Non NATO troops

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-08-30 01:19

Beckwith wrote:
i think a good storyline would be Iran invading the US occupied Iraq

beckwith and a storyline?!?!

Tacamo · Post by **Tacamo** » 2005-08-30 01:58

Or it could be somewhat of a progressive campaign. It starts with small insurgents in Iraq. Then maps progress where there's insurgents, Revolutionary guards, and a few Iranian regulars. From there it can move on to a full conflict with some action from the Syrians too. A few months down the road a military juanta kills the Saudi Royal family due to them standing by as the Americans enter Iran. That's where the money and high tech assets will come from.

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2005-08-30 03:28

BrokenArrow wrote:
Beckwith wrote:
i think a good storyline would be Iran invading the US occupied Iraq

beckwith and a storyline?!?!

wats that supposed to mean i was never AGAINST a storyline, basically i dont care what the storyline is i just would like the mod to be about desert warfare be cause its the shit and i also want at least in part to be in Iraq cause i would like to (if i can figure out how) make maps based on real battles in OIF, and many of the battles from Generation Kill

so basically i support any story line based on Desert warfare and taking place at least IN PART in Iraq

Kamikaze Watermelon · Post by **Kamikaze Watermelon** » 2005-08-31 23:59

i agree with the focus on desert warfare in iraq but i think that you guys are forgetting the PLA. Maybe that conflict could have something to do with the north koreans and their WMD programs. could the NKs do something crazy, like cross the DMZ or nuke (i just forgot the capital of south korea), and then the chinese leap to their side. That sounds good to me but i don't know to much about what's going on over there.

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-09-01 01:34

dunno if the DPRK and the PRC are on that friendly terms.

Wonder · Post by **Wonder** » 2005-09-01 13:16

http://www.newprophecy.net/warroom.htm
Interesting prophecies about the coming global war. It seems as Russia will have allied itself with "Greater Iran" against Europe and the US. China will ally itself with Pakistan against India, but Is uncertain that the chinese will turn against Russians at the end of the war.

WMDs are used extensively, and there is an all-out thermonuclear exchange between US and Russia. The earth is not completely destroyed but the human population is reduced to one-third.

Check out the site! It has some very good ideas for storylines!

Dirty Beets-TPF- · Post by **Dirty Beets-TPF-** » 2005-09-01 13:25

Heh, check out http://www.johntitor.com if you want some war prophecies. Basically, the US decends into civil war and Russia uses the opportunity to become the domiant world power by nuking the **** out of America.

Djuice · Post by **Djuice** » 2005-09-01 16:55

What i dont get is, why is it Russia against the US, Russia right now are having a nice relationship with the US, and they would not attack anyone if the coming decades, as most of they military units are under-fund, under-trained, and basically not up to scratch.. They major deterrent against any possible invasion against them, is there 20,000 odd Nuclear missiles.. Russia would definite not help anyone if a global war starts that doesnt not significant affect them so.

Wonder · Post by **Wonder** » 2005-09-01 20:55

The west has always been the enemy in russian eyes. Remember how Stalin and Hitler were good friends before WW2?

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-09-01 23:29

alright, heres how it works:

Prophecies=****

but, there have been so many prophecies that by sheer bulk, some of them have 'come true'. prophecies are very vague and any number of events can resemble a certain prophecy. anyone know how many times the world has been supposed to end and hasnt? quite a bit.

Djuice · Post by **Djuice** » 2005-09-02 04:29

The world ended 3 days ago when i couldnt play Bf2.. T_T

Post by **Wolfmaster** » 2005-09-02 12:02

BrokenArrow wrote: prophecies are very vague and any number of events can resemble a certain prophecy.

^true^
i just started reading on that http://www.johntitor.com website. John Titor, who says he's from the future, predicts there will be a civil war in america starting in 2005, brutally ended by the Russians in 2015 (by nuking the US). with a bit of creative thinking you could link this civil war prophecy to the mass plundering in the areas hit by hurricane katrina (as in, no law and order, shootouts, mobs, and also lots of people who think the government isn't doing enough to help them), thus making the prophecy 'come true'.

Wonder · Post by **Wonder** » 2005-09-02 16:47

I've always wanted to see New Orleans. Now it's too late - it's not there anymore

Post by **Wolfmaster** » 2005-09-02 17:22

oh, they'll rebuild it. don't worry about that. you can say a lot about the americans, but you can't say they're not good at rebuilding things..... i just hope they'll learn to use concrete/bricks, instead of wood, to build houses.....

Wonder · Post by **Wonder** » 2005-09-02 18:39

Anyway... back on the topic!
I didn't want to argue about wether these "prophecies" were true or not. All I wanted to point out that they have nice ideas for fictional future wars.

Post by **Wolfmaster** » 2005-09-03 10:52

definetely true.

Wonder · Post by **Wonder** » 2005-09-03 11:17

BrokenArrow wrote:id actually like to see the MEC made into a more insurgent like faction, the way you make up for them having older weapons and less sophisticated systems is by giving them more hit and run type weapons or hidden IED type weapons. i think that this could more than make up for having less sophisticated stuff.

It would work on games like America's Army, Ghost Recon ect. with emphasis on infantry combat, but not on all-arms battlefield games.

Wonder · Post by **Wonder** » 2005-09-03 11:49

[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker]
Beckwith wrote:like i said before on this issue id bite the bullet and give them toys comparable to what the allies have, id say for the most part people kids mostly want to play with the real US toys and dont want to go opp, and if you give the opp sub standard toys theyll be even less interested
In ODS Iraq did indeed have some equipment comparable to US capability. They had some of the newest and most capable Soviet aircraft at the time, like the MiG-29, Su-24 Fencer interdiction strike fighter and Su-25. They also had formidable anti-aircraft and anti-ship missile capabilities. Even now, Syria, Iran and other potential threat states have some of this same equipment, and these aircraft and vehicles are still contenders, even if they don't look as shiny and cool as the US and UK equipment, and the newest Russian equipment (that even the Russians don't even have fully fielded).

The older equipment they have is still quite durable and useful, especially in the hands of crews who have worked with them for years. In Iraq, a T-55 with cement blocks attached to it reportedly withstood multiple hits from the Milan ATGM. Plus, manufacturers are constantly selling upgrades for this equipment, so they don't have much incentive to buy new ones.

So, each force may possess a capability that the other does not, and will have to make the best of that they have. The better players will usually migrate to whatever side needs them and balance the game out that way. If there was no such thing as a better operator, only better equipment, then the game would be unbalanced. It can be achieved without "cloning" and including unrealistic weapons, which gives rise to new problems (see the VSS in DC, for example).

Indeed! Take a look at Forgotten Hope for example. Most German vs Allied tank maps are battles of Quality vs Quantity. A Sherman will not survive a direct hit from a PzIVH and its gun is less accurate, but the German tanks are still quite destroyable by them when used properly and there are usually enough tanks to go around.

Iraqi troops had tanks that were still considered quite capable in '91 and could've posed a threat to coalition armour despite being tachnologically inferior, but the quality of Iraqi troop training was appalling! This was apparent in the Iraq-Iran war in the 80s. An Iraqi anti-tank missile crew would score one hit for every ten missiles fired. Still the Iranian tank crew would be demoralized by a missile flying way past them and they would flee abandoning the tank. They had the weapons, but didn't know how to use them.

Djuice · Post by **Djuice** » 2005-09-03 14:29

There was no way a T-72/T-55 that the Iraq fielded in the in ODS and OIF could penetrate the M1s frontal armour that the US fielded. They were armed with obselete munitions, the 3BM-15 Steel Penetrator APFSDS, which could only penetrate 420mm @ 0 degrees @ 2km. The M1A1HA that the US Army fielded has a frontal turret armour of about 600mm+ with 30 degree slope. Thats why you hear so many stories about Iraqi Sabots rounds just richoching from the M1A1. Considering that the 100mm 3UBM-20 APFSDS rounds that the T-55s were firing can only penetrate about 250mm, there was no chance that the Iraqi could defeat the M1A1 frontally. Even worst was the fact that the T-72s werent even equiped with laser rangefinders, also no thermal sights as the Soviets sold them downgraded T-72A, armour composition was that on just Steel, not composite as the Russian were fielding at the time. Gving them inferior armour against anykind of HEAT/APFSDS threats.

The only threat they posed against US tanks were the M60A3 that the US Marines were fielding at that time, and even those there were minor losses, as the M60A3 had thermals and could detect the T-72s earlier and fire earlier too.

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2005-09-03 15:12

what i meant was tit for tat, M1's counter is a T-90 not a T-72

Non NATO troops

WW3 details