Fine-tuning NK/China

keldon · Postby **keldon** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 17:09

I'm aware, that eugen is unlikely to do something drastic about NK/China in this stage of game now. So this is not a “please change everything right now” post, but should rather be seen as the “Should/could have be” roster. The sources used to draft are exclusively Chinese, some are from Forum where ex-service member visit and occasionally do some leaks and give insights. Meant to say, this is not a product from one afternoon on wikipedia.

I made only few stats recommendations, most of the time it is only the unit name and some reference picture. I did give comments for things I modified, but I did not make a lengthy reasoning why certain units is chosen above others.

The Guideline while making this is:

1) Based on the roster already in game. Units in normal textcolor are from original roster
2) designed to complement NK. One example being China brings tracked MRL and NK brings wheeled MRL
3) Every time frame gets at least one unit. This means in most cases there will be 3 units for any given role.
4) Cutting out OOTF units. Most tabs are now free from 1991+ units, exceptions are INF, TANK which imo is really important and need to have some 90s units, also SUP got new arty pieces.
5) Further streamlining the roster by cutting out redundant equipment and try to emphasis the coalition level balance

Final unit count: 80 units,
1991+ units: 13
Future unicorn: 1

Color code:

Green: Units I added
Yellow: Units which could have stayed, but due to the reason given in comments left
Red: Shouldn't be in game

LOG

Spoiler : :

INF

Spoiler : :

SUP

Spoiler : :

TANK

Spoiler : :

REC

Spoiler : :

VEH

Spoiler : :

HEL

Spoiler : :

AIR

Spoiler : :

Comments and feedbacks are welcomed.

remilia019 · Postby **remilia019** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 18:16

With the current Wargame roster, wouldn't call 1995 as OOTF but rather "Prototype" but meh

I think you might've forgotten HQ-17? with that roster, the lack for a mech/armored SAM is still present which really shouldn't

47andrej · Postby **47andrej** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 18:26

K1A1, MBT that Southkorea has ingame, has 2001 service date, first protos builded in 1997. Why cant Northkorea have Chonma 98 if the actual IV is from '92 instead of '85?

Solution renaming old Chonma IV to V with some random buffs is, how to say, rather cheap.

keldon · Postby **keldon** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 18:27

remilia019 wrote:With the current Wargame roster, wouldn't call 1995 as OOTF but rather "Prototype" but meh

I think you might've forgotten HQ-17? with that roster, the lack for a mech/armored SAM is still present which really shouldn't

TOR-M1 was bought in 1996, so OOTF. :/

Bougnas · Postby **Bougnas** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 19:02

[EUG]MadMat wrote:So ... youre telling us that our ChoHo IV is actually a V model ... and that the V do actually hit the timeframe?
I've seen several times a 1992 service date for the V, but found no confirmation elsewhere. Where does that information comes from?

If it proves right, bumping the ChoHo IV as a V (with overall improved stats) is a possibility ...

47andrej wrote:K1A1, MBT that Southkorea has ingame, has 2001 service date, first protos builded in 1997. Why cant Northkorea have Chonma 98 if the actual IV is from '92 instead of '85?

Solution renaming old Chonma IV to V with some random buffs is, how to say, rather cheap.

Actually, I'm saying that the designation system is fundamentaly flawed.

The Chonma Ho III, IV and V are just wrong names of the exact same tank which is the Chonma-92 (I think that the piece we see at the NK museum is a simplified Chonma-92 that removed ERA blocks and front turret smoke dispensers for later tanks like the Songun-915).

The 1992 intro date isn't even the actual introduction date because it's only the year when we first saw this. It is very likely that the Chonma-92 entered actual use earlier and hence it shouldn't get proto tag.

The model that you have ingame is the Chonma-92, and IMO I think that you can buff it with like 55% acc and 35% stabs (or 60/40 if you are generous), 7 rpm of ROF and 13 or 14 of front armor, maybe 8 of side armour and 3 of top armour.

Depending on the chosen accuracy and armor stats, the vehicle could cost between 70 (worse Chieftain Mk.11) or 75/80 pts (pretty equal to Chief Mk.11 with better speed and autonomy and the KPVT, but worse rear armour, and 1pt less of AP and HE).

As for the Chonma 98, I really don't mind about it entering in game or not but it would just add 1 or 2 additionnal armor at the front and IMO adding an extra tank and a new model for a marginally better tank (when China is already doing the job at coalition level) that doesn't have enough ROF to compete with heavies anyway is kind of a waste.

The Chonma series ingame were always designed as hard hitting tanks that are perfect against mediums but however lack the mobility, armor and rate of fire to engage heavier tanks offensively.

I'd rather add more Konkurs options like infantry and UAZ to get a somewhat capable anti-tank net.

@Keldon: what about the MD-500 with HOT-1 and rotor mast? And the PLZ-89?

keldon · Postby **keldon** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 19:43

Bougnas wrote:@Keldon: what about the MD-500 with HOT-1 and rotor mast? And the PLZ-89?

The modified roster is just a barebone 2.0 version. You can add more units to fill out the flavor side. To answer your question about those 2 units:

- There are only 2 MD500 in China and it lost the competition to the Gazelle
- PLZ-89 lost the cat.a howitzer slot to PLZ-45, because the 155mm gun is simply more useful. But like i said, to fill out the flavor side of a roster such units can be added.

Edit: read a bit more about that MD500. Apparatnly the missiles are TOW provided by USA. After the chopper lost to Gazelle the mast mounted sensor pod and TOW were returned to US while the choppers themselves remained in China, cause those were already paid for.

That's a bit like the Blackhawk situation of PLA, technically those choppers could have been added, but due to small IRL numbers i guess they were not.

Bougnas · Postby **Bougnas** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 20:54

Alright, thanks for the explaination

.

Sgt._Pepper · Postby **Sgt._Pepper** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 22:31

1995 on the PGZ-95 and the WZ-550 really isn't OOTF, SK alone has two 1996 units, which also weren't adopted in that year. And there are loads of other 1995 units in the game.

EDIT: Scandinavia has 8 1995 prototypes and 2 from 1996.

keldon · Postby **keldon** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 22:47

Sgt._Pepper wrote:1995 on the PGZ-95 and the WZ-550 really isn't OOTF, SK alone has two 1996 units, which also weren't adopted in that year. And there are loads of other 1995 units in the game.

EDIT: Scandinavia has 8 1995 prototypes and 2 from 1996.

I just want to demonstrate, that a non proto infested Chinese roster is possible. I believe with the list i presented you can actually do pretty well ingame, at least better than now, unless of course you get the usual special pricing for being one of the Asian factions. For the full potential you should of course use the coalition deck which also require NK to be streamlined, but i think you get the idea.

Is this my dream roster? No! but it is like i said a barebone version 2.0 and it would work ingame. Just kinda tired when people claiming China/NK need some help from the galactic empire to be viable, where the core problem is the lack of information/bad research when drafting the roster 2 years ago.

Well, just hope that Inf, tank and ASF being salvaged and i'll be pretty happy.

Admiral Piett · Postby **Admiral Piett** » Fri 26 Aug 2016 22:49

keldon wrote:Just kinda tired when people claiming China/NK need some help from the galactic empire to be viable, where the core problem is the lack of information/bad research when drafting the roster 2 years ago.

^^^

Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Re: Fine-tuning NK/China

Who is online