Action Phase - is this sequence correct?

[plloyd1010]

....so this entire chain of activations would then count as a SINGLE action? It would then be the case that, in your example, ALL of the German units would be marked with Fired/Moved markers and therefore would not be able to activate again in that game turn?

Basically correct. Everything could be done in 1 activation, except activating the LT in the C stack. The units in the C stack could be activated by the LT in B or the SGT in E, That would leave the LT on C to do something all by his lonesome later.

Keep 2 things in mind. 1) Leaders are not units. 2) All the move and fire activations need to be declared before any actions are actually taken.

[joe_oppenheimer]

 it just seems a bit "gamey" to carefully place the leaders side by side so all of one's units can activate.

Think of that as your well planned attack. What you'll likely find is that as units advance and some become disrupted your nice chain of leaders will get broken up and you'll have to do more, smaller activations.

[Tony M]

 it just seems a bit "gamey" to carefully place the leaders side by side so all of one's units can activate.

Think of that as your well planned attack. What you'll likely find is that as units advance and some become disrupted your nice chain of leaders will get broken up and you'll have to do more, smaller activations.

That makes sense. One of my complaints about previous tactical games I've played is that they don't include leaders. Leaders--NCOs and officers--are an essential element in small-unit actions. Maybe my only criticism of The Gamers' TCS series is that the games didn't have leaders.

For me this is perhaps a case of "be careful what you wish for," because of the confusion I am experiencing with the PG system. I suspect I will be playing the scenario Odessa: Hill 101 over and over for a long time!

[plloyd1010]

One of my complaints about previous tactical games I've played is that they don't include leaders. Leaders--NCOs and officers--are an essential element in small-unit actions. Maybe my only criticism of The Gamers' TCS series is that the games didn't have leaders.

For me this is perhaps a case of "be careful what you wish for," because of the confusion I am experiencing with the PG system. I suspect I will be playing the scenario Odessa: Hill 101 over and over for a long time!

One thing I very much like about the PG system is how command structure breaks down under stress and frictions. A couple of leaders are disrupted or demoralized, now you see how good your planning really was and how your army performs.