Relative unit strengths

[hm_stanley]

I've found an interesting combination of unit setups that I find interesting.

However, first things first, One thing that is not clear are what are units relative strengths, that is how are they made up weapons wise. For example, there is no need to add a bazooka to an airborne squad, since they have one contained in one squad. I found the useful element of adding a BAR to those platoons, since it provides them some very interesting firepower. On the otherhand, armored pzgrdn (mech infantry, not regular infantry) platoon contain no anti tank capability, which can be quite confusing to a new person aartting up ther forces.

The other aspect of force setup is the quality of that unit in terms of length of service and morale. I can get by much better (in terms of quality of fight, not plugging holes on the defensive) with one extreme airborne company then setting up two regular airborne companies, it seems quality trumps quantity everytime, with the exception of armor, which really doesnt seem affected by unit quality considerations. I've had regular armor units act like gods on the battlefield vs elite armor elements getting hit once by a spalling round and buggin out, this isn't so for the infantry elements. Now why? I have idea, but I've won games with little more than a company of crack men duking it out with 2x as many enemy and coming out on top more often than not.

I'm curious to what other people have found? To sum:

1. Armor seems least affected morale and longevity multipliers

2. Infantry get a huge bonus with incrementing their morale multiplier

3. Infantry get a smaller multiplier when improving their longevity (veteran vs crack for example)

4. BFC should try to provide more granularity to platoon Malthus, that is, how many men and what they are fielding.

Thanks,

[sburke]

I'm curious to what other people have found? To sum:

1. Armor seems least affected morale and longevity multipliers

2. Infantry get a huge bonus with incrementing their morale multiplier

3. Infantry get a smaller multiplier when improving their longevity (veteran vs crack for example)

4. BFC should try to provide more granularity to platoon Malthus, that is, how many men and what they are fielding.

Thanks,

Honestly there are so many variables I am not sure how to even start. What kind of force multipliers do you have, how well do you use them etc etc.

Individual instances are just too hard to make distinctions on. Do I see value on better armor units, yes definitely. But does that make them supermen, not at all. For infantry though I think those values come out immediately as they may actually survive incoming fire they just bug out too dang quick and then your whole defensive position starts to crumble.

[hm_stanley]

I agree with you, my sample set is waaaayy too small. But these are elements I've uncountered in about 30+ games.

[hm_stanley]

Oh, typo in my post, Malthius??? Have no idea how the iPhone came up with that one. It should read "Makeup". Not that weird sounding German philosopher name.