You can always agree with whomever you are playing DYO with that you can.PS .. I guess you can't purchase CPVA or ROKA as "Commando". [H1.24]
My .2 cents, but Fanaticism imparts other abilities to units besides increase ML. I'm not sure that would be the way to go. This might be where a TTP could do the research and, if justified, add elite counters to the CVPA mix.My main question (for Andy and Rick) is just regarding ML: is the intent that if one wants the PLA to be ML 8, one declares them (like say a company or a battalion's worth in a scenario) Fanatic?
ditto, this module is quite an accomplishment.To Andy, Rick, and all the design team and playtesters: congratulations on a project long-anticipated!
My .2 cents, but Fanaticism imparts other abilities to units besides increase ML. I'm not sure that would be the way to go. This might be where a TTP could do the research and, if justified, add elite counters to the CVPA mix.
ditto, this module is quite an accomplishment.
You are correct. They also don't surrender via RtPh method per A10.8. They don't Disrupt and they don't PAATC.My .2 cents, but Fanaticism imparts other abilities to units besides increase ML.
Not sure why there is a belief that MMP has gotten this wrong. Did someone want to suggest the identity of a CVPA unit they feel *should* be granted elite status?This might be where a TTP could do the research and, if justified, add elite counters to the CVPA mix.
I was of the understanding that Japanese airborne and some* SNLF rated elite treatment. You see the Special Naval Landing Force referred to in some contemporary accounts as "Japanese Marines." Steven Swann wrote some good stuff on Japanese airborne troops in the '95 Annual.The Japanese do have elite squads.
That I think would have to come from the design team, unless some others here are experts on the CPVA. I have a fulsome KW library, including most of the recent works by Chinese scholars in English, but don't have time to read them, and I doubt the indexes will help me with an entry for "elite." (Just looked in Millett, They Came from the North, and his index for the CPVA does not include "morale." It has "leadership" and "weaknesses," but I'd have to look at the refs to the units to assess potential elite quality.)I was of the understanding that Japanese airborne and SNLF rated elite treatment. You see the Special Naval Landing Force referred to in some contemporary accounts as "Japanese Marines." Steven Swann wrote some good stuff on Japanese airborne troops in the '95 Annual.
I would suggest there is ample evidence of Japanese 'elite' troops. I'd love to see such discussion of 'elite' Communist forces with specific examples if anyone has them.
I think the idea with the ROK is that it was a very fledgling army, whereas the ROK Marines learned an elite Marine ethos from the USMC. Truly gung-ho ROKA would be battle-hardened to Fanatic.If it helps .. the Red Chinese doesn't have "Elite" either -- ie Partisans.
Like I said before .. neither does the ROKA.
Are we okay with these?
Yes, which I'd suggest highlights the need to examine specific units in these kinds of discussions, and even narrowing those examinations down to specific time-frames.Note that we do see plenty of scenarios with Japanese units with ML 8: hardly limited to SNLF (who I think have also been slanged as 2d rate) or airborne.
Sam,I get the no-green (and no-conscript), and that one can SSR Elite for ammo, or AE, etc. Also recognizing the step-loss/reduction system a la the Japanese. The Japanese do have elite squads. Maybe we'd say they were a more "organized" army (take that how you will, but I guess meaning essentially one more akin to a western army). My main question (for Andy and Rick) is just regarding ML: is the intent that if one wants the PLA to be ML 8, one declares them (like say a company or a battalion's worth in a scenario) Fanatic? Or is your view that a substantial PLA force should not be rated at ML 8?
To Andy, Rick, and all the design team and playtesters: congratulations on a project long-anticipated!
I too would raise an eyebrow about usually considering SNLF troops as Elite. They were intended as base defence troops and for naval landing parties. Think more colonial gunboat diplomats than crack amphibious assault troops. That's not to say they did badly at times, they were even more brutal and and fanatic than the IJA in their defence of Manila for example, but overall I get the impression they were not up there with the USMC, a bit of a mixed bag.I was of the understanding that Japanese airborne and SNLF rated elite treatment. You see the Special Naval Landing Force referred to in some contemporary accounts as "Japanese Marines."
You're the one that added the 'usually'. As stated above, I would stress the need to consider units on an individual basis in order to realistically assign morale, ELR, fanaticism, etc.I too would raise an eyebrow about usually considering SNLF troops as Elite.
Quote from the Pacific War Online Encyclopedia, and the "Benninghof" article quoted is here: http://www.avalanchepress.com/SNLF.phpThe SNLF did share with the U.S. Marines a reputation for toughness. Two of the Special Naval Landing Forces, 1 and 3 Yokosuka Special Naval Landing Forces, had jump training, and all had special training in amphibious assault. They were also ruthless, committing a number of atrocities in the Southwest Pacific during the Centrifugal Offensive. These included massacres of prisoners of war at Ambon and Kendari. Allied intelligence rated their infantry training and tactics as not up to the standards of the Japanese Army, but the Marines disagreed, regarding the Special Naval Landing Forces as superior to the average Japanese Army unit (quoted in Benninghof 2005):
Naval units of this type are usually more highly trained and have a greater tenacity and fighting spirit than the average Japanese Army unit.
Even if the Japanese didn't themselves consider them an elite, those kind of assessments are often less meaningful than actual performance in combat. The Waffen-SS had plenty of divisions with cuff titles, honorific names and a claim to being elite, which failed to perform even minimally well much less better than the average line unit.This may reflect a predisposition by the elite American Marines to assume that "Japanese Marines" must also be elite. However, the Japanese Navy did not regard the SNLF as elite forces, but simply as sailors assigned to ground combat duty. The different assessments may also have their origin in confusion between the Special Naval Landing Forces and the less well trained and equipped Base Forces. As Japan lost the initiative in the Pacific, the Special Naval Landing Forces tended to be replaced with Base Forces (konkyochitai) and their subordinate Guard Forces (keibitai) which were often hastily organized before being rushed to Pacific bases.
Probably a function of being less gravity in 1950.Are all the HVSS suspension Shermans now low ground pressure, even the dozer? Is that backward adaptable to WW2 like the 81mm mortar?