Fine-tuning NK/China

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 » Wed 13 Jul 2016 15:04

frostypooky wrote:Hwaryok-jiwon-ban 화력지원반 (literally Fire Support Team)

(and yea bibanchongpo is literally RR in North Korean)


Thanks for help, added in first post.
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
Admiral Piett
Colonel
Posts: 2910
Joined: Sun 12 Feb 2012 22:04
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Admiral Piett » Wed 13 Jul 2016 19:06

keldon wrote:Tag.


Something to add to your inconsistencies:

The J-7IIM is 10-points more expensive than the F-7B despite them being the same plane with the same loadout (with negligible cannon differences). Both should be 50-points.

Honestly, a lot of Red Dragon aircraft should be re-rolled, the redundancies in the low-end are insane.

Edit: Oh! Also, the Su-7BMK would be a decent rocket truck, but a few patches ago Eugen broke something and instead of firing all 64 rockets and evac-ing, it now only fires half, sails over the target and dies. That really needs to be fixed.

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

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Xeno426 » Wed 13 Jul 2016 19:20

Admiral Piett wrote:Honestly, a lot of Red Dragon aircraft should be re-rolled, the redundancies in the low-end are insane.

I have asked to do this more than once.
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.

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 » Wed 13 Jul 2016 19:49

Admiral Piett wrote:Something to add to your inconsistencies:

The J-7IIM is 10-points more expensive than the F-7B despite them being the same plane with the same loadout (with negligible cannon differences). Both should be 50-points.

Honestly, a lot of Red Dragon aircraft should be re-rolled, the redundancies in the low-end are insane.

Edit: Oh! Also, the Su-7BMK would be a decent rocket truck, but a few patches ago Eugen broke something and instead of firing all 64 rockets and evac-ing, it now only fires half, sails over the target and dies. That really needs to be fixed.


I just compared both planes to all similar RedFor options and i actually think they are consistent with the pricing. The J-7 has 2 more missiles and costs 10 pts more than the F-7, i'm personally fine with that. What absolutly doesn't make sense is the avail. options though. The usefulness of those 2 planes are a different topic altogehter though. Also, the Su-7 could be buffed by firing all 64 rockets in 1 salvo, but i honestly never used it and can't even remember how it was few patches ago.
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
Admiral Piett
Colonel
Posts: 2910
Joined: Sun 12 Feb 2012 22:04
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Admiral Piett » Wed 13 Jul 2016 20:07

keldon wrote:I just compared both planes to all similar RedFor options and i actually think they are consistent with the pricing. The J-7 has 2 more missiles and costs 10 pts more than the F-7, i'm personally fine with that. What absolutly doesn't make sense is the avail. options though. The usefulness of those 2 planes are a different topic altogehter though. Also, the Su-7 could be buffed by firing all 64 rockets in 1 salvo, but i honestly never used it and can't even remember how it was few patches ago.


Oh, derp! Yeah, I missed the two extra missiles on the J-7.

The Su-7 used to fire all 64 rockets at once, and all other rocket planes in game work that way. One patch a really long time ago changed the Su-7, and only the Su-7, so that it fires half. That made it totally useless. I'm 99% sure it was an oversight by Eugen. Rocket planes generally aren't bad at all (if they have enough rockets like, say, the Su-7BMK), so it would be a nice boost for those that want to use it. Particularly in a NK deck, since they really don't have much to choose from. :lol:
Last edited by Admiral Piett on Wed 13 Jul 2016 20:14, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Razzmann » Wed 13 Jul 2016 20:13

Admiral Piett wrote:The Su-7 used to fire all 64 rockets at once, and all other rocket planes in game work that way. One patch a really long time ago changed the Su-7, and only the Su-7, so that it fires half. That made it totally useless. I'm 99% sure it was an oversight by Eugen.

I think that is only the case when you use fire position. When you use it against a visible target, then it fires all rockets.
Also the fact that it does not shoot all rockets at once makes it able to split them and shoot at 2 nearby targers in a single run which is pretty useful.

Also there is a workaround for the fire position comand: turn off the gun and use the shift to give it a 2nd fire position command.

User avatar
Admiral Piett
Colonel
Posts: 2910
Joined: Sun 12 Feb 2012 22:04
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Admiral Piett » Wed 13 Jul 2016 20:15

Razzmann wrote:I think that is only the case when you use fire position. When you use it against a visible target, then it fires all rockets.
Also the fact that it does not shoot all rockets at once makes it able to split them and shoot at 2 nearby targers in a single run which is pretty useful.

Also there is a workaround for the fire position comand: turn off the gun and use the shift to give it a 2nd fire position command.


Ahhhh, I see. That is interesting. I will have to test that later. If true, I will just crawl back into my hole. :oops:

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Razzmann » Wed 13 Jul 2016 20:17

Admiral Piett wrote:
Razzmann wrote:I think that is only the case when you use fire position. When you use it against a visible target, then it fires all rockets.
Also the fact that it does not shoot all rockets at once makes it able to split them and shoot at 2 nearby targers in a single run which is pretty useful.

Also there is a workaround for the fire position comand: turn off the gun and use the shift to give it a 2nd fire position command.


Ahhhh, I see. That is interesting. I will have to test that later. If true, I will just crawl back into my hole. :oops:

:lol:
I would love to see it getting changed for the fire position command though, that should not need such a workaround...

CUALEB_Operator
Corporal
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed 18 Feb 2015 07:17
Contact:

(yet Another)Zhanshi 85 Buff Proposal

Postby CUALEB_Operator » Tue 19 Jul 2016 09:44

Right, this is not the first time people proposing this, but up to this point I don't see the issue has ever officially addressed or answered.

So the problem is, the Zhanshi 85 is perhaps the least used 85-90 era regular line infantry in game. It has got the sad combination of a not-impressive AT weapon and a frustrating MG, the squad is not unique at all and not cost-effective enough. The RD/CHN players usually just go for the cheaper reservists or high-end Shock/SFs instead. However there are some viable transport options exclusive to Zhanshi 85, not to the baseline Zhanshi and many other infs (besides the pricey marine squads). This is also a lil shame and a pain in the ass when making your deck.

Image

Well before then all infantry pricing and stats are strictly standardized, All regular line-foots had the same assault rifle ACC and ROF and Non-CQC MGs only. I can see the reason why this unit is being awkward. However some recent tweaks to the Anzac Diggers 90 gave me inspirations. As regular line-foots, the Diggers 90 have got a CQC MG, and a ROF buffed assault rifle. These certainly created discrepancies, but I don't see them being OP, because: 1) the Diggers have got a sloppy AT launcher anyway; 2) the ANZAC is also one of the weaker decks that can use more love; 3) I enjoy some novelty and diversity once a while, some CQC-oriented regular foots looks cool.

Image

Therefore, here comes my vision of modelling the Zhanshi 85 into a redfor Digger 90:


1. Replace the Type 67 with CQC-capable MGs like RPD (Type 56-1) or Type 81;


Both weapons are already in the game. Besides, IRL they are the standard squad automatic weapons for both light and mechanized infantry. In offence, the PLA infantry valued small fireteam (1-3 man) maneuvers and frequent alternating overwatch to take enemy positions, mobility was always the greater concern for PLA when it come down to the choice of squad firearms.



Image

An entrenched PLA Type 56-1 (RPD variant) gunner during the Sino-Vietnam conflict in 1979.



Image

A PLA recon squad on the Sino-Vietnam border, presumably between 1983-1984. Notice that the machine gunner (third left) was already holding a Type 81 LMG, while the other soliders had not switch to the Type 81 assault rifles yet, they were still carrying Type 56 (AK47/AKM variant). Soon later the major army groups had complete the throughout transition to the Type 81 squad weapon family and had seen extensive actions in border conflicts.

This change would much Zhanshi 85's firepower and re-role them as an affordable anti-infantry/urban combat unit, just like the Diggers 90.


2. +5% Buff to Type 81 rifle ACC


Even though the in game rifle stats are mostly standardized, small discrepancies still exist, e.g. the ROF of the F88, the ACC of Stg 941, etc. I understand that the F88 is a bullpup design, and the Stg 941 has...er...polymer parts? whatever, they bring diversity to the infantry gameplay.

So to further emphasis the close combat role of Zhanshi 85, improving their rifle ACC a bit wouldn't hurt. I am not here to talk big about gun mechanisms, but if you know about military rifles, you'd understand that Type 81 is not an AK clone (and it certainly deserves an independent in-game model). The improved gas system (w/ a gas regulator), redesigned bolt lugs engagements and a reinforced receiver provided significantly smoother action, and helped a lot in full-automatic accuracy.


Image

Accuracy data sheet of the Type 56 (AK47/AKM) assault rifle. Numbers in red box are the shots deviations at 100-500m in single shots (vertical and horizontal), numbers in blue box are the same deviations in short bursts.



Image

Same data for the Type 81 assault rifle. It can be seen that there are better results in the burst fire department.



Some more links to read if interested. Don't get me wrong I am not arguing the Type 81 is a better rifle of some kind, just providing some ideas of potential more variety and diversity. It could make some differences in gameplay.
http://www.military-today.com/firearms/type_81.htm
http://www.tactical-life.com/firearms/c ... pe-81-lead


*3. Or AT laucher buff instead


I believe this has been proposed much more often. The dilemma of the Zhanshi 85 is that they are not good at anti-infantry nor anti-armor. I think the devs are more cautious at buff the AT laucher than small arms. Therefore my proposal is to gave Zhanshi 85/90 a clearer role, either go CQC MGs or PF89, I only ask for one of the two.

(And I don't think PF89 is asking too much, since it's on par with LAW80 and chronically correct. If I want to be greedy, I would bark for a Zhanshi 95 w/ prototype tandem warhead PF98B)


In summary

The both nations in the RD faction lack viable regular line-foot options, especially in 85-90 era, and the Chinese deck alone is short of infantry options right from the start. I don't think any of the changes above would hurt the current game balance nor take any effort to re-model, but they would certainly enrich RD tactics. Just imagine how many combination you can have with Zhanshi 85 and all the transports options? It is more cost-productive than modelling new faction into the game.

The Wargame series are not just about gamey and meta, it helps us reliving the military legends in a different timeline. The PLA in 1980s were not hold up by a few western-imported hi-tech nor superhuman SF badasses nor reservist zergs, the large number of hard-willed and sufficiently trained infantry were the backbone of the dragon.

I hope it can be finally well portrayed in Wargame Red Dragon. 8-)



Image
Last edited by [EUG]MadMat on Tue 19 Jul 2016 10:38, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Merged with existing topic

User avatar
Admiral Piett
Colonel
Posts: 2910
Joined: Sun 12 Feb 2012 22:04
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Postby Admiral Piett » Wed 20 Jul 2016 18:49

I have always found it strange that the PGZ-88 is only 1 HE rather than 1.5. A 37mm shell is far closer in capability to a 40mm shell than it is to a 30mm one.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests