When Is It Best To Buy Vet Infantry Over Regs?

[Col Deadmarsh]

I've been wondering this for quite some time now. Take your normal reg/vet mix in a QB. It would appear that vets would be preferred when you need men to go over and beyond the call of duty. This might be advancing towards a flank or into any dangerous area where arty or enemy support fire might be present. The regs might panic or break but the vets have a better chance at holding their ground.

Then again, if they get hit by arty or tank fire, you lose expensive men. In addition to this, the 200 bucks you spent upgrading a regular company to a vet company could have been used to buy another regular rifle platoon, 2 zook teams, and 2 medium mg's. It makes you wonder if getting vets is ever worth it. And yet I do it constantly and have never questioned myself afterward because the vets do hold up well under stress.

In all honestly though, I can't figure out if it's worth it to get these seasoned soldiers or not. Anybody got a theory on when's the best time to have these guys in your mix?

[CMplayer]

It's not just that they are less likely to break. It's also for the shorter command delay. You need to use this mobility to keep them hard to hit by enemy tanks and artillery.

[Londoner]

I think you've pretty much answered your own question Colonel. I never used to buy vets but regs as you say, lack staying power. More importantly IMO vets are so much better in offensive operations. As to how many, say I've got two coys in total I like to keep 1-2 vet platoons in reserve, so I can deploy them as needed. So normally 20-30 percent of my infantry force will be vets.

[ April 13, 2002, 02:42 AM: Message edited by: Londoner ]

[CMplayer]

I don't keep my vets in reserve. Both on offense and defence they are the farthest forward troops.

[Scipio]

Always

[Juju]

I only ever buy vets when I have some leftover points. and then exclusively schrecks/zooks or snipers. Platoons get assigned with specific orders depending on their HQ qualities (and my luck in getting any good ones).

You don't need vets to be able to win a CM game.

[Tanaka]

Originally posted by Juju:

...You don't need vets to be able to win a CM game.

...Just a well placed SMG charge

[Pak40]

I almost always buy Vets. It's always worth the price, attacking or defending. The only time I don't buy Vets is for a recon platoon that I know will get chewed up anyway. The recon patrol's mission is to reveal the enemy's positions not fight it out, therefore, Regulars do the job quite well.

[Tanaka]

Originally posted by Pak40:

...is for a recon platoon that I know will get chewed up anyway. The recon patrol's mission is to reveal the enemy's positions not fight it out...

Correction, not "recon platoon", but "suicide platoon"

You are one of those "recon by death" COs that, If I was under your command, I would shoot in the back... war “accidents” do happen, you know ?! :cool:

Luckily for you, in CM, bullets only fly in one direction

[ April 13, 2002, 01:20 PM: Message edited by: Tanaka ]

[mrcobbler]

Veterans ALWAYS seem better in infantry.

With AFV's it doesn't seem like they make enough difference to be worth the extra cost, especially in PBEM's.

Shoeman

[Jarmo]

Vets also have more firepower (not visible in the list).

Me? I'll take greens anytime and swarm those veterans

with 2 to 1 odds.

[CMplayer]

There is a middle ground between 'recon by suicide' and not scouting at all. Attacking or on ME you can use some of your highest quality troops for aggressive recon. That means they fight their way as far into the objective area as they can, but not totally suicidally. If they take about 50% casualties thats okay. This way they reveal enemy assets etc, as well as being a thorn in the side of your opp. Then the follow on regulars have a much easier time. Most important bonus is morale.

Even on defence you can do this. Have a higher quality platoon, or even a stripped 2 squad platoon infiltrate forwards with 1 or 2 AT teams and maybe a light mortar. They can sneak up and do all kinds of neat things to frustrate your opponent's attack, including letting the opponent pass unchallenged and then bushwhacking his slower support teams when they are moving forward. Then the most important bonuses are morale and stealth.

[Col Deadmarsh]

Originally posted by Jarmo:

Vets also have more firepower (not visible in the list).

More firepower? How can this be Jarmo?

What I'm wondering is if anyone has done a test pitting a reg platoon against a vet platoon and seeing how much more effective the vet platoon is. I'm assuming they cause more casualties than the regs.

[ April 13, 2002, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: Colonel_Deadmarsh ]

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh:

What I'm wondering is if anyone has done a test pitting a reg platoon against a vet platoon and seeing how much more effective the vet platoon. I'm assuming they cause more casualties than the regs.

The vets have about 10% greater firepower than regs.

[Dirtweasle]

Vets have more applied or appreciable firepower because they tend to hit their targets with more accuracy. Also, they are better at spotting, hiding, amubushing, and just about everything.

I tend to use some as a reserve force on the assault, and others as a recon / infiltration force. Not a suicide recon, but rather using them carefully to expose the enemy and get in close. Then manuever with the large force of regulars. Say a rifle company of regulars, and 2 rifle platoons of vets, plus maybe a sharpshooter and AT team. If either vet platoon has the stealth bonus (x?), that's the recon platoon.

[Redwolf]

Vets have more firepower. You can't see it in the unit info display, but it is reported in the LOS tool (even in the editor).

