Biltong

Have a 2nd look at what Claude 'The Scalpel' wrote and give feedback. I want to take a descision tomorrow, if possible, and get rid of exp gain for once and for all - so far no-one has come up with a simpler solution... Still holding thumbs - Biltong As I see it, currently the player has little hope (or motivation) of ever having troops better than the replacement level. The higher the current point value of the unit above the replacement norm, the farther it drops when substitutes show up to fill in for casualties (and there will be bodies). And if the existing unit is of lower quality than the replacements, then the commander has a strong incentive to kill off those troops to get the higher quality newbies. (I can just picture a commander near the successful end of a battle, herding his low experience units into open ground, and then calling in friendly indirect fire on their heads.) The trick is to allow a unit to keep experience gains if they do not suffer catastrophic loss events, while discouraging commanders from slaughtering low experience units for higher quality generic replacements. Oh, and the solution should apply the KISS doctrine. Taking that into account, my proposal modifies the experience gain/loss based on one of five casualty states a unit can be in at the end of a battle. The states and their effects are: NONE. No casualties. (YEA!) Compute experience gain/loss normally. MODERATE. 1/3 or less of the unit strength are casualties. The unit keeps its before battle experience, neither gaining or losing points. HEAVY. More than 1/3 and less than half of the unit strength are casualties. If the unit is over halfway to the next experience level, drop to the halfway point. Else drop to the base experience value for the current level of skill. CATASTROPIC. 1/2 or more of the unit soldiers are casualties, but at least one person remains functional. If the unit is over halfway to its next experience level, drop to the base points for current level. Else drop to the halfway point of the next lower experience level. TOTAL. Unit eliminated. Use the Replacement level experience, if equal to or less than the current level. Else drop to the base points of the next level down. This helps discourage heartless commanders from slaughtering low point units for the high point replacements. Examples of these casualty states on subsequent (post replacement) experiences are: NONE. A six person MG team starts the battle with 16 experience (Regular), kills a tank (work with me here), gets rattled, and loses no soldiers. They end the battle with six warriors and 18 experience points. MODERATE. A six person MG team starts the battle with 16 experience (Regular), kills a tank and loses two soldiers. They end the battle with 16 experience. HEAVY. A ten person squad starts the battle with 16 experience (Regular), kills a tank and loses four soldiers. They end the battle with 10 experience (still Regular). If the unit had started with 18-24 experience points (over half-way to next level), they would end with 17 experience points. CATASTROPIC. A ten person squad starts the battle with 18 (over half-way to next level) experience (Regular), kills a tank and loses from five to nine soldiers. They end the battle with 10 experience (still Regular). If the unit had started with 17 experience points, they would end with 7 experience points (Green). TOTAL. If the replacements are Veteran level then a six person MG team starting the battle with 16 experience (Regular), killing a tank and losing all soldiers, they end the battle with 5 experience (Green). If instead the replacements were Regular, then the new team would have 10 experience. Now to run the above against existing campaign data. Using my campaign instance, I find that my units suffer a casualty state of "HEAVY" or worse about 9 percent of the time. So (assuming probability does not hit till it approaches unity) after the first ten battles, a unit will be at the (15 point) Regular experience level. Assuming the best, and it gets hit with a "HEAVY" effect, it drops to ten points of experience, still a Regular (barely). Now with average experience and casualty progression from this point, the unit will not get hit with a "HEAVY" or greater till it gets to 20 experience points. If it now receives a "HEAVY", it drops back to 17 experience points (it passed the halfway point at 18). From here it is only eight experience points from becoming Veteran! With probability holding, the unit should make it to that level successfully. Gaining the next level gets dicey from here. There is a difference of 35 points separating the start of the Veteran and Crack levels. The halfway point is 18 points from the start, almost twice the distance that the occurrence of "HEAVY" or worse events happen. Most likely, a commander wishing to get a Veteran unit up to Crack will have to consciously start keeping that unit safe, holding it away from the battle line, for use only as a last ditch reserve. This reduces the flexibility of that commander in conducting the mission. This is a commander's prerogative, and not necessarily a bad thing. I like the quandary this presents. You get real reluctant to risk those high experience units, especially when it takes sooooo long to get them there in the first place. But not committing them also significantly reduces your combat potential. Anyway, that is my idea on improving the experience experience. It reduces the effect of the replacement quality on unit progression, but not totally. I look forward to your thoughts on this.

Eden 12/12 Oh really? So luftwaffe shouldn't be used at Dawn? Curious. I just spent 300 bucks on strafing ME109s, in my first (tactical) defeat of the campaign. I should have spent it on anything else, but your rules made me buy air, and there was nothing to strafe!!! Dreadful, dreadful battle. 9 deaths. I lost the IIC, although I picked up a JagerSomething from the repo auction. I'm quite distinctly nonplussed. Just had a look at the whole arty/Air issue again and scheduled the following: Investigate Arty/Air – time for air (include dawn, but not dusk?); Allied armor more likely to get air; Ax assault etc modifiers pushing points too high etc ….Those 'ifs' listed there would mostly end with the statement "proceed to next section", while the cases which are exceptions might say "jump to section X". Look at it again, maybe you'll see it differently. I think The Scalpel and you are on the same track here – he sent me an example (I’m going to e-mail to you) If it is the same Let me know Else Please send me an example of yours J Note 8_, concerning Immediate Assaults and whatnot. ( First, I assume that "Weather" is one of the things altered back or forth by one? ) Consider adding the Section # for each thing and listing them in order: [section 39] Temperature [section 40] Weather (?)…. You and Scalpel both onto the same thing again – see update doc – listed already … put "Favor" on backburner, eh? OK, then, I'm off to peruse Mssr du Scalpel's note- let me see what is being prescribed for the experience ills, hmmm. Ahh good would like to get some feedback on this one and put it to bed this week-end… Got a long week-end: Monday off!!! Manstein Fork Al AT_ is not- it is an allied defense. Unless I grossly misunderestand the naming scheme, (which is a good one- I've prodded other mappers to use a similar scheme)... To be accurate, the only flag I see as allies is on my setup zone, so... ? My bad – I modified Manstein’s map and created the 7 battle Types in a rush for the Friday’s launch… Hopefully those rush jobs are now at an end…. changed the map – it will be uploaded in due course J Apache 14/12 Posting this just in case it is an issue…. tried 50 F9 presses with the date set to Nov 41. No Allied attack, assault or probe was generated. I then tried another 50 in December. Again, not one. Best that could be got is a ME. Is that right? I assume we’re talking about Max’s Auto parameters? There’s a couple out there already… & Which version? Biltong

Took the rest of last night off - but now 'm back!! Max send me this mail (doing mails 1st) Biltong, I saw Claude's good comment about casualties near the end of the Updates doc. I'd like to add that I think that vehicle/armor that end up being casualties aren't mostly from cold casualties to the crew themselves but some sort of mechanical casualty. Instead of losing the crew (and any gained experience) I think that the tank and crew would come back the next battle after repairs. Fair enough: makes sense - how would one KISS it better? - Can we avoid the complication of a 'Special Parameter/Die roll/Note' - way, Guys? BTW - Claude's note was/is: 13. Note 10 - Casualties. Please consider replacing the current text with "Handle units (squads, individual soldiers, vehicles, etc.) missing from the initial setup because of the Casualties (23) parameter like normal casualties of combat. You replace them the next time you have a Normal Replacement (56). The result of that die roll determines the quality of the replacements."

Friday … Time for the weekly BCR Update BCR v1.4 A few modifiers and Most of the Notes have changed: I think it’s imperative to download this set – it will influence your campaign considerably - hopefully for the better Most important changes since last week’s version: 1. Experience Gain Solution implemented – Note: Replacements are still causing a problem – see my post with Scalpel’s possible solution a bit higher up. 2. Clarified how Auxiliary Experience is determined. 3. Clarified how partial units left over from an Emergency Reorganisation march off the map & later rejoin the fight. 4. Parameter Sheet cleaned up and Scrounged units now in line with the rest and rules adjusted to make this clearer. 5. Renamed Core Sheet to ‘Battle Group’. 6. Revamped the Battle Group replacement Procedure 7. Cleaned up Battle Group Sheet Update & Unresolved Issues v1.4 BCR has now reached a stage where I doubt it will be necessary to restart a campaign due to changes that will still be implemented. The ‘large’ ones are in the bag, but there are still a lot of ‘small’ changes that need to be done, esp. to make the rules less confusing. Note: In the future we will only be updating BCR et al every 2nd Friday to give the BCR Team and BCR campaigners more time to discuss, implement and test changes. If you have a problem with one of the facets of the rules – have a look here and see if it is listed – if not post: and it will be prioritized & investigated. Next on the list is finalizing Experience Gain (no 1 above) and then we move on to the Favor cleanup. We are getting there…. :cool: Max’s Auto Parameters v1.4 Max’s Auto Parameters has been updated to match the new 1.4 rules of course, and now includes a new sheet for calculation of the After Battle Parameters. BCR Map Expansion List v1.4 & Map Pack 2 14 NEW MAPS ADDED! If you haven’t tried this expansion yet, give it a spin – it’s easy – no rule changes at all! You are missing out on some really great battles! Manstein22 has given us 14 more maps in Map Pack 2. Each one fine-tuned for a specific Battle Type, e.g.: Axis Probe etc. Map Making Suggestions for BCR v1.4 For those of you who would like to contribute some maps… Have a look – all you need to know about making maps for BCR. The designers would also love some feedback on their maps from the player POV… let them have it – good or bad – the end result will be better maps for everyone! As for everything – get it here from the worlds fastest web masters!!!! Scooby and SuperSulo Next update: December 27! Download and enjoy From me & the BCR Team A Happy and Prosperous Weekend. Biltong [ December 13, 2002, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: Biltong ]

"useless posts" like these are most welcome Your timing is good - the latest update of BCR (see post below) should be a lot "friendlier". Biltong

“Won't see where the Favor comes from? “ It comes from BTS's grog-savvy black-box estimation algorithm of how successful we are at battle. Notice that in the rewrite, when we (allegedly?) will have more, and more sophisticated victory conditions, we will still be right on the money by adopting the above. I missed that – tell me more… do you know what they’re planning or where can I read about it? Who's The Great Scalpel? Claude McDaniel – The Serial Slasher of the Unclear!! Check t’morrow night’s Update & Unresolved Issues and you’ll see the maniac in action… There’s 24? Pages of ‘issues’ and a goodly chunk is his attempts to convince me to make BCR half understandable. OK. (Please notice previous post in re small PDF goofs, btw). PDF goofs… if it’s the PDF’s on one of the websites it’s out of my bailawick (spelling?) In 9, if Enemy force becomes "Unknown", we select "Random" for 10,11,12. Ergo on 10,11,12, there really should be a "Random" cell after the other cells, since it is a valid result/choice. There we go!! - Listed – Enough errors for everyone to have a go – let them roll in – I’ve got a 3 week holiday coming – all set aside for cleaning purposes Throughout the document there is inconsistency with usage of the > and < symbols…. Already fixed – new symbols are ‘< 9’ = ‘less than 9’ and ‘9+’ = ‘nine plus’, i.e. 9 and more than 9. Section 33- "If Time not Day or..." I came across this one today; it's Dusk, and I don't have the knowledge of whether that counts as "Day" for the luftwaffe...? Suggest either "not Mid-Day" or "is Night". As I said… – changed to ‘Mid Day’ Sections 9, 10, et cetera correspond in number to the parameters sheet, but 1 through 8 do not. Or 1 through 6 do not, or something. Consider renumbering 1 through 8, the "pre-roll" sections, as "0.1 , 0.2 , 0.3 ..." to help refer to them and distinguish them from the others which mostly follow the param sheet. Good idea – the whole numbering system is up for a revamp as is… on the list Generally, attacking the rules with a flow chart mind would most certainly help. Like cascading "if" statements- if "this condition" then "read this blob" else read next if statement. Section 01, date, right side instructions column: not too sure about this one – hell of a lot of parameters interacting – that If statement would be something to see But it can definitely be used in some restricted cases. My idea was to follow the parameters as they come up on the CMBB QB screen – to make it easier for the plyayers. You fill in one and read the next rule…etc. etc… got a bit corrupt with all the changes…. Scheduled for a cleanup. Is that enough for now? I might have more typos or something when I understand everything... As I told Scalpel: Don’t worry that there’s a hell of a lot at the moment… Send them all now when everything is still fresh… soon you will do things without thinking/reading and then the problems remain unresolved. I list everything and eventually they will all be addressed (touch wood) Thanx for your effort Eden

Favor – You thought we’re moving on to Favor!? Hah! No, we’re back to last week: Unit Exp Gain… Replacement…. Problem Claude “The Scalpel” sends this: I continue to bang my head against the thinking block trying to find ways to improve the “Experience” experience. As I see it, currently the player has little hope (or motivation) of ever having troops better than the replacement level. The higher the current point value of the unit above the replacement norm, the farther it drops when substitutes show up to fill in for casualties (and there will be bodies). And if the existing unit is of lower quality than the replacements, then the commander has a strong incentive to kill off those troops to get the higher quality newbies. (I can just picture a commander near the successful end of a battle, herding his low experience units into open ground, and then calling in friendly indirect fire on their heads.) The trick is to allow a unit to keep experience gains if they do not suffer catastrophic loss events, while discouraging commanders from slaughtering low experience units for higher quality generic replacements. Oh, and the solution should apply the KISS doctrine. Taking that into account, my proposal modifies the experience gain/loss based on one of five casualty states a unit can be in at the end of a battle. The states and their effects are: NONE. No casualties. (YEA!) Compute experience gain/loss normally. MODERATE. 1/3 or less of the unit strength are casualties. The unit keeps its before battle experience, neither gaining or losing points. HEAVY. More than 1/3 and less than half of the unit strength are casualties. If the unit is over halfway to the next experience level, drop to the halfway point. Else drop to the base experience value for the current level of skill. CATASTROPHIC. 1/2 or more of the unit soldiers are casualties, but at least one person remains functional. If the unit is over halfway to its next experience level, drop to the base points for current level. Else drop to the halfway point of the next lower experience level. TOTAL. Unit eliminated. Use the Replacement level experience, if equal to or less than the current level. Else drop to the base points of the next level down. This helps discourage heartless commanders from slaughtering low point units for the high point replacements. Examples of these casualty states on subsequent (post replacement) experiences are: NONE. A six person MG team starts the battle with 16 experience (Regular), kills a tank (work with me here), gets rattled, and loses no soldiers. They end the battle with six warriors and 18 experience points. MODERATE. A six person MG team starts the battle with 16 experience (Regular), kills a tank and loses two soldiers. They end the battle with 16 experience. HEAVY. A ten person squad starts the battle with 16 experience (Regular), kills a tank and loses four soldiers. They end the battle with 10 experience (still Regular). If the unit had started with 18-24 experience points (over half-way to next level), they would end with 17 experience points. CATASTROPHIC. A ten person squad starts the battle with 18 (over half-way to next level) experience (Regular), kills a tank and loses from five to nine soldiers. They end the battle with 10 experience (still Regular). If the unit had started with 17 experience points, they would end with 7 experience points (Green). TOTAL. If the replacements are Veteran level then a six person MG team starting the battle with 16 experience (Regular), killing a tank and losing all soldiers, they end the battle with 5 experience (Green). If instead the replacements were Regular, then the new team would have 10 experience. Now to run the above against existing campaign data: Using my campaign instance, I find that my units suffer a casualty state of "HEAVY" or worse about 9 percent of the time. So (assuming probability does not hit till it approaches unity) after the first ten battles, a unit will be at the (15 point) Regular experience level. Assuming the best, and it gets hit with a "HEAVY" effect, it drops to ten points of experience, still a Regular (barely). Now with average experience and casualty progression from this point, the unit will not get hit with a "HEAVY" or greater till it gets to 20 experience points. If it now receives a "HEAVY", it drops back to 17 experience points (it passed the halfway point at 18). From here it is only eight experience points from becoming Veteran! With probability holding, the unit should make it to that level successfully. Gaining the next level gets dicey from here. There is a difference of 35 points separating the start of the Veteran and Crack levels. The halfway point is 18 points from the start, almost twice the distance that the occurrence of "HEAVY" or worse events happen. Most likely, a commander wishing to get a Veteran unit up to Crack will have to consciously start keeping that unit safe, holding it away from the battle line, for use only as a last ditch reserve. This reduces the flexibility of that commander in conducting the mission. This is a commander's prerogative, and not necessarily a bad thing. I like the quandary this presents. You get real reluctant to risk those high experience units, especially when it takes sooooo long to get them there in the first place. But not committing them also significantly reduces your combat potential. Anyway, that is my idea on improving the “Experience” experience. It reduces the effect of the replacement quality on unit progression, but not totally. I look forward to your thoughts on this. Sincerely, Claude "The Scalpel"

