Question?

[Ratzki]

If your force consisted of one Vet. Infantry Company(4x squads, 1x 50mm Mortar), about how many enemy Companies could you take on and still be successfull.The enemy force would consist of(4x squads, 1x 50mm Mortar).
I guess what I am asking is what is the level of effectiveness of each of the troop qualities , Conscript, Green, Regular, Vet., Crack?

[Mad Russian]

It depends on a lot of factors. Are your men attacking or defending? What kind of terrain is each unit in? A big factor is the leadership values and ammunition levels.

All things equal, which they never are, units of comparative size and experience should perform comparatively the same. Attackers generally need more numbers or better leaders/tactics. Defenders generally have better chance at winning if they can achieve concentration of fire.

The great multiplier are the leadership factors and the tactics used to achieve the objectives.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Ratzki]

I was under the all things being equal umbrella. I have always kinda wondered how much of a difference the troop quality made.

[Bear]

I was under the all things being equal umbrella. I have always kinda wondered how much of a difference the troop quality made.

Ratzki,

A Veteran Company vs. Regular Company, the Veteran has approximately a 33 - 50% advantage. i.e the model I'm thinking of is a meeting engagement. After a two minute exchange of fire, the advantage will progress, compounded in a geometric progression in losses. Turn two could give the Veteran a 40 - 60% advantage. Three could remain the same. Then on four, the morale issue shows itself after 3 minutes of a full firefight and the Veteran advantage can leap to 66 - 75% advantage. Average small infantry engagement, which a company borders on small to medium, is over in ten minutes. The men in the field don't know it but it's essentially over.

Manpower and throw weights are equal. It is the Veteran higher rate of fire, including intensive fire, plus the higher morale that gives them staying power (less likely to break/rout compared to the Regulars) that give the Veteran the edge.

I hope that helps.

[Ratzki]

Do you know if the step values are the same between each troop quality level? So would a Regular company vs a Green company perform about the same as the Vet. vs Regular that you mentioned? My thoughts would be that it would be the same but there would be more room for some unpredictable results as the morale checks on the Regular company would be failed more often then would the Vet. troops.
Thanks for that answer. I have always kinda designed by "feel" and I am working on something that I want to be alot closer in somewhat predictable results.

[Kelen]

If it were a pure even match up, e.g. single squad against suad squad, both in the same terrain, both with the same firepower then yes Vets would beat Regs, however things are rarely ever than straightforward and therfore much more difficult to predict.

AS has balready been said, there are too many variables to simply say that Vets would have 33% - 50% advantage, and even if it were an even match up I'm still not convinced that they have that much direct advantage.

From personal experience the biggest advantage more experienced troops has is their ability to absorb firepower and therefore they pin and break less often, meaning that they can continue to advance in the face of opposition, and continue to poor fire into the enemy thereby hastening their breaking.

You also have to remember that the points difference means that there will be more Regular units compared to Vets, (if your opponent has spent his points wisely), meaning that there will be an imbalance in unit match up. Those Vets squads facing 2 Reg are therefore more likely to pin/break than either of the 2 Reg squads, and as such the quality advantage is soon evened out by the sheer numerical advantage.

Finally, in the face of superior forces, breaking contact early due to units panicking can be a distinct advantage. I love it when my opponent advances with his Vets against my Regular squads in cover. My defensive stance negates their quality advantage, and the fact that they stand there and take the punishment means that I will often wipe out Vets squads whereas Regs would have pegged it and lived to see another day.

As such it isn't as straightforward as simply saying they'll perform x% better.

[Bear]

Do you know if the step values are the same between each troop quality level? So would a Regular company vs a Green company perform about the same as the Vet. vs Regular that you mentioned? My thoughts would be that it would be the same but there would be more room for some unpredictable results as the morale checks on the Regular company would be failed more often then would the Vet. troops.
Thanks for that answer. I have always kinda designed by "feel" and I am working on something that I want to be alot closer in somewhat predictable results.

I get your train of thought. Try to focus on the result, your vision of how you see and want it to be. Then think backwards from the result you'd like to see. Designers can wrap their head around that one. Game Science can cause some heads to explode, usually it gets full and it's time for a breather or a nip.
Yes, the step down from Veteran to Regular to Green is similar in the geometric results. It's an average, we know from playing CM and shyt happens.
We can't get to an absolute result in this simulation or in reality. This issue confounds the quickie players who unjustifiably protest that scenarios are predictable. And y'all get tired of my saying that "why is chess still played?".
Even with the chess model, working backwards from a specific checkmate position is possible. But once movement and psychology of players (and AI in CM) the battle plan proceeds then in those moments of decision or I like to call the moment of Flux...everything can go right or frakin upside down.
If we get close to the visualization then we succeeded.