Will NBC be an option?

[Guest Bish]

I'm VERY excited about this new title!

Just wondering though if Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC), as it was known back in the day, will be options for weapon systems (eg. Artillery / Rockets) or as an environment for scenarios? 

I know nukes wouldn't make for much fun in a tactical level game. But chemical agents could definitely have been used and armies of the time were equipped and trained to fight in that environment. In fact the whole original design concept of IFVs, in their initial manifestation as the Soviet BMP, was to enable infantry to fight mounted in an NBC environment. So IMHO fighting in a nuke or chemical-contaminated area would be a realistic tactical problem for commanders of the era?

cheers,

Bish

[LukeFF]

In response to the initial question - No

Edited February 23, 2021 by LukeFF

[Holman]

The modern CM games do have settings for compromised electronic warfare conditions, but I don't think there are settings where soldiers fight in gas masks and chemical protection suits.

As far as I understand it, chem warfare would require figuring out how to manage a withdrawal, not an attack.

[HerrTom]

A chemical attack would occur before your troops got to the battle anyway. Presumably, you could simulate it in your missions by reducing initial unit strength as applicable and reducing everyone's fitness by a level or two to simulate the NBC gear.  Unfortunately, there still wouldn't be visuals for it, though. Maybe a modder could figure out an [nbc] tag?

[Freyberg]

It would be fun to have semi-post-apocalyptic landscape option - defoliated trees, heavy overcast and so on - just for the really adolescent players like me

[chuckdyke]

It was one of the reasons WW III never happened, so they better leave it out. 

[Monkie]

I'd pay for a DLC that only added troops in NBC gear to be quite honest, and it might draw in a whole new crowd that is into the apocalyptic theme that seems to be so popular (people are weird, what can we say?).

While fighting in a nuclear environment might not be much fun to simulate, dealing with a chemical attack would be quite likely in the CW time frame and was practiced for regularly. As the OP mentioned the WP doctrine planned on fighting through areas of persistant and non-persistant chemical contamination.

Edited February 23, 2021 by Monkie

[Wicky]

Set game weather to foggy - crank the central heating up to max and play with Vasaline smeared on glasses and wearing thick gloves*.

Recently watched a video where a buch of geeks rebuilt an old Apollo lunar lander computer - connected it to a laptop and joystick and recreated a simulation of a lunar landing. 

The youngster who pulled it off was modest enough to say it was a lot easier not having to wear thick gloves like Neil Armstrong!

 

[Rice]

5 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

It was one of the reasons WW III never happened, so they better leave it out. 

So if a game is simulating WWIII, it would then be expected to have an NBC environment? This doesn't make sense.

[Bil Hardenberger]

Re: NBC:

From our Design Document (and before you ask... no, sorry I won't be sharing it):

Quote

The NBC option will not be represented in this game family, the game will instead concentrate on the comparative level playing field that existed in the opponent’s contemporary ground forces in that potential warzone and will concentrate on the initial days or weeks of the ground war before an NBC option would need to be put on the table.

In our mind representing NBC was a rabbit hole best stayed away from.

Bil

[Sequoia]

Right, I think the only way that an invasion by the Warsaw Pact in the time frame would be if the Soviets did something along the lines of:

1. Announce they would not be the first to use NBC weapons.

2. Announce limited objectives. i.e. they'd stop at the Rhine and Dutch and Danish Borders.

3. Announce they'd pull back once the political reason for launching the invasion was met.

By doing the above the Soviets might be able to convince NATO not to go nuclear first.

The objective could be simply to limit NATO power by "Finlandizing" (that's not a word coined by me) West Germany. With a neutered West Germany the Soviets would be in a position to repeat the invasion with ease whenever they wanted to, and become the dominant world power. Marxist ideology was not to conquer the whole world by external military power but that eventually all Western countries would go Marxist by internal factors.

 

Just my two cents.

p.s. I know the actual Soviet contingency plan was to go nuke from the get go. They never implemented that plan. I don't think it was because of pity. I think it was because the Soviet leaders felt that plan was unworkable or too risky whatever you want to call it. 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Sequoia

[mrzafka]

Use of chemical weapons in World War One was not decisive, it just made life of all participants more miserable. And it was used on very large scale, both in terms of quantity and variety.

