How Common Were Crack Units?

[Col Deadmarsh]

On some of the scenarios I've looked through, the designer has showed literal use of crack units on the battlefield. Sometimes, the entire platoon has either crack or vet units in it with +2s in abundance. 

 

Is this rare?  It would seem that a crack unit would be pretty rare to find in a company...maybe one or two at most.

 

 

[George MC]

These are BFC's definitions of what the various experience factors mean.

 

Like all these things you can argue the toss about should be what but that's how the game 'sees' these soft factors. So re your question I guess it would depend on what the unit was and the designer's interpretation of what that unit's experience would translate as?

 

- 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.

[womble]

One way of getting an idea of BFC's thoughts on the matter is to set the troop quality to "Typical". If you do that, you'll find that very few units outside airborne have any Crack ratings at all. There was some research about combat effectiveness related here, if you fancy searching for it. But on the whole, Crack should be relatively uncommon.

 

Personally, for the sake of QBs, I'd like to see divergent soft factor ratings attract a rarity modifier...

[c3k]

The definitions are very useful.

 

To me, the "Veteran" definition applies to (modern) US soldiers before they've seen combat. MILES, virtual combat, enhanced workups prior to deployment, stable units, and constant training brings a high degree of proficiency. That means combat veterans would be at least one step higher, "Crack". Alternatively, that could mean that the very first firefight otherwise "veteran" troops would be engaged in could mean they're "regular", to make them a little more brittle.

 

WWII training and professionalism was bit less than modern (US Army). I'd jump down one level for each. That would make a lot of units "veteran" after they'd seen some combat and many would be "crack". That would be the very "veteran" units.

 

Regardless of the definition, the designer may've changed the settings to tweak the battle to either be more balanced, or to create historical outcomes.

 

Ken

[ASL Veteran]

The rating is a soft one and how you rate a unit will be different to different people.  For example, the rather famous example of the I&R platoon during the battle of the bulge.  A platoon that held off an entire battalion - yet that platoon by the definitions would be rated as 'Green'.  So I wouldn't get too hung up on how a unit is labeled, but rather how they perform in the battle being recreated and whether that performance generally aligns with what happened.  You can also get to the point where during WW2 a squad was rarely composed of soldiers who all had an equal amount of combat experience or training.  So a squad rating would probably be representative of a collective guesstimate of how they would perform as a unit.  Perhaps if the squad leader had performed well then just the squad leader would push the squad's rating higher.  Perhaps also if a unit had been in combat for an extended period of time without taking in any replacements they might perform at a higher level.  Perhaps the opposite effect is true and a unit in extended combat would perform at a lower level. 

 

The thing is that an extended discussion of 'Crack' or 'Veteran' is probably not a worthwhile discussion since it means different things to different people and the labels themselves aren't having an effect in the game but rather the values that are assigned to those labels are what is having an effect in the game.  It is also a good idea to keep in mind that you have two values that interact with each other.  You can have Elite units with Poor morale if you want to, or Conscripts with Fanatic morale.  I personally think the morale values are probably more important than the experience rating.

[Rinaldi]

 

Personally, for the sake of QBs, I'd like to see divergent soft factor ratings attract a rarity modifier...

 

In my experience they have.

 

I don't know about the rest of you, but I try to squeeze every drop out of  my QB purchases; which usually means buffing leadership and experience for individual units. I once had enough points left over to make all the 76s in an armored company "Crack" - but their rarity skyrocketed as a result. It made me experiment; you also take a rarity hit in June if you try to make a regular rifle unit 'crack', for example. Its not disastrous but it happens.

[womble]

In my experience they have.

 

I don't know about the rest of you, but I try to squeeze every drop out of  my QB purchases; which usually means buffing leadership and experience for individual units. I once had enough points left over to make all the 76s in an armored company "Crack" - but their rarity skyrocketed as a result. It made me experiment; you also take a rarity hit in June if you try to make a regular rifle unit 'crack', for example. Its not disastrous but it happens.

