Hmmm... how do we determine player NCOs in that case?
I think it usually works best with fixed squads with known good squad leaders assigned to lead them.
Which is what you had at Cassino, though I was rather deflated to end up with the squad of newbs and not be with any of my friends!
yes, I was sorry about that, you were meant to be with Ranj, but then a Bren team arrived.
If you will accept my apology I did feel bad about it all day.
Yes, we should put them together before hand so people are with friends and we have NCOs we like and trust.
No punters are NCOs, we have 1 goto in each squad to relay tasking to.
We dont have the numbers to offer a proper command structure, which is why originally I suggested having a rank no higer than sergeant! 
Webby, huh?
I don't see any reason why we can't assign two low rank NCOs to lead the two squads. Two corporals for instance. Craig can be a PFC runner, Webby a Sgt and me the Lt.
We can't have all the players just as a rabble of randomness, we need some sort of structure to make this work!
I think the thing to remember here is that you are an organiser for this event, not a player. Hence although you will definitely get to do some shooting time your main purpose is to make sure everything goes well and to support Dean whilst he's doing the same.
If I opted to lead a patrol it would be for a practical purpose, not to go do some shooting. I know what I'm there for. I conceed on the squads though, I'll stick as a 'floating' platoon 2iC. I'd like to stick with the 2 8 man squads though and pick a temporary runner from a squad as needed. Probably better anyway as that way said runner won't get too knackered.
Lardy, how you organise your squads in the end is up to you! I personally like the 2x squads myself, but seem to be being voted out by the two other lower ranking organisers on my side. 
I outrank you as the pilot Yith so nerrrr! 
lol
To my mind it makes sense to start big and break down as needed, not the other way around. It gets complicated then as people won't be sure who meant to be with who and you have 4 squad leaders all of equal authority.
Lardy, how you organise your squads in the end is up to you! I personally like the 2x squads myself, but seem to be being voted out by the two other lower ranking organisers on my side.
now now, the American obsession with communist erosion doesn't start for 10 years yet.
Seriously though, three is best form a play point, and they are not each 'squads' they are teams. We are in effect one squad using its teams as it sees fit.
Yes it would not really happen in history, but then again 14 men would not really do anything independent in history.
To my mind it makes sense to start big and break down as needed, not the other way around. It gets complicated then as people won't be sure who meant to be with who and you have 4 squad leaders all of equal authority.
actually the opposite is true, people know who is meant to be with who as they are with those people all day. If two teams are working together on something then they will likely have an attached person from the HQ directing them.
in a functioning squad soldiers would be part of teams that they would know, and they would know who their team leader was in the field and who they should follow within the squad, we are preparing this in advance so players will know this all day, not in each scenario as it changes.
