I can't speak of all the earlier ones (4/43 and so on), since as said, I am rolling backwards in time. From what I can see/know in 41 a platoon consisted of 4 Squads and then around late 1942/early 1943 there was a development towards 3Squads per Platoon. Now, it is obv. possible that some "waves" kept their old KSTNs applied for an extended period but since the Issue is still present in 10/43 and ID44 TOEs when all IDs (at least in the East) were ordered to be streamlined with new KSTNs and so on it is still weird...
Maybe I am completely missing something (which is pretty much possible), pls enlighten me, since I am pretty confused from what I am looking at right now.
...maybe I've just missed a Memo...or simply missing the right Company KSTN.
At the end I will discuss some KSTN which may be part of the reason (or the only one, who knows)...
So if we take 6 or 9 Line Infantry Batallions and add/not add the Recon Battalion, none of the setups of 6, 7, 9 Battalions is rly adding up with the numbers used in game.
If we ignore the Recon batallion and assume a 2Batallion/3Regiment Setup (does not differ in numbers of Line Infantry from 3Btl/2Rgt setup), in game currently there are:
6Batallion total: 216Squads → 4Sq x 3Pl x 3Co x 2Btl x 3Rgt
9Batallion total: 324Squads → 4Sq x 3Pl x 3Co x 3Btl x 3Rgt
So it appears one of the multipliers was used as being a 4.
The issue lies in the fact that almost all KSTNs of that time which were done for the new TOEs (should be the "n" for new type (?)) (see: no.1, no.2, no.3 (see end of the Post for the 131c) are already using a triangular 3Squad/3Platoon/3Co configuration. So instead the numbers should rather be:
6Batallion total: 3Sq x 3Pl x 3Co x 2Btl x 3Rgt = 162Squads → 54 too many
9Batallion total: 3Sq x 3Pl x 3Co x 3Btl x 3Rgt = 243Squads → 81 too many
FUNNILY BOTH CASES ARE "number ANAGRAMS"!
...so maybe it's all typos???
The TOE-overviews for the IDnA (Infanterie-Division neuer Art = Infantry Division new type) give a number of 16LMGs, maybe that's part of the issue. But actually it was the normal triangual setup with 1xLMG per Squad with additional 2LMG/Platoon and 1reserveLMG/Company. But maybe another TOE overview was used which gives 12LMG (as the ID44 does).
Taking the Recon Batallion into consideration to make sense of it there appears another issue, which is that it should have had 3Sq x 3Pl x 3Co x 1Btl = 27Squads.
But actually we have varying amounts of 33, 45, 21, 36 to name a few... So also not conclusive. I assume those are derived from actual Strength reports of the time or so?!
Each Regiment should have had 3 Bicycle/Cavalry Recon Squads, which would give 27+3Sq*3Reg=36 ...or in case of 2 Regiments 27+3Sq*2Reg=33 ...so at least one number can be explained - assuming a 2Regiment Setup and another one 36=27+3+3+3 with 3 Regiment Setup. ..I assume the 45 is 27+3+3+3+9 which means an additional Company on bicycles - but if so, then why 9 and not 12 of Line infantry calculations would have been done with 12 - or is it then using 2 Regimental Setup, so 27+3+3+12?
...grrr But as mentioned neither of those numbers can be rly used to explain the surplus in normal Line Infantry Squads from how far I can tell.
So now some pictures.
Following is the KSTN 131c, as mentioned before. The 1941 version with 4 Squads can be found here and the later variant and the deletion-order follow:
- KSTN 131c_01.12.1943_RH_2_1332_0040.jpg (647.23 KiB) Viewed 698 times
- KSTN 131c_removed.jpg (182.62 KiB) Viewed 692 times
There are several reasons for my assumption:
- The 1941 KSTN 131c is that it still contains AT-Rifles, which have not been around anymore during that period and are not shown in this or previous TOEs.
- The number of LMGs in the 1941 131c variant is 12 (not 16).
Further I'll attach an planned TOE for the Eastern (OST) Divisions (no idea in how far this was ever rly applied/plannd to rly be implemented!) and the somewhat "final" IDnA TOE from October 1943 (which is the one of concern).