On the contrary (contra Nick contra Alex?), I'd say that was an _excellent_ organisational reason, within the broad meaning of the term as I intended it... (Not so much a lack of sub-leaders, and too dang many...)
The more problematic cases are likely to be things like the closed order infantry. If you really need, not one phalanx, but 20 or 50 or 200 patrols of one size or another, then you may be somewhat hosed in terms of finding a 'valid' doctrinal means of doing so. Which doesn't mean that it won't ever be done, but it guarantees pretty much that they won't like it, won't be magically and mayhemicly efficient wh^H^Hif trouble strikes, etc.
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail