Company HQ (and beyond)

[PEB14]

Hello gentlemen,

Here's a newbie question.

I have well understood the importance of low level (i.e. platoon) HQ in terms of chain of command and command bonus.

What is not clear to me is the effect of the higher level HQ (company, most notably). The role in the chain of command is clear, but does it has some other effects like the platoon HQ does? Hence what is their optimal position with respect to the frontline?

I am also wondering the effects go the mortars HQ when those mortars are used in indirect fire mode.

Thanks in advance for your enlightening answers!

PEB

 

[womble]

Any HQ can act as a lower HQ in its own "tree" (the units that highlight if you select the HQ). So if you lose a PltHQ, you can move a Coy HQ nearer to the platoon's squads to pick up the slack.

The chain of HQs also passes information, so that, once it's gone "up and back down" the chain, your elements at the "pointy end" will have better situational awareness.

So, where you want the Coy HQ varies. Generally, somewhere out of the way and stationary if it's infantry and you want its comms to be active (sometimes enemy fire incoming will cause the radio to be out of service, and obviously, the risk of casualties if incoming fire). You might want it somewhere that can get eyes on somewhere important if you want to use it to call arty. Or you might want to send it forward to the firing line to take command of a headless platoon.

[PEB14]

Thanks womble, very clear.

[chuckdyke]

2 hours ago, womble said:

Any HQ can act as a lower HQ in its own "tree" (the units that highlight if you select the HQ). So if you lose a PltHQ, you can move a Coy HQ nearer to the platoon's squads to pick up the slack.

The chain of HQs also passes information, so that, once it's gone "up and back down" the chain, your elements at the "pointy end" will have better situational awareness.

So, where you want the Coy HQ varies. Generally, somewhere out of the way and stationary if it's infantry and you want its comms to be active (sometimes enemy fire incoming will cause the radio to be out of service, and obviously, the risk of casualties if incoming fire). You might want it somewhere that can get eyes on somewhere important if you want to use it to call arty. Or you might want to send it forward to the firing line to take command of a headless platoon.

I like him close to the HMGs HQs who often don't have radio. That way they become situational aware to engage enemy from say 700 meters. Scenario 1st mission The Road to Nijmegen the Tripod mounted Browning .30 with the Company HQ his Platoon HQ acting as "spotter'. US C2 is the most efficient in WW2. So the Company HQ can take the platoon's heavy weapons under his wing. US airborne 3 Brownings Bipod mounted one on the Tripod very powerful if you together with the radios.

[PEB14]

And what about the XO team from US OOB? Is it considered as a HQ?

[Combatintman]

1 minute ago, PEB14 said:

And what about the XO team from US OOB? Is it considered as a HQ?

Yes - any XO or 2IC team assumes an HQ role if the HQ team gets destroyed.  @MOS:96B2P has a great thread which explains C2 in enormous detail and hopefully he'll be along to point you at it.  I can guarantee it will answer all of your C2 questions.

[A Canadian Cat]

On 1/23/2023 at 2:01 AM, Combatintman said:

  @MOS:96B2P has a great thread which explains C2 in enormous detail

It is the definitive guide.

 

[dkchapuis]

On 1/22/2023 at 2:46 PM, womble said:

Any HQ can act as a lower HQ in its own "tree" (the units that highlight if you select the HQ). So if you lose a PltHQ, you can move a Coy HQ nearer to the platoon's squads to pick up the slack.

 

Are you sure about this?  I thought this was specifically not the case.

[PEB14]

12 hours ago, IanL said:

It is the definitive guide.

 

Great stuff, thank you!

[Shady_Side]

On 1/23/2023 at 1:57 AM, PEB14 said:

And what about the XO team from US OOB? Is it considered as a HQ?

One thing I like to do when my force has more than 1 company but no battalion HQ, is to place company A's XO with company B's commanding officer and company B's XO with company A's C.O. This allows cross communication between the companies and having them in different locations makes certain one unlucky shell wont decapitate all higher level info sharing. If a battalion element is present placing weapons platoon elements with battalion XO or CO. And I still cross the company CO's and XO's with each other because it seems to allow info to pass quicker between companies that way. So rather than company A's info passing up to battalion HQ and then to company B it can pass directly between A and B.

[PEB14]

1 hour ago, Shady_Side said:

One thing I like to do when my force has more than 1 company but no battalion HQ, is to place company A's XO with company B's commanding officer and company B's XO with company A's C.O. This allows cross communication between the companies and having them in different locations makes certain one unlucky shell wont decapitate all higher level info sharing. If a battalion element is present placing weapons platoon elements with battalion XO or CO. And I still cross the company CO's and XO's with each other because it seems to allow info to pass quicker between companies that way. So rather than company A's info passing up to battalion HQ and then to company B it can pass directly between A and B.

That's clever, but it sounds a little gamey as it is not the way the command structure was supposed to work, isn't it?

[Dr.Fusselpulli]

Yeah, it would be great to have signaler units, who are able to connect the different company networks.

[Shady_Side]

3 hours ago, PEB14 said:

That's clever, but it sounds a little gamey as it is not the way the command structure was supposed to work, isn't it?

Well, all war games are going to have gamey aspects to them. Some worse than others. But to make it more realistic I can easily envision a situation where company A and B were going into a battle and for technical the 2 HQs were going to have trouble communicating with each other and tasking their XO's to with the other units HQ to help info flow easier. Just has I can imagine a battalion commander telling his subordinates to work out a better way to communicate with each other instead of waiting for all info to be passed to him and then for him to pass it back down another C2 chain. As for locating weapons platoons HQs with other units leadership seems like the more useful thing to be doing. I know they supposed to have a moral effect on their subordinate units but I question how effective that is because most of the time their weapons teams were supposed to be farmed out throughout the platoon anyways. Attaching a MG to a particular squad for example. To me it seems like less gamey and more like a smart unit trying to maximize the equipment they have to work with no matter if it is in the field manual or not.

I do get why some people would say it is gamey though and it is a matter of taste in the end. I don't like the gamey things like last minute rushes for objectives knowing that even if you do manage to get a fingernail grip on it you would never be able to stay there if not for the clock ticking down. Don't get me wrong in tournament games for example you are pretty much forced into it. There is the always gamey aspect of putting a scoreboard at the end to try to show in a point value who won, and there really is no better way of doing it, but for my own enjoyment I prefer to look at what the mission spelled out to me was and whether or not I accomplished it at a reasonable cost to determine within my own mind if it was a win lose or draw completely independent of what the final score is. 

[A Canadian Cat]

15 hours ago, dkchapuis said:

On 1/22/2023 at 3:46 PM, womble said:

Any HQ can act as a lower HQ in its own "tree" (the units that highlight if you select the HQ). So if you lose a PltHQ, you can move a Coy HQ nearer to the platoon's squads to pick up the slack.

Are you sure about this?  I thought this was specifically not the case.

Yes, this does work. If you have a platoon HQ that is eliminated your company HQ can get close to the platoon's sections and take control. The C2 chain will remain broken and the Company HQ must be with in visual range. In this case the platoon sections will have a red X for the platoon HQ in the C2 list but you will see visual, spoken C2 symbols in the command section next to the C2 list. @MOS:96B2P's excellent thread covers this in detail with pictures - if I recall correctly.

[dkchapuis]

2 minutes ago, IanL said:

Yes, this does work. If you have a platoon HQ that is eliminated your company HQ can get close to the platoon's sections and take control. The C2 chain will remain broken and the Company HQ must be with in visual range. In this case the platoon sections will have a red X for the platoon HQ in the C2 list but you will see visual, spoken C2 symbols in the command section next to the C2 list. @MOS:96B2P's excellent thread covers this in detail with pictures - if I recall correctly.

But that isnt "acting as the Lower HQ"?  It is just the squads communicating with the Company HQ directly.  For example, The B Company HQ could communicate with squads from A Company, irregardless of whether that A Company Platoon HQ is still functioning.

(note - it is possible I dont understand either what is being said in this thread or exactly how HQs work if a platoon HQ dies.  which is the point of why i am wanting clarification)

[domfluff]

So this is two different effects.

When the HQ dies, the XO becomes a new HQ, the icon and C2 lines change to suit.

As a completely different effect, most XO teams have a radio, and by definition they are a single C2 jump from the HQ. That means that the XO team could be placed (for example) with an AT gun battery, and then the infantry squad spots will be passed to them through the C2 network. 

[Simcoe]

Let me know if this is wrong but my understanding is if two companies have the same battalion HQ but if the higher HQ is not on the map then the higher HQ can’t relay the communication between the two companies.

rather than sticking the two company HQ’s next to each other so they can talk, shouldn’t we urge Battlefront to make offmap HQ’s work as intended?

[Monty's Mighty Moustache]

1 hour ago, Simcoe said:

Let me know if this is wrong but my understanding is if two companies have the same battalion HQ but if the higher HQ is not on the map then the higher HQ can’t relay the communication between the two companies.

rather than sticking the two company HQ’s next to each other so they can talk, shouldn’t we urge Battlefront to make offmap HQ’s work as intended?

Yes. I had this exact issue in a CW game a while back and started at thread about it as I assumed they would be in contact with Bn HQ as the light was green even though they were not on the map. It’s by design that they are out of contact apparently to simulate being cut off

MMM

Edited January 25, 2023 by Monty's Mighty Moustache

[Monty's Mighty Moustache]

Found the thread

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by Monty's Mighty Moustache

[Simcoe]

8 minutes ago, Monty's Mighty Moustache said:

Yes. I had this exact issue in a CW game a while back and started at thread about it as I assumed they would be in contact with Bn HQ as the light was green even though they were not on the map. It’s by design that they are out of contact apparently to simulate being cut off

MMM

Are you saying it’s by design for that scenario or every time the higher HQ is off map it is cut off? 
 

seems like the vast majority of the time the higher HQ should be relaying information between it’s subordinate HQ’s. 

[Monty's Mighty Moustache]

Every time is my understanding if they are not due as reinforcements  

MMM

Edited January 25, 2023 by Monty's Mighty Moustache

[PEB14]

17 hours ago, Shady_Side said:

Well, all war games are going to have gamey aspects to them. Some worse than others. But to make it more realistic I can easily envision a situation where company A and B were going into a battle and for technical the 2 HQs were going to have trouble communicating with each other and tasking their XO's to with the other units HQ to help info flow easier. Just has I can imagine a battalion commander telling his subordinates to work out a better way to communicate with each other instead of waiting for all info to be passed to him and then for him to pass it back down another C2 chain. As for locating weapons platoons HQs with other units leadership seems like the more useful thing to be doing. I know they supposed to have a moral effect on their subordinate units but I question how effective that is because most of the time their weapons teams were supposed to be farmed out throughout the platoon anyways. Attaching a MG to a particular squad for example. To me it seems like less gamey and more like a smart unit trying to maximize the equipment they have to work with no matter if it is in the field manual or not.

I do get why some people would say it is gamey though and it is a matter of taste in the end. I don't like the gamey things like last minute rushes for objectives knowing that even if you do manage to get a fingernail grip on it you would never be able to stay there if not for the clock ticking down. Don't get me wrong in tournament games for example you are pretty much forced into it. There is the always gamey aspect of putting a scoreboard at the end to try to show in a point value who won, and there really is no better way of doing it, but for my own enjoyment I prefer to look at what the mission spelled out to me was and whether or not I accomplished it at a reasonable cost to determine within my own mind if it was a win lose or draw completely independent of what the final score is. 

Don't get me wrong: it IS a clever use of the XO team, more clever than to use it a reserve squad by example! By gamey I only mean that it is a completely ahistorical use of this team, no criticize intended.

Anyway I don't think the XO team role is properly simulated, nor that it could be in such a game anyway. Indeed I don't understand why the XO team is not simply included in the HQ.

[Shady_Side]

 

3 hours ago, PEB14 said:

Don't get me wrong: it IS a clever use of the XO team, more clever than to use it a reserve squad by example! By gamey I only mean that it is a completely ahistorical use of this team, no criticize intended.

Anyway I don't think the XO team role is properly simulated, nor that it could be in such a game anyway. Indeed I don't understand why the XO team is not simply included in the HQ.

I was not offended by it being called gamey. I just like to chat about these games, but that more often than not means saying why one technique or another I use is not dumb and is not gamey. These games like everything in life have their flaws but I enjoy playing them. I know going into it I am not going to get a true to life simulation out of it though because even if you could get the perfect A.I. and a perfect realistic OOB.. There is still no way of getting around the fact that you has the player have a gods eye view of the battlefield and can literally what everything that happens thru the eyes of every unit you have and no commander has ever had that kind of situation awareness. Not to mention you can't get a true recreation of a historical battle because chances are you already know what the winning and losing sides did and will try a different plan for the losing side or have bit of prior knowledge for the winning side. That being said I really enjoy historical campaigns and scenarios anyways but I find that these days I am drawn more to the modern titles. I know some clever little C2 tricks in those to if your interested. 

[Combatintman]

4 hours ago, PEB14 said:

Anyway I don't think the XO team role is properly simulated, nor that it could be in such a game anyway. Indeed I don't understand why the XO team is not simply included in the HQ.

Given that the XO/2IC and the OC/Commander do different jobs in reality, it actually makes a lot of sense, and is realistic, to have them separated.  In real life commanders generally go forward to: do that leadership thing; to get a ground truth view of how the battle is developing; and, to impose their will on the enemy and friendly forces by directing friendly elements to do things based on what they're seeing.  The XO/2IC meanwhile makes sure the HQ is running, and tracks the battle in detail plus a whole bunch of other stuff.  As such, the two are usually in different places when there's fighting to be done and of course, as often happens in CM, they can step up to the plate if the commander has a bad day at the office.

Edited January 26, 2023 by Combatintman

[Dr.Fusselpulli]

2 hours ago, Shady_Side said:

I know some clever C2 tricks in those to if your interested. 

I would be interested to hear those. For a recent mission im CMCW I'm still working on, I assigned scout teams to the soviet battalion HQs and then shoved those scout teams together into a command BTR to play the role of a signaler group. The scout teams have radios, and all sitting in the same BTR makes it a communication hub.

 

Edited January 26, 2023 by Dr.Fusselpulli