Sorry Rinaldi, but you've either got a different version to me, or your recollection is faulty. I just went and checked. A US Infantry Battalion (all of it) in "Infantry Only" has zero rarity, whatever the Experience rating (from Conscript to Elite). The rarity multiplier (class) doesn't change when you change the experience. Same with Sherman 76s, which are "Limited" (5 x "points" cost in rarity) whatever Experience, or other soft factor I select for them. Maybe what you're remembering is how quickly the rarity cost increases when you increase the experience, because the Points cost increase is greatly multiplied. Or maybe when you adjusted the Experience of the rifle platoon, the system changed one of the other things you can change (type of halftrack, maybe, if you were using "Mech Infantry").

 

While looking at this, I also note that, even though you can select "M9A1" as the zook type for the armoured infantry, any squad that's assigned one gets given a "Not available" rarity modifier of times 999, making a single squad cost about 54k Rarity... I've noticed a couple of odd Rarity costs recently, in Specialist Teams, I think it was; might be "unavailable" equipment getting let through into inappropriate months...

Edited April 30, 2015 by womble

[JonS]

IMO/IME, more important than the values you use, is the difference between the two sides. If you want to make one side elite because that suits your nationalist groove, then go with it. But be aware that if you make the filthy enemy conscripts then the battle probably won't be very interesting or a lot of fun.

 

And, always, there should be variation within a side.

 

I've wrote some more about these ratings here.

[Rinaldi]

 

 

Sorry Rinaldi, but you've either got a different version to me, or your recollection is faulty

 

Almost certainly the latter; I'd trust your word over my own on this any day of the week.

 

 

 

 Maybe what you're remembering is how quickly the rarity cost increases when you increase the experience, because the Points cost increase is greatly multiplied. Or maybe when you adjusted the Experience of the rifle platoon, the system changed one of the other things you can change (type of halftrack, maybe, if you were using "Mech Infantry").

 

Yeah, I just went in a checked; that's precisely what it is.

Edited April 30, 2015 by Rinaldi

[Childress]

If, on opening a new user made scenario I discover that one entire side- normally my side- is rated Crack or higher that scenario is immediately deleted. Either the designer has an unrequited German (it's seldom the Allies) uber troop fixation or he's trying to force a certain narrative. And that's leaving aside the improbability that every man down to one's ammo bearers and truck drivers conform to that lofty standard.

 

Note that experience inflation is NOT characteristic of BF's in-house scenarios. These guys know what they're doing.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Childress

[Bulletpoint]

How about this way of looking at it?

 

 

                              No combat experience     Some experience     High combat experience

 

No training           Conscript                            Green                         Regular

 

Some training      Green                                 Regular                       Veteran

 

High training        Regular                              Crack                          Elite

[Myles Keogh]

If, on opening a new user made scenario I discover that one entire side- normally my side- is rated Crack or higher that scenario is immediately deleted. Either the designer has an unrequited German (it's seldom the Allies) uber troop fixation or he's trying to force a certain narrative. And that's leaving aside the improbability that every man down to one's ammo bearers and truck drivers conform to that lofty standard.

 

Note that experience inflation is NOT characteristic of BF's in-house scenarios. These guys know what they're doing.

 

Same here.  If I see a scenario that is loaded with "elite" or "crack" troops then it's almost instantly chucked into my recycle bin.  Elite and crack troops in CMx2 are really, really good.  They get such big boosts as to morale that it seems like the morale system no longer functions as designed.  They also spot extremely well.  Being elite or crack turns CMx2 pixel troops into almost fearless, automaton warriors.   Having an entire company of John Rambos may be fun to play around with on occasion, but if you're selling your scenario as "historical" or "semi-historical" then it's almost always over-the-top in CMx2 world. 

 

Crack and elite should be reserved for the very best of the best: Knight's Cross, DSO/Victoria Cross, DSC/Medal of Honor recipients, or Heroes of the Soviet Union:

 

Wittman's Tiger

Murphy's platoon HQ

Baskeyfield's AT gun

 

There is an unfortunate tendency by some scenario designers to overinflate the experience level of formations that were described as "elite" or crack:" Allied paratrooper formations and Waffen-SS panzer outfits.  However, those outfits were often filled with green replacements or were, in fact, almost entirely green.  Yes, these were highly motivated and conditioned soldiers in comparison to men of other outfits, but there are ways in CMx2 of representing "crack" outfits without elevating all the individual soldiers in that outfit into pixelated Sergeant Rocks.

 

[Of course, there is the opposite end of the spectrum.  There was a terrific scenario designer for CMx1 who firmly believed that ALL the experience levels above "green" made the pixel troops too unrealistically brave.  So, he had a number of scenarios in which all the player's troops were green regardless of the historical unit's actual experience level.  It certainly made for challenging (and, at times, frustrating) scenarios.]

[c3k]

...

 

Crack and elite should be reserved for the very best of the best: Knight's Cross, DSO/Victoria Cross, DSC/Medal of Honor recipients, or Heroes of the Soviet Union:

 

Wittman's Tiger

Murphy's platoon HQ

Baskeyfield's AT gun

 

There is an unfortunate tendency by some scenario designers to overinflate the experience level of formations that were described as "elite" or crack:" Allied paratrooper formations and Waffen-SS panzer outfits.  However, those outfits were often filled with green replacements or were, in fact, almost entirely green.  Yes, these were highly motivated and conditioned soldiers in comparison to men of other outfits, but there are ways in CMx2 of representing "crack" outfits without elevating all the individual soldiers in that outfit into pixelated Sergeant Rocks.

 

...

 

Going by the BFC definition, those units (Wittmann, Murphy, Baskeyfield) should be "elite", not "crack" or "elite". Of course, an argument could be made that it is not their experience which should be "elite", but their motivation should be increased ("fanatic") to keep them at it. 

 

A combination of higher motivation and differing experience levels create vastly different unit "feels".

 

True, some units do get overinflated. An alternative to your throwing out those battles would be to open them up in the editor and adjusting them to the levels you think they should be. (To preserve FOW, have someone else do it for you.)

[Childress]

Going by the BFC definition, those units (Wittmann, Murphy, Baskeyfield) should be "elite", not "crack" or "elite". 

 

In the interests of strict realism the latter two Medal of Honor (or the British equivalent) winners should have they experience rated as 'unknown'. Their heroic feats were unexpected. But the player can, knowing their 'eliteness', deploy them to his maximum benefit. Gamey!

[MOS:96B2P]

How about this way of looking at it?

 

 

                              No combat experience     Some experience     High combat experience

 

No training           Conscript                            Green                         Regular

 

Some training      Green                                 Regular                       Veteran

 

High training        Regular                              Crack                          Elite

 

I like this.  This should be considered for the game manual.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I like this.  This should be considered for the game manual.

 

The only issue I have is that it gives roughly equal weight to the importance of training and experience. But that seems to be what CM does as well so it's appropriate in that context.

 

In reality training is a better predictor of performance than combat experience.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Given the way a lot of the troop quality stuff is "under the hood" a loose set of guidelines for what "crack" represents vs "regular" might be nice in terms of letting the scenario writer know the sort of fight hes building.

The weight of that chart isn't important, but it might cut down on elite German volkstrum or less green allied units that had fought more or less June 44 to May 45 in well meaning but misguided scenarios

[LukeFF]

The way I look at experience levels in the context of WWII is pretty much the same as above:

 

-Conscript: very little or no training and no experience whatsoever, e.g., Volkssturm. 

-Green: trained units, but no combat experience. Or, alternatively, units being used outside of their intended role (Luftwaffe & KM infantry (yes, at the least they did go through basic infantry training at least once in their military service), army support & maintenance personnel being pressed into the front lines (many examples of this during Bulge), etc.

-Regular: trained to a higher standard than regular line infantry, or line infantry that has seen a good amount of combat. Airborne formations are a good example of this. Alternatively, veteran units that have been brought back to full strength with green replacements.

-Veteran: very reliable units that have been there and done that.

-Crack & Elite: the very absolute best of the best. The Wittmans, Cariuses, Audie Murphy types, etc.

[Childress]

-Veteran: very reliable units that have been there and done that.

 

LOL. Like that!