Platoon leader without radio stays in command and control?

[Bulletpoint]

In a recent game, I noticed a platoon leader was in contact with his regiment 2/353 GIR, even though he had no radio, and was far ahead of the rest of the troops. There were no vehicles nearby, and I went through all the squads in his platoon, none of them had a radio.

How is this possible?

He was out of contact with his company (D-company) though.

[A Canadian Cat]

Actually it sounds like your platoon was out of C2 with the company but the company was in C2 with the regiment. The green and red dots on the chain of command represent the C2 status of each level. So for the platoon's info to get to the regiment all the dots need to be green.

[Bulletpoint]

But this isolated platoon leader was able to contact some distant mortars... when I selected the PL and clicked on the fire support tab, several mortars were lit up in green as available. I checked their location, and they were back at the starting area. How is this possible?

[A Canadian Cat]

That does sound odd. Can you post a screen shot of the C2 icons and the mortar availability?

[akd]

C2 status and availability of a radio does not affect access to artillery on the spotter's end.

[Michael Emrys]

...regiment 2/353 GIR...

Actually, that's the name of a battalion. The Brits are accustomed to calling battalions regiments for reasons of their own, but that's not how it worked in the US Army.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

C2 status and availability of a radio does not affect access to artillery on the spotter's end.

Which appears quite strange. Is there any rationale for that, or is it just something that the programmers haven't gotten around to correcting yet?

Michael

[Apocal]

Playability.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Playability.

That's what I used to think as well. Then one day Steve called it a bug.

[womble]

Which appears quite strange. Is there any rationale for that, or is it just something that the programmers haven't gotten around to correcting yet?

Michael

The "rationalisation" is that methods of communication other than radios exist, and can be assumed to be "abstracted". It's a sorta shaky rationalisation, and I'm not entirely convinced that gameplay would be completely carked by requiring direct radio comms. It would just need to be a factor considered when buying or assigning units. IIRC, a British FO section actually included 7 observer-trained troops, so to represent them on a CM field, you'd "want" to have 7 FO teams, and assume that they're all spread out and have been assigned a radio man and a security bod.

[Michael Emrys]

The "rationalisation" is that methods of communication other than radios exist, and can be assumed to be "abstracted".

Sure. I'm cool with that. Wire was even more widely used than radios and I would love to see it with its limitations explicitly modeled. But I doubt very much that you call in an artillery strike using runners. Maybe on a TRP (flares could be used for this too), but not if corrections are going to need to be called in.

Michael

[Bulletpoint]

Actually, that's the name of a battalion. The Brits are accustomed to calling battalions regiments for reasons of their own, but that's not how it worked in the US Army.

Michael

Alright. I thought that GIR stood for Glider Infantry Regiment

[Pete Wenman]

....... was in contact with his regiment 2/353 GIR

Alright. I thought that GIR stood for Glider Infantry Regiment

It does 2/353 GIR =2nd battalion 353rd Glider Infantry Regiment

P

[Michael Emrys]

It does 2/353 GIR =2nd battalion 353rd Glider Infantry Regiment

There ya go. Pete's the man on point!

Michael

[c3k]

Runners and wire are not explicitly modeled: they are implicit. So, even with zero radio comms, your isolated unit will eventually pass information up the chain. At least, that's the theory.

Personally, I'd dread having to detail runners as part of my orders.

Ken

[MG TOW]

Just curious, I assume the radio man was killed and is laying dead somewhere with his radio on his back. If so, did anyone treat the wounded radioman and scavenge? I had a FO team once along time ago lose a radioman. Subsequent scavenging put a radio back into their inventory, even though the radio soldier body graphic did not change.

[Michael Emrys]

Personally, I'd dread having to detail runners as part of my orders.

It's simple, Ken. You just order them to ATTACK!

Michael

[Bulletpoint]

Just curious, I assume the radio man was killed and is laying dead somewhere with his radio on his back. If so, did anyone treat the wounded radioman and scavenge? I had a FO team once along time ago lose a radioman. Subsequent scavenging put a radio back into their inventory, even though the radio soldier body graphic did not change.

No, they have not been under fire. As far as I can see, most of my platoon leaders were just not issued radios... It's "Hell in the Hedgerows" from "The Road to Montebourg".

Or maybe the radio operators were killed in a previous map, and were never replaced?

[The Steppenwulf]

No, they have not been under fire. As far as I can see, most of my platoon leaders were just not issued radios... It's "Hell in the Hedgerows" from "The Road to Montebourg".

Or maybe the radio operators were killed in a previous map, and were never replaced?

Yes, the problem is most likely to be a map that has carried forward units from a previous battle - eg part of a campaign. The reason I'd suggest is that units starting with radios are coded in the .bts files as being able to call artillery. The loss of a unit radio later in a campaign does not remove that coded capability. It's not a bug as such, more a shortcoming in the game code.

Maybe Steve can confirm this is the case and also agree that it's worth BF time looking at for a future fix.

[Bulletpoint]

Yes, the problem is most likely to be a map that has carried forward units from a previous battle - eg part of a campaign. The reason I'd suggest is that units starting with radios are coded in the .bts files as being able to call artillery. The loss of a unit radio later in a campaign does not remove that coded capability. It's not a bug as such, more a shortcoming in the game code.

Maybe Steve can confirm this is the case and also agree that it's worth BF time looking at for a future fix.

That's a bit disappointing to hear. I always kept an eye on the radio operator, thinking that if he went down, so would my ability for fire support. So after a mortar strike, I would check and sigh with relief that it was only the executive officer who got hit.

Being a civilian myself, I have no idea what the EO actually does, and I assume he is some paper pushing bureaucrat who tags along to bother, nag and bog down the actual decisions on the battlefield

[womble]

That's a bit disappointing to hear. I always kept an eye on the radio operator, thinking that if he went down, so would my ability for fire support. So after a mortar strike, I would check and sigh with relief that it was only the executive officer who got hit.

Being a civilian myself, I have no idea what the EO actually does, and I assume he is some paper pushing bureaucrat who tags along to bother, nag and bog down the actual decisions on the battlefield

Depends on the service involved. Generally though, I gather that in effective militaries they're often the CO's strong right hand. They exist to see that the commander actually gets to command, and not be bothered by trivia. A good XO makes sure that minor disciplinary matters are never overtly noticed by the CO, that the troops' readiness state matches the CO's expectations. It can be that the XO is reviled by the grunts because he's the one that keeps them in line/hard at work/from getting 10 hours sleep at night, but that's the price for the CO being respected. AIUI, due to this tension, it's rare for an XO to directly succeed a CO in command of a unit except in exigent circumstances.

[Michael Emrys]

AIUI, due to this tension, it's rare for an XO to directly succeed a CO in command of a unit except in exigent circumstances.

I never thought about it, but you are probably right. At least that would be a pretty shrewd move on the part of the Powers That Be. Better to send the guy somewhere where he can make a fresh start as a commander.

Michael

[YankeeDog]

Bug or no, this is a tricky issue.

Strictly speaking, it's clearly not realistic for an isolated HQ to call in artillery support without an intact C2 chain. If an isolated HQ doesn’t have a radio, in some situations you could assume the HQ is communicating via wire comms, which are currently not modeled CM. Even so, wire comms would often not be practical, and indeed would usually not be practical for units moving forward on the attack. Other WWII-era forms of C2, like runners, would be a *very* impractical way to call in arty, except perhaps in the case of fire on an established TRP.

But as the game engine stands now, going completely the other way and totally preventing HQs without a fully intact C2 chain from spotting for Arty could lead to problems as well.

First, if C2 rules are going to be this strict then I think we definitely need wire comms explicitly modeled as, especially for units on defense, wire comms would often be an important part of C2 links. Even the U.S. Army used wire comms a lot in the ETO, and generally speaking U.S. formations had a surfeit of radios at the Company and Platoon level compared to other nationalities.

Second, for stricter artillery C2 rules to work well, I think that the player would have to be given more control over where radios are deployed in his force. As far as I know, such flexibility would be realistic. It varies a bit from nationality to nationality, but very generally speaking, by official TOE, usually the Company HQ gets a radio first, sometimes two, and then next in line the Weapons Platoon gets one or two. Last in line, and depending on nationality, formation, and date, the rifle platoons sometimes get a radio. But when the rifle platoons don’t have a radio of their own, it was definitely not uncommon for a radio from the Company HQ or Weapons Platoon to be assigned to a platoon that was seen to have a particular need for one.

So, if stricter C2 rules are going be implemented, then in addition to wire comms modeling, the player should also probably have some sort of flexibility to assign radios where they're most needed and useful.

Not expecting much new on this front in CMBN or CMFI, but Steve made some hints a while back that they were hoping to get explicit wire comms added to the game engine for CMx2:Battle of the Bulge. So further improvements to the C2 modeling are probably on the horizon…

[Bulletpoint]

I don't like the idea of "play prentend" wire comms. If it's to be in the game, I would prefer to have the option of having a squad leader send one of his men back to the headquarters to fetch the wire roll.

You would then have to wait as the guy runs back (along a route you define) and then more slowly rolls out the wire back to the starting point. Once established, the endpoint becomes a C2 link and a nearby platoon leader is able to call in artillery from that area.

But really, all in all I would prefer to just have to take care of my radios. "No arms, no cookies", as we say in my country. No radio, no artillery.

[c3k]

I don't like the idea of "play prentend" wire comms. If it's to be in the game, I would prefer to have the option of having a squad leader send one of his men back to the headquarters to fetch the wire roll.

You would then have to wait as the guy runs back (along a route you define) and then more slowly rolls out the wire back to the starting point. Once established, the endpoint becomes a C2 link and a nearby platoon leader is able to call in artillery from that area.

But really, all in all I would prefer to just have to take care of my radios. "No arms, no cookies", as we say in my country. No radio, no artillery.

What makes you think that isn't currently modeled?

Tracing wire breaks, repairs, fresh wire, etc., was a HUGE part of warfare up to the most recent times. Some commo wire and a crank-powered handset could keep the 2 man outpost in comms with the platoon HQ. A delay for C&C to be imposed COULD be the delay in establishing wire comms. Or runners. Or pigeons.