The sense of Elite?

[Scipio]

I don't see the great advantage of Crack or Elite troops in CM.

Okay, they follow their orders faster, and they can better spot and has better moral - but what I can say, they can't do the most important thing: they don't fight better.

I understand that a gun has a specific fire rate that can't be dramatical increased by they gunners (and we shouldn't forget the game abstraction), but I would expect an Elite crew hits better than a green or regular crew. I made a long and detailed test with (all) guns and AT fireing on moving and not moving targets, and all come up to the same result - the quality of the crew doesn't seem to matter, the green crews hit as often as the Elite.

I would expect that Elite troops are better in ALL aspects of fighting.

[PVLLVS MAXIMVS]

Personally, I think its enough that they dont panic at the drop of a hat, and perhaps its just my imagination, but it's always seemed to me that they suffer far fewer casualties than green troop when subjected to the same amount of firepower.

The hightened morale, and speedy execution of orders is plenty enough to make them worth it in my book.

[Mattias]

Perhaps you are referring to some other aspect but my Elite tank/gun crews certainly are superior to my conscript ditto.

I made a quick test…

PzIV H vs. dug in M4A3 at 599meter

Elite:42%

C:36%

V:31%

R:28%

G:23%

C:18%

The ROF increased in a liniar fashion from 5/min for the conscripts to 9/min for the elite.

75mm PaK40 deployed in the same situation produced almost exactly the same hit chances and a ROF that was 1 shot per minute higher across the line.

So… As far as guns and tanks goes I am pretty much certain you are wrong if you claim there is no difference in firing efficiency.

M.

[ 07-01-2001: Message edited by: Mattias ]

[Mr. Johnson--]

Well actually he is right.

I made a test map, put conscript infantry on one hill and elite on the other. After 14in navy shells started falling the ELITE SOLDIERS RAN AWAY OR DIED!

Please BTS fix somefink.

hehehe, just kidding

[ 07-01-2001: Message edited by: Mr. Johnson-<THC>- ]

[Cybeq]

It has been my experience that the more experienced the crew the faster they reload. They also hit more often and break less. There is a HUGE performance gap between crack sharpshooters and regular sharpshooters. I know this for a fact.

[Warmaker]

Well, to the nitty gritty of Elite and Crack troops for what it matters most... the infantry. Here's my list and why I love veteran and better troops, and not necessarily in order:

A. Quicker reaction time to orders. Maybe 7-9 seconds. Green/Conscripts? I'll go shopping before they finally put away their Playboy magazines and find their rifles... some of them will even take a while since they probably dropped them in the latrine or something

B. Quicker to react to unforseen events. Example: Moving one direction and all the sudden a LMG team has been spotted on the flank. Face the threat and assault through with no hassle. A casualty or two maybe, but won't run away when a rock has been thrown at them. They'll fight, barring catastrophic casualties that break their morale like losing 4-5 guys in one attack.

C. More lethal with their weapons. 0-50m is pretty deadly for most troops. Engaging at 100-200m is no problem for good troops and can yield better results than Green infantry who can just give volume of fire for suppression. Personally, I like suppression and a good volume of fire, but I want my shots to be accurate and deadly. Don't send rounds flying down range just for the sake of shooting the air. Make sure it hits a human being on the other end!

D. An offshoot of the above, they're more accurate with those precious few Rifle Grenades/Panzerfausts. Bazooka/Piat/PSchreck teams are quite a bit more deadly accurate towards their mid-long ranges.

E. Spot targets better and just as importantly, IDENTIFYING them much more quickly. It's one thing to overestimate a target, but treating something like it was a Tiger IE when it actually was a PzKpfw IVJ is another. You don't have to take as many risks for a less threatening target so you can afford to direct your fire towards something more detrimental to the mission.

F. Improved morale over lower quality troops. They'll stick around for the fight longer despite casualties to take that objective you sent them for or to hold on to an objective with determination.

G. It is my opinion that HQ units from more experienced levels get additional bonuses more often than less experienced. Seeing an elite Paratrooper/FJ HQ unit is a beautiful thing with all those +2 bonuses.

H. One of my most favorite abilities of veteran or better infantry... cleaning up in hand-to-hand combat and assaults! There are those times from mad rushes, dense terrain leading to hand to hand fighting, and other events that eventually lead into such close quarters fighting. Good troops will clean them up real good and send them to drop their rifles and run home. It's beautiful for me to watch my crack/elite platoon fend off in close combat a crazy rush by less experienced troops. Also, another time when this trait is important is in the last turns of a match. Ammunition is low or nearly nonexistant (even for crew/special weapons). Guess what? There's a reason infantrymen have knives and bayonets. A good infantry unit, despite having casualties from previous firefights, can still do a damn good job against superior numbers of lower quality men.

Those are the good points that came off the top of my head for the grunts. Here are my points for why it would be BAD to take "elite" troops:

1. Cost. Quite expensive.

2. Smaller numbers. Ties into the cost naturally. Learn to do more with less men.

3. Not much room for many mistakes. You have to know your troops and equipment and how to properly employ them! You cannot afford to be bumbling around taking such heavy casualties before the real fight starts for the objective! Your small numbers don't allow that. Manage your troops well and employ them properly and weight the risks and benefits. This should help your chances with good troops.

4. On the defense, don't get caught by stringing out your few elites too far across! Remember your small numbers, allow mutual support or reinforcement!

Well, that's it for this public message.

[ 07-01-2001: Message edited by: Warmaker ]

[Warmaker]

Just to add something "little" for this.

Yesterday, I felt like doing a small QB against the AI. Defending from an attack with these settings: Village/Moderate trees/Small slopes at March '45. I had a Mechanized veteran Waffen SS force of 2 Pz.Grenadier platoons, a HMG42, 75mm Inf.Gun, PSW 234/3 (75mm), and a cheap but effective wooden MG bunker. So much for mechanized though. I was probably better off selecting infantry force selection.

I decided to try my hand against the British Airborne. To be honest, I haven't played against Airborne as much and if I did it was usually against Yankee AB. Selected for the AI to get a 100% pt.boost and also these: Elite troops/Infantry force/automatic selection.

To cut a long story short, I did end up winning but barely. It was a 30turn game but it ended with a British surrender at turn 20/21. I found out I was playing against crack British AB early enough. Despite the moderate tree setting I set up the wooden MG bunker with a good field of fire void of cover except one little patch of tall trees that was covered by my Inf.Gun. All open space for them to rush me with so I new I was going to inflict good casualties with the bunker. To top it off, nearby I had 2 Pz.Gren. squads on its flanks to cover them and further back, a tall light building with the HMG42. Don't forget the Inf.Gun for added moral support further back. The squads and HMG42 team were all within the command radius of my Plt.HQ with +1command and +2COMBAT(yeah!). My respect for the British AB shot up immensely depsite their defeat in this QB with the AI. Remember, this was only one part of my defense as the other platoon was laying in wait in the other part of the village and will be fighting their own little war. The British, due to my setup, had no real choice but run the gauntlet of fire pouring out from my defenses. They kept pouring moving forward and some tried to use the tall woods for cover and setting up MG and mortar teams... bad mistake as the Inf.Gun proved to them. Their squads kept moving forward as they were getting hosed down by my MG42s. I was surprised to see them keep coming despite the horrendous casualties I knew I was inflicting. The first few squads that approached the FRONT of the bunker were quite surprised to see 2 Pz.Gren. squads suddenly pop out of nowhere as they were shot dead. Soon some of their comrades stood their ground in the open to provide covering fire (despite the bunker's MG fire!) against my squads to suppress them as more squads pressed forward to take the bunker out. I was irate that they actually took 2 of my men out from their defensive positions, but oh well. Still, despite all my defensive fire, one squad managed to get to the bunker. It either threw a Gammon bomb or an Engineer's charge and knocked out my bunker! For their heroic actions, I summarily shot them to pieces with my squads. Add to this, in the following turn a British mortar attack begins on my Inf.Gun and starts a fire in the tall woods where they were sitting in! My gun crew had to abandon their post and run! With such a sudden drop in my firepower in 2 turns things were quite bad for me since I gave the AI so many extra points. Shuffling of troops to hotspots was the order of the day. Late in the game, gunfire finally died down alot due to all the point blank firing going around but my troops were in pretty fair condition. I had to resort to assaults with close combat and clear 1 building at a time. With no more ammunition for my HMG42 team and both worn platoons on low ammo, crossing those roads in those rushes filled me with dread until I got across... never know when there's a squad/MG team down the road with a few bullets left and looking for something special to use them on.

Anyhow, I won over what it later turned out to be a company of crack British Airborne. Casualties were quite nasty for both sides, esp. for the Brits who had the following (I saved the screenshot):

247 casualties(56KIA)/24 captured/10 mortars destroyed/3 OK men/score 17 and a surrender.

For my Pz.Grenadiers:

49 casualties(13KIA)/1 gun destroyed/1 pillbox destroyed/1 vehicle knocked out/36 OK men/score 83 and a Major Victory.

In the last few turns of cleaning up, I was expecting a draw or maybe a minor victory at best since my casualties were hefty I felt. The casualties I inflicted though were high enough to tip the scales.

This long post of my QB shows the best and the worst of such good troops. Despite the heavy casualties I was inflicting on the brave Paratroopers, their morale did not break much (again, heavy casualties of losing 6 men in one of my attacks are of course an exception) and they proceeded with grim determination. The one squad that got through to the bunker still had enough wits about them despite casualties to make use of the last few seconds of their lives and throw that charge/Gammon Bomb and knock the bunker out before getting shot dead. This is a testament to the skill and high morale of elite formations. Green units simply cannot do that! They'll run at the first sign of a casualty! I thought whoever from that squad threw that charge deserved Britain's highest award posthumously. I'm still amazed by that assault against the teeth of my defenses.

Now to the bad part of elite troops in this QB. Because of the high cost of the crack British AB company, they could ill afford to take the casualties they did even against my 2 Pz.Gren.Platoons. Again this could not be helped much due to my usage of terrain and supporting fire for my advantage. Another point is brought up because of their willingness to stick around in a fight. Despite the mostly bad terrain they found themselves in they remained in the firefight despite heavily mounting casualties. There was a much better way to defeat my forces. The other platoon lost the support of the 75mm Puma as the fighting around the bunker was well underway. Surely, a good human player would abandon the assault against the bunker and pour his efforts into his other platoons' area after my Puma's destruction. Maybe keep a split platoon there to keep my attentions focused over there so as not to shift my defenses accordingly as I see more of their troops pouring to the other side of the village. The only way a human player would have continued the attack on the bunker is due to pride in not allowing failure or committing a huge tactical mistake. More than likely it will be the latter, just a bad mistake and not realizing that other options were opening up despite his other platoon's breakthrough. With a combination of his men's determination to see things through and a bad tactical mistake the AI allowed a wholesale slaughter of his men despite their bravery.

For me, I care nothing if I mow down masses of low quality fodder with my veteran troops. Serves a coward well to get a shot in the back from the enemy. But this time, it actually pains me to see such good men get shot to pieces. Actually sat there and thought that guys, regardless of nationality, really had to go through that kind of stuff.

[Scipio]

Warmaker, thanks for your short answer and the little addition .

I will think about my position and make more tests.

[lcm1947]

OK, I am trying to learn here. Who is right Warmaker or Scipio? Not trying to get you two in a fight but now I don't know if buying Elite troops are all that good or not. This is referring to if Elite troops actually shoot more accurate or not. The other things I understand about morale, etc. Tanks.

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scipio:

I don't see the great advantage of Crack or Elite troops in CM.

Okay, they follow their orders faster, and they can better spot and has better moral - but what I can say, they can't do the most important thing: they don't fight better.

I understand that a gun has a specific fire rate that can't be dramatical increased by they gunners (and we shouldn't forget the game abstraction), but I would expect an Elite crew hits better than a green or regular crew. I made a long and detailed test with (all) guns and AT fireing on moving and not moving targets, and all come up to the same result - the quality of the crew doesn't seem to matter, the green crews hit as often as the Elite.

I would expect that Elite troops are better in ALL aspects of fighting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well in a QB yesterday here are some results with a 'Vetran' PzKpfw IV crew vs an 'Crack' Tiger E crew:

PzKpfw IV H kills:

- 5 Sherman V

- 1 Cromwell VI

- 1 Cromwell VIII

- 1 Firefly

- 1 Cromwell IV

- 7 Inf

Tiger E Kills:

- 4 Sherman V

- 2 Firefly

- 10 Inf

Both tanks were in the same area & terrain fireing at basicly the same ranges vs a massed UK armor attack, By all accounts the engagement ranges & terrain were textbook perfect for an Tiger Ie, ranges of 800 - 1200 & 1200 - 2000m require very lil correction, so its basicly point & shoot.

Yet the Tiger was expending 5 rounds vs an stationary target to score an hit & 5 - 8 vs a moveing one while the PzKpfw IV's gun who's sweet spot was 800m was getting kills in 2 - 3 shots at over 1000m.

Another aspect I have been seeing off topic, as it cocerns tank combat, is they will score an hit after 3 - 5 rounds on a stationary Sherman, then miss the next 3 round's on the same target.

This is not realy copestic as according to US/UK & Ge tankers once a hit was achieved the range was set and its was just 'pull the trigger till it blows up time' then switch to next target ,again this is vs a stationary target.

Regards, John Waters

[ 07-01-2001: Message edited by: PzKpfw 1 ]

[gunnergoz]

John Waters-

Regarding your test between the veteran PZ IV and elite Tiger, I was wondering if the different turret traverse rates would come into play, especially if they were taking on moving targets that would require some leading of the target.

Just a thought...

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gunnergoz:

John Waters-

Regarding your test between the veteran PZ IV and elite Tiger, I was wondering if the different turret traverse rates would come into play, especially if they were taking on moving targets that would require some leading of the target.

Just a thought...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not realy the majority of the tanks were moveing across the front of the pair, very minor turret movements to aquire. Also my 20mm flack had already gun damaged & imobed 7 or 8 UK tanks with track hits so their was a plethora of stationary targets from 867 - 1076m.

Regards, John Waters

[ 07-01-2001: Message edited by: PzKpfw 1 ]

[Warmaker]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scipio:

Warmaker, thanks for your short answer and the little addition .

I will think about my position and make more tests.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

N/P, I just had some soda and needed to burn off the caffeine for that late night/early morning post

[Renaud]

My biggest problem with troop quality, specifically morale, in CM is that even a 'regular' force can suffer catastrophic casualties, including loss of most leaders, and still continue the attack, often straight into withering fire. This is clearly more of a problem with larger battles where the AI admittedly breaks down. It gets really ludicrous with batallion and above sized infantry units.

I've hit a batallion with a suprise mortar concentration leaving a hill covered with over 200 casualties (mostly command(!) and support units, but even a few whole squads evaporated), yet the batallion continues forward. I don't think any regular formation in WWII could take 30% casualties in 90 seconds of brutal mortaring and continue the attack 10 minutes later.

Perhaps this could be alleviated by having seperately tracked global morale values for each major sub-unit (like each company) rather than only one global morale value. Also CM AI can't be faulted for falling down at the larger troop numbers where things get silly (hundreds of troops clumped together in mobs during attacks). But hey maybe this will be appropriate to early war CMBB before the Russians learned less wasteful small-unit infantry tactics.

Ren

[CombinedArms]

My experience with infantry suggests that the great divide is between Green and Regular troops. Greens will break if a fly buzzes past them. Regulars will often hold on grittily, as long as they are in command. Veterans, Cracks & Elites, of course perform progressively better, but you can WORK with regulars and they offer a good cost / benefit ratio. Greens are cheaper but their slowness to respond to command and their ease in breaking makes them exasperating to manage--as I'm sure green troops often were in real life.

[Blenheim]

Well, I will get heavily bombarded after this affirmation, but....

Man, I love using green/conscript masses. Really. I am quite good using human wave tactics, overwhelming those uber soldiers that elite and crack troops are. Sorry, I really enjoy using brute force from time to time....

Mainly because I suck when using elite/crack/vet troops. Really. Even the AI smashes me silly and dances like crazy on my grave when I use them. Every time I take good troops against AI green hordes I lose.

So keep this thread rolling... I need some advice on using vets.

(BTW, I just won a 1500 meeting engagement vs the AI. My gamey Athlon purchased two Jadgtigers !!! I won, actually, using masses of Sherms...)

[YECoyote]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scipio:

I don't see the great advantage of Crack or Elite troops in CM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have to disagree here. I just played a QB night mission. Yanks with Elite 44 Rifle Company. I have Veteran Heer Rifle Company, with Infantry guns support. They just cleaned my clock. They hit hard, and they hit often!!! Mind you, they found a gap in my defense and exploited it. I didn't know they could do that. :eek: :confused:

[Warmaker]

Just using my previous QB example with my veteran Pz.Grenadier force against a larger, and crack British Airborne. Veteran troops are my usual preferance and Vet. Waff-SS Pz.Gren. are my absolute favorite. I usually play alot more defensive games than offensive ones so I know how to set up and placing my supporting arms to maximize their effects. Employ a small defense with good troops against lower quality ones and you will reap a damn good harvest. I'm not saying it will always be a cakewalk but you'll be the cause of numerous body parts laying around their advance and cowering men running back home.

There's no real one way to play using experienced troops, just practice and reading a bunch of AARs floating around. Play around with some QB/scenarios and choose an infantry only force or maybe mechanized at the heaviest. Leave behind those Tigers, Pershings, and Churchills for a bit and practice with the grunts and you should be able to better integrate them into your plans, not just mere fodder. Only good thing green troops are good for is stopping bullets. Even then, only sometimes.

Another thing that can help in playing small, elite infantry forces is to be bold. You've got the good leadership, weapons, experienced men, and good morale. You can afford to do more daring or risky stuff that the opponent wouldn't think most people would do. Because of all the elite troops' benefits and quick reaction to orders and random events, they can pull this off better.

Just to drive home another point in my opinion of elite over green/conscript: Another small 500pt. QB meeting engagement with me using regular Waff.SS Pz.Gren. w/ 251/1s and a plain vanilla SS Rifle Plt. Experience of the AI was random and so was nationality. Turned out I was fighting a bunch of green U.S. Army troops. The highlight was when I used the Rifle Plt. to flank the American advance as they were busy trying to push out my stubborn Grenadiers from the objective. During a successful assault with no smoke (I had no mortars/artillery) into a formerly American held wooded area to clear out a .50 cal team with my platoon, one of my squads got seriously raked and lost 4 men from the .50 cal (ow!) during the charge. During some close combat with a Plt.HQ and 'zook team that same squad lost 2 more men while the rest of the platoon got along quite unscathed. Soon in another nearby wooded area 4 whole 60mm/81mm teams and a cowering US rifle squad was spotted at 30-40m. I sent my 2 healthy squads to assault them with fire and close combat and the beat up now-2-man squad remained to keep a bloodied US rifle squad spotted on our flank which was identified with 8 men remaining out of their usual 12. My other squads assaulted and commenced to clear out the mortars quite easily. My 2 man squad engaged the cowering 8 man squad with an MP44 and MG42. Yes, that's alot of firepower for 2 men but it's only two men. After 2 attacks from this 2-man team, that 8-man squad got up and ran for the map edge! After playing the stubborn crack Brit.AB I was shocked at this since I was slightly concerned that the firepower from 8 M1 Garands into the flank of my platoon's advance would slow or stop my attack. Had those been regular or better troops, I would have probably lost that 2man squad from a short firefight and maybe lose several more. Yes, that green squad was probably close to breaking and out of command radius of their HQ but they ran away too easily when my guys threw white rabbits at them. Again, this is in sharp contrast to those Brits I faced before. Removing them from a house with even veteran Waff.SS Pz.Grenadiers was not easy.

[Nowotny]

[ 07-02-2001: Message edited by: Nowotny ]