"light" riflemans ridiculosity

ilias
Corporal
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon 11 Jul 2016 04:07
Contact:

"light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby ilias » Sun 16 Jul 2017 04:21

obviously no sense here:
Untitled1.png
Untitled1.png (288.79 KiB) Viewed 500 times
("experience" same too)

XanderTuron
Warrant Officer
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu 10 Mar 2016 23:17
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby XanderTuron » Sun 16 Jul 2017 04:45

Allow me to introduce you to military parlance; "Light" Infantry are light because they have minimal vehicle footprint. As a result, they carry more equipment on them than their mechanized compatriots.


Edit: You also forgot to point out that they carry 50% more AT ammunition.
My mouth is moving, but nothing relevant is coming out. Also I cannot guarantee that my research is perfect or even remotely accurate.

I have low quality Wargame Red Dragon casts on my youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/XanderTuron

Amarht
Specialist
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun 11 Dec 2016 19:02
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby Amarht » Sun 16 Jul 2017 15:08

What Xander said.

If you havnt noticed yet there is actually a dedicated Light infantry category ingame that provides +5km/h and extra ammunition carried. If you look at the card picture in the armory you'll se it has a different one to regular line inf. Just look at Gornostrelki vs Motostrelki, RiMa vs Legion or Highlanders vs Can rifles and you'll notice a similar trend.

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8064
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby Fade2Gray » Sun 16 Jul 2017 17:33

Here's a meme to help you understand as well.
Image
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2662
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby HrcAk47 » Sun 16 Jul 2017 18:42

Light infantry is awesome. My threestack of Brdska Peš. acts like a broadside from a Fletcher-class destroyer with their 45 rounds of recoilless rifle ammo carried amongst them.
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

ilias
Corporal
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon 11 Jul 2016 04:07
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby ilias » Mon 17 Jul 2017 03:09

Amarht wrote:What Xander said.

If you havnt noticed yet there is actually a dedicated Light infantry category ingame that provides +5km/h and extra ammunition carried. If you look at the card picture in the armory you'll se it has a different one to regular line inf. Just look at Gornostrelki vs Motostrelki, RiMa vs Legion or Highlanders vs Can rifles and you'll notice a similar trend.

Yeap didn't noticed

ilias
Corporal
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon 11 Jul 2016 04:07
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby ilias » Mon 17 Jul 2017 04:38

XanderTuron
throughout history light infantry was designation of some types of infantry which by having lighter equipment had better on foot mobility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_infantry
in modern time by technically mistakenly naming "heavy infantry": "mechanized" and other types of infantry which using "heavy" (armed|armored) vehicles as it's transport; it been lexically accustomed, what leaded to definition of "light infantry" been applicable to it's counter part (transported by "light" vehicles |dismounted infantry)

Nothing of that does really matter in the topic because its about what infantry of same "quality" (training) can't move faster having more equipment on them.
The infantry have to have as least same speeds (better the "basic" infantry should be the 5km/h faster).
Last edited by ilias on Tue 18 Jul 2017 00:27, edited 4 times in total.

XanderTuron
Warrant Officer
Posts: 494
Joined: Thu 10 Mar 2016 23:17
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby XanderTuron » Mon 17 Jul 2017 05:44

ilias wrote:XanderTuron
throughout history light infantry was designation of some types of infantry which by having lighter equipment had more on foot mobility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_infantry
in modern time by technically mistakenly naming "heavy infantry": "mechanized" and other types of infantry which using "heavy" (armed|armored) vehicles as it's transport; it been lexically accustomed, what leaded to definition of "light infantry" been applicable to it's counter part (transported by "light" vehicles |dismounted infantry)


There is no mistake in modern day parlance, as that is the accepted terms in modern day military terminology, which since this is a modern military game, is what matters. As well, there is no need to explain the origins of the term, considering that I am quite familiar with this subject.
My mouth is moving, but nothing relevant is coming out. Also I cannot guarantee that my research is perfect or even remotely accurate.

I have low quality Wargame Red Dragon casts on my youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/XanderTuron

R3d Sh4mbala
Sergeant Major
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu 12 May 2016 06:17
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby R3d Sh4mbala » Mon 17 Jul 2017 06:01

ilias wrote:XanderTuron
throughout history light infantry was designation of some types of infantry which by having lighter equipment had more on foot mobility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_infantry
in modern time by technically mistakenly naming "heavy infantry": "mechanized" and other types of infantry which using "heavy" (armed|armored) vehicles as it's transport; it been lexically accustomed, what leaded to definition of "light infantry" been applicable to it's counter part (transported by "light" vehicles |dismounted infantry)

Nothing of that does really matter in the topic because its about what infantry of same "quality" (training) can't move faster having more equipment on them.
but yeah i've been bit mistaken here: the speed = more physical training (but same combat); its just because in the standard W. R.D. the US infantry army units bit screwed up, in Crimean Escalation its better.


Technically the Lexicon up to about the 1950s was a bit more understandable.

Grenadier/Guard -> Heavy Infantry-> Assault Infantry/Armored Infantry
Skirmisher -> Light Infantry/Airborne/Paratrooper/Recon/Scout/Air Mobile

But also the classification told you what transportation or battle method.
Airborne -> Usually Glider/Paradropped
Airmobile -> Usually Deployed by Aircraft
Marine -> Also qualifies as Amphibous more depth in operations.
Naval -> Deployed from Naval Assets concentration on shore control.
Motorized -> Usually deployed by Motorized [Typically Wheeled Transport]
Mechanized -> Usually deployed by Tracked Transport
Armored -> Usually deployed in conjunction with Armored [Tank] formations.
Cavalry [Not always horses] -> Usually Deployed in the traditional Recon/Skirmisher role ahead of main forces.
Mobile [Not always vehicles] -> Uses transportation to get to engagement zone, disembarks for combat. [More Mobile than normal foot infantry.] {technically bicycle/motorcycle/horsemen (infantry who travel on horseback) are considered mobile infantry variants.}
Infantry -> foot walkers

And depending on East vs. West nomenclature and jargon this can be even more confusing. Because of their differing battle doctrines and tactical command set up.

So things like heavy, light, commando,special forces, paratrooper, spetznaz, ETC. all have different meanings and tactical ramifications. Heck, the difference between Western Special Forces, and Eastern Block Spetznaz is like night and day. SpecFor in the West are used usually seperately from main units, Spetz are deployed inside line formations; besides their Spetz only formations.

I think the WarGame series isn't really good at showing this particular difference in strategic/tactical doctrines at all. Maybe with the lessons learned from SD44, we might see a future game with historically set up unit composition limits.

R3d Sh4mbala
Sergeant Major
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu 12 May 2016 06:17
Contact:

Re: "light" riflemans ridiculosity

Postby R3d Sh4mbala » Mon 17 Jul 2017 06:04

R3d Sh4mbala wrote:
ilias wrote:XanderTuron
throughout history light infantry was designation of some types of infantry which by having lighter equipment had more on foot mobility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_infantry
in modern time by technically mistakenly naming "heavy infantry": "mechanized" and other types of infantry which using "heavy" (armed|armored) vehicles as it's transport; it been lexically accustomed, what leaded to definition of "light infantry" been applicable to it's counter part (transported by "light" vehicles |dismounted infantry)

Nothing of that does really matter in the topic because its about what infantry of same "quality" (training) can't move faster having more equipment on them.
but yeah i've been bit mistaken here: the speed = more physical training (but same combat); its just because in the standard W. R.D. the US infantry army units bit screwed up, in Crimean Escalation its better.


Technically the Lexicon up to about the 1950s was a bit more understandable.

Grenadier/Guard -> Heavy Infantry-> Assault Infantry/Armored Infantry
Skirmisher -> Light Infantry/Airborne/Paratrooper/Recon/Scout/Air Mobile

But also the classification told you what transportation or battle method.
Airborne -> Usually Glider/Paradropped
Airmobile -> Usually Deployed by Aircraft
Marine -> Also qualifies as Amphibous more depth in operations.
Naval -> Deployed from Naval Assets concentration on shore control.
Motorized -> Usually deployed by Motorized [Typically Wheeled Transport]
Mechanized -> Usually deployed by Tracked Transport
Armored -> Usually deployed in conjunction with Armored [Tank] formations.
Cavalry [Not always horses] -> Usually Deployed in the traditional Recon/Skirmisher role ahead of main forces.
Mobile [Not always vehicles] -> Uses transportation to get to engagement zone, disembarks for combat. [More Mobile than normal foot infantry.] {technically bicycle/motorcycle/horsemen (infantry who travel on horseback) are considered mobile infantry variants.}
Infantry -> foot walkers

And depending on East vs. West nomenclature and jargon this can be even more confusing. Because of their differing battle doctrines and tactical command set up.

So things like heavy, light, commando,special forces, paratrooper, spetznaz, ETC. all have different meanings and tactical ramifications. Heck, the difference between Western Special Forces, and Eastern Block Spetznaz is like night and day. SpecFor in the West are used usually seperately from main units, Spetz are deployed inside line formations; besides their Spetz only formations.

I think the WarGame series isn't really good at showing this particular difference in strategic/tactical doctrines at all. Maybe with the lessons learned from SD44, we might see a future game with historically set up unit composition limits.


Although I must be fair, sometimes historically there are combinations of terms.
Like Marine Airborne. [Marine Paratroopers] That were used in WW2, used only once [successfully]; but the term kind of disappeared after the war. Inter-Service Rivalry and what not.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests