[Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

User avatar
Nathan des Lessings
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon 24 Oct 2016 18:58
Location: In the Land of mountains, Land by river.
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby Nathan des Lessings » Wed 1 Feb 2017 23:59

How popular was austria or swiss in that survey?
Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren.

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13726
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby Killertomato » Thu 2 Feb 2017 00:02

Nathan des Lessings wrote:How popular was austria or swiss in that survey?


Not very.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
Nathan des Lessings
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon 24 Oct 2016 18:58
Location: In the Land of mountains, Land by river.
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby Nathan des Lessings » Thu 2 Feb 2017 00:09

Killertomato wrote:
Nathan des Lessings wrote:How popular was austria or swiss in that survey?


Not very.


Then it is time to change that by presenting these units.
Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren.

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1438
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby FrangibleCover » Thu 2 Feb 2017 01:18

Killertomato wrote:
Nathan des Lessings wrote:How popular was austria or swiss in that survey?


Not very.

Actually they did surprisingly well. I wouldn't have guessed that the fundamentally sad picture of the missileless Austrians would be the more popular proposal than highly viable Romania and quasi-decent Bulgaria put together.

The thing is that that poll is pretty useless now that more than 50% of the vote share is in the game and we don't know how the people that made those votes will vote if another poll were done. It's entirely possible that the entire Slovenian population voted for Yugoslavia first but would have taken their neighbour Austria as a second choice! The other point to be made is marketing: During the poll there were huge threads on the nations that were added to build up hype. It can be done, so long as Eugen continue to expand the game (And I'm afraid I'm going to be quite promiscuous with my support for nations).
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13726
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby Killertomato » Thu 2 Feb 2017 05:28

FrangibleCover wrote:Actually they did surprisingly well. I wouldn't have guessed that the fundamentally sad picture of the missileless Austrians would be the more popular proposal than highly viable Romania and quasi-decent Bulgaria put together.


I doubt most of the people who voted know the first thing about either Romania or Bulgaria. Israel certainly wasn't the first choice on the forums, but on the greater internet as a whole? Popular as hell.

FrangibleCover wrote:The thing is that that poll is pretty useless now that more than 50% of the vote share is in the game and we don't know how the people that made those votes will vote if another poll were done. It's entirely possible that the entire Slovenian population voted for Yugoslavia first but would have taken their neighbour Austria as a second choice! The other point to be made is marketing: During the poll there were huge threads on the nations that were added to build up hype. It can be done, so long as Eugen continue to expand the game (And I'm afraid I'm going to be quite promiscuous with my support for nations).


If I had to guess, the next nation would be South Africa, if Italy doesn't make it.
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

User avatar
Eukie
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2014 16:22
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby Eukie » Thu 2 Feb 2017 11:32

FrangibleCover wrote:If you could pintle an MG over the front of a Pinzgauer then it can be a 10 point Humvee analogue but that's not a good spot for a transport to be in.


You can! I've updated the proposal with two kinds of Pinzgauer; the Pinzgauer 710, which is a 4x4 in the truck role, and the Pinzgauer 712 with an MG74/MG710 on the top. It'd basically be a HMMWV-clone, but at least it means NCE has motorized transports.

Killertomato wrote:If I had to guess, the next nation would be South Africa, if Italy doesn't make it.


I am for reasons that should be all too obvious, perfectly fine with South Africa being the next DLC. :3

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1438
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby FrangibleCover » Thu 2 Feb 2017 14:50

Eukie wrote:
FrangibleCover wrote:If you could pintle an MG over the front of a Pinzgauer then it can be a 10 point Humvee analogue but that's not a good spot for a transport to be in.

You can! I've updated the proposal with two kinds of Pinzgauer; the Pinzgauer 710, which is a 4x4 in the truck role, and the Pinzgauer 712 with an MG74/MG710 on the top. It'd basically be a HMMWV-clone, but at least it means NCE has motorized transports.

Excellent! With the variety of prototype wheeled transports available to the decks, good infantry and a sorta-functional support tab the Motorised deck could be quite nice now that it has a bulk transport option. I know it's yet another prototype but could someone provide a Piranha/Pandur MCV to give motorised decks that all-important smoke cover? Other options include a Pinzgauer with a mortar in the back like the Dutch LARO Mortier or the Finnish TELAKRH 71, I don't know if that's doable but if you can get a 60mm in the back of a Landie I can't see that one wouldn't work in a Pinzgauer.

I would suggest giving the M-51 Smoke/HE and calling it a day but I don't think it had smoke rockets. http://en.valka.cz/topic/view/13303/CZK ... -raketomet This page has some info and also gives us another two possible into dates, 1959 and 1963 :D.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
Eukie
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2014 16:22
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby Eukie » Thu 2 Feb 2017 16:45

FrangibleCover wrote:Excellent! With the variety of prototype wheeled transports available to the decks, good infantry and a sorta-functional support tab the Motorised deck could be quite nice now that it has a bulk transport option. I know it's yet another prototype but could someone provide a Piranha/Pandur MCV to give motorised decks that all-important smoke cover? Other options include a Pinzgauer with a mortar in the back like the Dutch LARO Mortier or the Finnish TELAKRH 71, I don't know if that's doable but if you can get a 60mm in the back of a Landie I can't see that one wouldn't work in a Pinzgauer.


I've found no evidence that Switzerland operated Piranhas with mortars in them, but they sold them, like the LAV-M and Bison 81 mm already in-game and this one acquired by Saudi Arabia in 1991:

Image

For Austria, I found no evidence of Pinzgauer or Pandur-carried mortars.

Also, can anyone identify this Austrian weapon?

Image

User avatar
Eukie
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2014 16:22
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby Eukie » Fri 3 Feb 2017 19:07

I've made a spreadsheet of units. It's not complete, in part because I'm mulling over units and such, but it should give a rough idea of what the armouries could look like with Neutral Central Europe selected.

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1438
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: [Non-included Coalition] Neutral Central Europe (Austria+Switzerland)

Postby FrangibleCover » Fri 3 Feb 2017 22:54

Eukie wrote:
FrangibleCover wrote:Excellent! With the variety of prototype wheeled transports available to the decks, good infantry and a sorta-functional support tab the Motorised deck could be quite nice now that it has a bulk transport option. I know it's yet another prototype but could someone provide a Piranha/Pandur MCV to give motorised decks that all-important smoke cover? Other options include a Pinzgauer with a mortar in the back like the Dutch LARO Mortier or the Finnish TELAKRH 71, I don't know if that's doable but if you can get a 60mm in the back of a Landie I can't see that one wouldn't work in a Pinzgauer.

I've found no evidence that Switzerland operated Piranhas with mortars in them, but they sold them, like the LAV-M and Bison 81 mm already in-game and this one acquired by Saudi Arabia in 1991:

Image

For Austria, I found no evidence of Pinzgauer or Pandur-carried mortars.

A shame. However I've looked through your new proposal and a bit of Google-Fu tells me that the M4A1 Halftrack was an 81mm mortar carrier. I suspect it was one of your sources confusing the designation for the transport variant but if the M4A1 is a real Austrian-operated bit of kit then that's a huge boon for motorised spec and uniqueness.

Also, can anyone identify this Austrian weapon?

Image

Ooh, you have me there. It's too long to be anything but a Recoilless Rifle but it looks like it has no flare on the end at all, which is very odd. It looks more like a Tarasnice than anything else, by which I mean there are only about 5 major features which identify it as not a Tarasnice :D.

With regards to your spreadsheet:
  • Austria operated the Alouette II so one could replace their Alouette III CV. Minor change but lends a bit of differentiation.
  • Either Panzergrens or Jäger could get the FAL to increase distinctiveness. I don't know which, the bullpup weapon makes more sense for the guys in armoured transports but I feel like Jäger should get all the nice soft-stats they can carry to make up for them only coming in crap transports. I'm not too worried about them being too similar to Militz, the CG M2 and the training is difference enough for the Austrian infantry tab.
  • Gebirgsjäger is missing an 'r'. Also I thought we were going for Luftlandesoldaten. Was it changed due to putting them in motorised spec as well? That's fair enough.
  • What are Jagdkommando '90 for? They seem similar but inferior to their older cousins. Perhaps giving the Jagdkommando '80 the FAL and the '90 either the AUG/AUG HBAR or the TMP/AUG HBAR would be nice, making one squad the better for open or forested areas and the other better in towns.
  • A stylistic thing but why are the '90s infantry separated from the '80s infantry and the '90s support teams left intermixed?
  • I didn't realise the SK-105s were that good, they could be quite nasty to face.
  • If the Pinzgauers are switched and the 712 gets the machine gun then the 710 can use the model that's already in game. Might as well, they can both hold enough troops.
  • Radschützenpanzer 93 is missing an 'h'.
  • Knock the 'Hawker' off the front of the Hunters' names. It's pleasingly alliterative in the old Vickers tradition but I think it's more important to keep the standard designation-only name format rather than mentioning the manufacturer.
  • In the absence of anything much else to do with it how about turning the F-18D into a heavy bomber to further emphasise NCE's town/forest fighting focus? The Saab 105 remains totally useless.
It's looking superb though.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 9 guests