Using chemical weapons against a well-trained peer adversary in 1970s IMHO would yield similar results as 6 decades earlier. 

[Sequoia]

I would be though some enterprising modder will use some of the modding tricks learned to put troops in full chemical gear. You can set their condition to poor and you'd have what you would want I think except the limited perception being in a gasmask gives you.

[Wicky]

Nasty stuff in any situation

https://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/19/world/1991-blast-in-iraq-may-have-exposed-5000-gi-s-to-gas.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56116101

[Ryujin]

1 hour ago, Sequoia said:

Right, I think the only way that an invasion by the Warsaw Pact in the time frame would be if the Soviets did something along the lines of:

1. Announce they would not be the first to use NBC weapons.

2. Announce limited objectives. i.e. they'd stop at the Rhine and Dutch and Danish Borders.

3. Announce they'd pull back once the political reason for launching the invasion was met.

By doing the above the Soviets might be able to convince NATO not to go nuclear first.

The other possibility is that they go through with using tactical nukes per plan and count on MAD to prevent any NATO response beyond battlefield tactical nukes. I have no idea what the decision making in NATO would have been, but an all out nuclear response to an invasion of West Germany means accepting the loss of their countries. When it comes down to it, would the president be willing to give the order and effectively end the US over West Germany?

I can't really say the battlefront interpretation is wrong, but it seems like there's a lot of ways this could go. 

[Combatintman]

You guys are determined to be tricky about this NBC thing aren't you?

Trust me, it is no fun and as it is Feb 24 in Australia, here is me (vehicle commander in the helmet) 30 years ago in Australian time, 29 years ago and one day in the time zones that most forumites are probably living in, wearing an NBC suit about 10 minutes before we launched across the Iraqi border ... because yes it was that long ago ...

We spent three days in that kit and that is nothing compared to having the overboots, gloves and respirators on.  Want to see how much fun it is ....

Communicating .... put your COVID mask on.  Put a pair of gloves on and put a pair of washing up gloves on over the top.  Now try dialing a telephone number and speaking and being understood over that phone.

Writing ... as above but pick up a pen and paper and then try and write down what you can hear from your telephone call.

Using a keyboard ... as above.

Marking a map ... as above but also put on a diving mask.

Shooting accurately - COVID mask, diving goggles and two pairs of gloves - in your own time carry on.

Anything physical ... put on your normal clothes, then put another layer on, add COVID mask, diving goggles, both pairs of gloves and just try and do anything.

Or go for the full option - dare I call it 'Iron' with all of the above activities - COVID mask, diving mask, two pairs of gloves and twice the amount of clothes you'd normally wear.

Don't forget to check that your gloves, mask and goggles are on properly at all times and readjust them as necessary.

When you have done all of the above, you will see that there are more soft factors to be adjusted to simulate NBC than those being suggested.

So it might be 'cool' it might be reflective of the era and I do support the use of chemical weapons as an inclusion in the game as I know this would have been the most likely scenario in a tactical environment; however, it isn't going to happen as @Bil Hardenbergerhas pointed out.

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by Combatintman

[Pete Wenman]

all this ^^ plus you'd need a new death animation, as you shake, sh*t and vomit yourself to death.  When three combi pens is not enough and four will kill you.

P

Edited February 23, 2021 by Pete Wenman

[Combatintman]

And the morale impact of being told to go 100m downwind of where the NAIAD (a British chemical detection device) went off 30 minutes ago and do the sniff test ... yes I was that guy ...

[mrzafka]

1 hour ago, Combatintman said:

So it might be 'cool' it might be reflective of the era and I do support the use of chemical weapons as an inclusion in the game as I know this would have been the most likely scenario in a tactical environment; however, it isn't going to happen as @Bil Hardenbergerhas pointed out.

 

I don't think using chemical weapons would have been certain, as this wouldn't give any operational or strategic advantage after immediate retaliation in kind.

AFAIK the Germans during WWII had access to nerve agents (tabun, soman etc.) that the Allies didn't have, and yet they didn't dare using it. And the war wasn't going particularly well for them.

[slippy]

1 hour ago, Combatintman said:

You guys are determined to be tricky about this NBC thing aren't you?

Trust me, it is no fun and as it is Feb 24 in Australia, here is me (vehicle commander in the helmet) 30 years ago in Australian time, 29 years ago and one day in the time zones that most forumites are probably living in, wearing an NBC suit about 10 minutes before we launched across the Iraqi border ... because yes it was that long ago ...

We spent three days in that kit and that is nothing compared to having the overboots, gloves and respirators on.  Want to see how much fun it is ....

Communicating .... put your COVID mask on.  Put a pair of gloves on and put a pair of washing up gloves on over the top.  Now try dialing a telephone number and speaking and being understood over that phone.

Writing ... as above but pick up a pen and paper and then try and write down what you can hear from your telephone call.

Using a keyboard ... as above.

Marking a map ... as above but also put on a diving mask.

Shooting accurately - COVID mask, diving goggles and two pairs of gloves - in your own time carry on.

Anything physical ... put on your normal clothes, then put another layer on, add COVID mask, diving goggles, both pairs of gloves and just try and do anything.

Or go for the full option - dare I call it 'Iron' with all of the above activities - COVID mask, diving mask, two pairs of gloves and twice the amount of clothes you'd normally wear.

Don't forget to check that your gloves, mask and goggles are on properly at all times and readjust them as necessary.

When you have done all of the above, you will see that there are more soft factors to be adjusted to simulate NBC than those being suggested.

So it might be 'cool' it might be reflective of the era and I do support the use of chemical weapons as an inclusion in the game as I know this would have been the most likely scenario in a tactical environment; however, it isn't going to happen as @Bil Hardenbergerhas pointed out.

 

Hi all

 

Just my two pence worth. While i respect the decision not to include it, i do think it is a missed opportunity, that could maybe be included in a future module. All the points raised above go to show how detrimental to normal operations the threat of an NBC attack was. I was in BAOR from 1983 - 1988 and as i have mentioned in a previous post our whole MO was based around an NBC attack of some description, at least in the initial stages of any conflict.

To not have it included is to leave out a large proportion of what was trained for and expected, by all Cold War Armies at the time, and again as the post above shows, when conflict did occur, all be it in the Gulf in 1991, it was assumed that Chemical Warfare was still a very real threat against an opponent that had nowhere near the capabilities of the Soviets at the time, granted though they probably had more reason to use it due to the nature of the conflict.

Anyway as i opened, this is not a moan about it not being included but, more a way of pointing out, in my humble view, a missed chance.

 

take care all

 

slippy

[Lethaface]

I'd probably like any addition to the fidelity of the simulation. Chemical, why not? Battles across fall out zones, why not? However I understand that for many reasons they prefer not to go down that way / rabbit hole. I don't mind really, and tbh I'd prefer extension till the 90s and the addition of TOS-1 Buratino, to name something.

And indeed for 'immersion' sense a dense fog with heavy EW, unfit troops and modded chem uniforms combined with a briefing telling what's going on could go a decent way of portraying fighting in such conditions. Although I've 0 experience with it, unlike others here.
Plenty of fun to be had still, and at least as much to say for a pure conventional 'what if' compared to conventional +/++ 'what if's' imo. 

[hank24]

When I served in the Bundeswehr 40 years ago, I always hoped that if this goes hot, it will be as during WW II. Everybody had chemicals and, therefore, nobody used it. Maybe due to own experience not even Mr. Hitler used them at the end of the war. And at least my unit was nearly not prepared for it. I did not have the impression to be well trained for the case. The British Army showed a different picture judging by the small insight I had at that time.

In a game like this it is most certainly a factor which can easily unbalance a scenario and a whole bag of new interdependencies which need to be researched, designed, and programmed. So, I can very much understand the decision to keep it out.

Edited February 23, 2021 by hank24

[Monkie]

I'll make it simple:

I would like to see army men in gas masks.  Just a few in gas masks...  is that wrong?

 

[Sequoia]

Trust in the Modders. They will deliver.

[MikeyD]

This can be filed under 'Be careful what you wish for'. Some of the stuff people  ask to include for 'completeness' would bring gameplay to a standstill. I'm reminded of MLRS (fielded in '83, just outside our timescale) which would basically stop any scenario in which was deployed. Players, especially competitive 'play-to-win'-type players, would not enjoy seeing their men gradually shifting from green to yellow bases and becoming suppressed and unfit before even catching sight of the enemy. That already happens when pixeltruppen are caught in a WP cloud.