Denel,
These are fair points.....but there is a broader issue here that everyone should consider when either taking a CO role or a role that takes commands from the CO.
At FolkArps, the role of CO is not just one of the guy who commands troops and tries to win the mission. You also have an intrinsic responsibility to keep the game being played "fun". Indulge me for a second whilst I elaborate.
We have an approx. 3 hour window in which to complete missions which the hosts pick to cater for the tastes of all our community members. This means a mix of adv vs coop, different terrains, missions with combined arms (tanks, helos) as well as pure infantry missions. Missions played as blufor...missions as ill equipped rebels having to use the benefit of guerilla tactics....etc..I think you get the point. The very fact that some have mentioned they will never truly appreciate Arma adversarial missions is testimony to the need to provide a wide selection of missions during a session to keep everyone in the community engaged.
For any one of the missions I have commanded, the proper approach would have been to recon, recon and then do some more recon. Have people slowly move to staging areas and then attack. Unfortunately, this is time consuming. Incredibly time consuming. Which would mean we could only get through a fraction of the missions planned for the session.
In addition, there is the human element. For many players who look forward to the 3 hour window twice a week in which to play, they want to see action. Yes...there are those amongst us who would like to strive for more realism but FolkArps is about the compromise between a hard-core mission experience and a low barrier to entry experience based primarily around fun with a higher degree of discipline and organization than say, a purely public server playing Domination.
We believe our members are exactly the people who want this balance of tactical but casual game play. People want to shoot stuff. Anytime as a CO you command people to wait, hold position or not fire at enemies that are visible, you can feel the tension of a whole squad muttering under their breath, "Why the fuck can't we just go over there and shoot them...". It's difficult to understand what I mean until you have experienced so I encourage people to experience first before passing any judgement. Asking people to wait is always a tricky proposition and the amount of time you ask them to wait can make or break their enjoyment of the mission (which sometimes has the unfortunate effect of unfairly reflecting poorly on the mission and mission maker).
I mention these points not as an excuse but to create an appreciation for some of the finer points of COing that people may not realize. It's not just about moving pieces around the board. You are also, whether you realize it or not, directly responsible for the enjoyment of all the players under your command. Keep people trekking across the map, waiting and not providing them anything to shoot at and they will complain about the mission. Go in too fast and hard and equally people will complain as they sit in spectator and watch others have fun (you also have to take into consideration those who have died and potentially stuck in spectator mode for the duration of a long ass mission).
So whilst you make some excellent points, consider that the CO role is more than just organizing the perfect attack (which rarely happens due to a variety of reasons including sometimes the lack of our own discipline to perhaps not engage targets more than 400m away).
In the mission you refer to....I perhaps could have kept Alpha back. But Bravo was being engaged and taking casualties (something you probably couldn't hear as it was across the command channel) and my thinking was that Alpha could relieve the pressure. If Alpha charged in without checking buildings and what not, well that's something we could all work on. In addition, if you were in spectator mode after dying and turned on "tags" you could see the sea of Opfor units we were opposing. When the mission maker Head saw it even he double checked his work and realized an error in his mission created more opposition in the town than he has intended. I'm not sure any tactics would have helped us survive that short of artillery or CAS. These however, do seem like excuses. We were doing very well up until the assault on the town and I did make some mistakes assaulting the town as I hadn't realized we would attack from downhill. To be fair though, the amount of opposition far exceeded our capabilities.
So in summary:
1. Yes...we should pay more attention to clearing buildings.
2. CO's should consider this in their planning but be aware that the job of a CO also extends to keep the pace of the mission advancing at a reasonable pace for the enjoyment of everyone and the timing of the entire session.
3. Mission pace is always a balance between planning, waiting and shooting. CO's will not always get this right but they should aspire to do so.
4. Your point about defending forces spreading out may be valid....but people should feel free to experiment. The best demonstration of your proposed tactic is take CO and put into practice.
5. I by no means want to discourage anyone from COing. I welcome fresh approaches to the same scenarios we play. I look forward to being under your command as CO one day!