Basically, we're scrapping the idea of companies on the battlefield. We'll still use something of the sorts to get the administration done, but at game start it'll be one big pool of platoons.
This big pool of platoons will be assigned to Task Force Commanders (TFCs) depending on missions. If a mission near the enemy base requires 5 Inf platoons, 2 Mech platoons and a Shadows platoon, they will be assigned to the respective TFC. Smaller missions will then be staffed accordingly with the correct number of forces.
This will allow us to be more dynamic on the battlefield without risking under- or over-manning certain missions by letting ourselves getting stuck in a rigid structure of companies over platoons. As an added bonus, each task force will be a joint operation of mech, infantry, and shadows when needed, without any communication gaps going through the company and battalion hierarchy.
Furthermore, our enemy does not expect this.
And so on and yada yada.Sun Tzu wrote:If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Basically, if NAF doesn't know our structure, they'll be having a harder time adapting to it. Maintain OPSEC and let's keep it that way.