Can someone explain to me how order TP's work in MdE when the C-in-C is ordering formations directly?

Is there a command radius are is he only allowed to order units he's attached to? 

The C-in-C can only issue orders to those formations or units he is in direct base contact with (p.12).

(There is a nuance here, in that sometimes the C-in-C controls units directly, e.g. the grand battery referred to on p.9, but essentially any unit that is controlled at the Army HQ level. In those cases, the C-in-C controls those units like he is their General and does not need to be in base-to-base contact - but the downside being that only the C-in-C can control them).

So, in traditional armies like Wellington's in the Peninsula, I don't need to be in base contact with every formation I want to order?

No, you don't need to be in base contact with every formation you want to order. 

Now, there is a vicious reading of the rules where Wellington would need to be present to order any formation over a single base in size to start moving. This depends on whether you think that formation commanders can store Tempo Points or not, which in turn is derived from whether you think that all formation commanders can be considered generals for all purposes. It takes 3 TPs to start a 2-base formation moving, and if formation commanders cannot store Tempo Points, then Wellington would have to be present, because he can only allocate 2 Tempo Points per turn and he would have to provide the third himself. I suspect however that the author did intend that formation commanders should be treated as generals in this respect but there is nothing to prove that for certain. However, references like in the Anglo-Netherlands Army 1815 army generator (p.37) show that he does, on occasion, refer to formation commanders as generals and I think he meant to here, i.e. the use of 'general or formation commander' at the top of p.12 was meant to bracket them together for the remainder of this section of the rules. In any case, that is how I play it and I think it the much more realistic option.

Thanks for clearing that up!

You are very welcome.

I would agree with Whirlwind's conclusions.  MDE is a 'thinking' game and there are enough challenges already without further grit in the system.

On a personal observation I much prefer MDE as a game, but that is my peculiarity and is probably not a widely held view or indeed has any claim to reality.

One final question for Whirlwind. I am looking at the scenario maps in both Ligny and the companion Book and I'm wondering if the 2.5BW square unit is actually enough to fit the BW square unit in MdE. The maps themselves seem to have GDD units deployed.

You are right, visually they look more like GdD bases than MdE. In any case, they definitely don't fit exactly for Ligny, whether you use the recommended square basing of MdE or whether you stick with the recommended rectangular style for GdD. It does work if you change the scale to 1 square = 18cm rather than 15cm.

Some of the others in the Companion are somewhat similar - to get them to match, the squares tend to need to be about 0.5BW wider than the claimed scale. This applies to Austerlitz, Aspern-Essling, Vittoria, Wagram and Waterloo, although Wagram & Waterloo are pretty marginal. For example, for D'Erlon in the latter, think of his second line as being 5 bases of infantry in a line covering 2 squares. Probably the worst one is Aspern, but that is easily solved by playing on a 4' wide board, rather than the scenario implied 108cm wide board.

On a personal observation I much prefer MDE as a game, but that is my peculiarity and is probably not a widely held view or indeed has any claim to reality.

I am not sure that I prefer it - I really enjoy both - but it is a cleaner and faster game than GdD.