[JasonC]

One factor people haven't mentioned is defender's odds. Defenders are outnumbered as it is, and always taking vets this can give you a serious numerical problem, especially against lower quality attackers. The vets hold up fine at first, sure, but then they run out of ammo, because they each have to fire-fight two squads of attackers. Meanwhile, foxhole cover can make the morale boost less important than on the attack. At night I do notice that higher morale always pays off, because regular infantry and below (green especially) becomes very brittle at night. But in a daytime defense I'd rather have more regulars, especially if I spend a lot on armor, arty, vehicles, or field fortifications. Because otherwise it is too easy for attackers to just buy enough regular infantry with their extra points, and run you out of ammo, then out of men.

[ April 13, 2002, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ]

[Michael Emrys]

I agree that the advantage of going with higher quality troops is not that clear-cut. When I have fought against low quality troops (conscript; green) I have noticed that they do indeed break sooner, but before they do, they cause me the about the same amount of casualties as good quality troops (regular or above). And since there are more of them, the broken ones get replaced by unbroken ones. And as Jason says, a lot of cheap troops pack more ammo than a few good troops.

Buying high quality troops (vet or above) may make good sense if you have a particular reason for doing so, but as a standard practice it's probably better to split the difference and stay with regular.

Michael

[ April 13, 2002, 07:16 PM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]

[Thermopylae]

If your defending against lwo quality trops, vets can work wonders IF properly supported by deep fires to break up the oncoming hordes.

[russellmz]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

Most important bonus is morale.

HELL's YEAH. with a double bonus morale boost your regular inf squad is now crack in terms of morale. who cares if his firepower is below that of crack, if they got the staying power to duke it out for the long haul they will kick butt.

i had a pbem where my platoon of regs with double bonused morale held off smg squads while being shelled by a stuh. one squad fought down to the last man with out breaking in a house against two smg squads. i was able to move the other squads in close under fire and kill the crippled smg squads in the house and then back off from the stuh until it was destroyed by a rear hit by an m10.

there were 20 craters at the platoon's position. one squad totally wiped out, the other two had 4 and 8 i think, and the hq had one guy left.

double morale is the coolest bonus ever.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Tanaka:

Correction, not "recon platoon", but "suicide platoon"

You are one of those "recon by death" COs that, If I was under your command, I would shoot in the back... war “accidents” do happen, you know ?! :cool:

Luckily for you, in CM, bullets only fly in one direction [/QB]

You completely misunderstood what I said. I don't rush the recon platoon into certain death. I send them to look for the enemy. Once the recon patrol finds the enemy, I send other troops/tanks/artillery to pound the HELL out of what they found.

I only said that the recon platoon gets "chewed up" because they often fall victim to ambushes. That's part of their job, to find or spoil the ambushes.

Recon by Death, as you're implying, is a tactic where one sends out his recon units, usually in small units like half-squads. They find the enemy and then they keep looking for more "hidden" enemies until they are eventually killed off.

I admit that I sometimes use half squads as recon, but I certainly don't intend on getting them killed. I try, if at all possible, to save that unit. But, as we all know, they often end up falling victim to a clever ambush.

[Warmaker]

I'm quite fond of the reg/vet/elite mix but I usually find myself with a good percentage of pts spent on good units. I gravitate towards a 50/50 force exp. selection.

If I have a choice, I never choose anything below regular: Quantity be damned. What good is immense firepower with the best weapons of the war if the idiots can't tie their bootlaces or even throw a piece of paper in the trash can?

I never have a concrete philosophy on when the elite forces are at the forefront or in reserve at the beginning of the fight. It depends on the situation and my "gut feeling."

I'll tell you two things that are fun though: Fighting in games with dense terrain and you've got elite platoons running around causing all kinds of problems against inexperienced troops. People screaming, stuff flying all over the place (debris & demo charges!), conscripts running for Berlin/London/Washington DC while screaming for their milk bottles.

... and the other great joy to watch: Having elite Fallschirmjager/Allied Airborne platoons tear apart conscripts in close combat!

[Tanaka]

Originally posted by Pak40:

...I send them to look for the enemy. Once the recon patrol finds the enemy, I send other troops/tanks/artillery to pound the HELL out of what they found.

I only said that the recon platoon gets "chewed up" because they often fall victim to ambushes. That's part of their job, to find or spoil the ambushes...

Note that I used “you” not as you personally, but, “you” as a CM commander…

I noticed that you didn’t perform the supreme “recon by death” technique…

In likes of: “LMG frontline convicts” or “Jeep .50 woods hugging” or yet any of its more “retard" degenerations

When well supported (same turn support) your “recon platoon” can move to the class of “storm platoon” and take a less suicidal battle approach

[Tanaka]

Originally posted by Warmaker:

... and the other great joy to watch: Having elite Fallschirmjager/Allied Airborne platoons tear apart conscripts in close combat!

In Portugal we have an expression for your kind: " Bate na avó"... wish means "Beat up grandmother"… The idea is that you enjoy to pick a fight with people that can’t defend themselves (like old folks)

[Herr Kruger]

Having veteran is nice.. I usually try to get some. Recently I had some veteran troops make short work of Shermans at close range with Panzerfausts while engaging infantry almost 180 degrees away.