Balance?

[Wodin]

I'm not sure if I'm right here but I would think the USA would have a massive amount of firepower compared to Syrian terrorists. Or are the USA fighting the Syrian army? If so what weapons\tyanks etc do the Syrians have? Are they supplied by Russia?

[panzermartin]

Syrian Army is the main player, complete with elite and well equipped special forces, modern ATGMS, and some decent russian tanks like the T72M1. While it's no real match for the US, asymmetrical urban warfare, variable victory conditions etc will balance things as it seems.

[JaguarUSF]

The variable victory conditions do a lot to balance the game. While the U.S. may need to eliminate 75% of the Syrian forces and secure 3 terrain objectives, the Syrians may just need to destroy two Stryker vehicles to earn the same number of points. It's all up to the designer and it opens a world of possibilities.

[Severin]

First of all

Syrian ≠ Terrorist

Terrorist ≠ Syrian

Second

[Sixxkiller]

Boy you guys think this is gonna be a cake walk. The Syrians are far from inept, especially in a company level game. They have tanks, ATGM's, RPG's, IED's, and a scenario designer can balance the battles as he wishes. Stop thinking this is some turkey shoot because there are M1A2's in the game. I have faith this game is going to be balanced and with the additions of different objectives its going to be possible to win as any side. This kind of thinking is like thinking a Tiger II was unbeatable....

[Homo ferricus]

two different sides have their own distinct advantages, so it is assymetrical, but balanced, as in a game like Starcraft, where everyone had their own special little abilities, but it ended out to be a very balanced game.

while the US has superior training, more and better hi-tech equipment, and air/artillery support, the Syrians have home court advantage (defending urban area=General's wet dream), Unconventional warfighters, like religious extremists, AL-Qaida, terrorists, and old government loyalists and sympathizers, spies, IEDS, VBIEDs. Trust me, with these new assymetrical forces, it will no longer be "my tanks shoot your tanks and then i ride into your capital type wars, of course they can be an option, but you can simulate numerous other things like occupations, etc.

[allenj7]

The only real advantages that the U.S. player has over the Syrian player are:

1. Better communication.

2. Slightly better equipment (and slight better people controlling said equipment) when compared straight-up (tank vs. tank).

[SGT_56M]

Read "Marines in the Garden of Eden"... Even some of the best units in the Us military can be chewed up in an Urban fight.

Being a game based on a Stryker force, this will not be all "Thunder Run" with heavy forces...

At least I would not imagine it to be.

[Severin]

Originally posted by SGT_56M:

Read "Marines in the Garden of Eden"... Even some of the best units in the Us military can be chewed up in an Urban fight.

Being a game based on a Stryker force, this will not be all "Thunder Run" with heavy forces...

At least I would not imagine it to be.

We will have access to heavy forces. To be honest I have read Steve talk about how he would "hypothetically" set up a defense for a thunder run style op. I also recall talk that a mission may be in fact, unwinnable. It is up to you (the player) to pull your guys back before you get to badly chewed up. I don't know about you guys but when I see the thunder run: Damascus briefing I will know to proceed with extreme caution.