Fokker G1

Thanks @MOS:96B2P
 

Okay, so I dedusted my CMx2 copies on my new PC and trying to get back in the hype. I have not nearly played as much CMx2 as I have CMx1.
One of the things, I really, REALLY, liked from CMx1 is that the time penalties per waypoint changed with the experience of the unit. So an elite unit would have e.g. 2,2,3,4,5 seconds time penalty over 5 waypoints. Green units would go more like 3,5,7,9,10 (it's been a while, it not about the exact numbers here but about the model). Especially Barbarossa to Berlin the veteran / elite units would prove much more adjustable to changing situations whereas the green Russians you wouldn't want to give them too many waypoints as they could be stuck for a minute before making their first move. I felt this was a nice represenation of the impact of experience on the game. I am kinda missing this in CMx2. 
Curious why this was left out of CMx2; thoughts anyone?

There are several threads in the forum over the years where this is discussed.  I don't remember the consensus or if there actually was a consensus about the reasoning behind the decision.  It is probably not realistic to expect to ever see command delays in CM2.  
The good news is that players are able to implement similar types of rules on their own.  These different rule systems are something I'm interested in and enjoy following.  Below is a link to some fairly easy, useful rules created by @Bil Hardenberger and @IanL.  I think these add a lot of realism and enjoyment to the game.  It will not answer your question above but it might help you implement something similar as you play the CM2 games.    
 
 

There's no reason to make this personal.

What an obnoxious reply. Pompous oafs like you are what I hate about this forum.

Are some of your me going in the door you expect?
If not there is likely a problem with the map and the door is inaccessible.
If so you are facing a problem of your me are trying to execute your orders as fast as possible and some soldiers have grown impatient with thier buddies being slow and have gone to look for another way in.
What you can do is split your squads and set the orders so there are pauses that prevent this impatience. Or someone suggested using the assault command for the entry order. I have not tested it but is sounds promising.

There is only one download for all content (for each game) and then you unlock the modules you have with the appropriate keys.

When i started to play CM i learned the basics purely against the AI and that was by far enough to be fascinated for quite some time. Later, when the AI was no challenge anymore i began to try this strange PBEM thing for the first time.

Wow! That was a revelation! A complete new gaming experience began. Tasks, that worked against the AI, suddenly became very difficult. Because of stronger opponents, soon i had to learn how to read CM-maps to get a slight advantage over them. Careful planning and execution became prerequisites to have a chance against better and more experienced oponents. While the AI forgives tactical mistakes, and time to correct them, a good oponent does not. That was one of the most beautiful lessons, after playing the AI had become boring.

When i got better and was winning against most of my randomly picked PBEM-oponents, and with the experience of vanishing oponents if their situation had become uncomfortable, i began ladder-playing.
After around 40 battles ladder-playing became boring, too, because ladder-playing means playing meeting engagements and balanced battles only. Since i had a very high winning streak, i knew i had understood CM-tactics well and that was no longer a challenge, since reaching the top of the ladder would have meant to play much more games, all of the same. But i didn't want to play meeting engagements only, but was interested in the whole variety CM offers: from highly unbalanced attack and defend to historical battles.
I wanted to learn, how an attack against a heavily entrenched oponent has to be conducted in CM, or how a defense could be played against much stronger attackers. That was the reason, why i stopped ladder-playing and kept playing with a handful of players, that had proven very strong and reliable oponents.
And to answer your question: playing big battles with such oponents is a great experience.
BUT: They easily can span over several months and therefore you need to know your opponent well.

Bigger battles do not always mean better, but they offer aspects, smaller battles cannot:
Having battalion sized forces at your disposal, on a big and wide map, and an enemy, that could have weaker, but also could be two- or threefold stronger than you, and you have to think very carefully, before you decide, what to do with all those units and where and when to move them, while you know, your oponent is a very good player, who will merciless punish you for every little mistake, is a great experience.

Smaller battles quite soon reveal the whole picture.
In smaller battles one or two good moves, or losing one of two or three tanks, can also flip the coin torwards one side. But big battles can stay undecided for a long time, since single losses have a relatively smaller impact on the outcome and they contain enough units to compensate for bad luck.
In big battles more surprises later in the game are possible, because of the amount of units and the size of the map.
Big battles also allow real world tactics with flanking movements over several hundred meters.

Therefore i would say big and huge battles are great- IF the players on both sides have enough tactical experience to handle big forces on big maps and have enough knowledge about each other. Therefore i wouldn't recommend big battles for beginners, but for very experienced players with enough patience they are very entertaining and somehow the crown.