DreDay
-
Posts
477 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DreDay
-
-
7 hours ago, DougPhresh said:
I always thought it was a bit of an omission that the US has IBCTs but Ukraine and Russia had BTR units as their lightest formation.
That's real life though; I appreciate the CMBS team keeping things realistic like that.
2 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:Interesting and an eminently sensible concept for Russia to explore given the size of the place and the relatively low price of such vehicles.
The word on this side of the pond is that such OOB has less to do with Syria and more with Crimea-type scenarios (I.e. soft occupation). It is thought that more mobility and less armor is preferred under such conditions.
-
No need to apologize, friend. Your input is always welcomed! Just FYI, here is one of the articles quoting Shoigu on this. He had actually said that the minimum was 120hr/yr; not 140. It still seems pretty high for a minimum, as in the Soviet VVS - that was pretty much the average annual flight time (during peace time of course).
https://ria.ru/defense_safety/20161222/1484341140.html
-
Welcome back. I tend to agree; I did not see anything resembling a Pantsir there (although the resolution makes it difficult to say for sure. Based on what I've read - SAA Pnatsirs are positioned around Damascus to protect key installations and political leadership.
-
1 minute ago, Rinaldi said:
I agree. I follow the principle of 1 up rule in scenario design: If a scenario has the Americans at Veteran with a sprinkling of Crack troops, I make the Russians Regular with a sprinkling of Veteran. As a rule in CMBS I generally make both the Russians and the Americans have slightly above average motivation, with natural deviancies - unless the scenario can explain why a unit would be demoralized (re: heavy losses).
I make American leadership generally uniformly above average; jokes about Butterbars aside I think its safe to say that NCO and Officers are equally professional. My view on the Russian NCO and Officer corps may be antiquated and outdated in this regard but I generally make Russian Officers above average with a sprinkling of deviances but keep Russian NCOs as-are. The results are usually satisfying.
Good to know. I usually follow the same conventions, except that I tend to make recon/snipers elite in order to reflect their special skills and training.
I am not sure how to feel about Russian NCOs. At this point IRL they are all professionals with appropriate training; as opposed to the old Soviet model.
Perhaps our Ukrainian friends can enlighten us on the NCO selection process in ZSU?
-
Ok, so several people on this forum have complained that we barely ever talk about the game itself any more. It's a fair point; and as someone who has gone of on a tangent more than a few times, I feel my share of responsibility to get us back on track.
So here is my question - it appears to me that both Russian and Ukrainian units in CMBS have same (very low) default training and morale; while Americans have much higher skills. Now I agre with Americans have top training. However it seems to me that Russians should be somewhere between Ukrainians and US. Generally speaking, Russians spend more time in training and maneuvers than their ZSU counterparts. They should also be represented only by professional soldiers (per Russian laws) and their officers and NCOs should have slightly higher ratings due to the more extensive training that they recieve.
This is obviously only relevant for regular units - airborne, marines, SOF are a whole different story.
This is not meant to insult our Ukrainian members for a second - your guys have proven that they fight hard and with valor; I just want to make the game a little more realistic and challenging.
What do you guys think?
-
On July 22, 2017 at 11:46 AM, IMHO said:
@Sgt.Squarehead, and just to be precise - average flight time for an average RUS pilot is not particularly impressive as well. Significantly higher than UKR but still times less than US/UK practice. The exact figures were deemed confidential when they reduced the standards
I believe that the latest report by Shoigu had mentioned that all Russian combat pilots flew a minimum of 140 hr/yr in order to qualify as "combat-ready". Are those the same figures that you are referring to; or do you have access to more confidential numbers?
-
6 minutes ago, IMHO said:
AFAIK their main concerns as of now are:
-
Playing court politics
- Preventing any possible court coup against Kim.
-
Checking Chinese influence so that Kim does not wake up one morning with no country to rule
- Making sure an unquestionably difficult and risky time travel from mid-20th century into 21st does not put Kim's / NK aristocracy rule in danger.
-
Enriching themselves as much as possible. They're one of the most active players in NK foreign trade and internal "privatization"
Good points. All of it seems fair and probable.
-
Playing court politics
-
31 minutes ago, IMHO said:
- How does it offset economic losses due to negative effects to many a leading SEA economies? Russia will pay its hefty share of losses through commodities decline. To earn a buck yet loose a hundred looks like a bad trade to me.
-
Labor market effect:
- Right now Northerners don't have many options - not everyone welcomes them. Given a choice why will they go to Russia? Average salary in Russia is 50% less than in China and a nightmare compared to SK? Why Russia over countries much closer geographically and culturally?
- To make a dent in Russian labor prices there should be millions of Koreans - how likely such a mass migration?
