Wargame: Total Realism

TankHunter
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2220
Joined: Tue 31 Jul 2012 06:00
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby TankHunter » Thu 4 Apr 2013 06:09

ikalugin wrote:The argument was about the accuracy values for WP riflemen. Afghanistan veterans would have sufficient experience and training in shooting their rifles, no?


I didn't see the accuracy thing, but I wouldn't mind having increased accuracy for Soviet riflemen. Also I assume that the increase accuracy wouldn't apply to 1975 era Soviet infantry,as Afghanistan war begins 1979, so would only apply to the supposed new 1980 and 1985 Soviet infantry. It wouldn't apply to other WP infantry, as they didn't serve in Afghanistan.
"The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everybody else, and nobody was going to bomb them [. . .] They sowed the wind, and now, they are going to reap the whirlwind."

User avatar
Breadbox
Captain
Posts: 1667
Joined: Sun 20 May 2012 12:12
Location: Cannot into Space
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby Breadbox » Thu 4 Apr 2013 13:29

Dismissing The Soviet Union requires invoking the wrath of Ikaulkraken,nobody has ever returned from doing so. :ugeek:
He will even pursue you into your Graves!

We need more Ikaulgin in this world!

User avatar
Drang
Major-General
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun 3 Feb 2013 04:20
Location: Fighting on the edge of the world
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby Drang » Thu 4 Apr 2013 14:04

@ikalugin:

To address your various points:

This is all speculative. Provide me with evidence and I'll happily incorporate any suggested changes into the mod. Currently, I'm operating off my own (admittedly limited) set of evidence, but if you can provide convincing support to your points then I'd happily make changes to the mod proposal.


R/E: operational level training: Wargame isn't really an operational level engagement. It's divisional at the highest - fighting over limited objectives, so I'm bemused why that would have relevance to the game.

User avatar
enohka
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 928
Joined: Sun 21 Oct 2012 04:25
Location: HEAP
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby enohka » Thu 4 Apr 2013 15:16

Btw, I have seen/read tests that a M16 is superior in ACCURACY compared to an AK-74 because of the ergonomic design. (and other aspects)

I don't wanna push a discussion which weapon on its own is "better" or not since there a parameters like price, reliability and so on included.

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby ikalugin » Thu 4 Apr 2013 15:31

Drang wrote:@ikalugin:

To address your various points:

This is all speculative. Provide me with evidence and I'll happily incorporate any suggested changes into the mod. Currently, I'm operating off my own (admittedly limited) set of evidence, but if you can provide convincing support to your points then I'd happily make changes to the mod proposal.


R/E: operational level training: Wargame isn't really an operational level engagement. It's divisional at the highest - fighting over limited objectives, so I'm bemused why that would have relevance to the game.

Your changes are also based on speculative evidence. Shall you provide valid documents stating the advantages of a T55AM tank gun has superior accuracy to the T72B?
Or documents prooving that Specnas troops (with Ak74) had inferior accuracy to Legion Famas?

Or maybe that T72B has inferior front armor to a M1A1 side armor? I can go on.

Operational level considerations would directly apply to the tactical level. This means that on tactical level WP should have a decisive numerical advantage, on the points of decision.
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby ikalugin » Thu 4 Apr 2013 15:32

enohka wrote:Btw, I have seen/read tests that a M16 is superior in ACCURACY compared to an AK-74 because of the ergonomic design. (and other aspects)

I don't wanna push a discussion which weapon on its own is "better" or not since there a parameters like price, reliability and so on included.

And now you would provide results of shooting, such as spread on the relevant ranges, using iron sights only?
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

User avatar
enohka
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 928
Joined: Sun 21 Oct 2012 04:25
Location: HEAP
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby enohka » Thu 4 Apr 2013 16:01

Well, this alway depended of the individual skill of the shooter and how hes trained with the particular weapon.

Facts:
The m16 has a higher Muzzle velocity which provides a lower Drop
The m16s barrel is longer

There are severl studies that it is way more effective, intuitive and easy to shoot with an assault rifle if the Shoulder stock is on the same height as the barrel. Thats why all modern assault rifles are designed like that. The AK-74 has still the very old AK-47 design which is inpired by the German Stg 44 from the year 1944.

here a grafic to explain what i mean:

Spoiler : :
Image


I wont discuss any further, just bringing on some fact. Its not on us to find out which weapon is better. There are more competent people than you (and maybe me).

ikalugin
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun 6 Nov 2011 01:00
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby ikalugin » Thu 4 Apr 2013 16:12

I did not ask about how flat the bullet trajectory is. I asked how tight the groups were over open sights and on relevant combat ranges.

Or you do not know the difference between the two?
Image
Spoiler : :
We need more missilez code for the missilez god.
Praslovan:
"Tactical Ikalugin inbound on this position in 10... 9..."
Image

User avatar
enohka
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 928
Joined: Sun 21 Oct 2012 04:25
Location: HEAP
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby enohka » Thu 4 Apr 2013 16:52

ikalugin wrote:I did not ask about how flat the bullet trajectory is. I asked how tight the groups were over open sights and on relevant combat ranges.

Or you do not know the difference between the two?


I know the difference very well and who are you to give me orders? Give us some to proof the that im wrong. The facts do speak for the M16 i did not write more than that.

Another fact is btw that the M16 with its 5.56 has a better man stopping power.

As I mentioned before, the discussion with me ends now here - I just wanted to throw in some fact because nobody else is willing to go against your ignorant claiming about Russian superiority in every single niche anymore.

User avatar
Drang
Major-General
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun 3 Feb 2013 04:20
Location: Fighting on the edge of the world
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Total Realism

Postby Drang » Thu 4 Apr 2013 16:54

ikalugin wrote:Your changes are also based on speculative evidence. Shall you provide valid documents stating the advantages of a T55AM tank gun has superior accuracy to the T72B?
Or documents prooving that Specnas troops (with Ak74) had inferior accuracy to Legion Famas?

Or maybe that T72B has inferior front armor to a M1A1 side armor? I can go on.


You are the one requesting these changes.

I am not suggesting specific unit changes as-of-yet. Specific unit changes will be implemented as and when proof is provided for them.

ikalugin wrote:Operational level considerations would directly apply to the tactical level. This means that on tactical level WP should have a decisive numerical advantage, on the points of decision.


Why? The principle of concentration of force is hardly one unique to the USSR.

Return to “Wargame : European Escalation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests