Combat Mission Shanghai Pact: Ring of Fire 2021

[LUCASWILLEN05]

36 minutes ago, Erwin said:

"...it would take a year or two at least to train and deploy a big enough army..."  To think like that is almost the definition of "fighting the last war".   Evidence is that the next war will be very very fast, using cyberwar to cripple national infrastructure with the primary target being homeland society and objective being mass panic and disintegration of community.  And CMBS demonstrates that combat will be lethal in the way that WW1 shocked the world with its slaughter. 

The best deterrent is the knowledge by the decision-makers that in such a war, their nation's best troops and equipment will be destroyed leaving the "empires" of Russia, China and US militarily weak with low morale and easy pickings for smaller regional powers and uncon forces like ISIS.

Depends how we interpret "very fast" Combat very probably will be very high speed but that does not necessarily mean it will be a war of short duration. Like WW1 the initial battles may vbe fought over a few weeks or months Casualties and munitions usage will be very high.as was the case in 1914.  What happens next if here is no decisive result, no political solution and he commanders are to scared of the consequences of going nuclear? This may be a situation that will have to be faced in the next war after the extremely fast, highly lethal and violent opening battles. Both sides are going to have similar technological capabilities in a Ring of Fire type scenario just as both sides had similar capabilities in August 1914

Then we have the same problem faced in 1915. You need to spend some time recruiting and training new armies. Anyway, the whole point of Ring of Fire is to show what he land element of such a war might look like and how commanders might try to deal with such a difficult and lethal combat environment - and to show why embarking on such a war in the real world could be such a bad idea.

What we would see in ROF, unlike CMBS is he most up to date equipment of the US, Russia and China going up against each other in an even more intense combat environment than Black Sea (even drone hacking and similar might be included) It would also be in a theater never yet covered by Battlefront even if they only decided to cover the first six months initially. Covering an extended conflict would further be a vehicle to add new equipment coming on line in the real world within the expected time frame.

[Artkin]

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

easy pickings for smaller regional powers and uncon forces like ISIS.

[Erwin]

In terms of a game, however appealing that would be, if we can't do Israeli vs Arab conflicts from 50 years ago due to politics, I doubt this near future theme would be allowed by the powers that be.  Just my 2 cents...

 

[Vanir Ausf B]

BFC likes plausible near-future settings. This is Harry Turtledove territory. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't see BFC bitting.

[Kinophile]

2 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

BFC likes plausible near-future settings. This is Harry Turtledove territory. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't see BFC bitting.

HT on steroids. 

[Combatintman]

On ‎6‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 10:42 AM, kinophile said:

UK would not be anywhere near this, just saying. They're very much a regional power now, with some highly limited and platform specific strategic reach. 

You forget that there is a battalion of those terribly fierce Nepalese chaps in Brunei ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Forces_Brunei

[LUCASWILLEN05]

12 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

BFC likes plausible near-future settings. This is Harry Turtledove territory. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I don't see BFC bitting.

War between the US and China is in fact perfectly plausible now - as is war with Russia. While Ring of Fire is certainly the worst case (essentially WW3)

Chinese generals certainly think China will at some point go to war with the US

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/29/us-china-war-increasingly-a-reality-chinese-army-official-says.html

As do very senior figures ih the Trump Administration

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-china-war-be-end-of-life-earth-nuclear-weapons-apocalypse-steve-bannon-donald-trump-white-house-a7561821.html

Russia, being currently hostile to the US and one of the most senior members of the SCO could very easily be a hostile belligerent in such a conflict.

As for how such a war might start there are plenty of hot spots in the region hat could initiate crisis That is why I consider "Ring of Fire" to be an appropriate title It is also a passing reference to the volcanic Ring of Fire surrounding the Pacific Rim In geopolitical terms one might also consider the Pacific Rim to be a Ring of Fire 

http://apjjf.org/-Kimie-Hara/2211/article.html

All it could take is a mishandled crisis and a 1914 like situation may develop, running out of control before anyon can stop it

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1140.html

For a back story I would therefore suggest that the situation leading to war is modeled along similar lines to the July 1914 Crisis.The conflict is preceded by increasing tensons generated from the current disputes and perhaps trade wars  Nobody rely expects or desires war in 2021 but a crisis develops in, let's say the South China Sea. At the same time a crisis erupts between India and Pakistan. Throw in one or two chance events and the entire region explodes into all out war. North Korea, backed by China invades South Korea. Russia and Japan are soon forced to enter the war . And here we have it. World War 3

[LUCASWILLEN05]

4 minutes ago, Combatintman said:

You forget that there is a battalion of those terribly fierce Nepalese chaps in Brunei ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Forces_Brunei

It would be nice to see the Gurkhas as well as Australians and New Zealanders. British heavy armour would be very limited, presumably fighting on other fronts but we can use Australian ad New Zealand armoured vehicles as the next best thing 

[LongLeftFlank]

My own six yuan (aka, the "Six Nos") on this topic (fwiw).

1. NOT MUCH NEW. A 'land war in Asia' is frankly not going to offer up notably more interesting wargaming, tactics or exotic equipment than you can get today in Ukraine or the Mideast.

2.  INCONCEIVABLE!  Outside the Korean peninsula, as discussed above, no modern mechanized forces will be clashing in Oriental Asia in any foreseeable future.  A Taiwan invasion will be repelled in the water or not at all; America will not start WW3 to eject the PLA. And to me, Chinese adventurism in Central Asia (CM: SILK ROAD) sounds like modules for CMBS /CMSF, not its own game.

Social breakdown (likely triggered by pandemic) followed by civil war in China, with foreign intervention -- basically turning the clock back to 1900 -- is about as plausible as I can think of, but that still seems pretty far fetched. Why not just do a TWILIGHT 2000 mod set for CMBS (you'd need horses I suppose)? or else just go full WORLD WAR Z?

3.  PAPER TIGERS.  Budgetary scaremongering aside, there is no serious mandate in any Asian nation to build a land army capable of doing anything more than controlling its own population and secondarily, deterring theoretical invaders long enough to revert to guerrilla warfare.  This is the CMSF conundrum:  BLUE kicks RED's arse on any level playing field. And we know most CM players want mostly mech fights, not asymetrical.

4.  BAD LEADERSHIP.  Since about 1985, the core competencies of all Asian army officer corps, other than Japan and the Koreas, and (partly) Vietnam, have been: (1) golf course development, and (2) land (s)peculation. Warfighting comes a distant third. Skimming enlistee pay, hiring out troops as laborers, selecting NCOs as henchmen not for competence, etc. all hollow out the force beneath them.  And as for readiness, ha!

Also, such combat experience as they've had has been in hazardous, unproductive and unprofitable counterinsurgency ops. And that's just the poorer states (Burma, Cambodia, Philippines), who don't field or fund tank divisions.

5.  DEMOGRAPHICS.  East Asia is no longer the spawning ground of screaming yellow hordes, sorry white boys (neither is Russia, btw, unless you count Chechens). The countries who can afford to field modern mech are also middle class dominated, declining birthrate societies. While the prolific countries can't even secure their own territory using peasant light infantry.

6.  DEMILITARIZED SOCIETIES. The hardy, heroic 8th Route Army veterans of yore are dead or in dotage, so are the NVA 308th dac cong. With the possible exception of Vietnam, social views across Asia have (quietly) reverted to traditional suspicion of soldiers as dissolute, oafish bandits, not selfless guardians of the nation and people. Almost nobody without a family connection (and guanxi) puts their (only) kid in the military.  Simply put, a military career is no longer considered honorable, useful, or a route to social advancement in Asia, except for the very poor. And peasants may be hardy but are lousy material for a high tech force.

[Erwin]

"Why not just do a TWILIGHT 2000 mod set for CMBS (you'd need horses I suppose)? or else just go full WORLD WAR Z? "

Everyone will be delighted to know that there ALREADY is a TWILIGHT 2000 mod pack and scenario for CMSF. 

"Almost nobody without a family connection (and guanxi) puts their (only) kid in the military."    Confused re your intent...   perhaps "...WITH a family connection..."?

Otherwise, completely agree with LLF's assessment.   It would make for an entertaining "Sci fantasy" CM title - and that is fine, why not?   But never a sim of RL situation due to above points and primarily the logistical challenges of projecting significant power such a long way away (over water).  And politically even more sensitive than an Israel vs Arabs title set 50 years ago.  THAT would be an even bigger seller.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Let's have CM:SF II first.....There's plenty of fight left in that theatre and if Central Asia is part of the deal it could rapidly tie in with the existing CM:BS.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

My own six yuan (aka, the "Six Nos") on this topic (fwiw).

1. NOT MUCH NEW. A 'land war in Asia' is frankly not going to offer up notably more interesting wargaming, tactics or exotic equipment than you can get today in Ukraine or the Mideast.

2.  INCONCEIVABLE!  Outside the Korean peninsula, as discussed above, no modern mechanized forces will be clashing in Oriental Asia in any foreseeable future.  A Taiwan invasion will be repelled in the water or not at all; America will not start WW3 to eject the PLA. And to me, Chinese adventurism in Central Asia (CM: SILK ROAD) sounds like modules for CMBS /CMSF, not its own game.

Social breakdown (likely triggered by pandemic) followed by civil war in China, with foreign intervention -- basically turning the clock back to 1900 -- is about as plausible as I can think of, but that still seems pretty far fetched. Why not just do a TWILIGHT 2000 mod set for CMBS (you'd need horses I suppose)? or else just go full WORLD WAR Z?

3.  PAPER TIGERS.  Budgetary scaremongering aside, there is no serious mandate in any Asian nation to build a land army capable of doing anything more than controlling its own population and secondarily, deterring theoretical invaders long enough to revert to guerrilla warfare.  This is the CMSF conundrum:  BLUE kicks RED's arse on any level playing field. And we know most CM players want mostly mech fights, not asymetrical.

4.  BAD LEADERSHIP.  Since about 1985, the core competencies of all Asian army officer corps, other than Japan and the Koreas, and (partly) Vietnam, have been: (1) golf course development, and (2) land (s)peculation. Warfighting comes a distant third. Skimming enlistee pay, hiring out troops as laborers, selecting NCOs as henchmen not for competence, etc. all hollow out the force beneath them.  And as for readiness, ha!

Also, such combat experience as they've had has been in hazardous, unproductive and unprofitable counterinsurgency ops. And that's just the poorer states (Burma, Cambodia, Philippines), who don't field or fund tank divisions.

5.  DEMOGRAPHICS.  East Asia is no longer the spawning ground of screaming yellow hordes, sorry white boys (neither is Russia, btw, unless you count Chechens). The countries who can afford to field modern mech are also middle class dominated, declining birthrate societies. While the prolific countries can't even secure their own territory using peasant light infantry.

6.  DEMILITARIZED SOCIETIES. The hardy, heroic 8th Route Army veterans of yore are dead or in dotage, so are the NVA 308th dac cong. With the possible exception of Vietnam, social views across Asia have (quietly) reverted to traditional suspicion of soldiers as dissolute, oafish bandits, not selfless guardians of the nation and people. Almost nobody without a family connection (and guanxi) puts their (only) kid in the military.  Simply put, a military career is no longer considered honorable, useful, or a route to social advancement in Asia, except for the very poor. And peasants may be hardy but are lousy material for a high tech force.

Then why do both the Chinese and the US think they will be fighting each other. Regarding equipment China has been modernizing their ground forces. The Type 99 n service 2001 and an update version the Type 99A in service 2014. This is considered a 3rd Generation tank 

Then there are Indian and Pakistani developments - the Arjun and Al Khaid respectively. India also purchased he T90S. Pakistan uses the T80U, India also fields the Nag ATGM which is their own fire and forget weapon comparable to Javelin. China seems to be developing similar weapons the HG-12http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/threads/hj-12-top-attack-atgm.62027/

While many lesser Asian States won't have weapons anywhere near as advanced as this the major powers like India, Pakistan, South Korea and China do have advanced technology. No longer are we going to have a situation where top attack capability is limited to the US and UK. US enemies will be able to attack the M1A2 with this capability

Sure, the smaller Asian nations will be under equipped and often their armies are no doubt  poorly led in many cases. In a Ring of Fire scenario many of them could be overrun rather quickly in a PLAN Blitzkrieg if Beijing were minded to to it In fact the early phase of the war could be a 21st Century version of 1940. Assuming India sides with the US it is quite possible a large portion of India might be overrun early in the war. However, our scenario might well see US forces rushed to India eventually halting he Chinese/Pakistani invasion. India then becomes a major theater of land combat during the war. Something similar could happen in South Korea though the addition of Chinese armies and the proximity of China could be sufficient for the conquest of South Korea. Most or all of South East Asia probably will be overrun in the opening battles. Maybe China and Russia attempt amphibious invasions of Taiwan and Japan or perhaps just major Dieppe style raids but these will almost certainly be failures thanks to the intervention of the US 7th Fleet

After the opening battles the major land fighting happens in India fo the most part. Perhaps both sides enjoy some success gainng and losing ground over the next couple of years. Eventually however he US Coalition builds up large enough armies for the final, decisive battles. As with the Allies during WW2 US control of the sea is probably going to be a decisive factor permitting the US to choose he time and place for amphibious landings rather like WW2. Who eventually wins or whether he war ends in a stalemate is a question I would leave open

As for Chinese motives to get involved in a war against the US here are a few

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/04/seven_reasons_china_will_star_a_war_by_2017.html

Most likely however a near future great power conflict in the region will be by accident, not by design. Much as WW1 started more or less by accident. Nobody in he summer of 1914 though war was likely but it happened.Maybe the same happens in the Ring of Fire scenario

 

 

[LUCASWILLEN05]

Indeed 1914 is the most likely model for a war like this on the Pacific Rim

http://www.cityam.com/245098/south-china-sea-powder-keg-disturbing-echoes-1914

http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21598956-thoughtful-look-asias-dangerous-flashpoint-troubled-waters

Perhaps the flashpoint will be the Spratley Islands which brings in several regional powers such as China, Taiwan and Vietnam as well as the potential o drag n he US (international shipping routes.

Later crises can develop in Korea, over the Sengaku Isands and between India and Pakistan escalating the conflict towards a World War. Working out a back story for  huge conflagration really is not all that hard

[Vanir Ausf B]

11 hours ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

War between the US and China is in fact perfectly plausible now - as is war with Russia.

Yes, but such wars would look much different than what you are presenting, which sounds like a game of Risk. You posted an article about how a war with China might play out. Go back and read it.

Edited May 7, 2017 by Vanir Ausf B

[LongLeftFlank]

1. I carefully exempted navies and low intensity proxy wars from my assessment. Sea conflicts, and China funding insurgents to give itself leverage over neighbors are both highly plausible (as a Philippines resident I worry more about an NPA resurgence than about Moro headchoppers). I also fully expect a second, though brief, Korean war and give a Taiwan invasion attempt a 50/50. None of these are existential threats to superpowers that trigger WW3.

2. Generals and the MIC only get budgets for new toys by conjuring plausible potential threats. Preparation for war doesn't always lead to it absent other drivers.

3. Unlike other places and times, the underlying conditions for mechanized land warfare on roughly equal terms between advanced armies do not exist in East Asia, save in Korea. Chinese invade India? For what purpose are these forces unleashed?

There are no land hungry peasants to give lebensraum, no oil,  no sympathetic minorities to rescue, no ancient irridentist claims. The Chinese can and are building their Co-Prosperity Sphere without remilitarizing their generally unmartial, inward-focused society. And there are no other candidates. Indo-Pak, that's different, but also CMSF material.

[Vanir Ausf B]

24 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

For what purpose are these forces unleashed?

To provide inspiration and material for wargame developers. Thoughtful of them

[Erwin]

"Chinese invade India? For what purpose are these forces unleashed?"

That one makes some sense in that the Chinese are eager to gain a foothold on the other side of the huge Himalayan barrier.  They are making large investments in Bhutan - the Chinese just built the largest Buddha (and temple/visitor center) in the world outside Thimphu as a "gift".  That will draw vast numbers of Chinese tourists to augment the very large numbers of Chinese already there.  India is correct to be concerned about all this and keep a very close eye on things.  Bhutan is very poor and quite desperate for money, so quite amenable to Chinese overtures.

In case there is anyone who still doesn't know where Bhutan is:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bhutan/@28.3970822,88.1457263,6.63z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x375b92a573c595cf:0xbb0cac652836bcda!8m2!3d27.514162!4d90.433601

And yes, you may ask.  Whatever did happen to Tibet?

Edited May 8, 2017 by Erwin

[LongLeftFlank]

But human civilization has moved on from (a) existential struggle for pasturage/ farmland (the legendary fertile black soil of Bhutan, lol?); to (b) mercantilist struggle for raw resources to fuel smokestack industries; to (c) competition to export to global  consumer markets. This last is not seized by armoured columns; rather the reverse.

I used to believe that WW3 would start in Siberia, with China prying away the resources from aging, declining Russia. But here again, they find it easier to just buy what they need. And if the price goes up, there are plenty of other willing providers.

Mad Max/ZeroHedge fever dreams aside, humans are getting better and better at digging stuff out of the ground for cheaper and cheaper.

Edited May 8, 2017 by LongLeftFlank

[LUCASWILLEN05]

8 hours ago, Erwin said:

"Chinese invade India? For what purpose are these forces unleashed?"

That one makes some sense in that the Chinese are eager to gain a foothold on the other side of the huge Himalayan barrier.  They are making large investments in Bhutan - the Chinese just built the largest Buddha (and temple/visitor center) in the world outside Thimphu as a "gift".  That will draw vast numbers of Chinese tourists to augment the very large numbers of Chinese already there.  India is correct to be concerned about all this and keep a very close eye on things.  Bhutan is very poor and quite desperate for money, so quite amenable to Chinese overtures.

In case there is anyone who still doesn't know where Bhutan is:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bhutan/@28.3970822,88.1457263,6.63z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x375b92a573c595cf:0xbb0cac652836bcda!8m2!3d27.514162!4d90.433601

And yes, you may ask.  Whatever did happen to Tibet?

Indeed China and India have fought before in 1962.

China also has pretty good relations with Pakistan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–Pakistan_relations

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/world/china-watch/business/china-rebuilds-port-in-pakistan/

There is always the possibility of China and India combining in an attack on India. In gaming terms including Chinese, Indian and Pakistani forces allows for a good range of gaming possibilities. There are a couple of rater good techno thrillers written by an Indian author by the name of Vivek Ahuja. The first, Chimera is about a Sino Indian War in 2014. The second, Fenix is set in the same timeline a year or two later and involves an Indo-Pakistani War.

As well as the WW3 timeline I suggested Ring of Fire would also be usable for the gaming of regional conflicts like this which might not be viable Combat Mission titles in themselves. Other examples might include Korea nd Taiwan. Although a Sino Russian war is highly unlikely just now that also could be gamed. There would be so many different options potentially available under this title

[LUCASWILLEN05]

8 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

But human civilization has moved on from (a) existential struggle for pasturage/ farmland (the legendary fertile black soil of Bhutan, lol?); to (b) mercantilist struggle for raw resources to fuel smokestack industries; to (c) competition to export to global  consumer markets. This last is not seized by armoured columns; rather the reverse.

I used to believe that WW3 would start in Siberia, with China prying away the resources from aging, declining Russia. But here again, they find it easier to just buy what they need. And if the price goes up, there are plenty of other willing providers.

Mad Max/ZeroHedge fever dreams aside, humans are getting better and better at digging stuff out of the ground for cheaper and cheaper.

There are many different flashpoints for a major regional conflict or a WW3 situation within the region While few, if any people want war the danger is of a 1914 type crisis.A crisis or a combination of two or three almost concurrent crises develops and runs out of control much as the July 1914 Crisis did.

A war of the sort I suggest for Ring of Fire will not be a deliberate choice even though many regional powers are preparing for war in the real world. It will rather be the result of chance, accident and miscalculation. China may have territorial designs but there is unlikely to be a nefarious plan for regional empire building. There does not have to be such a plan. There are the Chinese claims along the border with India, along he Vietnamese border, in the South China Sea (Spratley and Paracel Islands), on Taiwan and the Sengaku Islands dispute. I see he Spratley Islands as being one of the most likely and dangerous flashpoints as a conflict here involves a number of regional powers including Taiwan and Vietnam as well as China and has the potential to pull the US into war with China. Conflict over resources is certainly at the root of the Spratley Islands dispute.

The back story to Ring of Fire could very well  begin with a crisis over the Spratley Isands and naval warfare in the South China Sea. With China at war with Vietnam a Chinese land invasion of that nation is certainly believable - the two countries have fought before. It also brings China into war with Taiwan over their mutual claims in the South China Sea.

Japan and the United States can be brought into the conflict through their attempts to protect he international shipping routes through the South China Sea via the Malacca Straits.

North Korea enters the war when Kim Jong Un takes advantage of US attention on the war with China (and China might wel encourage North Korea to enter the war) to attack South Korea particularly with Chinese support.

India and Pakistan become involved perhaps due to another Mumbai style attack traced back to Pakistan. China supports its ally Pakistan and both mount a combined invasion of India.

Russia enters the war latter, perhaps due to a crisis in the Middle East or Eastern Europe. In RoF however we are only interested in the Pacific Rim/Indian Ocean Theater of WW3 - and a conflagration like this would clearly be a World War. The reason Russia would be included is so we can play with the T14 Armata :-) Also later in the war here are possibilities around the Lehman Doctrine idea involving a US landing in Siberia to seize Russian bases there and to threaten an eventual invasion of China from the north

 

 

 

[LUCASWILLEN05]

By the way thee is a very good novel published by Jeff Head entitled Dragon's Fury centered around a war between the US and China starting circa 2005. While there are some detailed tactical ground fights most of the detailed action coves the naval battles and the rest is att war room level. Nevertheless a very good and thought provoking read

[LongLeftFlank]

"Attention! Your attention, please! A newsflash has this moment arrived from the Malabar front. Our forces in South India have won a glorious victory. I am authorized to say that the action we are now reporting may well bring the war within measurable distance of its end."

Sorry, all this is fantasy. There is no analogy between 1914 Europe, with 1000 years of dynastic intermarriage, irridentism and revanchism creating huge wealthy provinces claimed by multiple neighbors (Poland, Alsace, Savoy), and marginal Chinese claims on additional patches of mountain wastes.

Even if border wars do occur, a la Indo Pak or Iran Iraq, they do not result in full mobilization, blitzkrieg, grand battles of annihilation followed by capture of the capital and 50 BRPs / 7 bonus armies for control of Eastasia (or was it Eurasia?). Still less do they trigger WW3, or Armageddon.

They result in border adjustments followed either by brutal ethnic cleansing and recolonisation, or decades of guerrilla warfare abetted by the resentful loser a la Kashmir. Or withdrawal of the bloodied aggressor. Meanwhile the West goes 'tsk tsk', and sends guns and Hans Blix.

India basically wiped out the frontline Pakistani army in their 1971 war. The roads to Islamabad and Karachi were wide open (the former defended only by an air force maintenance unit led by the father of a university roommate). Except the Indians realized what would happen to them if they actually (re)occupied Pakistan, and happily let the UN broker a cease fire.

[LongLeftFlank]

... Btw, sorry Lucas, I am being a little shrill. Not trying to go all JasonC on your blueskying ideas here, all in fun I hope.

On the other hand, especially now that I live and work in Asia, I have big trouble seeing faceless hordes of... well, Asiatics. And Americans shouldn't either.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

31 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

... Btw, sorry Lucas, I am being a little shrill. Not trying to go all JasonC on your blueskying ideas here, all in fun I hope.

On the other hand, especially now that I live and work in Asia, I have big trouble seeing faceless hordes of... well, Asiatics. And Americans shouldn't either.

That is ok. The point is a lot of people are thinking a war between the US and China is a very possible near future scenario and there are good reasons for thinking this. We certainly would not want to portray the PLA or for that matter the Russians as a faceless horde, Rather the Shanghai Pact in Ring of Fire should be portrayed as a well equipped and cunning opponent.

We might explore possibilities such as the effect of tactical hacking, in game terms I think that would be best handled in a similar abstract manner to the way the game handles electronic warfare. The new weapons systems such as the T-14 Armata and the proliferation of top attack ATGMs must also be represented in ROF. How would the M1A2 fare against the HJ-12 for example? The US no longer has a monopoly on ATGM top attack capability and that is going to pose some difficult challenges

 

[LUCASWILLEN05]

1 hour ago, LongLeftFlank said:

"Attention! Your attention, please! A newsflash has this moment arrived from the Malabar front. Our forces in South India have won a glorious victory. I am authorized to say that the action we are now reporting may well bring the war within measurable distance of its end."

Sorry, all this is fantasy. There is no analogy between 1914 Europe, with 1000 years of dynastic intermarriage, irridentism and revanchism creating huge wealthy provinces claimed by multiple neighbors (Poland, Alsace, Savoy), and marginal Chinese claims on additional patches of mountain wastes.

Even if border wars do occur, a la Indo Pak or Iran Iraq, they do not result in full mobilization, blitzkrieg, grand battles of annihilation followed by capture of the capital and 50 BRPs / 7 bonus armies for control of Eastasia (or was it Eurasia?). Still less do they trigger WW3, or Armageddon.

They result in border adjustments followed either by brutal ethnic cleansing and recolonisation, or decades of guerrilla warfare abetted by the resentful loser a la Kashmir. Or withdrawal of the bloodied aggressor. Meanwhile the West goes 'tsk tsk', and sends guns and Hans Blix.

India basically wiped out the frontline Pakistani army in their 1971 war. The roads to Islamabad and Karachi were wide open (the former defended only by an air force maintenance unit led by the father of a university roommate). Except the Indians realized what would happen to them if they actually (re)occupied Pakistan, and happily let the UN broker a cease fire.

 

 

Sorry but you continue to miss my point. What I am saying to you is that, given the number of flash points the potential for a July 1914 style crisis is there and that this is the most probable way for a big regional war to start in the Pacific Rim region.

Nobody might intend or even want such a war just as nobody in Europe intended or wanted war in July 1914. Yet then, as now the conditions for a conflagration are in place. The tinderbox is only waiting for someone to light the fuse. Please take the time to read some of the links I have posted - like this one!!!

 http://www.cityam.com/245098/south-china-sea-powder-keg-disturbing-echoes-1914

The South China Sea is one of the most dangerous flashpoints considering the regional powers involved in the dispute and the vital international shipping route running straight through the South China Sea via the Malacca Straits. Take a minute to look at the map!

https://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/content/main-international-shipping-routes

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/18/why-disruption-in-the-south-china-sea-could-have-gigantic-consequences-for-global-trade.html

Major wars have been fought over far less than this! A war starting in the South China Sea could well be the start of at the very least a massive regional war and very likely in fact a global conflagration - which is why a lot of peopl in the real world worry so much about the timny dots on the map called the Spratley Islands!