Jump to content

Realistic Mission Making Resource Thread

Recommended Posts

Quote (ofpchaos @ Jan. 16 2005,04:02)

I need all about organisation (men,apcs) of US Infantry (Bradley) Reconaissance platoon and their tactics.

Can anybody help me ?


A Bradley recon platoon??? Earlier in this thread there is an excellant Table of Organization and Equipment (TOE) displaying a mechanized infantry platoon.

But even if you don't have military experiance, ask yourself how likely is it that an US infantry force would perform recon with M2s?

There a handful of alternatives. All combat arms battalions, regardless of branch and organizations, have a scout platoon attached to the headquarters of the headquaters company (HHC) which reports directly to the battalion commander (Bn Co).

The scout platoon is generally lead by the top lieutenant in the organization and is responsible for being the eyes and ears of the Bn Co by conducting leaders recons to determine OCOKA and benefit METT-TC.

OCOKA: Observation and Fields of Fire, Cover & Concealment, Obstacles, Key Terrain, and Avenues of Approach

METT-TC: Mission, Enemy, Terrain, Time Available, Troops, and Civilian Considerations.

It sounds like you'd like to have an armor or mechanized force. For an armor force, consider looking into the organization of a cavalry platoon or troop, who use M3 bradleys instead of the infantry's M2 variety.

But what is even more likely than organic calvalry assets at the battalion level is a platoon of mounted infantry or cavalry (who often dismount close to the objective) using HMMWVs. Equip them the HMMWVs with 3 soldiers per vehicle, and have the vehicles carry M2s, Mk19s, or M240s on top.

I hope this helped, goodluck with the mission and keep us posted.


I was a member of a Scout Plt in a Tank Battalion for half of my 8 years in service. Not sure if this differs from a Scout Plt in a Calvary Squadron.

6 vehicles (HQ31, HQ32, etc. etc.)

Driver, Gunner, Cmdr, 2 dismounts (Inf)

Total personnel: 30

We never used the ballpoint mounts in the M3 Bradley. We have less ballpoint mounts than an M2. We have less storage space inside, as we carry more ammo (TOWs).

My seat was on the left in pic below (The heater output is there!wink_o.gif


The inside right of an M3:


The inside right of an M2:


Note on the right side for the M3 is the TOW rack, for 4 additional TOWS. In the M2, they have nice cubbyholes to store all their things.

Everyone carried M16s, even the officer. He had an M9 Beretta AND and M-16. Only exception was me, I had an M60. Could've traded for an M249 SAW, but wouldn't give it up. SAW is crap, M60 rules.

Our vehicles always moved in pairs (HQ31 and HQ32, etc.)

HQ31 and HQ 33 were the Plt Ldr and the Plt Sgt.

HQ35 and HQ36 were our reserve

If anyone has questions about a Scout Plt, I can answer them. And don't forget, yellow on a map doesn't mean u pissed on it, it's to mark a contaminated area!


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Those symbols rock!  Thank you much!  Not everything I was looking for, and I would prefer to have them as rectangles and ellipses (so they do not synamically resize) but they are much better than stock.  They are also not quite what we did in the Army for overlays, but they will work for sure...

I would much prefer to be able to free draw the overlay, ala good old fashioned grease pencil or alcohol pen...  Anyone know of a way to do that?

Try the USMC Marker Pack, available at ofpec.com.  It has well over 90 map markers for briefings and maps.  Check out the various Chain of Command (CoC) missions, they use these markers very well for SPOT and SALUTE reports.

WGL does have its pluses though, its the only mod I know of that converts the maps to 6, 8, and 10-digit coordinate grid squares.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eddie - Armored cav units (like 3rd or 11th ACR or divisional cavalry squadrons) have platoons of six M3 Bradleys. Most battalion scout platoons and brigade recon troops use HMMWVs. The new RSTA squadrons will use humvees and UAVs. I'm pretty sure the M-3 Bradley is being phased out of service or converted into M-2s.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, I'm looking for some .pdfs of FM 90-26 and FM 90-4.

I checked out globalsecurity.org, but they only have html links and I can't access my AKO account due to them resetting my password and my inability to change that due to deployment.

Quote[/b] ]Eddie - Armored cav units (like 3rd or 11th ACR or divisional cavalry squadrons) have platoons of six M3 Bradleys. Most battalion scout platoons and brigade recon troops use HMMWVs. The new RSTA squadrons will use humvees and UAVs. I'm pretty sure the M-3 Bradley is being phased out of service or converted into M-2s.

Funny how you mention 11th ACR. I'm at the same location as 2/11th ACR.


I got them, nevermind.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Would a Special forces SAS team use weapons with tracers?

I would imagine they would use tracers in the same way that a regular unit would. But tracers are pretty lame anyway, since they just tell the enemy where you are. I believe they are mainly useful in MGs, especially heavy/crew served types.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

M-kay, waking this thread up. smile_o.gif

According to the US Field Manual, if I got it right, the FO-team, platoon aidman and platoon radio operator are permanently assigned to a rifle platoon, so they come along on every operation.

But in a mounted mechanized platoon, where the hell would those guys be? The Bradleys are already filled with grunts. Or is it just me that got it all wrong?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
But in a mounted mechanized platoon, where the hell would those guys be? The Bradleys are already filled with grunts. Or is it just me that got it all wrong?

I would assume they would be in whichever bradley the platoon leader is in, although I don't know for sure. IIUC, those billets would all be in the HQ element of the platoon, meaning they would be in the same squad/team as the platoon leader, platoon sergeant, etc.

What I have no idea about is whether the platoon leader is on foot, or crewing a bradley in such a platoon. For all I know, the bradley crew could be an entirely separate platoon from the infantry (thus each would have their own platoon leader, but report to the same company commander).

But just falling back on my Common Sense®, I would say that there is no reason to have an RTO riding along in a bradley, when those vehicles already have their own radio systems. Nor would it make too much sense to have the medic riding along as well, when the dismounted infantry are going to be the ones needing his help the most. Not sure about the FO, since I thought they operated separate from a rifle platoon.

It might also be helpful to link to the FM you are getting your info from. smile_o.gif

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

the start of this thread began with some posts on TDG's. I like the idea of using TDG's for ofp missions. I have been planning to encorporate TDG's into missions. However, i decided to make a simple infantry engagement set first (a sort of platoon based training manual).

Check out my thread for my set of three realism senarios. I used A Nato armour and mechanised infantry manual for the basis of my enemy soviet based troops. please go have a try...


also here is a mission for the UK enthusiasts, based on my realsim template it is short and fun.




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an extract from an opfor manual for those who put in non-realistic units and groups

Source FM 100 - 60

OPFOR Mech & Armour based opposing force Manual

Chapter 3

Maneuver Battalions

There are two basic types of mechanized infantry battalion: those equipped with tracked

infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs) and those equipped with wheeled armored personnel carriers

(APCs). Tank battalions of divisional tank brigades have a standard 31-tank structure. In a divisional

mechanized infantry brigade, the tank battalion may have the 31-tank structure or a variant

with 40 tanks. Tank battalions in separate mechanized infantry and tank brigades typically have a

51-tank structure, but 31- and 41-tank variants are possible. There is also a 44-tank variant that

may occur in either divisional or separate mechanized infantry and tank brigades or as a separate

tank battalion in a motorized infantry division.


Mechanized Infantry Platoon (IFV),

Platoon Leader...................PM*

Asst Plt Leader............. AK-74


Rifleman/Medic............. AK-74


IFV, BMP-1/2/3......................................... 3

9-mm Pistol, PM ...................................... 10

5.45-mm Assault Rifle, AK-74 ................. 15

5.45-mm LMG, RPK-74 ............................ 3

7.62-mm Sniper Rifle, SVD........................ 1

40-mm Under-Barrel Grenade Launcher,

GP-25/30 ............................................. 6

ATGL, RPG-7V......................................... 3

ATRL, RPG-22/26.....................................3

Flamethrower, RPO....................................3

Night-Vision Goggles.................................4

Night-Vision Sight (Small Arms) ................3


VHF, Portable, Low-Power..................1

VHF, Vehicle Mount,



* With a standard eight-man squad, each IFV has two or three empty seats. The platoon leader

and sniper normally ride in the first squad vehicle, the assistant platoon leader in the second,

and the rifleman/medic in the third. The sniper has an assault rifle for normal combat. However,

he also has a sniper rifle in the IFV for those instances when he acts as a sniper.



  • Thanks 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds very interesting and not to mention helpful! I was just wondering if u guys have any infos on guerilla tactics?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

guerilla tactics... or small unit tactics?

Guerilla; Spanish, raiding party, guerrilla force, diminutive of guerra, war, of Germanic origin. See wers- in Indo-European Roots.

adj : used of independent armed resistance forces; "guerrilla warfare"; "partisan forces" [syn: guerrilla(a), guerilla(a), underground, irregular] n : a member of an irregular armed force that fights a stronger force by sabotage and harassment [syn: guerrilla, irregular, insurgent]

Guerillas were invented/began during the 1600's (If my memory serves me correctly) when Brittish forces occupied the Penisular of Gibralta. Royal Marines were the first forces to encounter these small units of civilians and thier unconventional fighting techniques.

Most importantly Guerillas were always reluctant to engage in direct combat prefering to destroy army supplies and ambush supply wagons. Even the vast armies of France feared the famous British two ranked musket fire. So guerillas had to find new ways of defeating an enemy so adapt at killing.

Much of the Royal Marines modern small unit tactics have been derived from thier first major combat experience at Gibralta.


It is not really possible to describe or direct somone to information about Gureilla tactics. Basically they are situational what ever is need to defeat a larger, stronger, better equiped force.

Some examples being.

Partisans in Russia during WW2 would target train tracks as this was the major supply routes for the red army.

Vietcong would prefer to attack at night and used many improvised mines and traps to inflict casualtiesto the US army during the day.

Insergents in Iraq prefer the IED Improvised explosive device to inflict casualties on coalition soldiers.

Also the hit and run RPG attack.

Guerillas tend not to stick around after an attack is made. if the US and UK armies were faced with every insurgent in Iraq on a desert battlefied then the conflict would have been solved years ago!



(support the soldiers not the war)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

An example of tactics used by a small army facing a much bigger army with overwhelming resources can be studied from Battle of Suomussalmi, fought between Finnish and Soviet forces in Winter War. A small Finnish army faced a much bigger and better equipped army which was practically slaughtered because of lack of flexibility and carrying too much heavy equipment with them. The problem of carrying a lot of heavy equipment against much smaller troops can be seen in today's warfare too. Common denominators to guerrilla warfare include fighting a much bigger enemy with flexible and fast moving tactics and targeting supply lines. Also Soviet field kitchens were targeted.

Learn more about the Battle of Suomussalmi and about the Winter War from the following links:




Note that the Soviets did take their lesson and improved their tactics making them a tougher opponent later in World War II.

There is also a Wikipedia article about Guerrilla warfare:


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, if it's of any interest, i've found an article about Spetznaz for those of you, who want to make spetznaz missions. It has a good description of the unit's actual purpose plus its organisation down to squad level. I'm currently working on a SpNz rescue mission and it has been a great help.

Here's the link:


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey! smile_o.gif

I'm planning a mission with Lasers great PJs, about a Marines' helicopter shot down in Afghanistan. The task is to rescue the pilots and crew and get them out safe.

Now my question: What are today's possibilities to locate a downed helicopter pilot? GPS? Scott F. O'Grady was located by radio, is this still up to date?

Would be nice to get some answers or links.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems to me that mission makers are more concerned with cinematics and over-the-top action than they are with realism. I say to you: REALISTIC MISSIONS CAN BE FUN TOO!

This TDG idea is brilliant - if one or two or three mission makers start churning out a TDG once a month or so I think we'll see the quality of missions increase dramatically as more people are exposed to realistic military situations. There's a massive back catalogue of these TDGs and nearly all of them involve small unit tactics, which is perfect for OFP. Surely someone can find an interesting scenario they would want to make.

That's part of the inspiration behind the Sinews of War Missions of the Month; to create very small, realistic scenarios without a whole bunch of scripting or complexity...just straight fun. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like many people are biting yet! Hopefully, more people will contribute, or else there's not much point to it.

Forum post.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my opinion for what it's worth (not a lot :p)

There has to be a line between all out realism and fun to play.

How do you create a realistic feeling and looking mission whilst still letting the player have fun?

If an 3 or 4 SAS soldiers were going from A to B and they expected to encounter foot patrols along the way they would move very slowly and very quietly for hours at a time checking every thing in front of them for signs of movement and evidence of the enemy.

WHo wants to walk through one of the forests in Everon taking hours to go a short distance?

I know I don't and I'd be suprised if anyone else does.

Similarly. If a patrol is ambushed and become overwhelmed what happens?

the enemy creates a kill zone in the middle, hammers the patrol with fire and closes off exits.

What chance does the player have of escaping if the ambush is to be realistic unless the mission maker offers him an unrealistic way out?

Also, with such a large open environment like OFP, How do you stop the player from walking off to the other side of the map and avoiding objectives? fill the rest of the map with enemies? stop the game if he veers off too far?

neither of these are realistic and I know that it's not realistic that a soldier would walk off in the opposite direction from his mission but it's possible that a player might.

I think the best thing to do is offer realistic mission briefings, gear loads and scenarios and leave it at that. if you can do that then you've done very well indeed.

If slogging through the woods for hours an inch at a time or out and out realism is your thing, my advice to you would be to go and have a word with your local armed forces recruitment office. :D

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Realism" should not be confused with "idealism"

I mean, depending what army you're in - Ideally an infantry section should have about 10 men with 2 x guns - Ideally a tank platoon should have 4 x tanks - IDEALLY everyone should have a fancy ACOG sight and a UAV

But in "REALITY" - soldiers get killed - tanks break down - ammo runs out - units are worn down and link up with one another

So is it UNREALISTIC to see a T-80 and a T-72 in the same platoon? No. It might not be Russian / Soviet doctrine. But it could certainly happen. Is it unrealistic for tanks to attack without infantry support? It might be unorthodox and contrary to doctrine, but there's no reason why it can't happen in REALITY. Perhaps all the infantry are dead and the tank commander has no choice

In war, extenuating circumstnaces might require that doctrine be broken some of the time (i.e. alot of the time) - So why get fussed if everyone hasn't got the proper gear or aren't obeying proper SOP's?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

when planning a mission several factors go into account.

against an unprepared enemy spec ops dominates. the

term light refers to the level of intensity of the conflict

in the area. if the area is under heavy fire thats a high

intensity area, therefore light infantry is sent into low

intensity conflicts.

the four branches of the military represent the four areas we can project our force: coast, air, land, and the sea.

when war starts all branches of the military rush to get to their intended targets.

the spec ops search for their hit in smaller teams. for a successful hit,

sometimes stealth is required or infiltration where overwhelming force

won't work.

navy seals are navy spec ops. since the navy is usually the

first one to react to international situations without war, the

seals are the prime candidates. they also serve the navy and

its crew whatever ship they're on. when the navy assaults a

base the seals go in whatever necessary configuration the

situation calls for.

devgru is a navy version of delta, counter terrorists.

marines invade the coasts making sure noone can escape by boat.

they move men and supplies by water and land, and their job is to

secure the embassies as well as retake enemy held territory.

some marine units are tasked with waiting out at sea on call

during heightened states of tension

force recon are marine commandoes that handle special ops for the marines,

or in other words, hits on special targets.

the air force is responsible for securing the airspace if jets are

a problem. this is for more developed nations.

even the air force has its own special ops to take care of lasing

targets for bombs, finding downed pilots, handling incidents at

base as well.

rangers are the army's spec ops hitting low intensity areas

for either intel or surprise raids. when they're not raiding

they're patrolling.

101 airborne is an air assault unit that is dropped in by chopper, in the old

days it was by parachute, though there still are parachute units in the army

infantry and mechanized infantry arrive by plane to a base

the rangers have established.

green berets are commandoes who handle guerilla warfare

at an organizational level as well as tactical, responsible

for planning, manning, and handling counter guerilla


delta is an army counter terrorist unit.


terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or

violence by a person or an organized group against people

or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing

societies or governments, often for ideological or political


guerilla warfare - sudden unexpected attacks carried out by

an unofficial military group or groups that are trying to

change the government by assaults on the armed forces.

raid - A sudden forcible entry into a place or another's

territory for the purpose of seizing goods or valuables.

Edited by BronzeEagle

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

:681:I dont care if the missions are realistic or not in every litle detail...

How many of you were in the army???

not many i gues...

People watch lots of documentary and movies and try to visualise the real thing

I was in a army for some time...not in a war but i have some of the friends who have been in a Croatian-Serbian war

Belive me when i say that theyre stors are musch different from moves and Documentarys

(wee all know that even in documentarys producers like to change some things to make it more interesting)

I went trough an infantry basic training than i was on artilary Zis 75 mm old bulshit AT gun, it has like 1200 kg (2400 pounds) witch we onley used to push up the hill and down (6 of us)

When we asked why are we practising on that old pile of shit, the CO said because we have alot of ammunition for it and have to spend it anyway :P

Late we got the real thing 120 mm gun

What i want to say that 90-95% in war you are like in training, always marching somewere, carrying some load, patroling, building a camp, freazing your ass, sleeping in the wind and rain, and than you see some action (or you get shoot and end up home with out shooting 10 bullits)

most soldiers dont even see combat at all, some se it one time and 20% of them se it more than a few times...

So how to make an realistic mission when there was no real war in a long time and no one knows how it would look like if a two formidable oponents would clash with all the modern equipment...

in the last 50 years most wars are troops against guerila...or a powerfull military country against a third world country (thats why there are guerilla, if you are weaker than you adapt to the situaton

Its known that when Hanibal atacked the Roman empire he used unusual tactics for that time and managed to defet much biger and well equiped army, sloughtering 90 000 roman trops (the bigest loss the roman empire has seen in 100 years)

My favorite campagne in OFP was the "Cold War Crisys"...

because it had a dose of realisam and athmosfere and there were other units on the battlefield, tank and air suport

I still remember the first time i played the first mission in CWC campagne...

mission ended without my shooting any bodey (it showed that the war is happening and i'm not the hero that saves the day, im just another grunt in this massive assault) first game that had the mission were you acctualy have to gard a radar station at night, or recon for enemy AA, or escape from captivety and orientate your self by stars...things like that made it interesting and stand out from other game were in every mission you kill 200 enemy soldiers over and over again...

"Red Hammer" was not that god because 90% of the time i was all alone or a smal group against mass of enemy units (rambo kinde of style), same thing with "Rsistance " campagne

it dosent have to be realistic but it has to have atmosphere!

like there is a war going on out there

This game simulates battlefield so why make only missions like spec-op

use the games potential, if it has tanks, helis and infantry use them all to make versatile missions

Why onley focus on your group, put other groups like they have theyre job too and the mission will be more interesting if you see friendly units at your right side doing theyre thing, helis in air covering you and tank suporting the infantry

What makes the game realistic and interesting, its not the addons, graphic or how the trops look like, its how the mission is designed and if it has the battlefield athmosphere!!! :681:

Edited by Rellikki
Removed off-topic

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree with daraofp. I never understood why there are so many "Black-Op" style missions: they're fun when well-crafted, I know, but they use only a tiny portion of the OFP potential. This game can simulate - within a certain realism rate, of course - battles in which aviation, armored platoons and standard grunts are involved, so why focusing only on the special forces? daraofp is also absolutely right on the atmosphere factor: it's not much the realism put in a mission that makes it fun, but the amount of elements that make the player feel like he's really standing on a battlefield. Interesting plots, proper voice acting, cutscenes and such are of vital importance for that reason.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Realistic mission-making is a topic I've thought about extensively, and the truth is that you simply can't always find the information you need about how military units are organized. As a solution, I categorize military units into a simple 4-tier system: maneuver units, tactical units, operational units, and strategic units. Please note that these are my own terms (and I have never served in the military), but they are based on real terminology that I've researched.


The goal is to categorize military units not by size, but by function:


-A "maneuver unit" is the minimum cohesive unit that typically deploys to the field to complete a mission; it is typically the lowest level unit led by an officer. It may travel in formation, or it may break up its formation into sub-units or even sub-sub units for tactical purposes. A platoon of tanks or infantry are a "maneuver unit," and a squad of infantry would be a "sub-unit" to the maneuver unit.


-A "tactical unit" is a grouping of maneuver units, led by a headquarters element, which is capable of performing military actions across both time and geographic space. Each maneuver unit belonging to a tactical unit can work in shifts with each other maneuver unit to accomplish the mission. For example, 1st Platoon could be patrolling, 2nd Platoon could be on standby as a "quick response force," and 3rd platoon could be resting. A "tactical unit" is basically a homogeneous grouping of maneuver units that can rotate between various duties and "down time" until the mission is accomplished. A company/troop/battery is typically a tactical unit, both for practical and historic purposes.


-An "operational unit" is a grouping of tactical units that includes a headquarters staff capable of mission planning (i.e. intelligence & recon) as well as providing combat or combat-service support (in CWA, that means MEDEVAC, refuel trucks, ammo trucks, and repair trucks). Operational units are typically less homogeneous than tactical units, but they are often still specialized (an infantry, armored, or combined arms battalion). A battalion is an example of an operational unit.


-Lastly, a "strategic unit" is a somewhat-mutable grouping of different types of operational units to deal with a variety of missions. Typically, a strategic unit deploys to an area of combat operations in its entirety (i.e. an entire brigade, regiment, or division deploys to the combat area in order to accomplish its nation's long-term strategic goals). Brigades/regiments or divisions are examples of strategic units, and they work hard to promote espirit de corps and pride of membership. Some strategic units have become very famous for valiant combat actions (like the 101st Airborne Division of the U.S. Army, for example).


When making realistic missions in CWA (or any other ArmA game), I typically try to set up operational-level units. In my fictitious scenarios, a "strategic unit" like a brigade/regiment or division has deployed to the theater of operations, but the particular island on which the mission takes place will host only some element of that strategic unit - in other words, one island will have one or two battalions of each side. ArmA games really can't simulate much more than that due to the limitations on the game engine as well as limits on physical space in the game maps.


On the island, I'll designate a forward operating base for each battalion and then deploy platoon-level units on patrol. I try to set up defensive systems that are somewhat autonomous so that if my deployed platoon detects the enemy (a "detected by" trigger covering the entire island), another platoon-level unit will automatically come to reinforce them. For the attacking side, I just set waypoints using the proper number of platoon-level units that would be available for an attack (assuming that some element of the attacking side will remain behind to protect its base).


To me, this approach represents a reasonable middle-ground between the extremely tedious process of researching the exact composition of historic Soviet & U.S. Army units on the one hand, or throwing a random but convenient grouping of military units together for arcade-style gameplay on the other.


I know this post was long, but I hope that my approach can at least help guide anyone wanting to design realistic scenarios.

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now