Question: Anyone ever played Right-hand vs. Left-hand?

[Imp]

Never done it with this game but works fairly well for some others.
I do like DRG's idea of handing over infantry control to the AI.
Might even try playing the AI with 2 out of 3 infantry platoons in a company under AI control.

[jp10]

Rather than do it by unit type, I take charge of 1/3rd of the force. 1 Company out of a Battalion or 1 Battalion of a Brigade. Since the AI controlled forces may not respect unit boundaries even if movement routes are plotted, taking charge of a forward unit demands an understanding that a unit to your flank may move across your front. My best battles have been when I start out in 'reserve' with the two AI forces leading the attack/defense. In this case I must watch the battle, maneuver to support the battle and decide when or where to counterattack a penetration or make a spoiling attack or make an attack to renew a failed assault.
I also only control my organic fire support and designate which batteries are prioritized to my support. I let the AI control the other batteries. Do not turn A0 over to the AI however since the game considers that to be you.

[Mobhack]

Just leave A0 on the baseline, maybe somewhere he has a field of view where he may be able to spot some arty fires (he is an observer 2nd class, between proper FOOS and company etc commanders). His main job is to act as a comms relay to the off map support.

The game is no longer SP1 with 24 or so core units, where upgrading A0 to a combat unit made a significant addition to your force with the added exposure to deleterious results (e.g making him a vehicle attracts air - planes look at available vehicles to attack first). Now, losing A0 tends to kill a long campaign since you just died (but not, IIRC a PBEM campaign).

By all means move him to the rear of any mass rout you may have going on, as he provides an extra rally roll above company CO level, but dont get him mixed up in the furball. Also, dont place him right alongside indirect fire attractors sitting around in your rear such as SAMs, AAA or Arty units.

[Suhiir]

I usually put A0 right behind my main attack of defensive position near the company CO but far enough away both won't (usually) be affected by the same AoE attack.

[shahadi]

In my scenarios, the A0 is the company commander if the scenario is company sized or less, otherwise I'd build battalion hq with A0 as the battalion commander.

I am aware my design is contrarian, but it is also exciting. It also forces the player to keep units within contact of formation leaders, rather than having units of same formation flung all over the map.

This will require creating formations in MOBHack. As an example, rather than purchase a weapons company, I'd integrate those weapon teams within my platoon and company formations.

=====

[jp10]

When you write 'weapons company' do you mean a company of a specific weapon (such as a company of all AT weapons) or a company of varied support types (HQ plt, Recon Plt, Mortar Plt, ATGM Plt....etc)?

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by jp10

When you write 'weapons company' do you mean a company of a specific weapon (such as a company of all AT weapons) or a company of varied support types (HQ plt, Recon Plt, Mortar Plt, ATGM Plt....etc)?

The weapons company provides crew-served weapons support to the infantry battalion, so typically you might find machine guns, mortars, and inf-ATM's. A weapons platoon would serve an infantry company. The organization and equipment may vary.

So, if you bought a weapons company those units may end up far removed from the formation leader. So, I'd insert MGs, Inf-Atms within my platoons, and mortars within the inf company.

=====

[Suhiir]

Yeah, one of the things I did in the USMC rebuild was split the weapons platoons and companies up among the rifle companies as they normally would be. They only exist in the first place for admin/logistic/training purposes, none of which is terribly relevant in actual combat.

[Aeraaa]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

They only exist in the first place for admin/logistic/training purposes, none of which is terribly relevant in actual combat.

Not only that. Keeping all your support assets together gives the commander the freedom to deploy them in the most optimal way deemed necessary. He may ditribute them evenly among all companies, or that one company that is expected to be attacked by armor getting all the AT assets, or only two companies getting indirect fire support, or that one company not getting any support etc.

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Aeraaa

Not only that. Keeping all your support assets together gives the commander the freedom to deploy them in the most optimal way deemed necessary. He may ditribute them evenly among all companies, or that one company that is expected to be attacked by armor getting all the AT assets, or only two companies getting indirect fire support, or that one company not getting any support etc.

True.
But for game purposes it's usually better to have them evenly distributed as you can't usually be sure where the main attack/defense will be.

If you really want to distribute them yourself then you can buy formations without support weapons, then buy the support units and play with the editor. If you don't use Command Control then you don't even need to bother attaching them to platoons/companies.