Pzman Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 Ok artillery spotters are Lt. right so then why do they need independent HQ to decrees there moving time? ie how long it takes them to move out. [ 09-01-2001: Message edited by: Panzerman ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 Good question. You're not the first that it has occurred to. I've never heard of a satisfactory answer myself. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzerman: Ok artillery spotters are Lt. right so then why do they need independent HQ to decrees there moving time? ie get ride of the red radio symbol. I didn't do a search becuase, it took just timed out when I tried to use it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 Heh, I had to read that a few times to figure it out, but I think I understand now. Independent units (FOs, zooks ect.) do not suffer a delay penelty for not being in C&C of a HQ. However, if they are in C&C of an HQ with a command bonus they will get the benefit. Make sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 Is that what he means? I still cant tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B: Make sense?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No, because what Rob means is that an FO has the same rank as a platoon leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 2, 2001 Author Share Posted September 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Juju: No, because what Rob means is that an FO has the same rank as a platoon leader.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Bingo! So why dose he need anther Lt/ Cpt ect.? [ 09-01-2001: Message edited by: Panzerman ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 Eh, I don't think rank has anything to do with command delay. A battalion HQ has the same delay as a platoon HQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 Oh, ok, I see what you mean. I dunno. I think its because the orders come from the player, rather than the higher HQs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 2, 2001 Author Share Posted September 2, 2001 But the FO has the rank of Lt why should he need anther HQ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzerman: Bingo! So why dose he need anther Lt/ Cpt ect.? [ 09-01-2001: Message edited by: Panzerman ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Dose? Drugs? What???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzerman: But the FO has the rank of Lt why should he need anther HQ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Because being the same rank as the HQ unit doesn't make him an HQ unit. Actually, I think they get a lesser delay bonus for free. A reg. HQ unit with no command bonuses has a 20 sec. delay while a reg. FO is only 13 sec, IIRC. EDIT: Nope they are both 20 seconds. [ 09-01-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigZergRat Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 I see a valid point about FO's being the same rank as platoon leaders. (One butter-bar is just as much an idiot as any other) We all know C&C bonuses are not cumulative (i can dream) and yet FO's do get bonuses from other officers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 I don't think this is a question about rank, but really one of command hierarchy. In the Commonwealth armies, an FOO would work under the command of the infantry unit commander, and react to his orders/needs, even if the FOO outranked him (e.g. FOOs often were Battery commanders, rank of Captain or Major, IIRC, but they could receive the requests for help from a platoon commander, rank of lieutenant). This did not always work out like that, and there were cases where the FOO took over command (if the infantry officers had become casualties), but generally they would not just saunter about and bomb the enemy to their heart's delight. And since to my understanding the command delay is simulating the co-ordination problem to some degree, it is correct that an FOO should be subject to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtweasle Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 The FO for the US side is more of an abstraction is'nt it? I know this has already been discussed to death, and there was an explanation... it is a little more untidy for the Americans as I recall. In reading various accounts I'm thinking they were able to call on arty direct from the line, they made the call often... No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: I don't think this is a question about rank, but really one of command hierarchy. In the Commonwealth armies, an FOO would work under the command of the infantry unit commander, and react to his orders/needs, even if the FOO outranked him (e.g. FOOs often were Battery commanders, rank of Captain or Major, IIRC, but they could receive the requests for help from a platoon commander, rank of lieutenant). This did not always work out like that, and there were cases where the FOO took over command (if the infantry officers had become casualties), but generally they would not just saunter about and bomb the enemy to their heart's delight. And since to my understanding the command delay is simulating the co-ordination problem to some degree, it is correct that an FOO should be subject to it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, outstanding. I can think of one example off the top of my head - at Walcheren Causeway, one company of Calgary Highlanders was rendered officerless, and the Brigade Major, as well as a trusty FOO, went over to the island to take command of the company. In CM it would be neat to be able to have FOOs who have expended all their ammo be able to put infantry of a specific platoon or company under command and control, in the absence of the other officers in that subunit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: In CM it would be neat to be able to have FOOs who have expended all their ammo be able to put infantry of a specific platoon or company under command and control, in the absence of the other officers in that subunit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why stop there. Why not have leaderless squads revert to control of other platoon HQs as well. Granted, might not be feasible in a half hour firefight, but could be used in Ops. I've had platoons lose their HQs in the first battle of Ops, then have to mate up with a company HQ for the rest of the Op (which lasts several days). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted September 2, 2001 Share Posted September 2, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish: Why stop there. Why not have leaderless squads revert to control of other platoon HQs as well. Granted, might not be feasible in a half hour firefight, but could be used in Ops. I've had platoons lose their HQs in the first battle of Ops, then have to mate up with a company HQ for the rest of the Op (which lasts several days).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Or have the platoon sergeant take over. They were often more experienced than the Lt's anyway. I also have plenty of extra Lt's running around after I distribute the heavy weapons. Let those guys command a platoon, maybe with reduced bonuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts