently kept in its own tray..

[STS]

Do you formally organize your collection?

Yes. I usually try to stay somewhat historical if I can, and have lately been buying ships (WW2 micronaut collector) to fit certain historical formations. For example, when building my French fleet, I've been trying to stick to ships that have been part or attached to the Force de Raid first, my Japanese have been purchased to fit Nagumos carrier force at Midway, now I'm in the process of building up ships that were part of ABDA.

Of course, since historical warships are unique objects, with a lot beeing sunk before others have been comissioned, a lot of my US and British formations have become some sort of "what-if" fleets, with certain ships replacing their historical counterparts. My TF 16 is comprised of Enterprise and Ranger (historically Hornet) and has 3 Fletcher-DDs standing in for 2 Porters and a Benham, for example.

The biggest liberty I took with my German units, since the organization of their battleships and heavy cruisers was almost non-existing and confusing, especially mid-to late war when the admirality desperately tried to prevent them from being scuttled. The battleships and cruisers are simply organized as they would have been in the Imperial German Navy of WW1 in "what-if" formations.

[Extra Crispy]

No.

Mine are game pieces. They are "organized" at the platoon level, in that they conform to the needs of the rules I use. These rules always have a company at the core of their forces, so I have a few units that are companies. After that I just add what I need for a game.

Most of my collection was purchased second hand. In fact my "refurbish" thread is just tracking my project of getting fully organized in this way - adding or dropping or repainting in order to have more game pieces (i.e. platoons).

I admit to happily using units in gray late war and units in Dunkelgelb early. I proxy when close (any long barreled PzIV can stand in for any other, a Sherman is a Sherman, etc.). I wouldn't use a Panzer IVH for a Panzer III, but if the two models look somewhat close, sure.

[paul]

I have no problem using a M1 for a M1A2 but usually try and use the exact model if needed. If the vehicle needed is unique then I will use a sub. My force is structured to a TO&E at a specific time. For example. My German and USSR force is setup for 1988 period.

[panzergator]

I see the challenge for naval units. I would do the same as you. While I might depict certain particular battle groups or fleets through collection and pick a particular period for them (and so paint them in the appropriate camo scheme), I think I would tend toward the theoretical, with, say more of the Scharnhorst class, or perhaps, if they made them, a group of those battlecruisers that we sank after the Washington Naval Treaty - we converted two hulls to carriers Lexington and Saratoga).

On the other hand, Paul, I'm surprised game rules don't interfere with your substitution of M1s for M1A1s when gaming. That isn't to say I don't substitute a bit, but I don't game. My 1950s heavy tank battalion will be M103A2s rather than M103A1s. But other than that, I wouldn't sub M48A3s for M48A5s, or M60A1s for M60A3s. I don't have to worry about game rules. I do want most of my units to be depicted accurately, but in the case of my heavy battalion, I just have to say we kept the heavy tank battalion around long enough that they got the next model. Of course, now that I have learned what a piker I am when it comes to numbers, thanks to Nashor88's recent posts.

Paul, how do you handle your Marine tanks. Do you keep them together in a battalion or do you have battalion landing teams already formed with a tank platoon? I currently have a battalion of infantry carrying LAVs reinforced with an additional company and an M60A1 (AOA) platoon. Do you have a Marine tank battalion of M1s or M60A1 (AOA)?

[paul]

Hey Panzer,

My Marines have not been started yet other than to say these M60's and AAV's belong to them. I believe I have a battalion of M60's and I'm guessing they might be A3's but it has been a while since I looked. They will get worked on when I get my German and US divisions completed. Which if I could focus on painting for a while each week might be done in a few months.

[panzergator]

Paul,

Should I go to AAVs for my Marine infantry for more accuracy? If so, how many per company, how many per battalion? I used to have a reference (1980s vintage), but it is lost in the cacophony of STUFF in my basement at the moment.

We may have discussed this before. As I recall, the Marine infantry battalion included a 24-vehicle AT platoon, as well as 6 LAVs for recon. How many mortars and are they in LAVs or towed by HUMVEEs? My gosh, this certainly fills GHQ's coffers, doesn't it?

[paul]

Hey Panzer,

We had 3 platoons of 4 and a command platoon which consisted of 2 command AAVs and an Engineer AAV. I believe there 4 companies per battalion.

[redleg]

I don't know much about the cold war organization, but I have a Marine manua dated february 2005l: MCWP 3-13 Employment of Amphibious Assault Vehicles. I have it in a pdf file. If you don't have it and you're interested I can email it to you.

-Mike

[panzergator]

Paul, Redleg,

Thank you, Gentlemen. That was very helpful. Redleg, I'd appreciate it. At your convenience. No rush. I am still in the midst of a major household reorganization.

Paul, PM on the way.

[Mech]

My units are more infantry-heavy, pretty much beacuse they are cheaper to build
All moderns, i tend to base them as fireteams / command teams and use the vehicles as add ons, no "organic" vehicles per se

So, usually we have a few softskins, APCs and a couple of tanks on each side to play, nothing too strict, as they act more as infantry support