War on the rocks - hypothetical NATO-RUS

[Rebby]

The statement by @BTR about alcohol abuse in the ZSU reminds me of old Osprey Publishing book about the Soviet Army.In their analysis they wrote how alcohol consumption was not something of a issue related to the general character of the 'workplace' but rather a feature of the paragidm of manliness in the Soviet culture. 

 

Just now, BTR said:

From what I read in first hand accounts it has caused a lot of grief during training, downtime and rotation. Originally it was more of a Ukrainian problem, but with formalization of LDNR forces, the problem is now apparent on both sides of the front. It may sound like a Sputnik headline to a foreigner, but it is a very natural problem linked to passive stress in COIN operations in large post-soviet armies. First Chechen campaign was no different.  

If i recall correctly, I remember the Ukranian military also has a problem with a shortage of trained psychologists and other medical staff. Wasn't there like a significant soldier rehabilitation plan that was heavily publicized lately? 

[AttorneyAtWar]

4 minutes ago, BTR said:

From what I read in first hand accounts it has caused a lot of grief during training, downtime and rotation. Originally it was more of a Ukrainian problem, but with formalization of LDNR forces, the problem is now apparent on both sides of the front. It may sound like a Sputnik headline to a foreigner, but it is a very natural problem linked to passive stress in COIN operations in large post-soviet armies. First Chechen campaign was no different.  

I see, fair enough.

[Kinophile]

Interesting, thank you gentlemen. 

@BTR I guess my angle is more that the UA has the institutional capacity, manpower pool, incentive (defense of home soil) and western contacts to reform and develop into a more modern force. 

I'm also intrigued by how far it has come in so short a time -  there seems to be a solid core of officers who give a damn and are desperately  fighting the corruption,  incompetence and blinkered beurocracy to build a proper modern army. 

[BTR]

2 hours ago, Rebby said:

If i recall correctly, I remember the Ukranian military also has a problem with a shortage of trained psychologists and other medical staff. Wasn't there like a significant soldier rehabilitation plan that was heavily publicized lately? 

Don't know to be honest. Shortages of trained medical staff don't surprise me though, where was there ever a surplus of trained professionals working for any military?  

Edited May 28, 2016 by BTR

[LUCASWILLEN05]

5 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:

Kharkiv indeed will be a target goal. It is so close to our borders. Although there is one issue, the 92nd mechanized brigade of Ukraine is stationed in Kharkhiv. in 2015 during the war they were moved to Donbass. Attacking from Lugansk and Donetsk as well as large scale naval and aerial landings might be used to draw out a lot of forces to face this issue. Missile strikes would hit Ukrainian garrisons in order to make brigades less effective. Then essentially a third front can open to take Kharkiv, which will basically put Ukraine in a very overwhelmed situation. 

 

Kharkov also is a key road hub as well as being politically and symbolically important as even a cursory glance at the map (see Google Earth) There is a reason the city saw four battles during WW2 as most of us know very well. I agree with Vladimir hat, in the event of a Russian invasion of Ukraine a Russian thruston this axis is likely

[Rebby]

3 minutes ago, BTR said:

Don't know to be honest. Shortages of trained medical staff don't surprise me though, where was there ever a surplus of trained professionals working for any military?  

 Not really, I suppose. 

[LUCASWILLEN05]

5 hours ago, kinophile said:

If I understand correctly, the 92nd is one of the more effective Ukrainian units -  @Haiduk @BTR @Battlefront.com can maybe clarify/correct?

By naval landings, you mean along the southern coast? And by aerial you mean paradrops on Ukrainian airfields? The former possibly, in limited amounts (lets say max battalion, but in the right place it could have a disproportionate effect) and the latter, yes that could work. I doubt Ukrainian airfields are heavily defended, and a paradrop on a primary regional airbase could wreak havoc, if if eventually defeated.

Sounds like a reasonable assumption. Battalion sized airdrops on or near strategic objectives like Mariupol and Kharkov where they could capture certain strategic objectives and prevent or delay  Ukrainian forces from reinforcing strategic points (NATO is unlikely to intervene at this early stage) Small scale amphibious landings on the Southern coast might also fulfill a similar role. Maybe somewhere like Berdyansk to capture the airfields nearby and to secure the nearby road junction northwest of Novovasylivka and cutting the E58 road. Russia can subsequently develop an attack aimed at Melitopol and linking up with operations pushing out from the Crimea

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

5 hours ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

Sounds like a reasonable assumption. Battalion sized airdrops on or near strategic objectives like Mariupol and Kharkov where they could capture certain strategic objectives and prevent or delay  Ukrainian forces from reinforcing strategic points (NATO is unlikely to intervene at this early stage) Small scale amphibious landings on the Southern coast might also fulfill a similar role. Maybe somewhere like Berdyansk to capture the airfields nearby and to secure the nearby road junction northwest of Novovasylivka and cutting the E58 road. Russia can subsequently develop an attack aimed at Melitopol and linking up with operations pushing out from the Crimea

Impossible.  Russian VDV will be rerouted to deal with the Japanese-Korean-USMC invasion of Vladivostok, and it's frankly impossible for much of anything to happen once the Neo-Ottoman Turkish Jihadists reach Volgograd.  

And all that will be simply setting up for the US 2nd, 3rd, 4th Armored that will certainly be reactivated in the face of Russian aggression coming over the pole via hovercraft.  Moscow will be secured in days by specially modified EOD robots armed with laser pulse rifles, and the killing blow will actually be accomplished by physic doom troopers in the basement of the Pentagon, projecting ill thoughts straight into the minds of Russians everywhere.  

Re: John Barleycorn and friends

It's an interesting question as to if the consumption of the booze is the disease or simply a manifestation of other issues (poor discipline, lack of meaningful ties to mission, poor unit cohesion etc).  

Re: Ukrainian Problems

The Ukraine has a long ways to go.  However historically the defender's failings are less punishing than the attacker's.  A great example is how long and how much effort it took to subdue the Nazis well after whatever qualitative and quantitative edge they had was shot.  The various airsofter forces are equally burdened but doing so on the offensive which makes their effectiveness dubious.

A general offensive will require complete Russian commitment, and even then I wouldn't hold out as much hope.  The Ukrainians have had a few years to get hard and start to fix their military.  I wouldn't totally discount a successful "short" war for the Russians, but I contend long term political-economic fallout would negate it's value.

Frankly a longer war would more or less dismantle Russia's place as a part of Europe.  Even defeating the Ukraine there'd be no victory.  NATO would expand, economic sanctions would expand several times over, and Russia's "soft" power weak as it is would be gone, and it's "hard" power is frankly too weak to accomplish much in the wider picture.  

 

[Kinophile]

So another plus one whereby  a UKR initiated attack could actually be successful, tactically,  strategically and long term -  so long as the UA can keep its **** together. 

I'm curious (that's why they call me Whiskers),  what is the current state of the Donbass armies? Does OSCE  or NATO have a reasonably up-to-date analysis? 

I mean,  really,  how are things over there? 

Edited May 29, 2016 by kinophile

[Haiduk]

1 hour ago, kinophile said:

I'm curious (that's why they call me Whiskers),  what is the current state of the Donbass armies? Does OSCE  or NATO have a reasonably up-to-date analysis? 

I mean,  really,  how are things over there? 

DNR/LNR forces united under 1st (DNR) and 2nd (LNR) "people militia corpses". Both subordinated to 12th Reserve Command of South military district in Russia. Real command in General Staff of both "republics" conducts Russian hi-ranked officers - curators, though in brigades they operate under pseudonymes like "locals".

Each corps has several brigades and regiments, one arty brigade, recon units, territorial defense battalions (mostly in LNR) etc. I have structures pics, but its on Russian. Both corps has 30-40K of personnel, among them about 60 % are locals and rest are Russian volunteers and "vacators". Also 3-5K of regular Russian troops, but they are stay in rear, only EW and sometimes artillery operates on frontline. DNR/LNR corps has heavy problems with discipline and morale, has lack of personnel.  

[Kinophile]

Excellent information,  thank you. 

 I assume they are organized very close to the current Russian BMGs, with perhaps a bit more light infantry. 

How do they handle their heavy armor? Do they have dedicated strike/reaction groups? I've read that the Ukraine was using its tanks mainly in "penny packets",  ie small groups supporting infantry,  due to the width and depth of the front. Is this also true of the Separatists? Is this still true of the Ukraine? 

Is there an open source,  public breakdown of the DNR/LNR military structure? 

Also, and idea why are they still separate Republics? Why not just unite,  under a single Donbass Republic? The different entities smacks of fiefdom building,  which would make sense considering the strong fringe/criminal/military  elements within the Separatist political scene. 

 

Edited May 29, 2016 by kinophile

[VladimirTarasov]

8 minutes ago, kinophile said:

Also, and idea why are they still separate Republics? Why not just unite,  under a single Donbass Republic?

Excellent question  

[Kinophile]

@Haiduk what's your own estimate the Separatists resilience and combat skill? 

[Haiduk]

5 hours ago, kinophile said:

@Haiduk what's your own estimate the Separatists resilience and combat skill? 

It's hard to say. Different units have different staffing, so its skills/motivation also will be different. Here of rough classification of their personnel:

 - Russian volunteers - retired soldiers. They are mostly skilled and motivated. Big part of them are served in Soviet and (or) Russian army and they have experiense of 1-3 wars. By CM gradations I would give them "veteran"/"crack" levels. But now, when active war paused and among "militants" reign alcoholism, robbery and showdowns between leaders (indeed showdowns between different Kremlin curators) many of idea veterans abandoned Donbas and returned to Russia

- Next category is also Russian volunteers, but they are either young people, victims of TV propaganda (some of them served in modern army, someone not), or peoples under hook of police (jail or training camp in Rostov and go to Donbas), or peoples wich have problems with bank credits (especially hipotec). Most of them are "green" with motivation average. 

- "Vacators". Regular soldiers, which direct by their command to separatists forces as "local miners". Some of them go to Donbas by own will, but most of them are go there by order - both contractors and conscripts. By words of our soldiers I can judge, that they have avarage "regular" level and motivation average or lower.

- Cossacks. Both local Don cossacks and Don cossacks volunteres from Russia have a reputation even among Russian militants like drunkers and uncontrolled bands, though now they united in several battalions and regiment of LNR by iron hand of Russia. They can toughly fight for own settlement or area, but can reject to fight somewhere else. Good example fight for Lohvynove during Debaltsevo battle. Among cossacks also enough quantity of army or police retired, but in whole their avarage level "green-regular" and motivation, which can very differs depending of task and enemy forces.

- Locals- retired servicemen. Many of Donbasians served in Soviet army and army of Ukraine, but here means most active pro-Russian people. But unlike Russian veterans, single experience for them left far Afganistan war. So they are "regulars" with morale hihger, than average (up to fanatism).

- Local criminals. Donbas is extremaly criminal region. I will not tell why it so - this is long story, but criminal subculture is one of features of this region. When war have started, many of "tough guys" - from mafia security forces to street bandits "legally" took the weapon. I would give them "green-regular", but motivation average.

- locals. Wide cathegory of men. Somebody go to militatnts by ideological moods fight wuth "junta", somebody turned out without money and go to militants for its salary, somebody was conscripted, somebody go to militants in order to have opportunity to "play in war" in real. They are most numbered and most poor part for intensive actions. "Green" (end even "conscript" at the summer 2014) by training and lower than avarage motivation.They need commander with +x Command level :), else they can't fight too long under fire.

So, by mixing these components in different proportions and considering commanders level you can receive resilence and combat skill       

 

Edited May 30, 2016 by Haiduk

[LUCASWILLEN05]

47 minutes ago, Haiduk said:

It's hard to say. Different units have different staffing, so its skills/motivation also will be different. Here of rough classification of their personnel:

 - Russian volunteers - retired soldiers. They are mostly skilled and motivated. Big part of them are served in Soviet and (or) Russian army and they have experiense of 1-3 wars. By CM gradations I would give them "veteran"/"crack" levels. But now, when active war paused and among "militants" reign alcoholism, robbery and showdowns between leaders (indeed showdowns between different Kremlin curators) many of idea veterans abandoned Donbas and returned to Russia

- Next category is also Russian volunteers, but they are either young people, victims of TV propaganda (some of them served in modern army, someone not), or peoples under hook of police (jail or training camp in Rostov and go to Donbas), or peoples wich have problems with bank credits (especially hipotec). Most of them are "green" with motivation average.

- "Vacators". Regular soldiers, which direct by their command to separatists forces as "local miners". Some of them go to Donbas by own will, but most of them are go there by order - both contractors and conscripts. By words of our soldiers I can judge, that they have avarage "regular" level and motivation average or lower.

- Cossacks. Both local Don cossacks and Don cossacks volunteres from Russia have a reputation even among Russian militants like drunkers and uncontrolled bands, though now they united in several battalions and regiment of LNR by iron hand of Russia. They can toughly fight for own settlement or area, but can reject to fight somewhere else. Good example fight for Lohvynove during Debaltsevo battle. Among cossacks also enough quantity of army or police retired, but in whole their avarage level "green-regular" and motivation, which can very differs depending of task and enemy forces.

- Locals- retired servicemen. Many of Donbasians served in Soviet army and army of Ukraine, but here means most active pro-Russian people. But unlike Russian veterans, single experience for them left far Afganistan war. So they are "regulars" with morale hihger, than average (up to fanatism).

- Local criminals. Donbas is extremaly criminal region. I will not tell why it so - this is long story, but criminal subculture is one of features of this region. When war have started, many of "tough guys" - from mafia security forces to street bandits "legally" took the weapon. I would give them "green-regular", but motivation average.

- locals. Wide cathegory of men. Somebody go to militatnts by ideological moods fight wuth "junta", somebody turned out without money and go to militants for its salary, somebody was conscripted, somebody go to militants in order to have opportunity to "play in war" in real. They are most numbered and most poor part for intensive actions. "Green" (end even "conscript" at the summer 2014) by training and lower than avarage motivation.They need commander with +x Command level :), else they can't fight too long under fire.

So, by mixing these components in different proportions and considering commanders level you can receive resilence and combat skill      

 

Re Russian volunteers I think a veteran/crack rating may be over inflating their capabilities. Taking into account recent service I would think Regular might be a more accurate reflection with faiirly average leadership and Normal/High motivation.

  I would consider a veteran/crack rating would be more appropriate to good quality regulars such as British Paras, US Marines and their Russian equivilants. The rest of your evaluation makes sense to me

[Haiduk]

11 minutes ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

Re Russian volunteers I think a veteran/crack rating may be over inflating their capabilities. Taking into account recent service I would think Regular might be a more accurate reflection with faiirly average leadership and Normal/High motivation.

  I would consider a veteran/crack rating would be more appropriate to good quality regulars such as British Paras, US Marines and their Russian equivilants. The rest of your evaluation makes sense to me

Big part of this cathegory are retired officers and sergeants, which served in VDV, Marines or Spetsnaz. In Russia exist veteran organization of these forces - in every region or big city, so not a problem to gather many of people, which have experiencxe of Afganistan, both Chechen wars and S.Osetian war. Many of them really have as minimum level of veterans and huge combat experience.  

Edited May 30, 2016 by Haiduk

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Just now, Haiduk said:

Big part of this cathegory served in VDV, Marines or Spetsnaz. In Russia exist veteran organization of these forces. in every region or big city, so not a problem to gather many of people, which have experienxe of Afganistan, both Chechen wars and S.Osetian war. Many of them realy have as minimum level of veterans. 

Ah, I see  where you are coming from. Maybe give them a variable rating between Regular and Veteran. Crack might be too high for most units however - few make it into Special Forces. You could give units a good leadership rating  and probably get similar results. A crack squad seems to me like a very exceptional unit - we don't want "The Dirty Dozen" in our typical battle - these are not the US Marines, Royal Marine Commandos, etc :

[Haiduk]

31 minutes ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

Ah, I see  where you are coming from. Maybe give them a variable rating between Regular and Veteran. Crack might be too high for most units however - few make it into Special Forces. You could give units a good leadership rating  and probably get similar results. A crack squad seems to me like a very exceptional unit - we don't want "The Dirty Dozen" in our typical battle - these are not the US Marines, Royal Marine Commandos, etc :

If crack too high, who then can be elite ? :). You know, men, officers, which have many years of service and passed several long bloody conflicts - not surgical special operations or "turkey shot" like during Iraq wars, turned out to real "dog of war". Especially if they have idea and motivation. Of course "crack" appropriate not for everybody of them, but veterans - 100 % But such cathegory not so numerous in separatists forces, especially now. Of course among them can select sub-cathegory "regular"/high motivated, but as I said it is rough classification.

For other hand I can say about Ukrainain troops - here also all different. Most skilled and motivated are airmobile units (regular-veteran/good+ motivation). Infantry mostly green (especilally in 2014), after 2015 already close to regular due to comabt experience and raised number of contractors. Motivation - mostly poor in 2014 and normal+ now. Marines - regular/ good motivation. Special forces regular/good in 2014, now close to veteran/good+. National Guard (former Internal troops) - green/poor+, National Guard (volunteer-formed) - green/high in 2014 and regular/good+ now. Of course all these values also "avarage temeprature in whole hospital" - for each operation and unit its values could differ itself even among one brigade or battalion...  

Edited May 30, 2016 by Haiduk

[Kinophile]

Fascinating as always,  Haiduk. Thank you so much. 

 

Within any given regular UKR or Sep line battalion,  could there be quite a variation in experience/motivation between companies? Or even within companies? 

This could make for some very interesting battles with mixed (technically  & psychologically) forces... 

[Vanir Ausf B]

3 hours ago, Haiduk said:

I- "Vacators".      

Vacationers. But we knew what you meant

[Haiduk]

9 hours ago, kinophile said:

Within any given regular UKR or Sep line battalion,  could there be quite a variation in experience/motivation between companies? Or even within companies? 

Of course, yes. But in airmobile/marines/special and in some specific separatist units variations not so significant. In UKR forces units consists of cadre officers, contractors and mobilized officers and soldiers. By law last two serve one year (but in real can delay up to several month over), so typical company in 2015 approx. has 10-30 % of cadre/contractors and rest - mobilized. When they just come to front they have one level of experience, close to to end of service they, as rule already have firm "regular" or even "veteran" level (in some units, where good training and initaiative commander and which have many fire contacts). Motivation significantly doesn't change - but when mobilized delay on positions after year, of course its became lower.

Edited May 31, 2016 by Haiduk

[LUCASWILLEN05]

11 hours ago, Haiduk said:

If crack too high, who then can be elite ? :). You know, men, officers, which have many years of service and passed several long bloody conflicts - not surgical special operations or "turkey shot" like during Iraq wars, turned out to real "dog of war". Especially if they have idea and motivation. Of course "crack" appropriate not for everybody of them, but veterans - 100 % But such cathegory not so numerous in separatists forces, especially now. Of course among them can select sub-cathegory "regular"/high motivated, but as I said it is rough classification.

For other hand I can say about Ukrainain troops - here also all different. Most skilled and motivated are airmobile units (regular-veteran/good+ motivation). Infantry mostly green (especilally in 2014), after 2015 already close to regular due to comabt experience and raised number of contractors. Motivation - mostly poor in 2014 and normal+ now. Marines - regular/ good motivation. Special forces regular/good in 2014, now close to veteran/good+. National Guard (former Internal troops) - green/poor+, National Guard (volunteer-formed) - green/high in 2014 and regular/good+ now. Of course all these values also "avarage temeprature in whole hospital" - for each operation and unit its values could differ itself even among one brigade or battalion... 

From the CMSF Shock Force Manual which should give you some guidance

EXPERIENCE

 

 

– determines the experience and training level of

the soldiers of the formation. Options include:

- Conscript: draftees with little training and no combat experience

whatsoever.

- Green: draftees with little training and some combat experience

or reservists with some training and no combat experience.

Green can also represent professional soldiers whose training

is substandard in comparison to another force.

- Regular: professional soldiers who went through extensive,

quality training programs, but lack combat experience. Or

Regular can represent troops that received mediocre training

that have a fair amount of combat experience.

- Veteran: professional soldiers with standard military training

and first hand combat experience. Alternatively, it can be professional

soldiers who have trained to a slightly higher standard

than Regulars, yet lack combat experience.

- Crack: exceptional soldiers with more than the average training

and plenty of combat experience.

- Elite: the best of the best. Superb training, frequent combat

experience, and generally all around tough guys.

I would give units such as the US Marines, 82nd Airborne, US Marines, British paras and Royal Marine Commandoes a Veteran rating. Seleced units would get a Crack Rating. Elite is relly the best of the best and I would reserve this for Spcial Forces of he major nations (eg British SAS, Russian Spetznaz or Crack troops with a lot of major combat experience. The trouble with your Russianvolunteers, though some of them will certainly have served in Chechnya (Afghanistabn is too long ago for most) is that their experience was some time ago. If it were my decision I would rate them as Veterans with quite high motivation and mostly +1 and occasional +2 leaders.

