Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

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

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby codextero » Fri 27 Jan 2017 22:20

HrcAk47 wrote:Oh, so you also think that we should get rid of Longbow and ATACMS?


Perfectly fine with both if the rules are evenly applied to all nations.

That would still leave AH-64 as the top dog anti-tank gunship, since everything better than Mi-24 VP is gone. It would be a lot more useable too because the number of 3325 anti-helo AA is cut down to Tunguska M1, Crotale/HQ-7, Chaparral A3, and Tan Sam

1991 strict is one of the best scenarios for the US in WG:RD.

Steamfunk
Lieutenant
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sun 14 Dec 2014 06:19

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby Steamfunk » Fri 27 Jan 2017 23:03

That would still leave AH-64 as the top dog anti-tank gunship, since everything better than Mi-24 VP is gone.


The Ka-50 did exist - it was first of all misidentified as an escort helicopter, and secondly no pictures emerged until about 1993. Also, it doesn't matter if we adopt a redacted timeline or not, the issue is whether certain units are appropriate or necessary for an RTS based around tactics and movement.

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

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby HrcAk47 » Fri 27 Jan 2017 23:27

codextero wrote:
HrcAk47 wrote:Oh, so you also think that we should get rid of Longbow and ATACMS?


Perfectly fine with both if the rules are evenly applied to all nations.

That would still leave AH-64 as the top dog anti-tank gunship, since everything better than Mi-24 VP is gone. It would be a lot more useable too because the number of 3325 anti-helo AA is cut down to Tunguska M1, Crotale/HQ-7, Chaparral A3, and Tan Sam

1991 strict is one of the best scenarios for the US in WG:RD.



I am down with this too. Yugo loses Praćka, M-91A Vihor, L-19, Grom-B, M-96 Vidra, and Bumbar.

But it retains everything else. ;)


Edit: I actually made a Yugo '91 strict deck. It is actually very competitive. :mrgreen:
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

User avatar
Solo
Brigadier
Posts: 3429
Joined: Thu 20 Mar 2014 19:45
Location: Washington D.C.
Contact:

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby Solo » Sat 28 Jan 2017 00:10

Eugen isn't removing units lol

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

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby codextero » Sat 28 Jan 2017 00:10

Steamfunk wrote:
That would still leave AH-64 as the top dog anti-tank gunship, since everything better than Mi-24 VP is gone.


The Ka-50 did exist - it was first of all misidentified as an escort helicopter, and secondly no pictures emerged until about 1993. Also, it doesn't matter if we adopt a redacted timeline or not, the issue is whether certain units are appropriate or necessary for an RTS based around tactics and movement.


91 strict means in squadron service by 91. One squadron of planes or one battalion of a land vehicle in frontline service by New Years Eve 1991.

HrcAk47 wrote:I am down with this too. Yugo loses Praćka, M-91A Vihor, L-19, Grom-B, M-96 Vidra, and Bumbar.

But it retains everything else. ;)


Edit: I actually made a Yugo '91 strict deck. It is actually very competitive. :mrgreen:


It loses a bunch more,the Vidra M-80A, Drug, M-91, Senke, Sava, Nora, Igman, and perhaps most importantly, tank ammo better than BM-15/17.

It's amazing how miserly the Soviets were with the good ammo. Perhaps that's because they didn't trust the Warsaw Pact enough and believed that "small" objects like tank rounds would end up in the west as soon as it was issued.

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

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby HrcAk47 » Sat 28 Jan 2017 00:17

codextero wrote:
HrcAk47 wrote:I am down with this too. Yugo loses Praćka, M-91A Vihor, L-19, Grom-B, M-96 Vidra, and Bumbar.

But it retains everything else. ;)


Edit: I actually made a Yugo '91 strict deck. It is actually very competitive. :mrgreen:


It loses a bunch more,the


Vidra M-80A

1987

Drug

1989

M-91

1991

Senke

They can be rearmed or rerolled to elite recon. Called Diverzanti.

Sava

We developed the fancy missile in 1987, and had it used on our MTLB-based Strela launchers. Vehicle is from 1989, adopted in 1990.

Nora

1987, first TMG ever, goooo Yugoslavia!

Igman

Partially true, the ERA one has to go.

and perhaps most importantly, tank ammo better than
BM-15/17.


You'd be surprised :mrgreen:
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

Steamfunk
Lieutenant
Posts: 1470
Joined: Sun 14 Dec 2014 06:19

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby Steamfunk » Sat 28 Jan 2017 00:59

91 strict means in squadron service by 91..


The intro dates in Wargame refer to the first units produced, which are usually sent to training and conversion units - the F-15E at Luke, for example, or the MiG-29 at Zhukovsky. There is no standard 'in service' date and in some cases we have units that were sent to war almost as soon as they came out of the factory - the F-111 went from Nellis to Vietnam within about a month.

It's amazing how miserly the Soviets were with the good ammo.


It really isn't necessary to supply the latest APFSDS when the majority of opposing tanks were M48s or Leopard 1s. The circumstances in RD are completely different from reality, as far as NSWP is concerned.

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

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby codextero » Sat 28 Jan 2017 03:34

Steamfunk wrote:It really isn't necessary to supply the latest APFSDS when the majority of opposing tanks were M48s or Leopard 1s. The circumstances in RD are completely different from reality, as far as NSWP is concerned.


That definitely was not the case by 1985-ish. Abrams, Leopard 2, and Challengers started making up a considerable portion of NATO's tank force, and the up-armored Leopard 1A5 and Chieftain turrets could definitely give BM-15 a lot of trouble.

Steamfunk wrote:The intro dates in Wargame refer to the first units produced


That's definitely not the case for the US at least. The first M1A2 was 88, and the first AH-64D with Longbow radar was 1992. 1991 was when they took first squadron delivery of Block 52's.

User avatar
Grabbed_by_the_Spets
General
Posts: 6605
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 11:40
Contact:

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby Grabbed_by_the_Spets » Sat 28 Jan 2017 05:04

Most modern technology went back to the Soviet Union when the bloc started to collapse, wouldn't be surprised if that's what happened to most EB countries munitions.

But regardless, tanks fire the most powerful ammunition it could fire, not the ammunition it had in storage, this applies for both Blufor and Redfor tanks.
Image

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

Re: Bumbar is from 2005 and didn't enter service until 2012. Why is this in the game?

Postby codextero » Sat 28 Jan 2017 05:46

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:But regardless, tanks fire the most powerful ammunition it could fire, not the ammunition it had in storage, this applies for both Blufor and Redfor tanks.


There's a couple cases.

T-72B, T-72B1, and T-72B Obr. 87 shoot 18 AP ammo, while the same year (or earlier for Obr 87) T-80U shoots 20 AP ammo, which consensus says is Vant. Vant is not a round that's limited by the shorter autoloader of T-72, so they should be able of shooting it.

M1A1 HA shoots M829 when M829A1 is available, M1A1 HC shoots M829A1 when M829A2 is available.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests