"PrivateSnafu thanks for the comment. Interesting that you don't like those elements of CoC, I think both are noteworthy design features. The game stresses the importance of leadership, so I like the way the risks leaders must take to lead effectively is reflected in the wound rule. That is minor compared to bad things happen, which when combined with accumulating shock, does a very good job of reflecting the way combat slowly degrades a unit's ability. One of the very neat features that I think make CoC the standout skirmish ruleset."
I love your work and appreciate your comments. However, I think that 9 out of 10 people that say similar things have never experienced combat and are regurgitating what others have said. I've never been in combat so I would never suppose to assume what it would be like. You probably know better than I.
As far as a game goes I think its mechanics make it much different that other games I have experience with and as a result it is interesting and entertaining and you have to play it differently.
I don't really like wounds. Why not have the MG loader be wounded?
The problem with the bad things happens table is that there are no ignore results. Perhaps someone does get wounded and shrugs it off only to heroically lead the grunts to victory. My regular opponent says "well maybe the leader is crying, that would hurt morale" sure but maybe he's pissed and ready to fix bayonets.
I think the game tends to also isolate platoon action and effectiveness where the basic unit of maneuver and combat (modern combat) is the company. Things like the support have a lower rating than the platoon (when play elite) makes little sense to me. If something was organic to a company it should have the same morale. They did train together contrary to what the rules state.
Just a few niggles. Enjoy the game plenty.