Yes it does add a lot of complexity. It also has a great potential for causing disputes between players and DMs. I can readily see player's saying that the DM is not being fair because in their (player) opinion certain bonuses shuld be applied or even worse the set bonuses should be 'modified' such that say a unit gets extra attacks or damage due to the circumstances. Even if it says the "DM can" from my history this doesn't stop players from feeling cheated by the DM. Heck see the opinions on TGA and how the AI cheats to get a feel for how some/many players view things. Adding specific options for specifics feats and such with regards to modifiers is pretty much opening a can of worms that I don't think we want to. IMO the BRCS is best served by simplicity whenever possible and not by building in more comlexity. There are several mass combat products out there already that provide a more detailed system and IMO it would be best if we had a simpler system to use (much like how the 2nd ed system was a "simple" system when compared to the normal war games out there.

But I wouldn't dismiss this outright or even make a snap judgment on it. IMO we need to be real careful on this one though.

For the record I didn't say I wouldn't go with the multiple attacks. I only said that I didn't like introducing a "special" mechanic in the middle of things. I said I understood where the logic is coming from. I did say that if it ends up with making the hero group concept more appealing than playing as individuals it is definitely worth it.