Is it possible to edit the chain of command?

[Aeraaa]

I've started a campaign where I have approximately a Soviet tank regiment in 1962 and in every tank battalion I've put not only the 3 tank companies, but a tank detachment as well to simulate the 2 tanks Soviets had in the HQ. Trouble is the two tanks are commanded by Sergeants, not Lt Colonels (or the Soviet equivalent, I think Podpolkovniks?). Can I somehow change their rank and make them command the rest of the battalion?

[Judicator65]

You should be able to cross attach the battalions to the tank detachment platoons to make the tank detachments the leading formations, but I'm not sure if you can change the ranks.

[void1984]

I have a problem with an infantry company consisting of 3 infantry platoons and a machine gun team.
When the leading platoon is destroyed and the MG has the highest experience he's assigned the leading, and it's inconvenient, as it is slower then the rest of the company and I sometimes leave it a bit behind at an overwatch position.
The same happens with 2-man AT team which is a part of a company.

[DRG]

Interesting...

Can you provide me with a save game that shows command assigned by experience after the lead platoon is destroyed ?

You can test this by setting up a game where the company commander is isolated and destroyed by pre-planned arty fire then check who gets command next. Try this as many times as you need and then post the save game when any unit but the next one in line gets command.

I concede your point that it's inconvenient when a MG or AT team assumes Company command but you need to demonstrate your assumption about how command is passed and hands on experience is the best teacher



Don

[void1984]

I was only guessing that it's done by experience. I wasn't paying a lot attention to that.

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by void1984

I was only guessing that it's done by experience. I wasn't paying a lot attention to that.

Command passes in list order when the 0 or whatever is destroyed. So the #1 will usually take over from the #0.

Myself, I dont like mixed speed company HQ platoons with say an HMG section and perhaps a 60mm mortar section all rolled up in one bundle.

- If the rifle section is killed then a slow MG or worse yet, mortar element gets the command.

- Even if not killed, in regular play should you wish the coy command to be up-front then the MG gets left behind. Worse yet, if there is a mortar element then it can fall out of voice command and so if the radio link fails that turn, not be available for plotting or moving existing fires. (Unless you keep it up there with the HQ element by using say a light truck to shift it as the coy advances).

So I prefer support weapons (if any) in a rifle coy to be in at least one separate platoon, even if its a grab-bag assortment. Especially the mortars!.

In campaigns:
If there are scouts in the grab bag coy HQ, and other fast movers like snipers or inf-AT that can keep up with the rifle platoons then I usually cross-attach these down to the rifle platoons.

If the coy HQ assortment has 2 rifle elements, then number 2 may get upgraded to a pioneer element perhaps.

If there are MMG/HMG in the mixed bag, then those will get cross attached away to a Bn level support platoon. Same with any compulsory mortars.



However - the main point in the mixed bag rifle coy HQs is the limit on the number of formations. If every rifle coy came with a separate MG and perhaps a mortar platoon - then you would soon eat into the formation count limitation. So really - you're stuck with these.

I usually avoid any Coys with a "grab-bag" HQ if there is an alternate choice without them since I prefer my medium mortars and MMG to be centralised in a Bn support coy, so I can put them where the particular fight requires. I'm not a fan of permanent individual company parcels of support weapons. Best centralised at BN, so the BN commander can assign as required IMHO.

So this summer I'll be looking into a utility to allow the leader to be swapped, probably at deployment (ie post fixes in the campaign) as it is irritating to have section #2 be the commander of platoon 2, and #3 of platoon 3 since they were almost wiped out 3 battles back.

Andy

[void1984]

There's an inconvenience that I can't buy a formation of 3 AT teams and assign each one to different company, as the formation leader can't be reassigned.

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by void1984

There's an inconvenience that I can't buy a formation of 3 AT teams and assign each one to different company, as the formation leader can't be reassigned.

Of course not - a formation cannot contain 2 leaders simultaneously.

Assign 2 subordinates, then delete the formation.
Buy another formation, assign 1 subordinate, delete formation
Job done.

Andy

[chrissandvick]

Originally Posted by Mobhack

I usually avoid any Coys with a "grab-bag" HQ if there is an alternate choice without them since I prefer my medium mortars and MMG to be centralised in a Bn support coy, so I can put them where the particular fight requires. I'm not a fan of permanent individual company parcels of support weapons. Best centralised at BN, so the BN commander can assign as required IMHO.
Andy

I've never quite mastered what to do with the Bn heavy weapon platoons. Do you then deploy them as a single unit to where you think they might be needed? I find I tend to spread their units out to much and end up out of HQ support. Why I started assigning their HMG/MMG's out to the line company HQ's in the first place.

That editor would be useful though part of the fun was coming up with amusing explanations for how that mech infantry platoon ended up being led by the 60mm mortar track. "The new lieutenant likes leading from the back, WAY in the back."