Green Troops

[Daroc]

I cannot get fire suppression cause green troops run.  They won't stay after being fired upon once - they flee.

If someone gets hurt or dies they enter panic.  Trying to bring 3-4 units to a line to gain fire suppression is like herding cats.

[Bulletpoint]

I had a green tank crew that got permanently "rattled" because their tank got stuck in mud

[IICptMillerII]

This is an issue that is greatly exacerbated by the 4.0 infantry AI bug. Word is that a patch has been developed and is being tested now before its released. Hopefully the patch comes out soon. I just played a battle in CMBN v4 that was particularly infuriating due to the infantry bug. 

[Josey Wales]

There are times when we don't have the quality of troops we want so we have to play the hand we're dealt regardless of patches or updates. 

Keeping low quality troops as a combined squad helps mitigate the negative effects of suppression. Splitting them into smaller teams is not always a good idea. 

If any of the squads have leadership or motivation bonuses then get them on the firing step first as they can handle incoming fire better. 

Keep the HQ within C2. 

Use smoke to conceal them getting into position. 

Don't let them get killed 😉

 

[Daroc]

My entire inf force was green.  It was a small battle with a allied attk and they couldn't stay long enough for supporting forces to come to the line.  CMBN.

[IICptMillerII]

Was the scenario "Buying the Farm" by chance?

[Bulletpoint]

Yesterday I also noticed an infantry team in good condition got panicked by firing their own Panzerfaust. They ran out of the building they were in and into an open field.

[nik mond]

On 3/18/2018 at 1:31 PM, Bulletpoint said:

Yesterday I also noticed an infantry team in good condition got panicked by firing their own Panzerfaust. They ran out of the building they were in and into an open field.

Without trying to patronize that example I could see a green soldier firing a panzerfaust in a building and back blasting a comrade. Firing hand held AT in a building was implemented some time ago with penalties to condition. I've had schreks cause light casualties to squadmates when fired in a building too on occasion.

[Daroc]

IICptMillerII no, it was just a Inf plt, HMG, & Sm mortor. all green (not sure of the name anymore).  I tried to use the smoke on the enemy, but I think it would have been better used covering the the advance and I prob would have had better results.

[DerKommissar]

Green troops? I have enough issues with Regular troops. A single MG-42 can make a platoon suppressed, a squad retreat or a team broken. Unfortunately, most German squads have MG-42s. Same experience with those brilliant Italian light mortars. I've had one flush out a platoon in foxholes on a hill. I've used Green infantry, previously, as a budget option in Quick Battles. They are a good reserve, or delaying force. I hardly expected them to remain combat effective after an encounter. 

There's two scenarios. The fresh-faced lads open fire first and suppress/inflict casualties on an unsuspecting enemy. Or the enemy opens fire first, and they pull back -- giving you a chance to detect and react with other troops.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Chances are that green troops won't stay around unless they have good morale in which case they will just get the stuffing knocked out of them.

[domfluff]

I usually think of Green troops as being able to do one thing. You can rely on them to take that hill, defend from this position, kill one vehicle with their AT assets etc., but you can't rely on them to do more than this.

In CMFI, Italian troops are usually Green by default. Ideally, you use them in the attack against a fixed position. You give them a ton of supporting fires, preferably from Brixia mortars, and you hope that enough of them make it to grenade range to make the difference.

Any more complex plan is inviting failure - you can't guarantee that any individual part of a Green formation will actually be able to do it's job, but with careful hand-holding and limited expectations, they can still be useful.
 

[wadepm]

Welcome to the 90th ID on D+1...

[IICptMillerII]

1 hour ago, wadepm said:

Welcome to the 90th ID on D+1...

Lack of combat experience does not equal "Green" experience level in CM. Green means poorly trained. The 90th ID (and the rest for that matter) were not poorly trained for Operation Overlord. 

[domfluff]

5 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

Lack of combat experience does not equal "Green" experience level in CM. Green means poorly trained. The 90th ID (and the rest for that matter) were not poorly trained for Operation Overlord. 

I think that definition has been an unresolved argument for as long as wargames have been a thing.

It's a consequence of being forced to supply hard numbers for soft factors, and there isn't really a great solution - are the 101st Airborne on D-Day "green" troops, since they hadn't dropped before, or "Veteran" troops, given the higher levels of training? With how specifically Combat Mission models "Green" behaviour (i.e., designing the scenario for effect), you're probably better modelling them as Regular or Veteran, but it's not a question with a single answer.

[IICptMillerII]

1 hour ago, domfluff said:

I think that definition has been an unresolved argument for as long as wargames have been a thing.

It's a consequence of being forced to supply hard numbers for soft factors, and there isn't really a great solution - are the 101st Airborne on D-Day "green" troops, since they hadn't dropped before, or "Veteran" troops, given the higher levels of training? With how specifically Combat Mission models "Green" behaviour (i.e., designing the scenario for effect), you're probably better modelling them as Regular or Veteran, but it's not a question with a single answer.

The CM manual literally answers the question. The experience rating is relative to CM, as in CM has its own interpretation. Just because it says Green does not mean every definition of the word applies. CM defines the term Green in the manual. The exact text has been posted in this thread, and other places a few times now.

To answer the rhetorical question, the 101st should be set to Veteran, based on how CM defines Veteran. Veteran simulates either soldiers who are battle hardened, OR soldiers who have undergone extensive, elite training. The latter applies to the 101st for Normandy. At the very least, the 101st should be at least one step above their German counterparts to simulate the paratroopers having better training than your average German in Normandy at the time of the landings. 

Another example of setting troops to veteran is if you were simulating a regular infantry unit that has spent months training for a specific mission, like taking a specific bridge or something where they ran realistic drills on mock-ups, etc. It simulates the troops being very well trained for the specific battle they are in. It doesn't mean that they are all universally good at every tactical situation they find themselves in. So following that example of troops taking a bridge, if there is a follow on scenario that is a regular fight, you can set them back to Regular to simulate their average, standard training. 

One last point, the experience ratings are relative to each other. So for example, you could set US forces to Regular and Russian forces to Green to simulate the Russians having a lot of conscripts. In this example the Russians are still competent, their training is just much more outmatched by the US. Same can be said for UKR vs Russian forces. The UKR could be set to Green and the Russians Regular or above to simulate the quality difference. 

The pre-conceived notions about what the words mean need to go away. Again, CM defines these terms. Use their definition, provided to everyone in the engine manual. 

Edited April 10, 2018 by IICptMillerII

[wadepm]

8 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

Lack of combat experience does not equal "Green" experience level in CM. Green means poorly trained. The 90th ID (and the rest for that matter) were not poorly trained for Operation Overlord. 

I would read this:  http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA506897

[Falaise]

This is not the subject of the discussion
but I can not stand criticism of this division so to defend it

2 months later the experience is there…
the 90th ID engaged in the fight of Bourg Saint Léonard and a formidable unit.
the 1st battalion of the 359th regiment has a front too wide to hold (5km instead of the 700m recommended)
it will face for 2 days the 2nd SS das reich and armored element of the 116th. Losing 4 times the village, counterattacking every time and taking over the village,, the A and B companies on August 17 do not have anymore officers.

i like this unit the “tough ombres”

 and i have a texas flag hooked on my wall give given by veterans of this unit

 

Medal of honor in Chambois

[domfluff]

3 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:

The pre-conceived notions about what the words mean need to go away. Again, CM defines these terms. Use their definition, provided to everyone in the engine manual. 

Oh, you're quite right, but I do think there's scope for flexibility within CM scenarios - depending on the narrative you're painting, it can definitely be appropriate to shift experience levels around, even if only to model relative differences. For the 101st example, Veteran vs Regular German troops would be fine, but you could certainly argue for Regular vs Green, depending.

This is the "design for effect" part of CM (and wargame design in general) - occasionally you need to bend the model to suit the outcome, particularly if the events you are simulating are significantly outside of the norm.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

There is nothing to prevent green troops fro having high morale and thewere are historical examples of this. Moreoften however they won't be that well motivated

So for instance you could have Training Green )or Conscript with Extreme or Fanatic motivations. These might represent, for example, a unit of Shi'te militia Iraq 2014. These are newly raised, largely civilian volunteers with no training or military experience but full of religious fervor. You can of course adjust ratings in individual squads to account for small units who actually do have some experience. Also don't forget leadership caan have an effect as well

Edited April 10, 2018 by LUCASWILLEN05

[Erwin]

What are the factors ones can alter in the editor?  IIRC one can have troops that are weak/unfit etc.  So, well-trained troops would have all those soft factors to the max, but may still be "Green" as in not battle tested.  You could have tired and unmotivated Veterans, who have all soft factors set to minimum. 

That would be an interesting match-up actually.

[Heirloom_Tomato]

43 minutes ago, Erwin said:

What are the factors ones can alter in the editor?  IIRC one can have troops that are weak/unfit etc.  So, well-trained troops would have all those soft factors to the max, but may still be "Green" as in not battle tested.  You could have tired and unmotivated Veterans, who have all soft factors set to minimum. 

That would be an interesting match-up actually.

The factors are: 

Experience: 6 levels, Conscript to Elite

Motivation: 6 levels, Poor to Fanatic

Fitness: Fit, weakened, Unfit

Leadership: -2 to +2

Supply: 5 levels, Severe to Full

The possibilites exsist to create virtually any situation you can imagine.

In my opinion, whatever preconceived notions one has about the definition of the word "green" or "veteran" with regards to troop quality is meaningless. The game is based off of the definition found in the manual, and for CM purposes, this is the only definition that matters.

[sburke]

1 hour ago, Heirloom_Tomato said:

In my opinion, whatever preconceived notions one has about the definition of the word "green" or "veteran" with regards to troop quality is meaningless. The game is based off of the definition found in the manual, and for CM purposes, this is the only definition that matters.

Yep. both you and Cpt Miller are on point.  It doesn't matter what other references there are for definitions out there.  Within the context of CM only CMs view matters regarding the settings to use.  Forget the definitions even.  Figure out what "green" means in the context of the battle your are creating then set the options in CM to match that.  Veteran, green, elite etc are all just naming conventions to a set of options that are only relevant when compared to each other.

[MikeyD]

There was a saying among veteran GIs in WWII - don't make friends with the new guy. Attrition within units would be made up with new soldiers fresh from the states and as green as grass. The combat survival rate for the 'new guys' was very much lower than veterans. Infantry got it from both directions. The high NCO casualty rate meant veteran units often found themselves saddled with '90-day-wonders' fresh out of officer candidate school who were more of a danger to themselves than to the enemy. I recall a story told to me by an old Pacific jungle fighter about one newly-arrived unit that broke during an enemy attack and didn't stop running until they had made it all the way back to the beach. Behavior he considered shameful.

[IICptMillerII]

6 hours ago, domfluff said:

Oh, you're quite right, but I do think there's scope for flexibility within CM scenarios - depending on the narrative you're painting, it can definitely be appropriate to shift experience levels around, even if only to model relative differences. For the 101st example, Veteran vs Regular German troops would be fine, but you could certainly argue for Regular vs Green, depending.

This is the "design for effect" part of CM (and wargame design in general) - occasionally you need to bend the model to suit the outcome, particularly if the events you are simulating are significantly outside of the norm.

I completely agree. 

4 hours ago, Heirloom_Tomato said:

In my opinion, whatever preconceived notions one has about the definition of the word "green" or "veteran" with regards to troop quality is meaningless. The game is based off of the definition found in the manual, and for CM purposes, this is the only definition that matters.

Same here.