Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

beares
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu 29 Oct 2015 08:17
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby beares » Fri 9 Dec 2016 08:32

Mike wrote:I swear I remember someone on here saying that the Leopard 2A5 upgrade was originally indeed to upgun it to the L/55.


IIRC there were three KWS programs in place, with one of them being the L/55.

M4jor
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 390
Joined: Mon 13 Jun 2016 12:59
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby M4jor » Fri 9 Dec 2016 09:37

PzH 2000

I would also like to see we get rid of that Timeframe thing and think more of an "ERA" thing.
All major nations should have access to high end units that could be considererd "post 90's Cold War Era" without using a specific timeframe as "restriction".

Its what I also call the "Narrative" or "Story" that is just randomly picked by the devs to justify their decisions.

We have Marder 2 which never existed now in the game. It should enter service 1998.
PzH 2000 exists today and should enter Service at the exact same time.

Both units had their first excercises at the same time (1991).

So we have a simple example of the same story used one time to reason against and one time to reason for a unit.

I just use german units as example here because I play them the most. From the board discussions I can tell, that almost any nation has the same "problems".

In other words: Bring Existing Nations DLCs!!

Oktoberfest
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 987
Joined: Wed 23 Oct 2013 09:01
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby Oktoberfest » Fri 9 Dec 2016 12:10

France tanks:

Leclerc T3 with 20 AP
Leclerc T5 with 23 AP
Recon Leclerc
Command Leclerc
Leclerc T40 support tank with 40mm autocannon.
Leclerc Crotale

For the Air Force:
Mirage 2000D
ROCKET PODS

Infantry:
Chasseurs 85 with APILAS

User avatar
Spielführer
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 950
Joined: Sun 28 Apr 2013 12:35
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby Spielführer » Fri 9 Dec 2016 14:25

Col_Sandfurz wrote:Eurofighter for Germany with AIM-120 and ASRAAM (would have been developed if cold war had not end) same on the british EF..
G41 for line '90 infantry
M2CG for Jäger '90
Deckungsgruppe '90 with Bunkerfaust
G11 for some special forces/paratroopers
Fernspäher as 10 man Elite with MP5SD, Armbrust and G3SG1
Gebirgsjäger as 15 man Stock light inf with G3 and M2CG
Panzergrenadire Milan Team (shock)
PZH2000
Leopard 1A4 recon
Leopard 2A4 recon (where actually used this way)
Leopard 2A6 (yeah, mit so much ootf, had this discussion at the beginning of RD, basicly an Leo 2A5 with 24-25AP)
Radpanzer 90
Begleitender 57
Marder 2 35mm for cheaper and with 10 Front AV again
Xenos Air tab changes
Rah-66 Comanche as steath recon with 2 stinger and 4 Hellfire
Rah-66 as Medium steath atacker with 10 Hellfire and 4 stinger
Realistic Implementation of the Longbow.. I.e. Ripplefire all 16 Hellfire on diffrent targets
Same for AMRAAM Jets

New models for 90 inf for old Nation (WGER, US, France.. Etc)


Yeah give it to me!
Soldier of passion. Diplom rerum militarium
Image

Lord Helmchen
Major-General
Posts: 3887
Joined: Tue 5 Mar 2013 00:23
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby Lord Helmchen » Fri 9 Dec 2016 15:56

beares wrote:
Mike wrote:I swear I remember someone on here saying that the Leopard 2A5 upgrade was originally indeed to upgun it to the L/55.


IIRC there were three KWS programs in place, with one of them being the L/55.

Leopard 2 KWS I was the introduction of the L/55, basically a Leopard 2A4 w/ an L/55.
Leopard 2 KWS II was the actual Leopard 2A5 ingame.
Both united would be the Leopard 2A6.

BUT:

KWS means Kampfwertsteigerung, basically Improved Combat Efficency(ICE, remember the ALB F4F).
So basically it was and improved combat efficency upgrade that was planned in two phases, first one would be the L/55 upgrade and following that the armor upgrade. Because of the decrease in defense spendings the KWS I was put back and KWS II came first.
But following the "what-if" scenario it should either be two new Leopards, first one should've been the Leopard 2A4 KWS I and the second one basically the Leopard 2A6 or only the Leopard 2A6.
Image

User avatar
integ3r
Lieutenant
Posts: 1144
Joined: Mon 3 Jun 2013 03:10
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby integ3r » Fri 9 Dec 2016 15:59

Now that maglan is a thing I'd like to see RBS 56 equipped on a line/shock troop.

