you're right : I created a complete map in the north of France (60km x 60km), using variations of 30 meters per variation (maxi authorized!).
In fact it depends the scale of the map linked with the scale of units. The main purpose of CO2, if I'm right is the chain of command (I don't find as efficient in other wargames). The commander of a military force (N level) orders to (N-1 ) level and some specific units under direct command . Then to well coordinate all the N-1 level units he needs to know/follow their immediate sub-units (N-2) level : ie a brigade commander orders to Battalion level and specific units sized coy/platoon (RECE, infiltrated units, specific support assets) and needs to know/follow the Coy level (units lines) but ART batteries too to know the areas covered by fire) and of course the specific assets under direct brigade direct command.
Hopefully this isn't redundant with your understanding, but it may help to understand the mechanics of the game.
1. In its broadest terms, the game is designed to be played within the command and control span of the highest level of command on the map (termed "the on map boss"). The span is measured in how many subordinate-formations the "on map boss" can control effectively with the staffing at the command echelon. A division command may have a span of 10, meaning the command staff can directly order 10 subordinate organizations within its chain of command before incurring penalties in responsiveness and time to initiate the ordered mission.
The subordinate units which count are measured from the next lower echelon of command down to the game's standard company level formation.
So, if the division commander orders a brigade to perform a mission, the command staff span of control is burdened with 1 subordinate. It can issue nine more orders without incurring command and control penalties.
If that same division commander chose to individually order 10 separate companies to perform diverse missions before ordering the brigade into action, the response for the brigade will be delayed significantly because the command span was exceeded.
There are other penalties involved dealing with time delays in sending orders through the echelons of command and distance over which the order is transmitted, but in broadest terms the constraining mechanic is the command span for the "on map boss."
2. The game is designed to a couple of standard measurements, area and distance measures and terrain effects are based on 100 meter increments -- the terrain effects other than rivers and routes being the most frequently found terrain feature in a 100 x 100 meter grid (a grid with 60-percent wooded land and 40-percent grass land would be considered a wooded location for sighting and force protection purposes).
This is done for a couple of reasons.
a. The company is the lowest level standard formation on the map. A company is assumed to have a 100-meter facing and direct influence over a 100 x 100 - meter grid when deployed. Something like independent scout platoons, mortar platoons and gun squads / batteries are considered "companies" for game play purposes.
b. Sighting and visibility effects are calculated at 100-meter increments to avoid excessive time delays in altering the dynamic sighting and visibility effects for all the units on the map.
There have been some efforts to design a game for lower tactical levels of command, using platoons as standard unit size and reducing the grid for measurements to smaller than 100-meter increments, but the game seems to bog down as the more refined measurements necessary to make a platoon effective are calculated.
3. Height measurements for terrain affecting visibility and protection are calculated as the standard height of an individual soldier -- roughly 2-meters. Brush anticipated to be 2-meters in height will interfere with a soldier's visibility into an area affecting intel and fire accuracy. Grasslands designed to be no more than 1-meter in height would not interfere with visibility.
These measurements affect the tactics a force can use and intelligence a force can gather on the map.
Today with computer tools, many wargames mix tactical levels (Battalion /coy /platoon /section) with higher ones (army/division/brigades) in the same play. I think it's a mistake in view of the engagement standards of each level and their specific maneuvers. In my opinion the "tactical frontier" for wargame is Battalion level.
So if we want to play maxi a Battalion commander (that means you need to give orders to Coy/platoon/sections) then we need low map scale (2p/meters 1/125000, see lower?), more precised urban area..... including precised height variations
If the aim of the game is Brigade commander or higher (division army), 1/50 000 maps (16p/meters in CO2) are precised enough to give orders/follow icons level coys and other specific units..... 10m between contour should be sufficient as included in 1/50000 topo maps
Coming back to CO2 , my opinion is that the game is very well fitted for Brigade level (or higher). Maybe I'm wrong. Regarding what I developed above, I only use the more precise map scale (ie 2p/meters 1/12500) to be sure that the Coy will be well positioned to see/fire/Hide/selfprotect. (A well-trained one does it itself) and for airstrikes. Some players developed "platoon scenarios" with CO battle of the bulge. I was not convinced.
Most scenarios are designed around the operational level (corps and above), but tend to play best when commanded at the battalion level. Some of this depends on the map size and how many different chains of command report to an "on map boss."
I'm not strong enough in computer data to answer to this. The answer is in "Dave's hands". My opinion is it should be only possible if you create a new game. I only use Map maker tool (ie I use "dig lines" and modifie colour, parameters... in order to draw contour lines)
I dream of a wargame able to include directly maps from geographical software like QGIS.
Apologize for the length of the text.
I don't have access to it at the moment (suffered a computer crash and lost the software), but there was a routine written by Ioncore to begin conversion of standard OGIS information into battle maps.
Right now we're waiting for an update dealing in more intuitive and effective artificial intelligence response from formations when ordered to attack, so the mapmaking improvements remain on the back burner using non-standard (Alpha / Beta) software.