Jump to content

Na Vaske

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Na Vaske

  1. I guess this is more of a Cold War question, but did the Soviets/Russians ever consider using massed attack helos to hit an enemy force before a major attack?


    I was playing Flashpoint Campaigns: Redstorm and the AI used a regiment of Hinds to punch a whole in a portion of my line and then scour an area roughly 5KM in depth and 2 KM wide of nearly all armored vehicles. The helo regiment took about 50% losses but they managed to create a path to the objective for Soviet armor that was defended almost exclusively by dismounts.


    Was this something that represents a realistic use of a helicopter force or was it just fanciful scenario design?

    Each Army (a NATO corps) (and strictly speaking of Europe not Afghanistan) had 1 regiment of attack aviation and I think the next higher level did as well. Committing an entire regiment to one local attack seems quite fanciful.

  2. I did quite well by moving a platoon of BTRs past the tree line on the right flank, suppressing and reducing the buildings then clearing it out with the infantry.  I then moved the tanks up in box formation until one gets lased and pops smoke, I then moved off the road to the right and used the tree line as a bit of concealment got lased a few times which meant and automatic smoke screen.  I was able to use this to get my tanks on line to flank the BMPs, and I made quick work of them, I moved up the BTR platoon that was still behind the walled compound to provide infantry support for the tanks then assaulted trough the built up area with the tanks hitting all of the objectives and clearing out the infantry.  I never even used the BTR platoons on the left right road, I held them in reserve the whole time.


    Use your tanks as tanks use your BTRs only as local support for their infantry squads, if you try to use them as fighting vehicles you are going to have a bad day.

  3. Honestly, despite all of the rhetoric coming from all sides and pleas for peace, there is an actual unwillingness to do anything besides play blame game. The results are a lot like Jugoslavia, talks about talks, harsh words, all the while people die.

    As for the back story, what is the situation throughout the world? Meaning how much can NATO, mainly the U.S. afford to commit to Ukraine? Is there still a campaign against ISIS? What of GWOT? Or is Ukraine war happening in a vacuum? I saw written USMC invasion near Odessa or in Crimea, how was the massive land based (in Russia proper) ASM threat dealt with for sending ships into Black Sea?

  4. I think it depends on what point in the conflict you are speaking of. The earlier part, say April and May, the forces were a mix of local day laborers with sharp sticks (an exaggeration :)) and small groups of professional soldiers (in particular the ones in Slavyansk and Horlivka). The latter, AT A MINIMUM, contained Girkin's group that participated in the Crimean invasion. Many of his group were veterans from actions against Georgia, Chechnya, Moldova, and Croatia/Bosnia. Similarly, there were a couple of Cossack groups active at the very beginning that also had previous similar experiences. There are, of course, accusations that Russian military special forces were also involved as they were in Crimea, but I think there is definite room to argue against this position.So in the early stages there were a large number of what CMSF called "Uncons" and a very small number of what it called "Militia". The middle and current stage I would say the non military units are now all "Militia". The degree of competency of both groups obviously ranges from extremely poor to quite good.And yes, we do intend on releasing a Module that contains both Uncons and Militia.Steve

    I missed this post earlier, seems to me to be a quite fair assessment.

  5. The other thing that is just floating out there is the Baltic States. Their independence drives the Russians nuts, and they have black letter Article 5 treaty protection.  Nothing could possibly go wrong......

    Im Russian and live near the Baltic States, I am not driven nuts by this nor is anybody I know. I think this tends to be the Baltic perception more than reality.

  6. It was incorrectly always facing forward. In the process of fixing this, it seems the TC's ability to use the MG may have been borked.

    I would rather have an aesthetical abnormality than lose the ability to use a weapon system. :/

  7. As a side to Shasko's post, are what is being described as 'UnCon' really 'UnCon' ? I was under the impression this term meant ununiformed fighters fighting a guerrilla/insurgency campaign.  The forces being described are uniformed militia fighting a fairly conventional war with lines and territory being taken and lost.  In Shock Force there was a difference between Syrian Militia and UnCon.  But as is true this game is not modeled after the real situation.


    I'm interested to read the 17 page document though! 

  8. Yes, you need LOS and have a lazer designator to use precision rounds and they only come with the 152mm and 122mm artillery and 120mm mortars.


    Yes, I have used it unsuccessfully against M1A2s in that same battle as their laser warning sensor alerted them and they displaced to outside of my LOS before the impact.

  9. As we can see, there needed to be a significant provocation by the Assad regime to get the US onto the ground and make a game at all.Shock Force 2: the collapse of Saudi Arabia in a succession struggle, with the Iranians jumping in "to maintain regional stability", IS insurging in the north and NATO trying to secure the oilfields and keep them out of the hands of the Ayatollahs...

    I have no problem with BFCs scenario and enjoyed it vastly. I just see it claimed as an accurate prediction of the actual conflict in Syria by 3rd party writers a bit curious, that's all.

  10. This is not an attack at Battlefront, so please nobody take it as such.  I keep reading how Battlefront 'accurately predicted war in Syria'.  Other than there being a war in Syria I see very little in common with the backstory of the game and the actual war in Syria.  Pages 10-12 in the section titled "A Developers Conundrum" seems to point to Syria being chosen partly for gaming reasons.  Shock Force provided a great setting, though at some points I saw it as an Iraq war in Syrian skins, and I give great credit to not choosing a fictional OPFOR which was also mentioned as a possibility.


    I have read in more than one article including the headline posted earlier in this thread that war in Syria was predicted by Battlefront (I have not seen Steve say this himself , though I might have missed it) But to me, judging by the backstory of the scenario and the 2 pages discussing development of it - it seems to to be more of a coincidence that a civil war is occurring there than an accurate prediction of a NATO invasion of Syria following a state sponsored  dirty bomb attack polluting major cities of the West for hundreds of years. 


    If this has been brought up previously I'm sorry for beating a dead horse.

  11. I want to report that the same happened to me and my course of action was similar to Zipuli.  While not game breaking the company materializing out of nowhere among my units  who worked hard to get to that position was a bit frustrating.


    Edit: I also agree with his suggestion on a fix for it if it is deemed by developers in need of tweeking

  12. Isn't Stalingrad called Volgagrad these days. Of course Putin could change the name back again :D


    If BF extend the time period covered then a modern day Battle of Moscow in tjhe NATO win branch would be interesting, and could well be a Stalingrad like meat grinder continuing into the winter.


    In the meantime there are pssibilities for big city fights in urban centres such as Kharkov, Kiev, Mariapol etc. Lots of different types of battle that might be gamed within the context of this campaign.

    I know you are just making a joke, but for the record, the president of the Russian Federation doesn't have the authority to unilaterally change city names.

  13. Unless there is a "Belarussian spring" I dont see much changing. It's been four years since I visited. Minsk is like a mini Moscow. A lot of the streets are Russian named streets. Frunzesky(sic?) subway stop named after a famous Russian general. There is a Red Square. There is even a Gorky Park. Busts of Lenin are everywhere. They share a lot. And there is still a high security state. You cannot move to Minsk unless you have permission. The U.S. Embassy is only allowed a skeleton staff.

    Russian cheap gas subsidies, among other things, help keep Lukachenko in power. Uprisings have occurred but were brutally beat down. Last Dictatorhip is right.

    Minsk is nothing like Moscow. I'm not understanding the Frunze non-connection. He wasn't just a "Russian General" he was leader of the Minsk people's militia and the first elected leader of Beylorussian Soviet. Having the unfortunate experience of spending a lot of time in both cities I can assure you that Minsk is in no way a mini Moscow. I'm not sure of a red square in Minsk, I know there is a Victory Square, but the main square of ancient Rus cities was often "red square" at the time the word meant beautiful not red.

    Pskov is one of the many Russian cities with a Kremlin and there are statues of Lenin everywhere, this does not make Pskov a mini Moscow.

  14. My first impression is from the first mission of the Russian campaign - I didn't start small :) , I have found that the terrain and the way the scenario designer deployed the enemy in it are satisfyingly challenging.

    An impression that is of no consequence and doesn't matter in the slightest is that in the cemeteries on the territory of an Orthodox Church only people of the Western Christian, Jewish, and Communist faiths are interned. I'm Not sure I can enjoy this game with this travesty (this was sarcasm, relax)

    Enjoying my experience thus far.

  • Create New...