Forgotten War first impressions, or Where is the searchlight scenario?

JRKrejsa

Elder Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
3,667
Reaction score
1,094
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
We are wading through IPM now, in Centurions Reverse.

Not that bad. We had to stop and replay the first turn and a 1/2, but that was due to a set up error, not IPM.
 

hongkongwargamer

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
7,181
Reaction score
5,571
Location
Lantern Waste
Country
llUnited Kingdom
Well .. the CPVA certainly doesn't look all egalitarian in the sense that it does have 1st liners and 2nd liners. Don't forget of course that Infantry crews are always elite, as are SMCs (since they ain't Partisans no more). Designated CPVA (Assault Engineers) can use DC/FT [W7.91], so no issues here.

ROKA (South Korean Army) has no "Elite" troops either by the way and they sure ain't Communists. Korea Marines are "Elite" though.

PS .. I guess you can't purchase CPVA or ROKA as "Commando". [H1.24]
 
Last edited:

samwat

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
760
Reaction score
89
Location
west point ny
Country
llUnited States
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!
 

Ganjulama

Tuco B.P.J. Maria Ramirez
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
2,305
Reaction score
1,090
Location
Wilmington, NC
Country
llUnited States
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?
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.

To Andy, Rick, and all the design team and playtesters: congratulations on a project long-anticipated!
ditto, this module is quite an accomplishment.
 

samwat

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
760
Reaction score
89
Location
west point ny
Country
llUnited States
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.

Yes about the Fanaticism--which tells me that not having CPVA with ML 8 was a conscious design decision. I don't see anything in the footnotes that explicitly explains that: Andy, can you give us your insight?
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
2,765
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
My .2 cents, but Fanaticism imparts other abilities to units besides increase ML.
You are correct. They also don't surrender via RtPh method per A10.8. They don't Disrupt and they don't PAATC.

But it may worthwhile reviewing what the terms like Fanatic and Elite actually mean.

Great example of 'fanatic' troops in Normandy was the 12th SS Panzer Division. The battle at Buron is well documented (Lone Canuck did an HASL on it, but there are some very good books including Snowie's "Bloody Buron", and the graphic novel "Two Generals"). Consisting mainly of very young recruits directly from the HJ, with a cadre of the Leibstandarte, there are mentions in the histories of young riflemen populating an anti-tank ditch outside the town during the attack there in July as part of Operation CHARNWOOD. They simply refused to surrender (when other, more experienced troops, would have fallen back or given up.) Some positions were only reduced by the supporting Sherman tanks closing to point blank range and eliminating them with the 75mm MA.

This might be where a TTP could do the research and, if justified, add elite counters to the CVPA mix.
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?

The classic example of the Second World War was the Großdeutschland, and there are some compelling reasons why. They recruited nationally - possibly the only one of the Army's divisions to do so (the German Army was organized regionally). They had a height requirement and more stringent physical requirements than the rest of the Army. They had a higher scale of issue of heavy weapons. They received new equipment before anyone else, often doing the field trials of new kit. They were the first to take the Panther into action, for example. They wore one of a handful of Army units to have special insignia, including a cuff title. They had their own public affairs unit (Propaganda Kompanie). Training standards were higher. And most importantly, they fought hard and held onto objectives, even when losses were heavy. GD began life as a single regiment, suffered 4,000 killed and wounded in the first year of Barbarossa, then expanded to a motorized infantry division, then a panzergrenadier division, then an entire corps in November 1944, with several satellite formations making the up GD Verbände.

I'd be very interested to read of Communist units that anyone feels should be categorized in the same way.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
2,765
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
The Japanese do have elite squads.
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.

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.

*edit
 
Last edited:

hongkongwargamer

Forum Guru
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
7,181
Reaction score
5,571
Location
Lantern Waste
Country
llUnited Kingdom
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?
 

samwat

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
760
Reaction score
89
Location
west point ny
Country
llUnited States
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.
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.)

Which I guess suggests that no, the design team did not ID such units. But I don't think that GD or 12SS are quite apropos here, because I wonder to what extent English-language readers have had access to the level of description with which such famous WWII units have been cited. How many of us can seriously name a CPVA unit (as opposed to rattling off some number)? But we've accorded some of the Russian hordes elite status--maybe we'd do so for the CPVA if we knew more. But most of the memoirs by Americans that one reads don't make such a distinction: the CPVA remain faceless (though certainly sometimes very skilled and deadly, i.e., Stealthy with special concealment capabilities) hordes. Maybe digging through US/UN G-2 reports would change the picture, but the KW does remain the forgotten war in terms of being stuck between WWII and Vietnam (or just being an afterword to WWII) for most military historians.

Fanatic seems a bit much if one just thinks a CPVA force should be morale 8. 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. So I'm wondering at the possible link between a Japanese-like step reduction system and the decision to have all CPVA ML 7. Or maybe there's no connection. Andy, enlighten us!!
 

samwat

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
760
Reaction score
89
Location
west point ny
Country
llUnited States
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?
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.

For the Red Chinese (pre-KW), I think Partisans were a DFE convenience, in a limited number of "can we adapt another nation's (party's) forces to the system" scenarios. Would we represent all the PLA from 1945-1949 as such? Or as the CPVA in Forgotten War?
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
2,765
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
In addition to the stuff I outlined above, "Elite" troops in ASL can also simply reflect line troops who have performed exceptionally well. Best example I can think of are the Soviet Guards units of the Second World War, who became designated as such based on their performance. I think a formation such as the U.S. 4th Armored Division would include some troops who qualify as 'elite' based on this criteria.

Was Korea really that kind of conflict? After the first 18 months, it was largely trench warfare with small unit actions the order of the day.

Looking again at the Second World War, the First Special Service Force - trained in amphibious operations, parachute landings, and mountain fighting (including skiing) saw a brief period of intense operations in Italy in late 1943, languished in the Anzio beachhead where its biggest feat was tying down the Hermann Goering division in fruitless patrols of no man's land, and was disbanded after the Allied invasion of southern France - because they were considered a luxury in a war few believed needed 'elite' units. At about the same time the US airborne divisions were being squandered as ground troops in the Bulge. The last of the great airborne operations - VARSITY - has been derided by historians as "tacked on" to the Rhine crossings.

From autumn 1951 on, the Communists were happy to grind the UN forces down in a battle of attrition. The UN were likewise disinclined to launch major operations. Much of it was "come as you are" - the Canadian brigade, for example, was heavily populated with volunteers right off the street, and recruiting had focused heavily on getting World War II vets back in the fold. Peace talks went on continually - so what incentive was there for anyone to create expensive 'elites' which would do nothing more than flounder in the trenches?

Not to mention the Chinese Army was, by the summer of 1952, very good. Canadian historians note the high quality of Chinese NCOs, their effective use of camouflage, their good artillery support and effective fieldcraft. They were doing the job that needed to be done.
 
Last edited:

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
2,765
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
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.
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.
 

Brian W

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,216
Reaction score
1,024
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
I guess I just look at elite units from a combat experience/good leadership point of view, not from a training/official designation point of view. It makes giving everyone red berets make more sense if you look at it that way.
 

Justiciar

Elder Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
2,011
Location
Within Range
Country
llUnited States
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!
Sam,

I am not "enlightened." But thanks for according me that honor in post 170. I was one of 5 designers and several knowledgeable contributors, Michael (esp. on Canadian forces and weapons and equipment, as you see from the credits) and Rick (ditto on CPVA. I am hoping Rick will write an article for the Journal on the CPVA and he has some lovely tables on Refitting of units that might appear there too) among those who posted above.
My view point, Rick answers on his own (and carries more weight), is that if one deemed a particular CPVA unit worth an 'upgrade' for a given engagement as a result of study of that unit in a HASL one would SSR something to the effect; "All CPVA 1st Line MMC have a Good Order ML level of 8."

Andy
 

rick_mckown

Recruit
Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
13
Reaction score
15
Location
Spruce Grove, AB
Country
llCanada
I think Michael has very nicely summed up the two (to my mind, somewhat incompatible) ways that ASL uses "Elite" status. Looking at the 1950-53 PLA/CPV, I don't believe the "troops of an elite formation" model of "Elite" MMC fits at all, neither Western-style "elite" (i.e., Commandos, Rangers, Paras, Marines or whatever) nor Soviet-style "elite" (Guards), at least I've seen no evidence of PLA/CPV formations being given the kind of preferential treatment in manpower and equipment that that model implies. As for the "performed exceptionally well" type of "Elite" MMC, the bulk of such recognition in the PLA/CPV that I've seen have been titles awarded for "no surrender, no retreat" defensive actions, frequently at the company level (e.g., the 8th Coy, 563rd Regt, 188th Div, 63rd Corps, awarded the title "Kaesong Defence 8th Steel Company" for its role in defending Kaesong, action more akin to the 12th SS at Buron, perhaps?); Andy's suggestion of an SSR awarding the CPVA "1" MMC ML 8 in such actions might work, but Fanatic status, with its other benefits (as well as ML 8) seems a not unreasonable solution - and given the way the troops of the 188th Division went at those Centurions during the 8th Hussars' withdrawal from the Imjin, maybe the CPVA MMC in that scenario should all have been tagged as Fanatic!

Rick
 

Paul M. Weir

Forum Guru
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 3, 2004
Messages
8,706
Reaction score
3,732
Location
Dublin
First name
Paul
Country
llIreland
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."
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.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
2,765
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
I too would raise an eyebrow about usually considering SNLF troops as Elite.
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.

The 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.
Quote from the Pacific War Online Encyclopedia, and the "Benninghof" article quoted is here: http://www.avalanchepress.com/SNLF.php

Regardless, I should have probably included the word "some". I'll edit my comment to do so.

Benninghof concludes:

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.
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.
 
Last edited:

Brian W

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
7,216
Reaction score
1,024
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
Are all the HVSS suspension Shermans now low ground pressure, even the dozer? Is that backward adaptable to WW2 like the 81mm mortar?
 
Top