Effects of the unit attributes

[Steven482]

I am still puzzled to understand the effects of some of the unit attributes.

If a leader has negative (-1/-2) Leadership rating, does that mean it is better to keep him away from his troops? Or is he still bringing a positive effect to the table (C2 of course, but anything else)?

Under the morale section, I typically see "ok". But how does the -2 / -1 / .. motivational modifiers effect this? Or don't they?

Steven

[stikkypixie]

I believe the leadership rating only affects the squad itself. I haven't seen any evidence otherwise.

The -2/-1 next to morale means that their morale is more likely to drop quickly compared to say +2. So given the same situation a -2 team will go to panic while +2 team might be nervous.

[Steven482]

I believe the leadership rating only affects the squad itself. I haven't seen any evidence otherwise.

So what you are saying is the Leadership modifier defines how far (in distance) he can reach out to his troops, but does not really affect those other units negatively?

Effectively it forces you to keep them closer together?

If so, what is then the effect of a negative Leadership rating of normal (non-HQ) units?

Steven

[Vanir Ausf B]

The numbers next to the moral state correspond to the unit's Motivation rating:

-2 Poor

-1 Low

0 Normal

+1 High

+2 Extreme or Fanatic

Why fanatic has to share the same number with extreme rather than getting a +3 is a mystery to me.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I'm fairly sure the distance an HQ can keep subordinate units in C2 is the same for all leadership levels (this is different from CMx1). To the best of my knowledge there are only 2 things the leadership rating effects: the efficiency with which spotting information is passed to and from units, and moral recovery speed.

My feeling is that it is better to be in C2 of a -2 HQ than no HQ. IIRC Steve even stated that to be the case at one point.

Oh, and to reiterate what Stikkypixie said, as far as anyone can tell the bonuses only apply to the unit itself. That means a squad with a +2 leadership under C2 of a -2 HQ will have stiffer moral than a -2 squad under command of a +2 HQ.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=98978&page=2

[womble]

My feeling is that it is better to be in C2 of a -2 HQ than no HQ. IIRC Steve even stated that to be the case at one point.

And since he did, I think we have to take that on trust even if the numbers are hard to test.

Oh, and to reiterate what Stikkypixie said, as far as anyone can tell the bonuses only apply to the unit itself. That means a squad with a +2 leadership under C2 of a -2 HQ will have stiffer moral than a -2 squad under command of a +2 HQ.

That particular example only proves that having an out of C2 squad with a +2 leader is better than having a squad with a -2 leader in C2 range of a +2 higher echelon leader... Taking 2 squads with the same leadership and having them in command range of different qualities of HQ would say more about the effect of the HQ's command rating, since it's only changing one variable at a time.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Although I have never tested it, I think there is a moral benefit to being in C2. I've seen panicked unites rally back to shaken or broken status the moment C2 is re-established too many times. Soldiers in C2 also seem to cower less frequently. Whether that modifier varies by HQ leadership level I don't know.

[Echo]

Here are the practical effects of the attributes I've noticed after playing umpteen games.

Low leadership will cause a unit to retreat under fire in general. High is the opposite.

Low motivation will cause units to go to cover quicker under fire when they are moving (motivation=movement, seems to me anyway). Low motivated armor crews will bail sooner. High motivation units will keep moving under fire. Highly motivated armor crews will stay with their vehicles longer when taking fire.

Experience seems to affect how well troops aim when firing, and their rate of fire for weapons that need loading, like mortars and cannons.

This is all from observation.

[Vanir Ausf B]

For machine guns and small arms experience changes rate of fire by about +/- 10% per level.

[nachinus]

For machine guns and small arms experience changes rate of fire by about +/- 10% per level.

Is that so?! Didn't have any idea, and it seems quite relevant a modifier.

[Erwin]

I think someone did tests and apparently he concluded that the attributes do make a difference statistically.

But, they have a much more subtle effect in CM2 vs CM1 where they had a very noticeable effect. Maybe it's the way I handle my pixeltruppen, but I haven't noticed any difference in CM2 even with no HQ at all. Wish the effects were less subtle.

[Childress]

But, they have a much more subtle effect in CM2 vs CM1 where they had a very noticeable effect. Maybe it's the way I handle my pixeltruppen, but I haven't noticed any difference in CM2 even with no HQ at all.

From 6/30/12:

I re-ran my old test but changing the parameter to Allied vs Allied. One side had an HQ, with a short cover arc, the other side no HQ, or rather a HQ hidden behind a building. The 3 squads faced off against 3 squads over a low stone wall at 500m. Equal morale.

Ran it five times. The non-HQ side got creamed each time; more casualties, more broken squads.

[womble]

I have a feeling (not backed up by any testing) that experience also affects how well troops find "microcover" in their action spot, making high experience troops more difficult to kill as well as being more effective. Anyone else think this?