Battle Hardening Choice

Battle Harden which one?

  • 8-1 to 9-1

    Votes: 6 15.8%
  • 8-0 to 8-1

    Votes: 32 84.2%

  • Total voters
    38

bendizoid

Official ***** Dickweed
Joined
Sep 11, 2006
Messages
4,630
Reaction score
3,244
Location
Viet Nam
Country
llUnited States
Put 'em in the factories & keep 'em away from CC. A great bang for the buck.
This is how I would count the RF for a full strength Militia Co: 12x 4-2-6= 48 (in a factory, plenty around)
x1 MMG+6
x1 lmg+ 2
x1 ATR +1
x1 50mm mortar+2
about two leaders ~+6 (I count a ‘0’ leader at ‘2’ and a -1 leader or commissar at about 4, assume a ‘7’ DR on leader generation).
=
65 ‘raw firepower’
Divide by 4 CPP=16ish

German Halftrack platoon:
x4 LMGs (after the crews abandon and give them to a 5-4-8)= 12 + ROF adjustment= 14
x1 ATR+1
x1 37L +4 ( I double the basis attack number ‘4’ for ROF 3 then half it back because it only hits about half the time)
x4 1-2-7 crews+4

=23
Divide by 2 CPP = 12RF/CPP (round up, what the hell).

Just a cool way to crunch a few numbers before you buy a whole battalion of BS.
 

Arch71

Member
Joined
May 16, 2013
Messages
47
Reaction score
13
Location
Brisbane
Country
llAustralia
I was more thinking going forwards. The battlehardening table is basically a cut and paste job from CG to CG. Maybe they manipulate the numbers a little but otherwise it just follows the ELR path.
Mind you, I recall playing a game where a Finish 9-1 battle hardened to a 10-0 which meant the squad he was with failed the NMC which it would have passed if he hadn't battle hardened!
You can pass on the battle hardening though, so in that case I would have opted to not take the battle hardening. For example, sometimes you might not wish to accept battle hardening if you think you are about to be captured etc.

/edit Oops I should have read on before responding, it appears Phillipe D. beat me to the response :)
 

wrongway149

Forum Guru
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
9,403
Reaction score
2,099
Location
Willoughby, Ohio
Country
llUnited States
So, given the general feeling, should the tables be rewritten to make it harder to go from 8-0 to 8-1 than it is to go 8-1 to 9-1?
As with all things ASL, --'It depends'. 😁

In a Korean War setting, I'd go with the morale bump due to the fact you have less cover-- so you are going to be taking more low TEM shots. And you will be dealing out more low TEM shots, so '-1' won't be desperately needed. (Unlike say, RB where you will be shooting into stone buildings though debris and smoke, etc. and need every negative mod you can get. -- in which case I go from 8-0 to 8-1)
 

jfardette

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
496
Reaction score
213
Location
Mansfield, PA
Country
llUnited States
One other consideration, I like to stack an 8 morale leader with my 548’s To avoid those LLMC/LLTCs.
 

Philippe D.

Elder Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
1,393
Location
Bordeaux
Country
llFrance
One other consideration, I like to stack an 8 morale leader with my 548’s To avoid those LLMC/LLTCs.
Yeah, but then you'd rather give them a 8-0 instead of a 8-1 in case he has to do the "gimme that DC, I'll show you how to place it" trick - doing this with a 8-1 is a waste of a leader drm.
 

jfardette

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
496
Reaction score
213
Location
Mansfield, PA
Country
llUnited States
Also true. Negative DRM leaders and full squads support the kinetic weapons. -0 leaders and elite half squads get the lumpy ones (dc, ft).
 
Top