No worries. I'm sure the more experienced guys will stop me if I wander too far off course. (I crack me up)
Here we go:
Attack points: Say you have a....6k movement or whatever. Even on good terrain with a good body (sleep, food, injuries) things happen. So, you plot your 6k or whatever leg and look for nearby, clearly distinguished terrain features, things you can find night or day, at the end of that 6k. Intersections (two roads, a road and a blue line, two blue lines) make for great attack points. Shoot your azimuth to said intersection knowing that you only have 100-200 meters from it to your point. 1-200 meters is a lot better for one's pace count than 6k, right?
Now haul ass. Seriously. Shoot your azimuth, stay on it, don't fall into holes, and haul ass to the attack point. Once there you shoot your azimuth to the point you really need and then you have a short walk to get there....and NOW you worry about your pace count plus you picked up a bunch of time even with the slightly increased distance. An intersection is a LOT easier to find after running 6k than a 4x4 post. :)
Handrailing: Kind of the same thing. No attack points but you have a terrain feature that loosely parallels your route? Treat it like a hand rail and follow it. I've never seen a land nav course where walking on the roads was kosher...but you can handrail a road by 10m or so or a blue line or ridge or whatever. Hand rail to a point (bend in the road for example) and then pick up your pace count from there.
With both methods you are taking that 6, 8, 12k movement and reducing it down to only a few hundred meters or less where you have to concentrate and worry about your pace count. The rest of the time you are moving out and terrain associating.
"Alright, 247 degrees, I have a spur on my left and I'm moving downhill. Check. That spur peters out and then I hit a trail crossing a creek. Run, Forrest, run."
Make sense or did I lose anyone?