Reduced US troop efficiency

[devoncop]

An idea that may already be being implemented for the expansion covering post 19967 is that US forces should really see reduced morale and general efficiency post Tet as the incoming draftees arrived much affected by anti war sentiment back home.

Insubordination was a huge issue after this point with discipline breaking down and many instances of Marines and regular infantry units even refusing to go on patrol when directly ordered to do so.

[Jason Petho]

This will be a good chance to use the C class platoons!

[devoncop]

Great stuff....though maybe somewhat of a shock to US players used to the reliability of the 1965-67 platoons

As an unreconstructed VC player this concerns me not one jot [;)]

[Jason Petho]

Bahahahaah, of course, of course

[Twotribes]

Please list for us the battles the US lost in 68 to 72 due to low morale and lack of discipline?

[TomWalton]

Please list for us the battles the US lost in 68 to 72 due to low morale and lack of discipline?

Hm, difficult one (though we could also ask whether or not it mattered how many battles they "won", if in the end they lost the war?).

Much as I think CSVN is probably the best computer wargame I've ever played, I'm not sure that it really models the war at a scale where morale and discipline really make a difference. The scenarios have to assume the US forces have been willing to "go out on patrol". A CSVN scenario where discipline had broken down would have you trucking supplies round Da Nang or Cam Ranh Bay -- and possibly all squads beginning "disrupted" with low morale and then unable to move for 12 turns or more ! It would make a poor game!

Max Hastings, in his excellent Vietnam book, suggests that:

All the dollars, all the war, had failed to confer on the rulers of South Vietnam and their supporters three vital things: dignity, self-respect and sufficient human sympathy to achieve an accord with their own people. Absent these things, battlefield success counted for very little.

But I think you'd need a game on a totally different scale, modelling the whole war, to bring that sort of issue in.

[devoncop]

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

Please list for us the battles the US lost in 68 to 72 due to low morale and lack of discipline?

In the same book by Max Hastings mentioned above he describes quite clearly the decline in quality of such forces and specifically speaks of the overrunning of Firebase Mary Ann on the night of 27th/28th March 1971.
Manned by C Company of 1st/46th Infantry. He describes repeated refusals of combat by men of the 1st/46th including on one occasion by an entire company.

The OIC Col. Doyle though personally brave was unable to enforce discipline,and the Capt in charge of overnight security Capt Knight failed to post guards overnight "or reset tripwires and set Claymores,or to renew wire entanglements. Or to remain awake. Or abstain from alcohol and marijuana. Most of the designated guards were sleeping,playing cards drunk or stoned"

Discipline in the unit was apparently somewhat, though not considerably worse than many other similar units at this time.

After the base was overrun MACV's investigation found Knight guilty of dereliction of duty and found several other key men ineffective, Doyle was removed from Command and the Brigade Commander was sacked.

I think that gives you one example at least [;)]

[Twotribes]

From the end of the war for the US, you said 68 and on.

[devoncop]

You asked for battles lost by the US between 68 and 72 due to poor morale/ lack of discipline and I just gave you one.....

[Twotribes]

Ya one, which does not a trend make.

[devoncop]

I can give you several others.

"The history of the Marine Corps legal branch records that fragging of officers by their own men had never been so widespread and the US Army records between 1969 and 1971 more than 600 incidents of such fraggings resulting in 82 deaths and 651 injuries". Hastings again.

" No witness doubted that from 1968 to the end , the effectiveness of American forces was in relentless decline...."it became progressively harder to persuade (Gen) Abrams' men to match the communists' commitment and warcraft, even in the interests of their own survival".

No one can argue some US troops continued to fight quite well but as a whole their effectiveness had declined consuderably since 1965 as the war weariness and draftee percentages in units increased so I was just suggesting that maybe strength and/or morale numbers of US platoons should be reduced in the CSVN expansion.

[Twotribes]

No you advocated that all US troops be reduced and that simply is not historical

[devoncop]

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

No you advocated that all US troops be reduced and that simply is not historical

I said "US forces" not ALL US forces.

There is a difference.

We shall agree to disagree.

Have a good day.

[oldman45]

The problem with modeling efficiency of the combat units, you have to also take into account those units that shined and continued to shine to the end of the war. The statement about regular US and ARVAN units' efficiency being below average after '69 might be a true statement but it is a blanket statement that under real scrutiny would not hold up. The ARVN ranged from very poor to average until you get into the Marine and Airborne units and to some degree their armored formations. The US had issues in the regular army but not so extreme in the "elite" formations. How would you model this?

[Jason Petho]

Fortunately, one can utilize A, B or C class for each individual platoon. One can also have different Morale's set for each individual platoon.

So, if a battalion was generally a low morale or efficient unit, it could be filled in with B Class units with a 5 or 6 morale for each platoon.

BUT, if that same battalion had an exceptional B company, the units in that B Company could be created with A Class units with a 7 or 8 morale for each platoon, making it far more combat effective than the other companies in the example battalion.

[carll11]

The decline in motivation was just slightly more anecdotal than not due to the anti war issue.....there was more of sense of not wanting to be the last man killed, that began to have some effect after Nixon announced Vietnamization than the anti war situation back home.

My experience was that there was just as much can do attitude and *uck the civvies back home as there was the heck with the war lets just hunker down.

IMHO, its a wash, making changes in troop quality here in the game is a bit much, if you did then they'd be no better than the arvn, where in an arvn paratroop unit at a 7 morale stills beaks more frequently than a US unit at similar morale etc.
After playing a fair number of scenarios the morales assigned and becasue we're limited to a 1 thru 10 , is already dicey, no need to muck it up further...