"Merge into" function

[Bartokomus]

I suspect for the most part that this is an "after-action" function, but is it plausible to have a command to merge two badly beat up squads into each other during a mission? For instance, one of my recon teams lost 3 men and the survivor has fallen back to his LAV; another recon team lost 1 man wounded but applied buddy-aid and sent him along.

Would it be unreasonable during a two hour assault to fold the two teams together?

[LongLeftFlank]

Yes it would be unreasonable, IMHO, although modern BLUE soldiers might be more incented to attach themselves to a new group of "friendlies" (wandering off alone in Syria would likely be viewed as more dangerous than going into combat with strangers). The recently added ammo sharing function is about as much coordination as you'd expect to see in RL.

As for WWII, accounts of the Normandy airdrop for example, abound with "orphaned" paratroopers attaching themselves to other units but then largely failing to distinguish themselves in action or quickly becoming casualties when they try (e.g. 2LT Butterbar gets shot when nobody follows his lead).

In the game, a strong leader unit in command will raise the performance of both fragment units but they'd remain functionally separate even if they're in the same location and shooting the same targets.

[MikeyD]

U.S. became notorius, I understand, for restaffing depleted units with green-as-grass replacements. You you might wind up with a dozen hardened veterans surrounded by a hundred Gomer Pyles. That's where the line "don't make friends with the new guys" came from. Statistically the chance of surviving skyrocketed afer your third battle.

[LongLeftFlank]

And then there was the utter misery of the "Repple Depples" (Replacement Depots) whose endless ration of parade drills and chickensh*t busy work caused even badly wounded veterans to desert from field hospitals in order to return to their trusted buddies instead of finding themselves in an unknown new unit.

[Bartokomus]

Yes it would be unreasonable, IMHO, although modern BLUE soldiers might be more incented to attach themselves to a new group of "friendlies" (wandering off alone in Syria would likely be viewed as more dangerous than going into combat with strangers). The recently added ammo sharing function is about as much.

In case i wasn't clear Pvt. Jones still had his LAV to retreat to, with it's crew intact, and his Plt. Cdr still in radio range. I am just curious what happens to him while the fur is still flying in RL.

[vincere]

...As for WWII, accounts of the Normandy airdrop for example, abound with "orphaned" paratroopers attaching themselves to other units but then largely failing to distinguish themselves in action or quickly becoming casualties when they try (e.g. 2LT Butterbar gets shot when nobody follows his lead).

In the game, a strong leader unit in command will raise the performance of both fragment units but they'd remain functionally separate even if they're in the same location and shooting the same targets.

The quality, anc cohesion drop is interesting. My guess, and it is just a guess is that there was likey some variation.

Read some 'Reynolds' on SS in Normandy and I seem to recall it was not uncommen for them to merge.

I guess we cold invoke the abstract time issue again and not that 2hrs CMtime could easily be much longer RL.