An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks)

User avatar
Coffee_Zombie
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon 24 Oct 2011 23:35
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby Coffee_Zombie » Fri 21 Mar 2014 02:22

I'm for trucks and definitely for reserve troops. Most of the oriental countries still use trucks.

User avatar
Darkstar387
Warrant Officer
Posts: 485
Joined: Wed 19 Feb 2014 16:36
Location: Tower on the 38th Parallel
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby Darkstar387 » Fri 21 Mar 2014 02:52

Another +1 to whoever suggested limiting their fuel capacity. They should really only be allowed to travel 1/4th of the map before having to refuel, this would discourage players from using them as recon because of the unnecessary drain on supply.

smyljr
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 729
Joined: Tue 3 Dec 2013 13:59
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby smyljr » Fri 21 Mar 2014 07:37

i personally support bringing back cheap transports. my idea would be to make them 5 points, and turn them into empty supply trucks when the infantry disembark. conversely, for this to work, supply trucks (possibly only when empty) would be able to take and transport infantry. this would keep trucks worth not suiciding, and doubly apply the same properties that are true with current supply vehicles, where they would be captured rather than shot.

/my $.02
:mid-match connecting(matchmaking), LoS bubble(Ruse), interchangeable loadouts, moving in formations different ranges for altitudes, 1$ price increments, tank/copter ecm, 5/6 weapon slots, and 10 player deathmatch nukemode

Bryan
General
Posts: 5993
Joined: Mon 7 Jan 2013 07:16
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby Bryan » Fri 21 Mar 2014 08:50

Why trucks should NOT be in Wargame
In this case we are talking about trucks as a form of a cheap transport vehicle to deploy infantry in.

In most countries. Trucks are usually used for some foot infantry and light infantry.
Trucks are generally universal and can be used for hauling cargo or men, behind the front lines.

In some countries there is an exception to this rule, such as vehicles which are considered 'light' trucks for example, UNIMOG. These can operate like how an M113 or Fuchs would, so I have been told.
This does not apply to the 5 tonners like M35.


Trucks and their relationship to infantry
Usually, infantry or units with no organic transports will have to walk to the battlefield. If rapid movement is required, the commander can allocate or request trucks from motortransport units (that have trucks) to ferry the men from point A to point B.
Point B is usually closer to the frontline, and from point B, the men usually have to walk to get in position or to fight.

Difference with other types of infantry
Mechanised infantry- Have their own dedicated transports i.e. APCs or IFVs.
Motorised infantry- Have their own dedicated transports i.e. light trucks or some APCs like BTR-60/70/80
Light/foot infantry- have NO TRANSPORTS
Airborne infantry- use aircraft or helicopters to move, however, they do not have 'one vehicleper squad' like Mech or motorised.

Wargame does not capture the scale of the battlefield to the extent of 'rear areas' and deep supply lines. Wargame is focused on mechanised warfare which traditional foot infantry is not depicted, otherwise they would have to walk to their objectives and ultimately be useless.

My favorite example of Motor Transport operations is the USMC and the Republic of Singapore Armed Forces. They both have motor transport lines and units with infantry which are independent of vehicles.
PM me if you want to know more.

User avatar
Citadel
Corporal
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 17:54
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby Citadel » Fri 21 Mar 2014 09:08

@Bryan:

Those are some good points, there, but it seems you're covering ground we've already touched upon. We've already discussed how trucks probably wouldn't appear on the field. All we're saying is that we would like something which offers the economic utility of trucks for infantry players. Got any ideas?
Image

Celmeo
Private First-Class
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri 24 Jan 2014 20:54
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby Celmeo » Fri 21 Mar 2014 10:40

The option I find most appealling:

Allow infantry to be called in without transport (consider them as transported to the reinforcement point in trucks) and let player choose if they want to send old infantry carriers back to pick them or use other transport options.

User avatar
Dennos
Sergeant Major
Posts: 274
Joined: Wed 19 Jun 2013 21:07
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby Dennos » Fri 21 Mar 2014 11:06

The Necessity of Trucks

I am in favor of the introduction of trucks. I always disliked the idea that was suggested in EE, namely that every cold-war infantry unit was "mechanized". I know that there are many different definitions of what makes a unit "mechanized", but I mean the WW2 definition that is also used by wikipedia: Mechanized = Transported by armored vehicles of any kind, APCs or IFVs.

For the Soviet Union, this is indeed accurate: Motor rifle units were always mechanized infantry with tank support. But the US or UK motorized (= Infantry) decks for example should solely rely on truck-mounted infantry. IRL motorized (in the strict sense) units exist and they play a vital role on the battlefield, holding the frontline and fighting in cities, forests and other unaccessible terrain. To omit them from the game is a grave sin. They should NOT be available for mechanized or armored decks, though.

Thematic motor decks lost their trucks, and they have no bonus on infantry slots. In ALB, it was totally viable to play a pure infantry deck for defensive tasks, while the mechanized players attacked and armored ones exploited breakthroughs and mounted counterattacks. Now, it is impossible to play a motorized infantry deck. One of the most important arms in warfare has been severely nerfed in favor of armored or mechanized units.


Exploiting Trucks
Of course, there were some "specialists" who used their trucks as ATGM-fodder or recon units. But in this thread, we find plenty of suggestions to avoid this cheesy tactic. My favorite ones: Trucks that count as infantry or buildings, to avoid them drawing ATGM fire (best option: They only count as infantry/building when empty).


The Use of Trucks
I want trucks to be included. I don't want them to be used as assault vehicles. They should be used for moving infantry to defensive positions, not for mounted assaults.

Bryan
General
Posts: 5993
Joined: Mon 7 Jan 2013 07:16
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby Bryan » Fri 21 Mar 2014 12:06

Citadel wrote:@Bryan:

Those are some good points, there, but it seems you're covering ground we've already touched upon. We've already discussed how trucks probably wouldn't appear on the field. All we're saying is that we would like something which offers the economic utility of trucks for infantry players. Got any ideas?

Sure,
I have narrowed it down to those that I feel fit the game's mechanics and engine limits.
I have excluded log/trans dual purpose trucks and complex game mechanic changing ones.

Idea 1
Trucks, are now "vehicles", 1 card, 12 per, anymore and you will take it for-granted and people will use it as a cheap shield . 1-5 points. Infantry is now able to be bought without transports, they walk into the field by foot. You must manually load up infantry to the trucks and use them as a taxi.
Lose the truck and your infantry have to walk or reuse IFV/APCs to transport.

What you get? Cheap infantry, cheap transport, but.....not plentiful.

Idea 2
Add 'light trucks' serving the same purpose, but at the same time maximising authenticity. Sadly not all nations have dedicated light trucks with motorised infantry, Light truck example i.e. UNIMOG for ANZAC and European forces, used IRL.
Not M35s, not Jupiters, not URALs, light trucks.

More models need to be made except the UNIMOG, Eugen no likey.

User avatar
RS365247
Corporal
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed 20 Nov 2013 03:11
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby RS365247 » Fri 21 Mar 2014 13:38

I'd be happy being able to call in the marines with something other than the AAVs. With my play style I end up reusing a lot of Transports causing me to get stuck buying the same APC Heli over again when I have four empty's sitting at base.
I recruited a Korean!


Image

zervostyrd
Lieutenant
Posts: 1245
Joined: Sun 18 Mar 2012 21:12
Location: Probably North
Contact:

Re: An Argument in Favor of Trucks (or The Utility of Trucks

Postby zervostyrd » Fri 21 Mar 2014 14:16

Bryan wrote:Light/foot infantry- have NO TRANSPORTS


You're perfectly welcome to tell me how you "request a truck" when the municipality I live in governs a 23.5 times larger in total area to that of the entire republic of singapore, while having 20 times less the population... and even less military personell.. As anyone can make out, you don't request transports. You have your transports with you.

Because something works this or that way in country A doesn't mean it does in country B...

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Shifu and 29 guests