Matrix Games Forums

A look through the keyhole #10!The Age of Shadows on Distant Worlds starts now!Paypal System UpdateDistant Worlds: Shadows Final Teaser!Distant Worlds: Legends gets Updated!Recruiting Testers for Commander: the Great War on Mac!Armageddon invasion starts in 2014Command Rommels Panzers in Battle Academy!Servers UpdateThe Deal goes Fourth!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Fun with Alternative Military Organization

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Fun with Alternative Military Organization Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 2:36:45 PM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
Been toying around with my own ideas of platoon organization, possibly for a Close Combat mod. May or may not use my own ideas I don't know...

For starters here's my alternative organization of a mechanized infantry platoon, built around the Bradley IFV. Each rectangle represents a single soldier. Each column represents the contents of a single IFV in the platoon.

Thoughts, observations, or critiques?




Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 2:46:31 PM   
Arjuna


Posts: 16458
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
Where's the Platoon Sgt?

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 2
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 3:05:42 PM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
How about making the "Commander/Loader" of IFV 4 the Platoon Sgt? Either that or eliminate the Sniper assistant in favor of a Platoon Sgt.

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 3
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 3:13:10 PM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
You need your sniper's spotter.

Eliminate one of your FOs, make that slot Plt. Sgt.

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 4
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 3:24:23 PM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
Either that or I could maybe use this alternative organization I had in mind. Basically doing away with the concept of squads in favor or fire teams. Which looks better or looks like a better starting place at least?






Attachment (1)

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 5
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 3:45:46 PM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
Mr. Childress,

How about: One four-man fire team (M240B) AFV-1
One four-man fire team (M249) AFV-2
One two-man team (Karl Gustav, AT-4, whatever time period you're planning) AFV-3
One two-man team (Barrett) AFV-3
One two-man team (Stinger) AFV-4
One two-man team (FO) AFV-4
Spread your CO/PLTSGT and other specialists out among your AFVs.

I'm trying to build teams around weapon systems.

< Message edited by nate25 -- 5/4/2012 3:50:16 PM >


_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 6
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 5:52:04 PM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25

Mr. Childress,

How about: One four-man fire team (M240B) AFV-1
One four-man fire team (M249) AFV-2
One two-man team (Karl Gustav, AT-4, whatever time period you're planning) AFV-3
One two-man team (Barrett) AFV-3
One two-man team (Stinger) AFV-4
One two-man team (FO) AFV-4
Spread your CO/PLTSGT and other specialists out among your AFVs.

I'm trying to build teams around weapon systems.


Hmm. Interesting alternative. But it seems to smack in the face of current military convention. With only two fire teams in the entire platoon and everyone else dedicated to a special weapon or assignment that doesn't seem to leave many men to clear buildings or what not. Aren't squads or fire teams more or less the fundamental maneuver components of a platoon? Also with one of this and one of that there doesn't seem to be much redundancy in case of losses.

< Message edited by Gary Childress -- 5/4/2012 5:54:24 PM >

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 7
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 7:13:14 PM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
Very true. However with just 24 men it's hard to hit all the components and still have redundancy. Many of these men would be cross-trained, as well.

Just an on-the-fly alternative. Maybe current US Army TOE is best. They know a thing or two we don't.

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 8
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 7:43:30 PM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25
Maybe current US Army TOE is best. They know a thing or two we don't.


Very wise words indeed. Still, as an armchair general, it's always been a fun exercise IMO to toy around with alternative OOBs and TO&Es.

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 9
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 7:56:42 PM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
GC,

Check out this link. This'll take you back to the drawing board.

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=228516

No M240s, no Stingers, no Barretts. I was way off. (But all stuff I would want in MY platoon!)

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 10
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 8:18:48 PM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
Great find! There is also this link which is what I was looking at when I was figuring out my alternative formation.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/accp/in0202/le1.htm#pa

My second formation is a little closer to this setup with the main exception of the sniper team. Perhaps the exclusion of the stinger SAM is due to the fact that under most circumstances the US has air superiority and commanders don't want their troops firing too much at things in the air for fear of hitting friendlies.

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 11
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 8:30:12 PM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
GlobalSecurity is a great resource, I've been to that site a couple of times.

All right! Looking forward to your next TO&E.

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 12
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/4/2012 11:44:28 PM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
A lot of uncertainty here. I'm pretty sure mechanized infantry companies have a weapons platoon but I haven't been able to find much information on their composition. My ideal weapons platoon would be based on the M-2 as well. Ideally I would rather use something like a Stryker but having to maintain both Strykers and Bradleys might be a logistical headache. Besides the extra Bradleys can double as front line armored combat vehicles in a pinch.

The question marks are probably runners or something along those lines. Extra personal for administrative purposes perhaps?

Thoughts, comments?




Here's the my latest incarnation of the ideal Mech Infantry platoon.




Attachment (2)

< Message edited by Gary Childress -- 5/4/2012 11:48:08 PM >

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 13
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 12:16:46 AM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
Where did you get the info for the 60mm mortar?

I like how you remembered the M14 in the FT.

Not Karl Gustav but maybe M136 LAW instead?

And you still fitted an M107 team in. Nice.

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 14
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 12:41:39 AM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25

Where did you get the info for the 60mm mortar?

I like how you remembered the M14 in the FT.

Not Karl Gustav but maybe M136 LAW instead?

And you still fitted an M107 team in. Nice.


For the mortar I came across a post by someone in another forum who included the 60mm in his company weapons platooon. Seems like a useful addition:

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=4550&page=3

As far as the Karl Gustav, it is supposed to be considerably more expensive than the M136 which is a disposable weapon, however, I like the fact that it is reloadable and there is a plethora of ammo types for it which can be used in various roles, anti-tank, bunker killer, anti-personel. It seems reasonable to me to assume that carrying 10 rounds of ammo for a Karl Gustav would take up less space and weight than an equivalent 10 M136s. That's sort of my reasoning with the Karl Gustav.

Plus the disposable version is less environmentally friendly and would only take up extra space in landfills. (sorry couldn't resist)

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 15
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 12:49:02 AM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress


quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25

Where did you get the info for the 60mm mortar?

I like how you remembered the M14 in the FT.

Not Karl Gustav but maybe M136 LAW instead?

And you still fitted an M107 team in. Nice.


For the mortar I came across a post by someone in another forum who included the 60mm in his company weapons platooon. Seems like a useful addition:

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=4550&page=3

As far as the Karl Gustav, it is supposed to be considerably more expensive than the M136 which is a disposable weapon, however, I like the fact that it is reloadable and there is a plethora of ammo types for it which can be used in various roles, anti-tank, bunker killer, anti-personel. It seems reasonable to me to assume that carrying 10 rounds of ammo for a Karl Gustav would take up less space and weight than an equivalent 10 M136s. That's sort of my reasoning with the Karl Gustav.

Plus the disposable version is less environmentally friendly and would only take up extra space in landfills. (sorry couldn't resist)


True, I've read the M136 was disappointing to the Army in the bunker-busting role.
My thought was the M136 is a one-man weapon, vs. an asst. loading your next 84mm round.

Doesn't the 60mm have a 3-man crew?

Please tell me you're not a tree-hugger.


< Message edited by nate25 -- 5/5/2012 12:50:22 AM >


_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 16
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 1:00:05 AM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
One last point for the M136: ()

I believe you could call on your Bradleys for bunker-busting; the BGM-71E for the TOW II can be used against structures.

Other than that your plt. looks good.

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 17
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 1:12:27 AM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress


quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25

Where did you get the info for the 60mm mortar?

I like how you remembered the M14 in the FT.

Not Karl Gustav but maybe M136 LAW instead?

And you still fitted an M107 team in. Nice.


For the mortar I came across a post by someone in another forum who included the 60mm in his company weapons platooon. Seems like a useful addition:

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=4550&page=3

As far as the Karl Gustav, it is supposed to be considerably more expensive than the M136 which is a disposable weapon, however, I like the fact that it is reloadable and there is a plethora of ammo types for it which can be used in various roles, anti-tank, bunker killer, anti-personel. It seems reasonable to me to assume that carrying 10 rounds of ammo for a Karl Gustav would take up less space and weight than an equivalent 10 M136s. That's sort of my reasoning with the Karl Gustav.

Plus the disposable version is less environmentally friendly and would only take up extra space in landfills. (sorry couldn't resist)


True, I've read the M136 was disappointing to the Army in the bunker-busting role.
My thought was the M136 is a one-man weapon, vs. an asst. loading your next 84mm round.

Doesn't the 60mm have a 3-man crew?

Please tell me you're not a tree-hugger.



Not a tree-hugger.

My understanding is that the Karl Gustav is capable of being operated by a solo gunner. Albeit the reload time is considerably longer, but then how many M136s can a team field at a given moment? I figure one shot with a disposable M136 is roughly the same difference as one shot with the Karl Gustav, followed by later shots over a protracted period of time. Of course the convenient thing about the M136 is the crewman doesn't have to tote it around with him after expending it. Although the Anti-Armor Specialist doesn't need to tote the KG on every mission, only on ones where the team thinks they'll need the extra firepower. The rest of the time the AA Specialist can double as a rifleman.

I see plenty of pics with the 60mm mortar being operated by only two men, so the three I've assigned to it seems like it might be adequate. Not really sure though. But it is a relatively small weapon. My biggest concern is assigning two to ride in a single IFV is going to mean limited ammo that can be stowed for it. Might have to rethink that a bit.

< Message edited by Gary Childress -- 5/5/2012 1:24:44 AM >

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 18
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 1:19:15 AM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online
So here's a Mechanized Infantry Company so far. Pretty sleek looking I think.

The big ? mark under the Company HQ means I have no idea as yet what all goes into a Company HQ to do much hypothesizing on its vehicle make up. But the combat elements seem pretty streamlined I think--completely based on the M-2 vehicle. Logistic-wise that's got to be a plus.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gary Childress -- 5/5/2012 1:20:49 AM >

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 19
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 1:35:27 AM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress


quote:

ORIGINAL: nate25

Where did you get the info for the 60mm mortar?

I like how you remembered the M14 in the FT.

Not Karl Gustav but maybe M136 LAW instead?

And you still fitted an M107 team in. Nice.


For the mortar I came across a post by someone in another forum who included the 60mm in his company weapons platooon. Seems like a useful addition:

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=4550&page=3

As far as the Karl Gustav, it is supposed to be considerably more expensive than the M136 which is a disposable weapon, however, I like the fact that it is reloadable and there is a plethora of ammo types for it which can be used in various roles, anti-tank, bunker killer, anti-personel. It seems reasonable to me to assume that carrying 10 rounds of ammo for a Karl Gustav would take up less space and weight than an equivalent 10 M136s. That's sort of my reasoning with the Karl Gustav.

Plus the disposable version is less environmentally friendly and would only take up extra space in landfills. (sorry couldn't resist)


True, I've read the M136 was disappointing to the Army in the bunker-busting role.
My thought was the M136 is a one-man weapon, vs. an asst. loading your next 84mm round.

Doesn't the 60mm have a 3-man crew?

Please tell me you're not a tree-hugger.



Not a tree-hugger.

My understanding is that the Karl Gustav is capable of being operated by a solo gunner. Albeit the reload time is considerably longer, but then how many M136s can a team field at a given moment? I figure one shot with a disposable M136 is roughly the same difference as one shot with the Karl Gustav, followed by later shots over a protracted period of time. Of course the convenient thing about the M136 is the crewman doesn't have to tote it around with him after expending it. Although the Anti-Armor Specialist doesn't need to tote the KG on every mission, only on ones where the team thinks they'll need the extra firepower. The rest of the time the AA Specialist can double as a rifleman.

My biggestI see plenty of pics with the 60mm mortar being operated by only two men, so the three I've assigned to it seems like it might be adequate. Not really sure though. But it is a relatively small weapon. concern is assigning two to ride in a single IFV is going to mean limited ammo that can be stowed for it. Might have to rethink that a bit.


It is designed to be fired w/o the baseplate and bipod (!), so two may do it.

Also, the latest, greatest, up-to-datest Bradleys seat 7 in the rear, not 6. So that may ease your 60mm/84mm ammo constraints a bit.


_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 20
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 1:44:56 AM   
nate25


Posts: 1239
Joined: 9/20/2011
From: Middletown Ohio
Status: offline
@ 2nd ACR: You have to know stuff here we don't. Tear it up.

_____________________________

I have a subtle and cunning plan.

(in reply to nate25)
Post #: 21
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 1:45:00 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5517
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
Here is another roster of a Mech infantry Battalion.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/army/unit/toe/07245F100.htm

Here is a complete breakdown of Inf Company

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/army/unit/toe/07247F000.htm

And here is everything you want to know

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/army/unit/toe/index.html

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 22
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 1:56:09 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5517
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
I was leg infantry and then Cav Scout.......my TOE was way different.........My Mech days were in a Cavalry Sqdrn that had way more firepower than any single BN........we had basically 50 M1A1 and 50 Brads along with 8 M109 155mm howitzers. Each of our Cav troops had 9 M1a1 and 12 M3 Brads and 2 mortar tracks. We had 3 Cav troops and a full tank company of 14 M1A1.

Leg infantry we had 8-10 troops per squad and 4 squads per platoon. We had M60 back then as our primary squad support weapon. We had M72 Law and AT4 for short AT capability and Dragon missles for our longer AT weapons.

Most Mech infantry back in my day had 14 M2 Brads per company, and 2 mortar tracks assigned. Also they usually had M901 TOW tracks assigned usually 2 (attached from higher). Around the late 80's and early 90'2 the Combat Team was becoming the big thing......tank heavy and infantry heavy teams. A tank heavy would have 2 Tank and 1 infantry platoon and the infantry Team would have 2 infantry and 1 tank platoon assigned.......each also has 2 mortar tracks and TOW tracks assigned. Also a FIST track for forward observers.

Each command element adds 2 vehicles, either M1A1 or Bradley to a company TOE.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 23
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 2:13:57 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5517
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
Mech Infantry do not use the Carl Gustov nor the 60mm mortar........they have 120mm or 4.2" mounted on M113 tracks. Now a days it is the AT4 and the Javelin for AT firepower on the dismounts. But Mech mainly rely on the Brads for AT firepower.

Most Mech infantry do not have designated marksmen assigned. Not in the traditional sense anyway.........why have a sniper rifle when I have a Bradley close by with a 25mm and thermals. You will find that most have M16/M4 and M249 as weapons with at least 1 M203 per squad.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 24
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 2:56:06 AM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 4821
Joined: 7/17/2005
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Mech Infantry do not use the Carl Gustov nor the 60mm mortar........they have 120mm or 4.2" mounted on M113 tracks. Now a days it is the AT4 and the Javelin for AT firepower on the dismounts. But Mech mainly rely on the Brads for AT firepower.

Most Mech infantry do not have designated marksmen assigned. Not in the traditional sense anyway.........why have a sniper rifle when I have a Bradley close by with a 25mm and thermals. You will find that most have M16/M4 and M249 as weapons with at least 1 M203 per squad.


Thanks for your sharing your insights 2ndACR. The web sites you posted are a bit Greek to me. Not sure how to interpret the data. I'm a little better with the simpler schematizations at Global Security.

What are your thoughts on the Carl Gustav? My understanding is that it's used primarily by Special Forces and not at all by regular infantry. Is it more of a cost cutting thing that it isn't used by the infantry or is the AT-4 really the better system? If the Special Forces use it I would think that testifies to something. If presented with either an AT4 or a Carl Gustav, which would you say is a better piece of equipment for a Mechanized Infantry Company?

As far as a Mechanized Infantry Company having only 14 Bradleys, do the two extra bradleys contain any weapons teams or are they striclty Command vehicles? I take it there is no weapons platoon with a mechanized Infantry Company?

What you say about the designated marksman makes a lot of sense now that you point it out.

I guess a 60mm mortar is a bit of peashooter for mechanized infantry to mess around with. Sounds like maybe a waste of stowage space.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 25
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 3:07:21 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5517
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
Well, if you drill down on the TOE, it will tell you that a Mech infantry have 154 M16A1/A2 assigned and such, so many gas masks, so many radios and what type etc. That sight has full TOE rosters.

AT4 would be the weapon a Mech Infantry company would use. Not the Carl Gustav. I had no problems with the AT4. Never messed with Carl, so cannot comment.

Weapons PLT no.......Mortar section of 2 tracks yes........usually 120mm on M113 chassis. Also odds are they would have an additional 2 M901 ITV TOW tracks attached, so there is the weapons platoon.

Command Brads are packed with radios and usually have a radioman assigned and maybe 2 dismounts. These would be the drivers and clerks of the CO and such. Hummers are parked elsewhere and they help man the Brads in combat ops.

If looking at the right side of the Main text here:




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 26
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 3:09:48 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5517
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
Circled area shows that the Armor Brigade has 1 Mech Infantry BN assigned to it, the HQ Company of the BN has 1 M2 and 3M4 C2v assigned and below that it shows that the BN has 3 Mech rifle company's each with 14 M2 BFV assigned.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 27
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 3:15:28 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5517
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
Here in the circled area, this is the HQ company detail entered by clicking the unit name.......shows the Scout section with personnel requirements. 4 scout HMMV's with a total of 12 men assigned.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 28
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 3:22:17 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5517
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
And here is the detail at the bottom........here it shows that the HQ company has 119 M16A2 (going from my memory here)at a level 1 staffing (full strength) and a further 19 M4 and 30 M164A2E4 at level 1 staffing.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 29
RE: Fun with Alternative Military Organization - 5/5/2012 3:24:35 AM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5517
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
You don't get more detailed than that site once you learn to read it.........a lot of the codes are DOD stuff, and greek to me.....but it shows ranks (left side under the GD = Grade pay)that is total equipment listing assigned to a unit, gas masks, bayonets, radios, tents all of it.

Once you get used to reading it, not hard if you take the time to read everything, you can pretty much see exactly what is assigned to every major unit in the US Army. It is broken down to Corps elements, Div elements with all being able to drill all the way down.

< Message edited by 2ndACR -- 5/5/2012 3:28:57 AM >

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Fun with Alternative Military Organization Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.250