The "God" View...Explained, Somewhat
 

There is a lot to be said of this "God" view mode description as US forces, at least, depend heavily on technologies such as C4ISR or more commonly C2 that deliver to unit commanders a "view" of the battlefield that is tantamount to our "God" view mode in the game. So, in some respects, at least when playing a US side, "God' view is what your commander would see.

But, if you're not playing a US forces side, then well, there is nothing really to say, except "you got" as good C2 as the US side.

Now, the US forces have vehicle mounted FBCB2 and the RPDA fitted to individual unit members. These devices give unit commanders a tremendous multiplier in the battle area by clearly showing the position of Blue and Red forces while permitting horizontal and vertical text message communications. Now, that is some "God" view.

However, the enemy has two options, he can either interrupt satellite communications, the backbone of the C2, as the Iranians did with the downing of the US RQ-170 in 2013, or by getting so close to US forces that C2 does not matter, the fight is already on. It is as the Vietnamese tactic of "Grab them by the belt buckle."

LTC Hal Moore in after action reports of the battle of Ia Drang commented on this tactic, "Once the enemy gets as close as 25 meters out or intermingled then he has the friendly fighting on his terms, with those who have made it that close." Interestingly, Moore commanded the 1/7 Cav, the name of the same unit LTC Custer commanded at Litlle Big Horn.

Please note: I meant to append this post to Imp's post in, "What to do with the A0 unit," but as I have two teenagers over, I must have gotten distracted hearing the refrigerator door opening and closing every five minutes!

Re: The "God" View...Explained, Somewhat
 

Most "modern" armies have similar systems usually termed ISTAR or C4ISTAR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers; Intellegence, Surveilance, Target Aquisition and Recconaisance) which allow the battle commander to "see" what individual STA snipers (USMC), SAS (UK), Sayeret (Israel), squads; Artillery observers; Recon drones; satellites; Recon forces; etc are reporting and co-ordinate the whole.

The UK, Denmark, Jordan, Norway, Israel, Slovenia, Portugal, Belgium, Germany, Spain (to name just a few) ALL have systems as good as (and, in some cases, better than the US system).

Re: The "God" View...Explained, Somewhat
 

I don't know about, "...and, in some cases, better than the US system."

Re: The "God" View...Explained, Somewhat
 

Drone of various types have become very common on the battlefield since about 2000.

Re: The "God" View...Explained, Somewhat
 

Yes, drones of various types are common in battle areas. However, the very real concern, apart from interruptions of satellite communications, is the threat of non nuclear electromagnetic pulse weapons (NNEMP or simply EMP.) Imagine, small EMP devices exploding over an armor division in say, South Korea. That would render those tanks, vehicles, radios, and many weapons systems useless. Helos and drones would plummet from the sky!

In the immediate aftermath, in the chaos and commanders in the dark, those armor units are at serious jeopardy. In short, the side with weapons not dependent on electronics now has a significant advantage, the very modern, "Grab 'em by the belt buckle" tactic as coined by North Vietnamese commanders at the battle of Ia Drang.