Brown Bess - 3 Rounds per minute at 50 yards effective, unaimed
Lee Enfield - 15 Rounds per minute at 300 yards effective, aimed
C6 - 200 Rounds per minute at 1000 m/y, aimed(area)
The Regimental System grew up in an era where it took 1000 men to put down fire at the rate of 3000 RPM over a 50 yard zone of influence. - A Battalion
By World War 1 it only took 200 men to acheive the same rate of fire. - A Company
But the zone of influence had expanded by a factor of 6 squared or 36. One Company was commanding the same ground as 36 Wellington era Battalions. - or A Corps of 36,000 men
The only counter was to send in more targets as the single Company was still only equal to 1 Battalion
Now, it takes 15 troops armed with C6s to acheive 3000 RPM over a 1000 yard zone of influence. l'll allow for the No.2 and call it a Platooon (30 men).
Their zone of influence at Suffield (ie not allowing for shrubbery and dead ground) is 400 times greater than a Wellington Battalion. ((1000/50)squared).
That single Platoon is now capable of exerting influence over an area equivalent to that influenced by 400 Wellington Battalions (4/Brigade, 12/Division, 36/Corps. 108/Army, 324 Army Group - and I'lll stop there and allow the rest as supernumaries).
Now I know that that is a numbers exercise, and in the real world the MG Platoon can't cover that area because of dead ground, nor does it have 400,000 pairs of eyes to be able to maintain a watch, nor does it have 400,000 bodies to police the area or to launch an assault.
But on the two simple metrics of laying down fire, rate of fire and effective range, then an MG Platoon now supplies the same support as a Wellington Battalion over an area (in a low intensity environment) that Wellington would have needed at least a Division or Corps to acheive a similar effect (supporting musket calibre fire).
At one level, using the business world's model that argues for making the MG Platoon at least a LCol's billet, if not a Field Marshall, where the Boss is supposedly paid on the basis of responsibility for what he can do. Not on the basis of how many men he is responsible for.
At the other level, there are still many jobs that Her Majesty requires of her soldiers that still require one-to-one service. ie the soldier's zone of influence is reduced to his/her arm's length. In those instances only large numbers will meet the need.
Unfortunately most of those tasks are not related to killing. They are not related to fire support. If the Infantry is challenged consider the poor artillery who has gone from muzzle loaded 6 pounders firing over open sights to Predators loitering for 24 hours any where in the world with Hellfires being controlled from an air conditioned room in Nevada. How many Bombardiers and LCols do you need then?
The tasks are not even related to supplying the force. In their case it is not just a case of PLS Trucks and RTFLs replacing horse drawn wagons (and one wagon in 3 supplying feed for the horses) and strong backs. It is the fact that they need to deliver the same number of rounds but to fewer troops (who need less food, water and spares) spread over a wider area. What is the appropriate MGen to RTFL ratio?
The one area where the old regimental requirement can be justifiably maintained is in "Constabulary Duties" aka "Peace-Keeping". There you still need the ability to act one on one with the THREAT of deadly force. But you need the bodies to be able to conduct a human dialog face to face that will convince the other side of unruly rioters to back down and not lift a fist.
An MG Platoon, in that case can do an Amritsar on the crowd. But it can't persuade them to pack up and go home without slaughtering them.
If the Army is just about supplying deadly force is support of HMG's aims then a small army with few troops and lots of Generals meets the needs.
If the Army wants to supply a broader range of options, including non-violent or less lethal options then it needs lots of troops with fewer Generals.
And now back to your discussion about Wellingtonian Cap Badges in the ABG/OBG.
