3 Commando Brigade

Yes, that is why I think this gadget is a superb add-on for the Supreme Commander, all hail his wondrous beret.

However...I do feel that we tend to split our Sections too widely and set them off on objectives that are geographically separated, resulting in Troop Command (thanks welsh-Mike) not being able to physically see what is going on. I'm not sure what happens in the real 3CB, but I guess the Troop more or less sticks together? I'll admit to being a Dslyecxi fan-boy, but here is what I would consider a good example of how to command a 'Platoon' assault with 3-4 Sections (Squads) without needing much more than Mk1 eyeball (and the Shacktac map symbols, wish we had that!).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EZA0GFKJx8

Despite all this talk of high tech gadgetry (even today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24474336, you'll often find me wandering the Somerset hills armed with a map and compass shouting "Baaaa Baaaa" - lost sheep you see, happy but clueless.

That's interesting insight, thanks mwincboo.

I suppose the assumption that because we have UAV's and GPS's, that they always work and are accessible to those in command, is a false premise. It might be nice if they sometimes broke-up, gave misleading info or were taken away at the critical moment. But I guess we have enough ArmA bugs to simulate that particular frustration already! Not often on the real battlefield that a soldier experiences lag, gets stuck behind a door, or ''disconnects'?!

I guess it depends on the commanders 'game' style for having fun. If he wants to stand-off from the troops, an RTS gadget might be the only way to get involved. Whereas, if he's more embedded, then it can be less technological and more touchy-feely. In the first instance he still has to communicate the picture to the boots on the ground over the radio, no easy task.