It'd still be more balanced than maglan and would offset scandis lack of heavy tanks and long range stealthy ATGM.

Could simply give the weapon to norrlandsjägere and make them 10 man or even 5, as they are literally useless as is.

RBS 56 was relatively widespread in the swedish military, from mechanized troops to paras.
"How do into gaem of war? How 2 git gud?":
Spoiler : :

Karenin
Sergeant
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri 19 Sep 2014 16:56
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby Karenin » Fri 9 Dec 2016 16:13

beares wrote:
Mike wrote:I swear I remember someone on here saying that the Leopard 2A5 upgrade was originally indeed to upgun it to the L/55.


IIRC there were three KWS programs in place, with one of them being the L/55.


The third was the plan to equip the 140mm gun, this was chanceled pretty fast after end of Cold war. The second KWS (=what we know as 2A5) and first (=120 L/55. Coincidencly named KWS I) combined would give 2a6. But if you would want to argument FOR 2a6, there would be much room for it (when you look at the new fiction units, that not even deserve the tag "prototype", anyway), the Gun itself as well as the testing for implementation into turret was tested well before end of TF.

But hey, there were more Leo2A4 Recons than Yugos had tanks, yet we fight VIGORous space ships with a Leo 1a1. Why even try being reasonable? Gib 2a7 with Lahat.

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11965
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby Xeno426 » Fri 9 Dec 2016 16:21

Col_Sandfurz wrote:[Ripplefire on different targets] for AMRAAM Jets

Most aircraft couldn't launch multiple AIM-120s at simultaneous targets; what they could do was "bug" two or more targets, which would allow the aircraft to launch the second missile at the second "bug" immediately after the previous missile went pitbull.

Mako wrote:Show me on the doll where angelfire hurt you xeno :lol:

Same place Geocities did.

R3d Sh4mbala wrote:Since we have now Gsh-23 gunpod Mi-8 Gunships. [Which Eugen swore up and down couldn't be done.] How long before Helicopter Re-rolls with either Gunpods or AGL Pods?

They didn't want to do them because the gun pod has to be part of the model itself; it's not modular like other aircraft weapons or rockets.

I am disappointed we never got a helo with GUV-8700 AGS-17 pods.

R3d Sh4mbala wrote:Xeno, is there any oddball info on helicopters in the Mi-4 family sporting odd weapon loadouts? We have the Mi-2 covered, but not really much on the Mi-4, except being a flying PEZ dispenser for mines.

No, not that I know of. The Mi-4 was supplanted in service before much craziness could happen to it. I'll tell you for free that no Mi-4 flew with S-8 rockets, though.
Last edited by Xeno426 on Fri 9 Dec 2016 16:24, edited 1 time in total.
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3062
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby urogard » Fri 9 Dec 2016 17:59

Xeno426 wrote:
R3d Sh4mbala wrote:Since we have now Gsh-23 gunpod Mi-8 Gunships. [Which Eugen swore up and down couldn't be done.] How long before Helicopter Re-rolls with either Gunpods or AGL Pods?

They didn't want to do them because the gun pod has to be part of the model itself; it's not modular like other aircraft weapons or rockets.

I am disappointed we never got a helo with GUV-8700 AGS-17 pods.

I have yet to see a helo with fixed cannon emplacement to be genuinely useful.

Ka-50, Mi-24P?, W-3T Sokol? (tranport helo)
They just blow so much hot air because they first have to come to a stop, then turn then aim before they start dealing damage.

Rotary cannons are just incomparably better within the game engine.

User avatar
damoj
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon 26 Sep 2016 10:07
Contact:

Re: Units (Within Timeframe!) That You'd Like To See But You Know You Absolutely Won't

Postby damoj » Fri 9 Dec 2016 18:42

urogard wrote:
Xeno426 wrote:
R3d Sh4mbala wrote:Since we have now Gsh-23 gunpod Mi-8 Gunships. [Which Eugen swore up and down couldn't be done.] How long before Helicopter Re-rolls with either Gunpods or AGL Pods?

They didn't want to do them because the gun pod has to be part of the model itself; it's not modular like other aircraft weapons or rockets.

I am disappointed we never got a helo with GUV-8700 AGS-17 pods.

I have yet to see a helo with fixed cannon emplacement to be genuinely useful.

Ka-50, Mi-24P?, W-3T Sokol? (tranport helo)
They just blow so much hot air because they first have to come to a stop, then turn then aim before they start dealing damage.

Rotary cannons are just incomparably better within the game engine.


If helicopters had proper strafing and circling behaviours in Wargame, it'd be so bloody different.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 47 guests