Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

terror51247
Major
Posts: 1851
Joined: Thu 27 Sep 2012 12:55
Contact:

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby terror51247 » Sat 26 Nov 2016 03:50

Woozle wrote:Does anyone have any idea what delfo is on about? Outside of obvious stat mistakes like the HEAT praga, I'm really not sure.

Seems to be something about how yugoslavia is really powercreeped.Yugoslavia is powercreeped though.They have plenty of underpriced stuff and and the ingame presence one of their prototypes(novi avion) makes no sense.Other than point changes, and some stat changes(some would be buffs though), i would remove novi avion, the ERAless vihor(we shouldnt have 2 cards of that tank), and m84an(there are too many m84As in the deck).Those are the worst protoypes and without them the deck would make more sense.
How can anyone play to a faction's strength if the major flavour of that faction is overpriced units in every category?

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

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby frostypooky » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:01

Woozle wrote:
frostypooky wrote:
Woozle wrote:Does anyone have any idea what delfo is on about? Outside of obvious stat mistakes like the HEAT praga, I'm really not sure. Also he keeps bringing up the RT-20, has he ever heard of Recce?


yeah, half the units have retarded stats considering their timeframe of entry and actual measured performance in real life competitions

but le meme nation


I don't really see anything wrong with the stats as compared to already existing units, and the Swedes reported the FCS as being better then that on the leo 2.


you mean the FCS that wasnt in before 1990?

User avatar
Demonicjapsel
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 680
Joined: Sat 26 Jul 2014 20:58
Location: Triggering HRCK and his warcrime denying Yugoboos

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby Demonicjapsel » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:02

terror51247 wrote:
Woozle wrote:Does anyone have any idea what delfo is on about? Outside of obvious stat mistakes like the HEAT praga, I'm really not sure.

Seems to be something about how yugoslavia is really powercreeped. Yugoslavia is powercreeped though.They have plenty of underpriced stuff and and the ingame presence one of their prototypes(novi avion) makes no sense.Other than point changes i would remove novi avion, the ERAless vihor(we shouldnt have 2 cards of that tank), and m84an(there are too many m84As in the deck).Those are the worst protoypes and without them the deck would make more sense.


I think the reason they added the Novi avion is because otherwise the coalition lacked a top tier fighter.

IMHO, its not that far fetched in a case where yugoslavia didn't fall apart. The French aren't picky on who buys their stuff as long as you have cash and don't intervene in french interests, which is only really parts of Africa during the Cold War. (Or why the Puma shows up in communist Romania's inventory) the M88, which powers both the Rafale and the Novi Avion has been sold with a full ToT to India as the core of their HAL Tejas, which is an aircraft very similar to the novi avion in aerodynamics, weight and role.

In aircraft design, the traditional stumbling blocks are Engines and radars. with the M88 the Yugoslavs have solved the first problem, and depending on the radar set, (Chances that if it was designed with French Mica's it will be offered as a package with the RDM-3 radar, an export variant of the RDY that is found on the Rafale.)

User avatar
Sgt._Pepper
Lieutenant
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat 15 Jun 2013 10:57
Location: South Tyrol, Italy
Contact:

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby Sgt._Pepper » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:16

delfo wrote:
You created this
Image

Because the Logan act ? Never heard of it!


What about the Logan act? Are you implying that the Logan act prohibited the American Government from selling Mavericks to Yugoslavia, which they did in 1982? Or are you saying that actually never happened?

Because France would sell you embargoed radar and stuff ( like how you got superior FCS and Stabilisation as an export from a country than their classified domestic stuff) because I guess you assumed in that timeline the French government and defence industry would be blowing Miloshevich and asking for more and would hand you classified stuff like that.


Do you mean the Swedish FCS for the T-55? Because that was definitly exported, Finland also got it for their T-55s.
Image

User avatar
Narcissistic Black
Major
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue 14 Jan 2014 01:58
Contact:

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby Narcissistic Black » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:18

HrcAk47 wrote:
What about grenade infantry?

While considered (Yugo produced AGS-17 variant, and Croatia had handheld homemade revolver GLs akin to MM-1), it was again agreed not to lobby in this direction, because I did not wish to infringe on Czech national flavor. At the time, Yugo was considered being a standalone nation, and I guess the good karma of not being a flavor leech brought us the Superslavia coalition with Czechoslovakia after all.



Can i get the name of these Grenade launchers.
The First Narcissist
Image
Click signature to see Modification, Alpha Released. Try now.

delfo
Major-General
Posts: 3735
Joined: Wed 6 Aug 2014 19:57
Contact:

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby delfo » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:19

Sgt._Pepper wrote:
What about the Logan act? Are you implying that the Logan act prohibited the American Government from selling Mavericks to Yugoslavia, which they did in 1982? Or are you saying that actually never happened?



Yes and I checked it and eddied it that I got it wrong and yes it still applies weirdly enough. But things that started under Carter as the Library of congress suggests are weird.

Sgt._Pepper wrote:Do you mean the Swedish FCS for the T-55? Because that was definitly exported, Finland also got it for their T-55s.

And both brake things in a fine way.

And as to the tanks I counted and got to 72, but you could be right at 64.
Last edited by delfo on Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:21, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Woozle
Captain
Posts: 1603
Joined: Sat 1 Feb 2014 09:22
Location: Heierlark Base, North Osea
Contact:

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby Woozle » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:20

Narcissistic Black wrote:
HrcAk47 wrote:
What about grenade infantry?

While considered (Yugo produced AGS-17 variant, and Croatia had handheld homemade revolver GLs akin to MM-1), it was again agreed not to lobby in this direction, because I did not wish to infringe on Czech national flavor. At the time, Yugo was considered being a standalone nation, and I guess the good karma of not being a flavor leech brought us the Superslavia coalition with Czechoslovakia after all.



Can i get the name of these Grenade launchers.


I'm not sure what the name is but you can see them in footage from the yugoslav wars, they look like the Milkor MGL.

delfo
Major-General
Posts: 3735
Joined: Wed 6 Aug 2014 19:57
Contact:

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby delfo » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:28

Woozle wrote:
Narcissistic Black wrote:
HrcAk47 wrote:
What about grenade infantry?

While considered (Yugo produced AGS-17 variant, and Croatia had handheld homemade revolver GLs akin to MM-1), it was again agreed not to lobby in this direction, because I did not wish to infringe on Czech national flavor. At the time, Yugo was considered being a standalone nation, and I guess the good karma of not being a flavor leech brought us the Superslavia coalition with Czechoslovakia after all.



Can i get the name of these Grenade launchers.


I'm not sure what the name is but you can see them in footage from the yugoslav wars, they look like the Milkor MGL.


Do they have a ((11)) on them ? No my bad it's ((8))

codextero
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2334
Joined: Sat 13 Dec 2014 02:52
Contact:

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby codextero » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:44

Sgt._Pepper wrote:Do you mean the Swedish FCS for the T-55? Because that was definitly exported, Finland also got it for their T-55s.


If it means anything, I don't think the STRV 105 should have gotten 70% accuracy either. 70% should be a feature reserved for superheavies.

Using a feature checklist for accuracy like BTR did in his spreadsheet would be a great move for Wargame 4, but with a lower accuracy cap, since his goes up to 95% accuracy for things like Leclerc and M1A2.

Thinking of important features that could qualify for improved accuracy, I have

Rangefinding
- stadiametric - 0%
- coincidence/stereoscopic - 5%
- laser - 10%
- improved laser - 15%

Ballistic Computer
- none - 0%
- electro-mechanical - 5%
- solid state analog - 10%
- solid state digital - 15%

2275 requires at least 20% combined from Rangefinding and BC
2100 requires at least 10%
105, and 100mm guns require another +5% in order to qualify
90 and 85mm guns require another +10%
small than that requires +15%

Extra features
- cant sensor - 5%
- weather mast/temperature probe - 5%
- "good" automation (automatic point-of-aim adjustment, automatic data entry into ballistic computer) -5%
- lead calculation - 10%
- 5% fudge factor as needed for "new" (1989+) tanks

5% for every 175m below 2275
Last edited by codextero on Sat 26 Nov 2016 05:07, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sgt._Pepper
Lieutenant
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat 15 Jun 2013 10:57
Location: South Tyrol, Italy
Contact:

Re: Yugoslavia: The Frequently Asked Questions

Postby Sgt._Pepper » Sat 26 Nov 2016 04:55

EDIT: This was supposed to be the beginning of this reply

And as to the tanks I counted and got to 72, but you could be right at 64.


I only made an estimation, you could also be right, but it still doesn't change my point.





But now I'm even more confused by what you say about the Orao II

delfo wrote:
Because the Logan act ? Never heard of it! Hey I am wrong again. Two for you. I just checked. You still broke the game but enjoy. Boy was the Carter administration weird. The year you're dating it is as if it was a proto but like I said was wrong Two for you. You got 2 on me. And it only took a broken game.


What about 1983 makes it look like a prototype? Maverick and Orao II are both from 1982 and it probably took them some months to make the Maverick work with the Orao II.


delfo wrote:Image

Because you have no idea or a clue how HEAT works in Wargame, because you didn't even bother you went off the stats from the manual. You didn't care about real research.

You produced a 15 Autocannon heat vehicle for the lineup ?

Image

HEAT ? Really. HEAT in wargame on an autocanon? Read through that. Call it research.


This is not his fault, he never mentioned any HEAT ammo in the Yugo thread, it must be an error Eugen made, probably already fixed.


Image

Best autocannon in the world! No wait. It's not because it never existed.


Image

It does in fact exist.

Image

Because this screams balance like I nobody's business in 1981. Cat C here we come! How did you come to be so accurate in 1981? Is it a bug after all this research for months that made it into prod anyway ?


The range should definitly be reduced to 2100 m. BUT Sweden(where the FCS comes from) has two Centurions from 1983(STRV 102R) and 1985(STRV 104) that have 60% acc. They have however 1925m and 2100m range. This T-55 should probably also go to 2100m.

All your armored atgm vehicles come with 18 missiles ? What research ? Are you better than 20 other nations in the world who accepted yeah sure we'll go with 8 to 12 missiles in our vehicles and say fine in Wargame? Have you considered the supply implications of that in game ? Research, opinion polling, not breaking a thing for your own personal pleasure ? Not Milosheviching up the place?


They probably thought they were as good as all the other nations with Malyutkas that have 18 of them on their BRDM-2s. Israeli Pereh even has 24.
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests