RE: [SG] Leader placement

Sorry, I was being confusing.

If a platoon has 2 units (a command squad and a 2nd squad), it seemed
cheesy
to me to alow the Platoon Leader (PL) to use his action to reactivate
both
the 2nd squad and his own squad giving it (and through it, himself)
another
set of actions (move, fire, communicate, command?).

Now, if you use common sense and disallow reactivation of a squad to
which
you are a part, then the PL only has 1 squad on which to spend command
activation.

If you state that a figure may not reactivate himself, but may
reactivate
his squad, then his squad is limited in thier actions because they
cannot
move out of unit integrety.

Which is the proper way to read this?

-----
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
-----

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Atkinson [SMTP:johnmatkinson@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 3:35 PM
> To:	gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject:	RE: [SG] Leader placement 
> 
> 
> --- "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
> <Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil> wrote:
> > I guess that here is where I would call "cheese". 
> > I would argue that a unit cannot reactivate itself.
> > So if a Platoon Leader
> > (PL) is part of a platoon, the PL could not
> > reactivate the platoon (i.e.
> > itself). Reactivating the platoon should only be
> > done by the company
> > commander (1 level up).
> > 
> > Also, if you set the PL as a seperate level in the
> > chain of command the
> > Platoon could get 3 activations (it's own, and 2
> > from the PL).
> 
> I'm confused.
> 
> How could the platoon leader not be part of the
> platoon?  And how could the platoon leader reactive
> himself?  I don't understand what you're driving at.
> 
> John
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.