Let's talk about Elite Troops.

[Dr_Talon]

The Elite Soldier unit has been bugging me lately, because I feel that they are ahistorical in a way that feels gamey and breaks the immersion. These units are supposed to represent battle-hardened soldiers, but those men wouldn't all be grouped in an all-stars unit - they would be spread out throughout other units as the lucky ones who survived.

I keep thinking of the film versions of All Quiet on the Western Front. Take your pick - the 30's, 70's, or the recent spiritual readaptation. In those movies, the main character is a totally green newbie who is mentored by an experienced soldier who has somehow seen a lot of combat and managed to survive. By the end of the film, our protagonist is now the grizzled veteran who is teaching fresh replacements how to survive in the trenches.

I think that the way that Ultimate General: Civil War handles unit experience is a good model, if something like it could be implemented. As the men of a unit survive, the unit increases in ability - reload speed, morale, melee skill, etc. which is watered down as replacements fill in for the dead veterans. An experienced unit will rout a less experienced unit in a one on one, but they are not clearly a different species from other soldiers.

Sometimes, the elite troops of this game feel like ♥♥♥♥ sapians fighting against neanderthals. They wipe the floor with regular troops and don't come across as made of the same flesh and blood, quite frankly.

I say that if there is a choice to be made by the creators, it should always err on the side of history, even at the expense of arcade-like qualities in an attempt to appeal to a mass audience. This game will thrive on a devoted cult following because it fills an interesting niche. If the developers are reading this, I urge you, don't water that down and make it a game like others. I can buy tons of games with generic RTS qualities - but this one could be special.

[Androgos]

the elites do need to be looked at i feel, playing as allies ive had a lot of trouble getting 2 units of german elite out of trench in a melee fight unless i had my own elites. ive watched 2 german elites in the command bunker beat 4 regular squads in melee

[RainbowPig]

Elites are pretty much directly 2x better in melee to standard, they get reduced to 50% when all things are equal. No morale debuffs or buffs applied and such. Easiest solution is to hit them with heavy art and send in two standards (or vets/flamers). The standards should win unless the a.i sends in another infantry, but that means they aren't shooting.

[Vuld_Edone]

Niches actually suck, and military simulations can be especially grating.
The game has been designed as an arcade game and should be treated as such. Adherence to reality is a nice plus, but not a necessity.
(Again, an actual simulation of the Great War would have you draw plans for the battle and then watch it unfold like a movie, and that movie would be a comedy of errors.)

The complaint here is balance: elites too stronk. But that's just moving sliders around, no need for a complex system to fix that.
And in a fast-paced multiplayer, a complex experience system makes little sense. You want to identify at a glance what the threat is so as to react accordingly. Map sizes and unit speed aren't exactly like Ultimate General.
So having conscript-base-elite makes sense.

What I think is missing, as a mechanic, is for the campaign to have brigades able to move from conscript to base (and not spend the whole war fresh from the boot camp) to elite and conversely, on attrition, from elite to base to conscript. It would be part of making the grind more meaningful, along with dynamic maps and persistent defenses.

And talking balance, we also have each faction whose infantry has bonuses: the brits' fire farther and more accurately, the belgians have more morale and the French cost less. That's cute but also bullsh- and I think base infantry should be generic, whereas such buffs should be kept for the elite.
There, at the elite level, the Brits' can specialize in dakka, the Belgians can be stone walls and then the Germans be beasts in melee? I don't know, and the French can still be dirt cheap or level up faster. It's gimmicky but at the elite level it would probably make more sense -- and be more intuitive.
There is also an ideology behind this complaint: every soldier was the same. It was a meatgrinder and all that and so those buffs are more like stereotypes than anything else. They don't bring much to the gameplay other than "we could".

Tl;dr sure, some work there would be good but let's not ask the game to be something else than an innovative arcade RTS.

[Lord Kragan]

Originally posted by Dr_Talon:

The Elite Soldier unit has been bugging me lately, because I feel that they are ahistorical in a way that feels gamey and breaks the immersion. These units are supposed to represent battle-hardened soldiers, but those men wouldn't all be grouped in an all-stars unit - they would be spread out throughout other units as the lucky ones who survived.

I mean, to me these are the units that were active and served since before the war started, think of the remnants of the original standing armies.

[Cronos341]

i mean if you wanted to be accurate the UK would enter the war with the most elites but few actual stacks. the UK at the wars start was argueably the most professional and well trained army in the war at the start. by several historical accounts they were they only "professional army" to enter the war. now granted by the battle of the somme in 1915 that professional army had been turned into a sea of raw recruits but it doesnt change how they started the war

[holy-death]

Originally posted by Dr_Talon:

I think that the way that Ultimate General: Civil War handles unit experience is a good model, if something like it could be implemented. As the men of a unit survive, the unit increases in ability - reload speed, morale, melee skill, etc. which is watered down as replacements fill in for the dead veterans. An experienced unit will rout a less experienced unit in a one on one, but they are not clearly a different species from other soldiers.

While this sounds like a very good idea (it really does!), I do wonder if this wouldn't promote being completely on the defense, all the time, just to "farm" as much experience as possible (because the defender is always in better situation than the attacker).

I am not sure if the game can properly reflect something like the Somme, where the defending Germans took horrendus losses. In fact, if I am not mistaken, that's where their units actually lost the veterancy advantage over the allied troops (and wouldn't even be able to endure a two or three more battles of such intensity).

[Cronos341]

Originally posted by holy-death:

Originally posted by Dr_Talon:

I think that the way that Ultimate General: Civil War handles unit experience is a good model, if something like it could be implemented. As the men of a unit survive, the unit increases in ability - reload speed, morale, melee skill, etc. which is watered down as replacements fill in for the dead veterans. An experienced unit will rout a less experienced unit in a one on one, but they are not clearly a different species from other soldiers.

While this sounds like a very good idea (it really does!), I do wonder if this wouldn't promote being completely on the defense, all the time, just to "farm" as much experience as possible (because the defender is always in better situation than the attacker).

I am not sure if the game can properly reflect something like the Somme, where the defending Germans took horrendus losses. In fact, if I am not mistaken, that's where their units actually lost the veterancy advantage over the allied troops (and wouldn't even be able to endure a two or three more battles of such intensity).

actually the germans were at their peak at the battle of the somme. it was the combined losses of verdun and the somme that really turned them into the shell of an army we knew by late 1916

[holy-death]

Originally posted by Cronos341:

actually the germans were at their peak at the battle of the somme. it was the combined losses of verdun and the somme that really turned them into the shell of an army we knew by late 1916

Yeah, that's what I meant. Maybe I should've worded it better.

[Hexagoros]

I think everyone here is vastly overthinking it.

Elite Troops exist purely for the sake of existing, so that there's a tier of soldiers above "Basic Infantry."

Arguing what they represent, historically, is pretty much redundant, as these units exist for gameplay purposes.

Do they represent veterans?

Do they represent soldiers who have receive "elite" tier training?

Do they represent pre-war regulars?

The honest answer is: Yes and No to all of the above.

[Timmer120]

Originally posted by Vuld_Edone:

and then the Germans be beasts in melee? I don't know

Actually, the Germans are the ones that's bog generic, and therefore the worst of the basic infantry, in exchange the Germans have the Privilege of having Conscripts XD(they are actually ridiculously good, the conscripts, its just how the statement sounds)

As for why Elites are so much better in Melee than regular troops-that actually makes sense, consider that the normal infantry at BEST have a month or so's worth of training, basic bayonet drills at best, and likely no prior CQC Combat Experience. A veteran whom at least has been bloodied, if not experienced in CQC Battle, especially if he has the foresight to get weapons better suited to Trench Brawling is going to wipe the floor with the newbie, in fact that's the story of war pre-gunpowder, why experienced warriors were so much better than fresh levies. Gunpowder changed that with even the rawest recruit being able to easily kill a veteran with a shot(it still applies in this game, as Veterans don't have appreciably more survivability while under fire) So considering that Melee is the only area that Veterans are significantly better than Regular Infantry(I know they do more rifle damage, but that damage is so extreme to bring up what's the point in the difference) is in Trench Melee and melee meat grinding, so let them have that upside

As for where the veterans come from, just look at the historical sources of the Elite troops

It could be very physically fit and devoted troops, like the French Foreign Legion, or the fresh recruits given to the German Stormtroopers

It could just be veterans of combat, drawn from those that survived the meat grinders(which you actually end up with a surprising number of these considering the combat in the game, usually with each company having about 1/10th of its men surviving minimum)

Heck we have enough of the latter that could easily explain away the elite troops, but if not then the former, them getting the Creme of the Crop of the recruits, plenty explains it as well

[andrelemgard]

In the ealry war yes the elite are your shock troops in offence and rock in defence, but note that the infantry upgrades only applies for the standard infantry they get more damage and snipers and will walk faster. Now the snipers wont do alot in offensive but every unit they manage to snipe is still a couple of men, it will do more in defence. Elite troops wont get snipers. You will be encouraged to use standard infantry more reserving elite infantry for initial push when there cheaper to get and to hold crucial sectors of a trench with a conscript unit in the most vulnerble trench coverd by regular infantry.