Minor is Minor, and Tactical is just like in idiomatic English, euphemistically admitting that you "won", in some sense, but almost Pyrhhic (sp?). You 'won', but if this kind of "winning" keeps up, you're fired! Ok - I'll keep the Pyrhhic bit and cut out the rest - we need a bit of class in the rules. Why not use the calculated 'points' in the CMBB AAR as one's "Favor" points? The people at BTS have already gone to some effort, ... The benefits would be leveraging BTS's effort, (that number reflects multi factors), being more accessible to newbies, (by referring to a well known part of CMBB), fitting in with CMBB, and just plain fitting in with the KISS manifesto. I like the simplicity, but I'm worried that we'll have nothing to do?... Won't see where the Favor comes from? No after action satisfaction type thing... Some might like it, but I suspect some might not.. Feedback guys? ...But I *am* a ruthless proofreader... Are you *sure* you like feedback? You want to take on the Great Scalpel!!? Think you can make me bleed more than him!!! Hah - no chance in hell!! Bring it on!! Here's another one, section 28: "Can use 10 points of FAVOR to alter die by 1" Ah, great- I want to change the die by 4, so that's 40 points. ( or IS it? ) I suggest either: "Can trade in 10pts of F to alter die by *maximum* of 1" or "Can alter die by 1 for each 10 pts of F traded in". I'm pretty sure you mean the former; just for the next newbie. Come on... that's just a teensy scratch - If you're aspiring to take on the Great Scalpel we'll have to see a lot more blood than that!! Fixed in 30 seconds... Try again Biltong

Hiya Ken, They're arguing about how 'Favor' should have worked if it was done right the first time... I sit back and copy their comments into an update doc and then later I cut out the bits that I don't understand and copy what's left into the rules - seems a bit confusing, but since I don't get to play the rules it doesn't matter too much... For the latest version go to the 1st post of this thread... next update on Fri Auto Parameters - see 1st post as well Favor to be investigated soon! [ December 14, 2002, 09:44 AM: Message edited by: Biltong ]

Eden, Damn! So we have both Minor and Tactical... Now which is greater? What would be the difference? I imagine I better take this to the big board... As for your comments re matching CMBB - exactly my thoughts as well, why try and re-research something that the best has already done The new Appendix A (v1.4 coming Fri)should put your mind at rest < 5 Consc 5 - 9 Green nice and short 10 - 24 Reg 25 - 60 Vet 61+ Crack Thanx Eden - seeing more and more posts from you - feedback much appreciated Biltong

”The night of the Grogs” J Michael Dorosh gave his kind permission to post this as well: Hello all Apologies for not responding sooner. My silence has not been due to disinterest; quite the opposite, I have been purposely avoiding the Biltong threads because my own set of campaign rules - specifically tied to the GD Division - is simmering on a back burner and I didn't want to be influenced by Biltong's work subconsciously (I would not consciously, of course, want to duplicate his efforts or steal his ideas). Having said that, I will give my two cents here for what they are worth. Steve and Charles are right about campaign rules being unrealistic, with regards to units elevating themselves over the course of a "campaign" - which in real terms might mean a few weeks. Nonetheless, it is a fun idea and one I plan to incorporate - how, I do not know. But I am reasonably sure that any treatment of experience-level gain would be 'for fun' as there is no way of getting any kind of historical yardstick by which to measure troop performance in this manner. Firstly, you have no definition of what a "veteran" is. The GD Regiment didn't see combat in Poland, for example, yet in May 1940 performed in an above average manner. They had a cadre of NCOs and men from the Infantry Lehr regiment - the training and demonstration unit for the entire German Army prewar. In CM terms, I would consider them "veterans" despite not having seen a shot fired in action. Even the CM manual cautions against applying too strict a definition of "crack" and "elite". I would tend to treat this in a very abstract manner. One could go insane trying to factor in individual troop replacements, the state of the training army (basic training decreased to 8 weeks by 1944, down from 16 weeks in 1939 - but did it affect combat prowess? Drill and ceremonial was replaced entirely, but then again, many new weapons systems had to be learned - ie Anti tank mines, Panzerfauste, etc. so was the 8 weeks really a dilution, or was it an acceptable streamlining?), overall formation morale, individual experiences (does time in the line count towards an experience gain? Can it be tied to individual unit kills as handily tracked by CM AARs now - and if so, is that realistic? The answer is No, it's not, but it does provide a convenient and tantalizing yardstick by which to measure unit performance, from which experience can be extrapolated....) I don't like the "veteran", "green", "elite" labels anyway - the difference between a "regular" and a "veteran" troop to my mind is mostly tied to experience, but the difference between regular/veteran and "elite", by way of standard definition, is in the training and equipment. I would rate 12th SS Hitler Youth division as elite by way of their training and the cadre of LAH NCOs they had, for example, but in Normandy the rank and file were hopelessly "green" in terms of experience (and also Fanatic, to throw another factor into the equation). Yet to use "green" troops and "elite" HQ units in CM would not give historical performance. The answer must lie elsewhere. To try and apply these labels across the German Army in a broad brush will yield disappointing results. Some units - be they the first line panzer units, or the 1944 model Infantry Divisions - were simply better than others. I don't think these units ever moved from "green" to "crack" at all - they were either very good or simply average, and they tended to stay there - many divisions simply weren't around very long either, mind, being destroyed, and in some cases, reformed to fight again. The GD Division was reformed almost from scratch several times in WW II, having suffered appalling casualties. In game terms, I don't think it matters then what system you apply, it will be patently false. BUT - since the main idea is to have fun, you can pretty much do whatever you like, and if it "feels" right, you have completed your mission. I wouldn't try and find any basis in reality for it - it was because no such basis exists that Steve and Charles abandoned the idea to begin with! Good luck, Biltong, you have a very loyal and vocal following. I glanced briefly at Wreck's rules many months ago and was impressed with what I saw. I certainly applaud any and all efforts to bring some sort of system to CM, as it provides an element that is sorely lacking (no matter how ahistorical). I'm gratified to see your rules have developed so much interest - perhaps someday it will form a part of CM itself, with no need for written side rules, dice rolls or other impedimena. Until then, it is up to the CM community. Wish I could help more. If I can help with any strictly historical issues, I'd be more than willing to participate in discussions along with the other learned members of the board/this email group. Mike Thanx Mike You are confirming the direction that we're taking with our exp gain 'solution'... Obviously our 'solution' is far from historically accurate - we are working with averages over the whole Southern front, but we try... Input like your's make it easier. Much appreciated. As for your comment: "I didn't want to be influenced by Biltong's work subconsciously" I know what you mean and I agree... It would be better to do your campaign without any preconceived notions and break new ground. However, once you have finished yours, you are most welcome to view and "steal" some ideas (if you could use any, that is ... In fact I'm encouraging the players to come up with variations/changes/add-ons, whatever they can think up.... Like all great games, CMBB lends itself to a surprising number of 'add-ons'. As for a campaign - I think you will find it quite easy - the host of parameters make the designer's work quite easy - In fact, in a couple of instances I had to cut down on the use of some parameters because they were canceling each other out LOL Good luck with your' GD Div campaign - I'm very curious to see what you come up with. Concentrating on a single Div should enable you to be far more accurate, historically speaking than, BCR... Besides the fun factor, it should make for a very interesting History lesson... I hope you'll find the time to do it. Biltong

Claude McDaniel- the Scalpel mails this – very interesting reading: ”I looked at the quality of the replacements for casualties, and conclude that before October 1941, units in the infantry company will most likely NOT reach Veteran status or keep it for long if they do. Starting in October though, the more casualties you suffer, the faster your unit reaches Veteran status. The key to my thinking is the average number of casualties units suffer, and how long they go between losses. If a unit suffers very few casualties, or goes for a long time between those losses, then the quality of the replacements does not have a major effect on overall experience gain. If however, the loss events are frequent, or large, then the average replacement quality governs the unit skill level. How often do infantry suffer casualties? Using the Core sheets from my instance of the campaign (seven battles in six weeks), I find 19 line entries (units) in a motorized infantry company. I totaled the number of units with casualties (44), and the number of units on the battle field (19 units x 7 battles = 133). 44/133 gives an average chance for a unit to receive casualties during a battle at 33 percent. As rule of thumb then, every three battles a unit suffers loss and gets replacements. How many replacements? The company suffered 100 casualties in the campaign, for an average loss of (100/44=) 2.27 troops per incident. So, every three battles a unit loses two soldiers. What happens under the above conditions to a unit trying to go from Regular (25 experience points before battle) to Veteran? First determine the average point value of the available replacements. I used the values from your email to figure this. (Tables copied at bottom of document for convenience) Average experience level (Points) of replacements in 1941 Jun-Jul 12 Aug-Sep 14 Oct-Dec 16 Finally, how many experience points does a unit gain in a battle? I assume that most infantry units will neither kill tanks (one instance in the seven battles I fought) nor rattle (8 percent rate in the campaign to date). Therefore, on the average a unit gains a net of one experience point (plus casualties) per battle. So the situation is a unit with before battle experience of 25, gaining one point from battle, and losing two troops. Computing the experience point change: In June, 12 x 2 + ( (8x25) + 2 +1 ) = 23. Darn, didn't make it! Come December, 16 x 2 + ( (8x25) + 2 + 1 ) = 24. Shucks, still did not get the promotion! As long as units take average casualties, they will NOT advance beyond Regular. In fact, the greater the difference between a unit's current experience and that of the average replacement level, the faster the unit returns to the average replacement level once casualties start hitting again. But if we burn Favor to increase the replacement experience die roll, what happens then? Average experience level (Points) of replacements in 1941, using Favor: Jun-Jul 14 Aug-Sep 16 Oct-Dec 26 Now we are getting somewhere! Starting in October, using Favor, the average replacement quality is enough that casualties do NOT drag a unit below the threshold. In fact, they reward the commander for losing troops, since the normal replacements are Veterans to start. I hope this is of use to you, and that I did not make a glaring error. Sincerely, Claude 56 Normal Replacements Die Points <3 5 3-8 10 9+ 25 Experience Modifiers: Aug - Sept +1; Oct - Dec +2 Experience Titles Point Range Conscript 0-4 Green 5-10 Regular 11-25 Veteran 26-60 Crack 61+” Just what I needed Claude: Facts to 'tune' with... Hmmm Good and bad news - the Oct ease of getting to Vet will need adjustment - that's not what I want. (Just scheduled that) Did you factor in that if the CO starts losing men to get better replacements he will also lose Favor, which will then make it difficult to get Vet replacements? … LOL Round & round we go – fine tune time But the good news is that the various rules & modifiers are starting to mesh and create the campaign that I (and I believe others) would like to have: To summarize: 1) Mostly difficult to get to Vet or hold on to Vet quality because progressively crappier replacements keep on dropping your Quality 2) You need to become a Hot CO (win and get Favor) if you want to get the best replacements.... OR if you lose too much, your troop quality will drop to such a low level that you will suffer. 3) Winning/Favor becomes very important... and this will force guys to be very accurate (in BCR terms) when evaluating their own capabilities... This is the real crux of what I hope to achieve: If players lose too much their position will become untenable quite fast... If their own capabilities do not progress in step with the campaign they will have 2 options: 1) To re-evaluate their own capabilities and downgrade themselves a notch or, HOPEFULLY 2) Start learning proper tactics - search the board/websites/read books/get the strategy guide etc. etc. All the info is out there… This 2nd option will be virtually forced on the players since: BCR will become progressively more difficult from 41 to 45 The reasons: That's what happened. That's also how any game should be: if it gets easier it becomes boring. A game, just like any play/book/movie MUST end in a climax... Not that the ‘difficulty incline’ needs to be regular – a straight line – far from it. Variation is key… an interlude/romantic pause/a dance routine and in BCR terms: breathing space must be provided… Was provided by history as well… All good stories have things going right before they go horribly wrong and then: right again? You will have to learn as you progress or you will eventually run out of downgrade options. BCR will become progressively more difficult from 41 to 45 That rule is, I'm quite happy to say, unlikely to change. Off course - if you're not into realism/study etc. you can always give yourself an extra platoon of Tigers Biltong

Apache mailed some of his Grog acquaintances about the topic: “Moving from Green to Vet in a Campaign” “…the experience gain of troops is currently under debate. Main issue, given the confines of the game, is how long would it take (Axis) troops to move through from green to crack? The 'rules' being devised do, to some extent, take account of platoon dilution with replacements etc… Received this reply from Andreas Biermann – If you don’t know him… He’s an uber-Grog “This is a very complex topic, and I will not be able to do it justice in this email. With that said, sorry to have to rain on your parade here a little bit. None of my readings indicate that the German forces got better at what they did over the course of the war in Russia. Quite the opposite in fact. When the Wehrmacht invaded in June 1941 it was at the height of its proficiency. The lessons learned in France a year earlier had been absorbed to a large degree, with new infantry training incorporating them. The mechanised arm was stronger, and the theory of armoured operations had been improved. On the tactical level, the German soldier had been trained long and hard. >From June 1941 onwards then, the proficiency of the Wehrmacht drop to reach its lowpoint in 1945. The drop was faster at some times then it was at others, and at some points it may have stopped and slightly recovered, but the first hand evidence in the form of German reports that I have seen (I have not studied this topic exhaustively though) makes it clear that the notion of a green Wehrmacht invading and becoming crack in the process is completely misplaced. The opposite happened. if you care about realism in your campaign, you start with Vet/Reg troops, and the reward for good play should be that they do not lose combat efficiency as quickly as they otherwise would. I.e. if you are lucky they are still vet in October 1941, but if you were very profligate, they will just be green. Evidence in support I have would be histories of 13. PD, 12.PD, and a study by the 1a of XXXXVIII. AK (Gebirgs) on operations in Autumn 1941. That just from memory, I am sure if I dig I find more. All the best, Andreas My reply might give you guys an idea of where BCR is heading Thanx Andreas, This confirms what I have read though the years - even the best were killed eventually and the replacement quality kept on dropping... And not bad news either: it makes for a more interesting campaign because it will get progressively more difficult as the years go on. The rules cater for this quite easily - I just set the modifiers for each year to make the chances of getting good replacements more and more remote... Ending with the final weeks in Berlin with heavily outnumbered; out of ammo; unfit & decimated conscripts taking on Vets - should be a blast! Heh heh... But by then the players should be able to handle it (I hope) Go well & thanx for your time Biltong

SuperSulo Heh, I have NO idea about patches or ribbons, but I do remember something from BoB, where they attacked that gun emplacement and got lots of different medals, but maybe that wasn't for the guns but for the battle itself. Oh and they were yanks. Yanks or not – that was a single platoon taking on 50? entrenched troops with MG’s et al… They deserved some medals! That is a 'real' and quite famous skirmish AFAIK. But no sweat, it's easy enough to add if I want it. There we go!! Can't say it enough guys: BCR is the ideal lover: mold her to your desires! I completely agree with you on no exp. for mortars though, I knock those out even when I'm not trying. Sad thing is my mortars dies so easily too. Tried keeping them out of sight with a HQ spotting for them? Great for killing those guns that were bugging you so much J Death Commando Eden Smallwood Oudated example rearing it's head.. Note 5 - Experience gain example should read ...BUT now they get 6 Green replacement with 5 Experience. :-( Using the formula in Note 3: (7 men left x +10 experience) + (6 replacements x 5 experience) divided by 13 men = 7.69 Round up from .5 So After Replacement Exp for the squad remains +8 There'll be more As for the ‘No Minor Victory listed’ on the Favor Sheet…. Somewhere I got the idea that Minor Vic/defeat was changed to ‘Tactical’…? It’s been so long since I’ve been able to play – you guys will have to help me out here… Do you get both Tactical and Minor Defeat/Vic or just Minor Def/Vic? JaegerMeister On the medals/patches subject, shouldn't this also be self implemented?..ie in a PBEM battle i had recently, a tank hunting team (1941) completely reversed a battle by assaulting & destroying 2 T34 tanks that were bashing the hell out of my infantry positions...i immediately awarded that team the EK 1 (in my mind) and announced it to the opponent, who agreed !..cos thats what they probably would have got in real life for saving the day with their bravery. Incidents like that should be reflected in these rules somehow? A guy popped in sometime back. Signed all his mail: “Dr. Osage.” He had a set of rules to award medals. But he disappeared… Hi Doc wherefore art thou? Mailed him a number of times, but got no response – Maybe someone else want to do something about medals/patches/favor for heroics…? Could be a nice add-on. Nice AAR there Jaeger – wish more of the guys would post an AAR once in a while. SuperSulo In July you will notice that you can no longer carry on with the above Inf Co… it no longer exist." Is that correct? I can buy a Infantry Company (Motorized), under Motorized Infantry Battalion (Pz)'41 for 343 pts, Division Mechanized, in July too. Just checked again – in fact you can buy it right through to Dec. Don’t know where I got that idea from – must’ve changed the Mech to something when I checked it the first time… Fixed – line replaced with: If you have a favorite Inf. Co that you would prefer to deploy or, down the line, you want to upgrade your company or armor to something else – Do so. BCR is designed to enable and in fact encourage you, to do just that. Wow!! Sudden upsurge of mails and posts – can’t keep up – patience - I’ll get there…

Nah!! No medals/ribbons for guns = no points Grogs correct me, but I think you only got patches for tank kills. Guns were all in a days work Then there's the problem: what size gun? So you kill a little teeny scout tank and get 2 points and nothing for killing a mother AT gun: Unfair... Mmm agreed, but: KISS Once you;ve bought the Strategy Guide you're going to be killing guns by the ton and Zip!! off you go to Crack... Back to square one As few points gain, per battle, as possible gives BCR better 'historical' quality 'growth' from Green to Reg etc. Been thinking about this... I think we might be on to something here... Steve & Charles' main problem (AFAIK) with campaigs were/are the unhistorical exp gain and with a bit of luck and a lot of testing we might just have cracked it? Let me sleep on it and then I'll write it ip t'morrow - 2am again here Damn!! $%#&$% clock is too fast. G'night Biltong [ December 09, 2002, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: Biltong ]

Wragtag - we are moving more and more into Grog territory... How many battles did the average inf experience in South 41 :confused: G-Damn this is realy fine tuning... On the list

Mmmm.. lets hope... Just cleaning up the Update doc then I'll send it along... Later Biltong

Check your mail Sardaukar Biltong

Unit Exp Gain Problem & Possible Solution Ok Guys, Here we go… I looked through all the e-mails and posts re this problem and come up with the following: PROBLEM Units Gain Experience too Fast..impressive huh? Considerations 1. Unit exp gain should be historically accurate 2. If units reach crack too fast, players will find the campaign too easy and abandon it. 3. Keep the change Simple (KISS) since the rules are starting to become too complicated Other Considerations Apache 29/11 I still think it's a bit OTT that a unit panicked at end if it only just broke gets a double whammy…. I presume if a tank is burning it is counted once as a burn, not once for burning and once for KO? SuperSulo 29/11 That "KO'd" and "KO & Burn", in my understanding you only apply one of these…. what does "broke panic" mean? I always thought it was "if they have the dot"? Why use two tables, in appendix a and b? Should "Enemy Casualty" really be "+1 each"? Claude 4/12 Note 2 - Emergency Reorganization. One paragraph begins with "You will be left with some ...". It implies that the missing individuals from partial squads/teams will rejoin the unit at a later time. However, I see no place where they are reintegrated into the force. Should there be? Since this represents an ad hoc collection, have you considered changing the title to "Battle Group"? Also Cleanup Parameter Sheet and bring Scrounged units in line with the rest and adjust the rules to make this clearer. Clarify Exp gain throughout the rules for Battle Group (old core + Scrounged Units) as well as Aux. Modify Parameter and Battle Group (old Core Sheet) No Conscripts in 41 South (except the penalty for CO’s who die) Overall exp gain - simplify Thoughts 1. No-one had a definite answer as to how long the piece of string was (Green to Reg to Vet etc) decided that playability will be the main factor: Reasonably easy to get from green to Reg.; quite difficult from Reg. to Vet. and virtually impossible to get to Crack. 2. The main problem with exp gain is points for killing soldiers. A soldier who is in the thick of things; handgrenades exploding around him; being shot at; shoots a couple of shots, but misses; nearly gets killed VS The famous gun who kills 150 soldiers from far away…. Solution: No points for killing OLD RULES: Points for: Mortar; Own KIA; prisoners; vehicle Points against: Broke at end; What exp do you get when you shoot up a mortar crew; a car; capture some poor slob? Own KIA – maybe… but too many points too easy… Broke at end? Rattled is Rattled. Solution: All gone But taking out a tank – yes; an inf. guy who takes out a MG pillbox – yes; etc – all the things that give you ribbons & medals Overall exp gain… You kill a lot of enemy – you get more points? Sounds like an easy fight to me… Solution: just one point per battle - no calc. So – Normally 1 exp. point gain per battle; once in blue moon a 2 or even 3, if the inf. manages to take out a bunker or tank – Fausts will earn faster, but they die faster as well… so does armor. If the CO is a bit careless and his squads keep on panicking… no gain If the CO is careless and marches his troops along the map edge… no gain If the CO is reckless with his MG’s and Mortars… even a ‘–1’ So – slow and steady exp. gain if the Co is good… Appendix A B = history 5-10 Green 10 > 25 Regular 25 > 60 Veteran 60 > Crack There’s a 5 year campaign ahead…. And the replacements should help to keep the exp gain down. Other changes 1. Core = history. ‘Battle Group’ nice & romantic and more accurate as well. 2. Infantry: Fled Map –1, Rattled –1, Equipment Lost –1, MG Bunker +1, MG Pillbox +2, Light Armor +1, Enemy Tank +2 3. Armor: Fled Map –1, Rattled –1, KO’d/Aband –1, Gun Pillbox +1, Enemy Tank +1 4. Overall Exp Gain – no formula – just +1 per battle for every unit 5. Replacements: LT 3 = 5 (Green), 3-8 = 10 (Reg), GT 8 = 25 (Vet) (plus date/CO modifiers) 6. Explained how Normal; Scrounged and Auxiliaries get their replacements – e.g.: See Aux below Aux replacements You will find that the QB generates a wide range of Experience for your Auxiliaries. Ignore this. When you buy your Auxiliaries for the Real Battle, you will only use the Experience that you rolled up earlier while determining Quality (21). Quality (21) points to: Note 13 Auxiliary Experience To determine Quality (21) you will have to determine your Auxiliaries Experience setting first. It is calculated using the same modifiers that you will use later to determine Normal Replacements (56) combined with Appendix A. Tick the box provided on your Parameter Sheet. You will need this later when buying your Auxiliary Units. However: the QB parameter for Quality only allows generalized settings: Low, Medium and High and the AI could decide that ‘Medium’ means Regular in 41 and Veteran in 43! For the purposes of '41 South' use the following Quality: Green = Low, Regular = Medium, Veteran and Crack = High Claude and Mare put a lot of effort into coming up with formulas – thanx guys, but I decided to keep it simple – worried about newbies running away... That’s it! Curious to read your reactions... t'morrow... (2:00am) :eek: off ta bed G'night Biltong [ December 08, 2002, 07:01 PM: Message edited by: Biltong ]

Won't that depend on when they were deployed.. If they started out in 42 as someone above suggests, they would surely move up the exp. ranks in the years that follow? Any ideas when they were first called on? I also thought they were only called up end 44 onwards, but in 42 already? Biltong

Hi Super Could the exact dimensions of the maps be entered into the Map Add-on? Done! Next: When on goes through the after battle map, looking for knocked out/abandoned mortars and stuff, it's a lot easier finding them with labels (or what it's called, shift-g). Just a small tip. I love tips – esp. the ones that crinkle Last: How long it should take to go con-green-reg-vet-crack. I have no idea really, but my gut says: green -> reg : 4-5 battles reg -> vet : a lot longer, a year's worth of battles? How many battles that may be... in 41 maybe 15 - 30? Die roll makes a definite impossible. Didn't many of the troops at the beginning of Barbarossa have a year or more experience from France etc? Yep – Most I would say – In the rules I wrote a note: “Be aware that starting off with a Green Core is quite difficult and not quite historical either. Some, if not most, of the German Divisions had seen some action in Western Europe.” vet -> crack : many, many battles. These guys should be Rare! I agree – I would say 40 battles at least… The problem is: taking your Core through a 5 year campaign you will end up, after only a year or so, with Crack troops, which to my mind means that all the battles thereafter might become boring…. A problem that will have to be solved at some stage. Edit 9/12 I believe we have just cracked this one as well Like I saw in the "main forum thread" by Biltong, someone said conscripts should never be able to reach green, as they are basicly just old men and small boys thrown in at the last time in the end of the war. Another guy mentioned that they were deployed in 42 already…? We need confirmation. I’m going to start working on the Exp gain problem today, (I hope - got my 6 year – oops, 7 year old boy’s birthday party just now – 13 screaming kids! Rather face a platoon of Ruskies :eek: ), and I’ll incorporate it. I don't know what I think of that, but I have lifted conscripts out of "my" rules (for the axis ), and plan to only bring them in '45 or so. I really hope some expert can tell us how it really was… mmm my sources are severely restricted – and searching for info, like these, on the web, takes ages… We need a Grog!! – I’ll post and ask on the boards again… the answers I got so far has been a bit vague… Edit 9/12 - got some excellent grog e-mails - confirms that we are on the right track with the solution that came up just after this post. Biltong [ December 09, 2002, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: Biltong ]

Hi Eden, Go here: Scooby's Site You can download BCR or Max’s Auto Parameters in PDF; or view the individual Rules sheets and the Intro Doc in PDF format online. Enjoy!! Biltong

OK - onto Exp Gain... What maketh a man? How many East Front battles would an average German inf soldier have to live through to move from Conscript to Green to Regular to Vet to Crack? How about 5 from Con to Green; 8 more from Green to Regular; 12 from Reg to Vet. And 40 more to get to Crack? Just looking for gutfeel/averages. Biltong

The issue is under discussion at BCR: How many East Front battles would an average German inf soldier have to live through to move from Conscript to Green to Regular to Vet to Crack? How about 5 from Con to Green; 8 more from Green to Regular; 12 from Reg to Vet. And 40 more to get to Crack? How long is a string – I know – just looking for gutfeel and averages. Biltong

Sounds good! Some guys will be happy... Biltong