Another point is you can actually rate individual squads, Hence,althogh your entire force might have an overall rating of Regular you can still have individual squds with better ratings.  would be very cautious about uing n Elite squad with your Russim Volunteers. I woud reservthis for actual Specisl Forces "advisors) and you won't have more than one squad of these in most cases

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

15 hours ago, Haiduk said:

If crack too high, who then can be elite ? :). You know, men, officers, which have many years of service and passed several long bloody conflicts - not surgical special operations or "turkey shot" like during Iraq wars, turned out to real "dog of war". Especially if they have idea and motivation. Of course "crack" appropriate not for everybody of them, but veterans - 100 % But such cathegory not so numerous in separatists forces, especially now. Of course among them can select sub-cathegory "regular"/high motivated, but as I said it is rough classification.

For other hand I can say about Ukrainain troops - here also all different. Most skilled and motivated are airmobile units (regular-veteran/good+ motivation). Infantry mostly green (especilally in 2014), after 2015 already close to regular due to comabt experience and raised number of contractors. Motivation - mostly poor in 2014 and normal+ now. Marines - regular/ good motivation. Special forces regular/good in 2014, now close to veteran/good+. National Guard (former Internal troops) - green/poor+, National Guard (volunteer-formed) - green/high in 2014 and regular/good+ now. Of course all these values also "avarage temeprature in whole hospital" - for each operation and unit its values could differ itself even among one brigade or battalion...  

Just to throw it out there, ask yourself, was the Iraq war's outcome purely because the Iraqis were "bad" or because they were an average 3rd World army that suddenly found itself thrown at a military force designed to take on the best the Soviets had and win?  Consider that the Iraqi army was filled with folks who passed through a very long and bloody conflict, and was equipped about as well as your average non-Soviet Warsaw Pact military.

I've always taken the troop rating to be sort of a center of mass for a unit, with some percentage being better or worse than that standard (D/2-9 IN is "regular" because it's a normal well trained US Army unit, but tanks 14, and 22 are frankly excellent crews so they're actually veteran, while tank 11 is commanded by a moron so it's actually green).

In that regard, taking my own spin from the manual:

Conscript: Has been adequately informed where the bullets come from on their rifle and little else. Well represents units hastily trained.  Formations may include some veteran fighters, but since it's a rating for squads and  crews, this effect is often diluted.  Will likely still have some "green" teams that represent folks who just take to war better than others.  

Green: "Regular" military forces with problems.  Not a bad level to represent hastily activated reserve type units (again, there might be some very good combat veterans in the formation, but the squad they lead hasn't worked together in months if not years) or perhaps units poorly prepared for combat (say something like the Egyptian Army operating outside of an internal security role)

Regular: Most every normal every day Army unit, or reserve units that have had time to fully mobilize and complete train up.  Nothing special, but does exactly what's printed on the box.  Also forces that were "green" at the start of the conflict, not quite as wired as a regular unit would be, but no longer tripping over their shoelaces either.

Veteran: Regular units that are just a bit better for some reason.  Could be they've figured a lot out on the road to Donbass and they're pretty darn good at their job now.  Could be they're the elite of their nation's regular military.  Also good to represent a qualitative difference between two "regular" units (or a very well drilled and prepared ABCT coming off of a large exercise with the Poles running into a Russian armor Brigade that's been in garrison for the last six months.  The Russian unit isn't going to be bad enough to be "green" but there's certainly a qualitative edge to the American unit in this situation).  

Crack: Some folks are just great soldiers.  Every unit in combat seems to pick up those dudes who are just disturbingly good at what they do, and sometimes the rest of their squad/crew follows suite.  Good to represent a regular team/vehicle that's seen some combat and excelled, but frankly the number of truly "crack" organizations (so a crack platoon or company) should be quite small.

Elite: Should hardly be used outside of missions where you really want to set aside certain units as something special.  Perhaps tank D22 is manned by the greatest tanker to ever tank, and his prowess will make or break 2nd Platoon in the coming battle.  But again, elite should be virtually unheard of in peacetime regular military units, and very very rare even in veteran forces.  

[Kinophile]

I forget,  does experience level affect the rarity points in-game? 

If not, sounds like it should. 

Edited May 31, 2016 by kinophile

[Abbasid111]

I don't believe it effects rarity but the cost of more for better trained and motivated troops