"Elite" militia?

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • "Elite" militia?

      I just saw this for the first time. From a historical viewpoint, elite militia are a bad joke. There is no such thing as a militia unit that could have gone head to head with an American, British German or Soviet frontline infantry unit of the same size. A well-trained infantry unit would have crushed a good militia unit every time. Only if we include some completely new game concept of guerrilla warfare does this remotely make sense.
    • Maybe miltia can be a stealth unit, or something like that

      just add maybe a feature that to them or something. Or maybe they improve moral in a provence, something like that



      If Socialists understood Economics, they wouldn't be socialists
      -Friedrich von Haye


    • Conceptually, this is a horrible idea. I think the German game creators' thinking on point has been unduly influenced by the more than somewhat mythological reputation of Volkssturm units fighting in Berlin at the end of the war. In point of fact, the fighting readiness of the typical Volkssturm unit was low and they were treated more like cannon fodder for Goebbels and Hitler's "final victory" fantasies than like legitimate infantry units. While there were a small handful of Volkssturm units composed of World War I veterans and the like which acquitted themselves well, most Volkssturm units existed only to get a bunch of teenagers, old men and cripples killed. Their own casualty rates were outrageously high when they fought, and they quickly surrendered or were overwhelmed by Allied units otherwise. Attempting to insert this concept of "elite militia" into a game that is supposed to be based upon the actual conditions of World War II is ill conceived.
    • Not sure if you're being facetious or not, TownGtr. The qualitative difference between a frontline American infantry unit and the typical colonial militia unit was not nearly as great during the American Revolution as it was during World War II for comparable units of the 1940s. Even so, the reputation of the American colonial militia was horrible, which was amply illustrated in the movie "The Patriot". The Mel Gibson character's successes mostly came about as a result of asymetrical, guerrilla-style small actions against British supply trains and other small rearguard units. Damn few regiments of colonial militia could have withstood the discipline and massed firepower of frontline British infantry regiments in a stand-up fight, which was one of the central themes of the movie. The Mel Gibson character was based on the real life exploits of Francis Marion, a.k.a the Swamp Fox, who led a guerrilla war against the British army in the Carolinas when frontline units of the Continental Army were largely absent from the region.
    • Yes, I was making a funny :)

      I did enjoy reading about the German militia however. I guess I never really thought about that before, interesting stuff.

      I always thought the old colonial style of line fighting was rather stupid anyway. Even the oldest armies on the planet didn't practice an all out toe to toe fighting style. They all had their versions of what could be considered secret forces as well i imagine.
      "It is even better to act quickly and err than to hesitate until the time of action is past." - Karl Von Clausewitz

    • The British foot regiments were the best in the world in musket firing drill in the late 1700s -- three aimed shots per minute, fired in ranks of three in 20-second intervals. Firing in ranks could be devastating to an exposed enemy advancing over open ground. It remained a British army tactic through the Boer War in the late 1800s (ever seen the movie "Zulu"?), but was eventually supplanted when the British replaced their single-shot small arms with carbines, bolt action rifles, and ultimately with machine guns and fully automatic small arms.
    • FYI, largely as a result of their experiences during the American Revolution, the British army formed rifle brigades during the Napoleonic wars, which employed rifles instead of the standard-issue smooth bore muskets (e.g., "Brown Bess") to supplement their usual foot regiments. The rifle brigades were often broken into much smaller units and served as sharpshooters -- special forces of their day.
    • Actually, SPQR, at Day 24, the time from which the level 7 "elite" militia is available, the available level 4 infantry is only marginally stronger (4.5 attacking, 6.8 defending) than the level 7 militia (4.0 attacking, 6.0 defending), and the militia is actually stronger in hills & forests because it receives a +75% advantage in that battlefield environment. That's complete garbage. No WWII militia regiment could ever engage any frontline infantry regiment of Britain, Canada, Germany, the Soviet Union or the United States on anything like an equal footing in a stand-up fight. As I said above, this is extremely ill conceived and takes the abstraction of the game further from the reality of WWII conditions and not closer. Frontline infantry regiments of the major powers usually included a mortars unit, a heavy machine guns unit, and often included other weapons that no militia unit ever carried (e.g., flamethrowers, bazookas, etc.). And it should go without saying that the training of frontline infantry was superior as were their professionally trained officers and career NCOs. The concept of "elite" militia is a very bad joke.
    • Militia has always been marginally lower than infantry, almost as good when on the defensive. Whether they would engage or not is something that a player chooses regardless of historic events? and militia are quite poor at attacking. This is not something new. There are different things that come into play for instance the speed which is very slow for militia - they are very easily flanked. Yes they have good stats on forests which is the primary reason some people like to use them.
      Another fact is that they are very, very weak against armor, where Infantry performs much better.

      If Militia were to be nerfed even more, people would build them even less than they do now (if that's even possible).

      I don't think there is anything to worry about.
      Sincerely, wildL
      EN Mod
      Report a problem

    • I agree with you @MontanaBB. Could the Home Guard take on German infantry? No way! Could the Volkssturm take on Soviet infantry? No way! The only 'effective' militia was the Soviet one, but they were essentially guerrillas. There was also an elite part of thr Home Guard, but they also specialised in guerrilla warfare.
      The past is a foreign country.
    • wildL SPQR wrote:

      Militia has always been marginally lower than infantry, almost as good when on the defensive. Whether they would engage or not is something that a player chooses regardless of historic events? and militia are quite poor at attacking. This is not something new. There are different things that come into play for instance the speed which is very slow for militia - they are very easily flanked. Yes they have good stats on forests which is the primary reason some people like to use them.
      Another fact is that they are very, very weak against armor, where Infantry performs much better.

      If Militia were to be nerfed even more, people would build them even less than they do now (if that's even possible).

      I don't think there is anything to worry about.
      You're completely missing the point. People aren't saying militia didn't engage actual infantry because they didn't historically, but because militia are weak as EDIT and would get crushed if they did.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by wildL SPQR: johnydude had a cuss word edited out ().

    • wildL SPQR wrote:

      Also, militia IS much weaker than infantry. Except in a forest.. I guess they must Ewoks. lvl 7 v lvl 7 = infantry has twice the power.
      Uh, no, SPQR, you're still missing or simply ignoring the point. As I already noted above, level 7 "Elite" militia is available at the same time as level 4 infantry, and the level 7 militia and level 4 infantry are more or less comparable, with the militia holding an advantage on defense. That's complete crap, so please stop defending the indefensible. As a moderator, you should be acknowledging the game users' legitimate concerns and not dismissing them with inaccurate and/or misleading responses. IMO, the goal should be to make the game more realistic and more reflective of 1940s military reality, not to simply add another new feature.
    • MontanaBB wrote:

      IMO, the goal should be to make the game more realistic and more reflective of 1940s military reality, not to simply add another new feature.
      Partisans have kicked the behinds of SS units you know. Repercussions were awful...
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: