[Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

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

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby FrangibleCover » Tue 7 Feb 2017 14:46

Eukie wrote:South Africa and Israel would complement rather nicely. Perhaps too nicely, since Israel is already immensely strong.

Well, we could lay about Israel with the nerf-bat but then you'd have to buy two DLCs to get the full coalition and it would look like p2p/ p2w features even if it's done to increase realism.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby Mike » Tue 7 Feb 2017 19:17

Mitchverr wrote:IIRC doesnt eugen have a system of "when in doubt, give them lend-lease ammo from the USA"? :lol:


For the 105mm rounds, yeah. The 120mm rounds tend to come from the US or Germany. Soviets tend to get very generous as well.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby Killertomato » Tue 7 Feb 2017 19:20

Israel/SA coalition would break the game.

No thanks.
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
Mitchverr
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10647
Joined: Sat 24 Mar 2012 18:08
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby Mitchverr » Tue 7 Feb 2017 20:03

Killertomato wrote:Israel/SA coalition would break the game.

No thanks.


It would also mean SADF simply from being 2nd in would get alot of its fun unique kit not getting in the game for balance.
Image

Steyntjie28
Private
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue 13 Dec 2016 14:51
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby Steyntjie28 » Wed 3 May 2017 11:02

Spoke to my dad about the war against SWAPO, he said that he only remembers fighting along side Portugal. Maybe a Portugal - South Africa coalition pack?

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

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby FrangibleCover » Wed 3 May 2017 12:29

Steyntjie28 wrote:Spoke to my dad about the war against SWAPO, he said that he only remembers fighting along side Portugal. Maybe a Portugal - South Africa coalition pack?

Portugal and South Africa are quite similar, possibly too similar to form a good coalition. They're both very, very wheely and can't scrape together many good tanks. I've written up a bit of a deck and South Africa provides the majority of units, Portugal's contribution being mostly in the air and recon tabs although the Comandos/Chamite combo still sounds wonderfully strong.

I think SA would actually work best as a standalone, like Israel but not. They have the capability to do so and don't really have any gaps that I think should be filled.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
Eukie
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2014 16:22
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby Eukie » Wed 3 May 2017 14:51

Steyntjie28 wrote:Spoke to my dad about the war against SWAPO, he said that he only remembers fighting along side Portugal. Maybe a Portugal - South Africa coalition pack?


South Africa and Portugal (and Rhodesia) cooperated militarily from 1970 to 1974. In 1974, the fascist dictatorship that ruled Portugal was toppled by a revolution and, in 1975, replaced with a democratic government that didn't want to fight a war and preferred to grant Portugal's former colonial territories immediate independence. After 1975, Portugal wasn't really all that interested in cooperating with South Africa - though a large number of Angolan Portuguese would sign up as pseudo-mercenaries with the South African Defence Force.

In short, there's not really any grounds for a Portugal-South Africa coalition, because South Africa and Portugal weren't really on friendly terms in Wargame's timeframe. (Nobody were on friendly terms with South Africa in the timeframe, except Israel.)

FrangibleCover wrote:I think SA would actually work best as a standalone, like Israel but not. They have the capability to do so and don't really have any gaps that I think should be filled.


Yeah, a standalone nation with a grand total of three Specializations! Four, if you can convince Eugen to allow wheeled transports in Armoured! :P
Last edited by Eukie on Wed 3 May 2017 20:07, edited 2 times in total.

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

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby FrangibleCover » Wed 3 May 2017 15:07

Eukie wrote:
FrangibleCover wrote:I think SA would actually work best as a standalone, like Israel but not. They have the capability to do so and don't really have any gaps that I think should be filled.

Yeah, a standalone nation with a grand total of three Specializations! Three, if you can convince Eugen to allow wheeled transports in Armoured! :P

You make good points about the relationship with Portugal, although the Oryx engines make me think that there were still some ties. So if there are no possible coalition partners and South Africa is unable to stand alone, what should be done? Personally I think SA would be able to wangle Buffels in Mech and Armoured decks, on the basis of necessity and I presume reality. How did SA infantry accompany the armoured formations?

Also, let's not kid ourselves. If SA gets the Bismark then nobody is even going to look for the Armoured specialisation.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
Eukie
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed 23 Apr 2014 16:22
Contact:

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby Eukie » Wed 3 May 2017 16:30

FrangibleCover wrote:You make good points about the relationship with Portugal, although the Oryx engines make me think that there were still some ties.


South Africa had warm enough relations to buy military equipment with nations like West Germany, Romania, and Yugoslavia. That doesn't mean they're going to be in an alliance. Norway sold supercomputers to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, but I don't think that justifies a coalition! :P

FrangibleCover wrote:Personally I think SA would be able to wangle Buffels in Mech and Armoured decks, on the basis of necessity and I presume reality. How did SA infantry accompany the armoured formations?

Also, let's not kid ourselves. If SA gets the Bismark then nobody is even going to look for the Armoured specialisation.


The reality of South Africa's mechanized infantry doctrine was that it was almost entirely wheeled. A Mechanized Battalion primarily comprised a few trucks, one Casspir, and a Ratel for every squad. Units that were merely "motorized" were the ones that rode in trucks and armoured trucks like the Buffel. This stands in some contrast to how Wargame usually handles it, where wheeled IFVs like the Ratel are considered 'Motorized' and not for putting in the Mechanized and Armoured specializations. The infantry units of an Armoured division rode in Saracens until 1991, when they switched over to Ratels. Eugen seems to consider the wheeled Saracen another Mechanized-Armoured-NOT-OK though, c.f. United Kingdom.

South Africa really liked wheeled transports and outside of tanks didn't operate a single tracked vehicle. This is somewhat awkward for Wargame, where the Mechanized and Armoured specializations don't permit wheeled vehicles... This leaves South Africa with Airborne, Motorized, and Support as options.

As for the Bismark, it's an interesting question. Is it VEH? (c.f. Vickers) TNK? (c.f. AMX-10) REC??? (c.f. SA doctrine)

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

Re: [Non-included nation] South Africa (and possibly others in region)

Postby FrangibleCover » Wed 3 May 2017 16:55

Eukie wrote:
FrangibleCover wrote:Personally I think SA would be able to wangle Buffels in Mech and Armoured decks, on the basis of necessity and I presume reality. How did SA infantry accompany the armoured formations?

Also, let's not kid ourselves. If SA gets the Bismark then nobody is even going to look for the Armoured specialisation.


The reality of South Africa's mechanized infantry doctrine was that it was almost entirely wheeled. A Mechanized Battalion primarily comprised a few trucks, one Casspir, and a Ratel for every squad. Units that were merely "motorized" were the ones that rode in trucks and armoured trucks like the Buffel. This stands in some contrast to how Wargame usually handles it, where wheeled IFVs like the Ratel are considered 'Motorized' and not for putting in the Mechanized and Armoured specializations. The infantry units of an Armoured division rode in Saracens until 1991, when they switched over to Ratels. Eugen seems to consider the wheeled Saracen another Mechanized-Armoured-NOT-OK though, c.f. United Kingdom.

South Africa really liked wheeled transports and outside of tanks didn't operate a single tracked vehicle. This is somewhat awkward for Wargame, where the Mechanized and Armoured specializations don't permit wheeled vehicles... This leaves South Africa with Airborne, Motorized, and Support as options.

Okay, how about this? The prototype tag in Wargame doesn't actually indicate prototypes, it indicates things that Eugen don't want in mixed decks (Reservists, for example). If we prototype the Casspirs and Ratels then they can be in the 'mechanized' and 'armoured' specialisation for South Africa and the Buffels can cover the Motorised specialisation. This also neatly fixes the problem of it being pointless to play Unspec SA when Motorised exists because now you're losing out on all of the good units, just as Motorised should ;).

As for the Bismark, it's an interesting question. Is it VEH? (c.f. Vickers) TNK? (c.f. AMX-10) REC??? (c.f. SA doctrine)

That really means it should be REC :?. Considering the description of the Rooikat's FCS that means that SA could justify three or four cards of stealthy, high-AP, reasonably armoured wheeled recon vehicles.

For my money, stick it in the tank tab. The recon tab is going to be too crowded, the vehicle tab is going to be too empty, in the tank tab you'll have to think about whether you want to take it.
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests