Fine-tuning NK/China

User avatar
Tamerlane92
Corporal
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2016 16:13
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Tamerlane92 » Sat 11 Feb 2017 14:31

frostypooky wrote:now do you see why I came up with the suggestions?
...
that's a huge mission/capability gap not covered in a nation that could use it for gameplay reasons and its not just "flavor" to try to reconcile it.

I think I have to say about this first of all. What I want say is not 'too many NK SOF. OOTF'. I'm totally agree that vanilla can't represent enough how much NK concentrated for SF power and more SF give nothing bad to RD. what I kept saying was there are some doubtful names which filled with some 'opinion' only.


Spoiler : for the thread readability :
the 교도지도국 was often shortened to 교지국, but they didn't confuse it for "bureau of teaching". ditto with 대외무역성...

I wish there are source about 'often shortened'. if it is true, it would be named because of to avoid confusing with other orgs, like 지도국(Bureau of Teaching/Guidance') like 민족개발지도국 & 나진선봉지도국 of 대외무역성, or 교도대(one of NK reserve unit, not confused with Kyodotai(JP)). but about unit name, it have to be '교도 or 교지' + '(mission or role)' + 대. I already suggested like '교도저격대'.



I worked alongside ROKA intelligence (777사령부) for 4 years and I have language+KPA analysis qualifications saved to folders if you really care to see them, so no patronization needed on that front. literally all I can find are blog links on top of the two journal links you provided, and nothing specifically indicating this is a NK term as opposed to an alternative SK name.

I hope you can show me that folders. It will be great lesson whatever I was wrong or not.



7호 발사관 is indeed a NK term for the RPG-7. and this is all ignoring that it was simpler to just go with calling it a 'fire support team'.

RR team was named as Bibanchungpo(-jo/-ban), then RPG-7 team can be Balsagwan(-jo/-ban), maybe.
You'll agree it is bit shorter than Hwaryok-Jiwon-Ban.



thus, a unit can be given to NK authentically to represent the TUGB discrete brigades. tell me, is there such a unit to represent these 60k troops right now?

Sadly, nope. but it seems not good to lump roughly that 60k troops into one unit. we can add variation for other TUGB units(like attatching Kyodo- ), instead of merging it.



Jeongchaldae represent the 정찰국. however, as your own sources pointed out, there are also 정찰대대 that have nothing to do with REBU, subordinate to each infantry divison under the administrative control of TUGB. so we have two combat formations in NK that can be called 정찰대. how would you propose to resolve that, especially when NK can use its authentic 정찰대대들 as line/shock recon squads? that was my entire point with having to come up with some reasonable rename for the current Jeongchaldae. if there aren't Recon Bn troops added, then sure, Jeongchaldae should stay jeongchaldae.


1. if another Jeongchalae(battalion) must be added, I'll suggest for the original one to be -yŏdan(brigade) instead of -dae. there are already 'regiment' named units such as LStR and Wachregiment. then why not the brigade?
2. or, I'll suggest another Recon's name for the new one, such as 민정경계대 aka 민경대(NK DMZ Border Patrol). there are border patrols like BGS and Grenzer at both Germany, too.

User avatar
Bougnas
Major-General
Posts: 3699
Joined: Sat 26 Apr 2014 18:24
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Bougnas » Sat 11 Feb 2017 16:29

RD's flavor strikes again:

Image
Image

throwaway
Lieutenant
Posts: 1262
Joined: Fri 27 Feb 2015 21:23
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby throwaway » Sat 11 Feb 2017 16:44

The 1TAV makes the t-55 unsuitable for the job of a tank cv. ZZZ may cost more but it won't randomly pop to artillery.

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby FrangibleCover » Sat 11 Feb 2017 17:00

Bougnas wrote:RD's flavor strikes again:

Image

CV pricing is all over the damn place anyway. 120 points will buy you a T-55AK, a Czech or Polish T-55 CV with 2TAV and less accuracy or a Finnish T-55A KOPA with neither the armour nor the accuracy. Alternatively you can pick up a ZZZ-701 without the gun or the armour for only ...120 points :lol: . Or a BRDM-2U if you really do hate yourself.

Incidentally, where are these tanks getting their medium optics from in the late 60s/early 70s? A similar justification to the VG optics CV helis?
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
keldon
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2044
Joined: Tue 16 Sep 2014 16:38
Location: Liebe Grüße aus Stuttgart
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby keldon » Sat 11 Feb 2017 17:11

There are also some weired optics stuff regarding the ZTS-63. It has medium in 1975.

btw. has the naming stuff being settled? I'm currently going by frosty's list. Please check the naming in the first post under "top priority" for NK SOF shifting. I'm not sure about the shock recon name, the other 2 are fine i think.

My primary concern however is the playbility of the coalition, so the actual rerole/shifting is more important to me. They can be called "those busty MILFs from neighbourhood '90" or whatever, if only the stats are good.

Oh, i will update the OP with experience gained from the Faustmann mod when a public version is released.
Image
> Sources for tuning Red Dragons --- Sources for tuning Blue Dragons <
亲们!大国梦哦!
小钱钱,真心甜,鼓钱包,放腰间,大国梦,早日圆 。啷个哩个啷♪

User avatar
Bougnas
Major-General
Posts: 3699
Joined: Sat 26 Apr 2014 18:24
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Bougnas » Sat 11 Feb 2017 17:32

FrangibleCover wrote:
Bougnas wrote:RD's flavor strikes again:

Image

CV pricing is all over the damn place anyway. 120 points will buy you a T-55AK, a Czech or Polish T-55 CV with 2TAV and less accuracy or a Finnish T-55A KOPA with neither the armour nor the accuracy. Alternatively you can pick up a ZZZ-701 without the gun or the armour for only ...120 points :lol: . Or a BRDM-2U if you really do hate yourself.

Incidentally, where are these tanks getting their medium optics from in the late 60s/early 70s? A similar justification to the VG optics CV helis?


All command vehicles get medium optics, helis get very good.
Image

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby HrcAk47 » Sat 11 Feb 2017 18:03

Two top armor is a huge thing when it comes to a CV survivability. That having been said, all T-55 variants deserve 2 TAV.

On a related note, I am of the opinion that all CVs could get at least good optics on the account that they are staffed by officers who report directly to you, the commander. If they see something themselves, they will definitely report it forwards to you.
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
Bougnas
Major-General
Posts: 3699
Joined: Sat 26 Apr 2014 18:24
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Bougnas » Sat 11 Feb 2017 18:11

HrcAk47 wrote:Two top armor is a huge thing when it comes to a CV survivability. That having been said, all T-55 variants deserve 2 TAV.

On a related note, I am of the opinion that all CVs could get at least good optics on the account that they are staffed by officers who report directly to you, the commander. If they see something themselves, they will definitely report it forwards to you.


The problem is that command units are too valuable to be used for recon. Tanks are survivable enough to be used like that (could be an interesting thing btw), but CV helos are generally only good when you want to quickly cap a sector with an airborne assault at a low cost (you don't ahve to pay for CV inf in heli and recon), which isn't very common and viable atm.
Image

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby HrcAk47 » Sat 11 Feb 2017 18:56

Bougnas wrote:
HrcAk47 wrote:Two top armor is a huge thing when it comes to a CV survivability. That having been said, all T-55 variants deserve 2 TAV.

On a related note, I am of the opinion that all CVs could get at least good optics on the account that they are staffed by officers who report directly to you, the commander. If they see something themselves, they will definitely report it forwards to you.


The problem is that command units are too valuable to be used for recon. Tanks are survivable enough to be used like that (could be an interesting thing btw), but CV helos are generally only good when you want to quickly cap a sector with an airborne assault at a low cost (you don't ahve to pay for CV inf in heli and recon), which isn't very common and viable atm.


It allows for a greater amount of tactical scenarios that can occur. You can, but should you?
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
frostypooky
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4334
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 14:12
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby frostypooky » Sat 11 Feb 2017 22:08

Tamerlane92 wrote:I think I have to say about this first of all. What I want say is not 'too many NK SOF. OOTF'. I'm totally agree that vanilla can't represent enough how much NK concentrated for SF power and more SF give nothing bad to RD. what I kept saying was there are some doubtful names which filled with some 'opinion' only.


that's fine, it's all to address the strange Shock/Elite/Recon situation of NK in line with the thread's desires. NK got the short end when they can get good shock/elite units for both INF and REC tabs with a variety of deck/transport options, and the main concern was two overlapping or misleading names (ryukjeondae and jongchal). as far as breaking TUGB into three, that would be ideal but I was also filtering the ideas through Eugen's balance logic in that I don't really see them incorporating more than 3 elite inf/rec squads for any given nation (all that comes to mind is USSR with GRU+VMF+regular Spetsnaz), esp one that has 40% bonus avail. the eother option is to simply keep the squads as they are now with Keldon's suggestions and rename to best fit KPA, which is about all that's realistic right now unless Eugen does a NK/Ch DLC.

Spoiler : :
You'll agree it is bit shorter than Hwaryok-Jiwon-Ban.


I went with "fire support" because most of the other fire support squads in Wargame are simply called "fire support squad" in respective languages/military terms. it's not really my main point of contention and i'm more concerned about the shock/elite abilities as you are. but sleeping on it, I think your suggestion of balsagwan is probably the clearest as you mention (i'd rather just see Eugen buff RR squads though lol). I will agree too now that ive calmed down that Jo def has a more military slant than Ban even if they are superficially exchangeable, so Jo is better.

1. if another Jeongchalae(battalion) must be added, I'll suggest for the original one to be -yŏdan(brigade) instead of -dae. there are already 'regiment' named units such as LStR and Wachregiment. then why not the brigade?


This is best and I didn't think of the German examples. I was also thinking 정찰국원 to reflect the hybrid spy/military nature of 정찰국 (that it shared with the 로동당 작전부 before they were merged) compared to the TUGB, if infantry Recon Bns were added.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests