[SG2] leader loss

Hmmm. Here's my take:

I myself use the platoon leader and platoon 
sergeant as individual figures, thus I know when 
they are corpsed. But assuming that you know 
which figure it is and it goes down when 
someone shoots at the command squad, you 
have an interesting situtation: If the Lt goes 
down, the PSgt can usually take over. Often 
times, he's as good of a combat leader if not 
better. So a normal leader loss replacement roll 
should be made (remembering the suppression 
placed on a squad for losing its leader). The 
rest of the command probably wouldn't react 
directly. 

However, in the event that the Platoon Sergeant 
goes down, power tends to devolve to the 
senior squad commander, who himself is 
probably a sergeant (may be a corporal). 

I find by assigning my Lt and his Platoon Sgt 
leadership values explicitly before the game, I 
save a little bit of mid game bookkeeping. 

Now, let's talk about the situation where a unit 
has had its next highest level of command 
wiped out (ie the platoon loses the entire 
command squad including Lt and Sgt, or the 
Company loses the Major and the CSM).

In this situation, I think it not unreasonable to 
1) halt command transfers until a new company 
or platoon commander is put in place
2) for each level down of the new commander 
(ie a squad leader running a platoon), degrade 
the leaders leadership value by 1 (a squad 
leader 1 becomes a platoon leader 2 and if 
forced to assume company command, would 
become a company commander 3)
3) The unit that should succeed (senior squad 
leader) should take a reorg which would cover 
his informing the platoon he's in command now
4) All units in the command should take a 
morale test at TL 2. This represents the morale 
issues introduced by losing key command 
elements. People might keep on fighting, but 
everyone might be kinda shookup about it also.

So, if your platoon loses the entire command 
squad, it temporarily can't do command 
transfers, and the squad leader who will be 
taking over the platoon must spend an action 
from his squad to reorg and take command. 
When he does, his effective leadership drops by 
1 (he's managing more than he usually does) 
and all the platoons units take a TL 2 test for 
morale. 

This isn't "rulebook", but it seems like a 
reasonable approach. 

I have to, OTOH, disagree entirely with Allan's 
comment about NOT leading from the front. 
Most of the good military forces of the 20th 
century with high levels of motivation have had 
officers that lead from the front. The Israelis 
have had brutal "officer killed" stats. In WW2, 
many german officers were killed (as were 
Canadian and other allied officers) leading from 
the front. This applies particularly at the platoon 
and company level, but even at the regimental 
level. Reading about Falaise, I'm finding stories 
of units who changed high level command three 
times in a day due to casualties and stories of 
majors and lt-colonels taking point to get their 
units moving during assaults. This isn't just a 
luxury, this is a necessity. Men will follow officers 
who take the risks and who demonstrate they 
won't ask anyone to do what they would not 
do. And it helps get a stalled unit moving again, 
even if the officer is injured or killed. This is one 
of the reasons the Aliens CMC model of the Lt. 
back in the APC wouldn't be too likely. 

My 0.02.