- So far the deal is Russia earns the monies from cheap Korean labor and bears almost no costs of supporting the families. In a scenario of mass-migrations a hard working Korean husband will need to spend RUSSIAN budget to support the family in Russia, not a fraction of it while his family stays in NK. The case of labor migration from Asian republic of former Soviet Union shows the prevailing pattern of keeping families home and bringing only those who can work to Russia.
- When Northerners live in their dormitories in Russia and venture outside just to earn an extra buck or entertain oneself with a MacDonald's treat you actually have minimal cultural interaction between two worlds. If whole families are resettled you have massive effort of bringing huge number of people "up to speed". Banking, different medicine, (still) much higher educational standards at school etc. That's immensely expensive IMO
- If NK workers do manage to have an effect on local labor market it means the prices will fall for EVERYONE. Even for millions of Russians who are barely able to provide for themselves and their families. What about this cost?
So I think the equation for a "cheap and hard working NK labourer" works just as long as he earns a Russian salary against NK costs, there're not so many of them to actually affect the overall labour market and there're no massive costs to the state finances associated with resettlement. Again I'd use the behaviour of Tajik, Kyrgyz and Uzbek labourers after the Russian rouble crash as a historical proxy. So many of them left because they can earn more working in Middle East.
1. I see South Korea and Japan as major financial loosers in such scenario; past droops in the GDP of these two countries have not correlated with similar effects in Russia, AFAIK...
2.1 You might want to double check your numbers. The salaries for Russian and Chinese middle class are roughly comparable; hover China has a huge agrarian underclass that lives in extreme poverty. I don't see how the Chines would want to artificially grow their population before such gap is resolved
2.2 I would say several hundred skill NK citizens would already make a dent.
3.2 I am picturing a scenario where entire families would move to peace and stability offer by Russia. The example of Central Asian migrant workers is not really applicable here.
5.2 Again, we are talking about educated middle class families; besides Russia already has Korean diasporas that have assimilated quite fine and live a productive and fruitful life
6.2 Given the return to Russian population decline that was brought on by the crisis in 1990s; Russians are in a desperate need of "quality" migrant inflow.
I have to disagree with your comparison of Central Asian gastarbaiters to the Koreans. Those are totally different calttures and societies; both have a lot to offer; but while Cental Asian laborers are comoditized, middle class Koreans offer highly needed skills and capabilities.
-
7 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
Why on earth would China or Russia possibly want to help?
I guess what we are saying (if I understand my fellow forum members correctly) is that they could be willing help in order to improve the relations with US and Japan (which we have not brought into this discussion yet). Unfortunately though, our current diplomatic shortsightedness; prevents them from taking such initiatives. Instead they are asking us to "Show them the money" before they move a finger.
-
Fair enough. I believe that Frunze was supposed to train its cadets to become regimental and brigade commanders; but I guess you are right - they could only be promoted to senior officer ranks upon graduation.
I can't speak for SVR or GRU either, but it seems to me that PDRK counter-intel was a lot more concearned with the Southeners rather than their Northen comrades.
-
10 minutes ago, IMHO said:
Sorry, I can't quite get to the point
You mean an organized mass-migration of North Koreans in peace-time or as the result of a major war?
Mass migration of skilled and educated Koreans as a result of humanitarian crisis caused by war. Again - think of Armenians that fled to Russia to escape pogroms in late 80s; I hope you'll agree that they have proven their worth to the Russian society.
-
8 minutes ago, IMHO said:
-
Nope, all Kims like to keep the top brass on very short leash Actually the first purge that Kim-the-Oldest executed some decades ago was shooting everyone suspected of harbouring sympathies to Soviet Union. And then NK was TOTALLY depended on Soviet Union yet the latter was able to save the lives of very few. And those who perished were literally personal friends of many years of Soviet officials formulating and executing Soviet Union's policy to NK. Actually having an education in Russia or China is a detriment to one's career in high echelons of NK's aristocracy. Lower levels of Army command - yes, science - yes, but not the political leadership. Kims are obsessed with total loyalty.
I admit that I am a little behind the curve on this, but back in the 90's there were dozens of DPRK senior officers in the Frunze military academy. Are you saying that they have all been purged now? Then who exactly has replaced them? I might be mistaken, but I have always imgained NK to be a paradise for SVR and GRU "illegals".
-
Nope, all Kims like to keep the top brass on very short leash
-
8 minutes ago, IMHO said:
- Russia can get as many of NK's gastarbeiters as it wants even now. Actually Russia's considered the most wanted destination inside NK. NK workers are kept in a kind of "labor camps with comforts" in other countries whereas in Russia they live just like other menial workers from abroad. As close to normal life as possible for a cheap unskilled labour. Entertainment, food, shops, ability to do extra work beyond their main employer if they wish to do so etc.
- Overall influence on Russian economy of any serious trouble in NK will be highly negative. China's a significant buyer of Russia's raw materials so if Chinese economy's in trouble so does Russian's. And China will be significantly affected.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but the current generation of NK gastarbaiters are just low-skilled seasonal workers; aren't they? I am talking about a senerio where whole middle class families migrate there (sort of like many Armenians did in the late 80s). I think that you know as well as I do, how highly Russians value educated Koreans for their work-ethic, discipline, and accountability.
-
11 minutes ago, IMHO said:
- Thanks a lot.
-
Just as a background Russia has limited influence over NK - there's no trade to speak of. There are some financial flows from Russia to NK but they're not so significant to be a critical leverage. Off the cuff estimation would be single digits of their hard currency inflows. The only influence Russia has in its arsenal is the fact that it still speaks to NK and there are precious few who do that nowadays
That is correct, however let's also not forget that Russia has huge influence over NK senior officer staff (most of whom are Russian-trained, and some might be Russian-financed). Those are not the type of cadre whose opinion Kim can afford to ignore.
-
5 minutes ago, DreDay said:
Please discard
-
8 minutes ago, IMHO said:
-
What's wrong with China benefitting from a useful pawn especially when the US is trying to steal one from them?
- Chinese establishment hates the guts of Young Kim.
-
China has always seen NK's nuclear program as a significant detriment to its interests and AFAIK China's never provided critical support for NK's missile programs in anything beyond tactical (and that was many decades ago). Or otherwise NK would have ICBM by now It's just China differentiates between propping a state and propping weapons programs while US sees a black-and-white picture. May be not least because serious trouble in NK will be Chinese, Japanese, SK's problem - not US's.
That is precisely right, PRC absolutely does not need an all out war, resulting in a major refugee and humanitarian crisis at their doorsteps. Even more so, as it will bring South Korea (read US) right next to their borders.
Russia, on the other hand, can potentially benefit in such scenario; as their border is much easier to control and they can actually use an influx of Korean refugees (who are highly valued by Russian employers).
-
What's wrong with China benefitting from a useful pawn especially when the US is trying to steal one from them?
-
Great points gentlemen! I happen to believe that China and Russia can covertly convince DPRK to diescalate their nuclear ramp-up. Unfortunately I am not an expert on PRC; but Russia might have done us that favor in spirit of normalizing our mutual relations (in fact they had originally joined us in criticizing Kim's first missle trials). Unfortunately though, our POTUS (whose foreign policy goals I actually happen to like); could not keep from acting like a used car salesman with his "make concessions first, and then we might talk"...so here we are
-
It was started by a popular Crimean blogger (colonelcasad.livejournal.com) who found himself in the epicenter of Russian takeover in Feb of 2014. There was a press release by Simferopol PR agent stating that a group of armed man had entered the airport, but they were not interfering with flights and acting politely towards the staff; to which colonelcasad had noted that many other strategic installations are going to be visited by such "polite people" that night.
-
You do know where that name came from, right?
-
You mean the Russian reporter?
-
I just don't see it
Please lmk if you can find it when you sober up. Skål!
-
@John Kettler Just out of curiosity - how do you filter your news sources? I ask because you seem to have the most random collection of reference material that I have ever seen. I really apprciate the effort and the amount of time that you dedicate to this forum; but at what point do you apply critical thinking and decide that perhaps a source is not all that reliable and might not be worth basing your theories on?
-
@Armorgunner Enjoy yourself friend. No need to worry about it now. But if you do find those pictures, make sure that you hold on to them; they would be worth a fortune! Cheers!
-
45 minutes ago, Armorgunner said:
The pantsir, the Lorry/truck version. Is on paper the most effective close air Defence in the world. But after the US cruisemissile strike at the syrian airbase a few months back. When there were pictures of destroyed pantsirs, got me woundering a bit of their irl effectivenes? Is it just a paper tiger? The US told them an hour or two, in advance. That there would be a strike. So the only reason to keep the Pantsirs there, and not moving them away. Should have been to test their effectiveness, and that was not very good. Since almost all cruisemissiles hit their torgets. And theese were slow moving Tomahawks, not supersonic ones.
Wait...what? Where did you see the pictures of destroyed Pantsirs? AFAIK, Russian Pantsirs are stationed in Hmeimim in support of Russian assets there. The Tomahawk strikes had targeted Syrian assets in Shirat (sp?); that's a completely different region. Did I miss something?
Russia Light Infantry
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Perhaps they were trying to follow the footsteps of Russian Federation's first president, who had tried something similar (albeit with a much smaller charge) in his younger years?