squad tactics
"You don't lead by hitting people over the head - that's assault, not leadership."
-General Dwight D. Eisenhower
While in the trench warfare of WWI infantry had been paralyzed by the employment of the heavy machine guns newer developments such as the modern tank, mortars and aircraft meant that combat had become more fluid. However, the appearance of new arms did not render the infantryman useless - but more effort was put on the combination of different arms.
The Squad
The Magic Number
The maximum number of people which can be effectively led by a single person is estimated at about ten. This is the largest group capable of developing a firm group coherency.
Already the early rhe Romans had made use of this system with their Decurion, literally a "leader of ten".
The squad is made up of the smallest elements of infantry tactics: the Fire Teams. Generally a squad would consist of about ten men seperated in two or three teams and led by a squad leader. The squad leader would be the second lowest link in the chain of command, followed only by the regular private. The parent unit of a squad is the platoon, generally consisting of three squads and a headquarters.
Terms
The different armies of Worl War Two had established different terms for their "squads" - all of them describing the same thing. In the Royal British Army a squad was called a Section. The Wehrmacht spoke of Gruppe (not Kampfgruppe) and the SS of Rotte; only the US Army used the term Squad.
The Textbook Squad
A typical Squad consisted of 8-10 soldiers, led by a squad leader and a second in command (2iC). The light machine gun was operated by either two or three soldiers.
Ideally, the squad would be made up of the squad leader and his second in command (2iC) plus a light machine gun operated be two or three man and up to eight riflemen.
Two teams would be formed, led by the leader and the 2iC. One of these teams would be the LMG-team while the other one would contain all riflemen. Depending upon nationality the squad leader was either meant to lead the LMG team or the riflemen. Squad tactics centered around these setup.
Light Machine Guns
The Germans mainly used the MG34 GPMG, later replaced by the MG42 (although the MG34 never phased out). The British used the Bren Gun in the LMG role while the American Marine, Airborne and Ranger units used the Browning Cal .30 - the infantry was issued the B.A.R. which offered less firepower but greater mobility.
Deviances
Except from the many deviances that would naturally occur on the field some armies changed the composition of their squads during the war. German Panzergrenadiere (mechanized infantry) and US Marines would be issued two LMG's per squad. While the Americans formed three teams (two LMG, one rifle) German doctrine demanded two equally equipped groups.
American infantrymen were issued no LMG at all (officially, that is) but instead relied on their semi-automatic M1 and the B.A.R. to provide firepower. German and Russian units also formed dedicated assault units, discarding the LMG and issueing automatic weapons (SMG or assault rifle) to all soldiers.
Fire and Movement
Brecourt Manor
The assault of E Company, 506th PIR, 101st Airborne, on D-Day against a German four gun battery at Brecourt Manor has become a textbook example for the attack of a small force against a defended positions.
Its success depended largely on two things: A strong base of fire from two LMG in different positions and the aggressive movement of the assaulting force at the right moment.
But two other major factors also contributed to this success: the excellent training, morale and teamwork of the paratroopers as well as the fact that they were not veterans yet - had they spent more time in the field, the men would have been more careful and probably averted to such a risky assault.
The basic element of offensive small unit tactics was the "Fire and Manouvre" scheme. The Fire element was to provide suppressive fire to force the enemy in cover while the manoeuvre element was to close in with the defending troops. The two groups would support each other by changing their roles - once the manoeuvre element had taken its new position it would become the fire element, providing cover for the other group.
This scheme assured that defending troops were under constant pressure and (in theory) unable to engage the advancing element (the British coined the term "one leg on the ground"). The ultimate goal of this scheme was an engagement at close quarters.
This basic scheme saw some variations among the different armies of WWII. German doctrine emphasized a more aggressive behavior with both teams advancing. Covering fire was mainly provided by the machine guns as the rifles were deemed ineffective at large ranges. The US used the comparable concept of marching fire, extensively using the possibilities of the B.A.R. and the semi-automatic M1.
Field Modifications
It seems unlikely that troops would be to perform these tactics under all circumstances. First of all, a squad would seldomly fight alone but instead be supported by other squads, tanks and artillery.
Moreover the Fire and Manoeuvre scheme demands a squad in full strength. casualties would diminish the firepower of a team and thus render their protective fire almost useless. Finally, fire and movement would largely be affected by terrain ad the disposition of the enemy force.
Final Round
First of all the rules would need two minor modifications to better represent the composition and role of the squad. The number of soldiers per base (the rules call them a "team") would have to be reduced to 2 or 3. A squad would then be made up of four bases. The term Team in the Final Round rules is in this context misleading - a team would consist of several bases.
Another possible modification would be to grant every LMG team a +2 OCAR bonus to make it more indenpent from the squad leader. The squad would then comprise of one command team, two combat teams (riflemen) and one LMG team. With these modifications done, fire and movement tactics can be partly recreated.
In any case, the question remains whether you want it like that. The scenario based approach means that in most cases you will not field a platoon straight from the TOE. Units will have suffered casualties, picked up stragglers from other units and acquired additional weapons. In a scenario you will most likely field an ad hoc formation formed from every men and equipment available.
Especially command structures will change significantly in the field - squad leaders regularily accounted for the first casualties and senior privates or simply anyone with a natural disposition for leadership would take over. Units would also become seperated and soldiers find themselves under the command of other leaders.