Project Reality Forums

I hope to God that there are more NVA maps than VC maps. I hated that about EOD. Only like one NVA map at all.

To clarify to the people on the last few pages, you shouldn't count on Special forces being in the game at all. I personally don't like special forces in games, especially Call of Duty, it was always 2nd Ranger Battalion or Marine Force Recon or SAS. I love regular forces. The most epic battles are always fought by regulars. For example, Stalingrad: Workers' Peasants' Red Army vs. Deutsche Wehrmacht (there were Soviet Airborne and 'elite' marksman divisions, not to mention the German SS, but they weren't nearly as involved). Also-I better not, I'm getting carried away

Anyways, I think for now there should just be Viet Cong and NVA vs. US Marines and Army (the bad guys ). the ARVN would be nice, but no rush.

I think it's much more important to place the ARVN and Vietcong than all other factions. These were the groups that fought most, who had more casualties and were in conflict before and after the American intervention.
But I think it is impossible (at least, improbably) you put the ARVN and leave aside the USMC and U.S. Army. Well, I think the presence of Vietcong is essential... They fought much against the American troops that the NVA ... (Excepting the VPAF)

So, for me it's: Vietcong vs ARVN or Vietcong vs US forces [USArmy, USMC, Green Berets]

RdClZn wrote:I think it's much more important to place the ARVN and Vietcong than all other factions. These were the groups that fought most, who had more casualties and were in conflict before and after the American intervention.
But I think it is impossible (at least, improbably) you put the ARVN and leave aside the USMC and U.S. Army. Well, I think the presence of Vietcong is essential... They fought much against the American troops that the NVA ... (Excepting the VPAF)

So, for me it's: Vietcong vs ARVN or Vietcong vs US forces [USArmy, USMC, Green Berets]

Uhh, Viet Cong was rather important in the beginning of the war, but after Tet not so much, and even around that time they were not as effective as the large numbers of NVA infiltrating the country. The VC were basically just a tool for North Vietnam that was supplanted by their own army for the most part, whose main use of VC were as guides in the South. That, and while ARVN doesn't get enough credit, when the Americans were in country and their involvement had escalated, they pulled a ton of the weight (which was actually a bad idea because the South relied on them too much and many developed a "the Americans will do the fighting for us" mentality). Also, due to common ARVN incompetence (usually a problem with bad command) the NVA considered the Americans to be their #1 enemy and the ARVN were just seen as "puppet soldier" grunts and Americans would be targeted first because they were better trained, led, equipped and motivated, usually at least. South Vietnamese troops weren't universally of poor morale and training and their rangers were well-respected by Americans. Just that I thought you weren't giving the NVA enough credit. After all, they won the war, not the VC.

EDIT: Just read through my Osprey book on the NVA (I know Osprey varies widely in quality, but this one was well detailed and written by a vet who even talked to NVA prisoners and whatnot, so I'll trust it), and it has more details on the NVA-VC relationship. In 1958, North Vietnam started sending troops to the South to act as advisers really, while in the next year they started sending regular troops. By 1964 NVA soldiers started to be put into VC units sometimes to replace losses and to provide a better trained and experienced backbone. After Tet, the VC was decimated and in many VC units the NVA troops would comprise as much as 90% of the force, and it'd still be called a VC unit though. The Viet Cong generally just supported the NVA forces in the South with reconnaissance, food, shelter, supplies, etc, while also laying traps for the enemy and engaging in guerrilla warfare. The NVA however engaged in conventional warfare with the US and RVN, although people called it guerrilla warfare because the forces in the South didn't have the same assets like ship, planes, copters, and howitzers like the RVN and US and allies. But they did use conventional tactics, just with lighter equipment.

Hresvelgr wrote:Uhh, Viet Cong was rather important in the beginning of the war, but after Tet not so much, and even around that time they were not as effective as the large numbers of NVA infiltrating the country. The VC were basically just a tool for North Vietnam that was supplanted by their own army for the most part, whose main use of VC were as guides in the South. That, and while ARVN doesn't get enough credit, when the Americans were in country and their involvement had escalated, they pulled a ton of the weight (which was actually a bad idea because the South relied on them too much and many developed a "the Americans will do the fighting for us" mentality). Also, due to common ARVN incompetence (usually a problem with bad command) the NVA considered the Americans to be their #1 enemy and the ARVN were just seen as "puppet soldier" grunts and Americans would be targeted first because they were better trained, led, equipped and motivated, usually at least. South Vietnamese troops weren't universally of poor morale and training and their rangers were well-respected by Americans. Just that I thought you weren't giving the NVA enough credit. After all, they won the war, not the VC.

EDIT: Just read through my Osprey book on the NVA (I know Osprey varies widely in quality, but this one was well detailed and written by a vet who even talked to NVA prisoners and whatnot, so I'll trust it), and it has more details on the NVA-VC relationship. In 1958, North Vietnam started sending troops to the South to act as advisers really, while in the next year they started sending regular troops. By 1964 NVA soldiers started to be put into VC units sometimes to replace losses and to provide a better trained and experienced backbone. After Tet, the VC was decimated and in many VC units the NVA troops would comprise as much as 90% of the force, and it'd still be called a VC unit though. The Viet Cong generally just supported the NVA forces in the South with reconnaissance, food, shelter, supplies, etc, while also laying traps for the enemy and engaging in guerrilla warfare. The NVA however engaged in conventional warfare with the US and RVN, although people called it guerrilla warfare because the forces in the South didn't have the same assets like ship, planes, copters, and howitzers like the RVN and US and allies. But they did use conventional tactics, just with lighter equipment.

Can i repply you!? Hope this isn't off-topic...
Well, the fact that the ARVN wasn't very effective does not imply that their presence or importance was reduced. Ok, the USA troops had the very difficult job to secure South Vietnam and support ARVN operations (that most of the time were a total failure without the presence of American forces) however, the large of the contingent on the big operations was the ARVN (except the USAF and USN operations). Some operations were conduced exclusive by U.S forces, but normally the bigger operations, city defence and border surveillance had a major presence of ARVN.

2 - Like you said, the NVA just acted clandestinely in South Vietnam until the U.S exit. You practically have no records of NVA armored brigades advancing across the border, large operations with regular units attacking the South... No. What we had was almost a guerilla war, with material and human support of NVA, but without its direct presence, so I insist that the VC guerrillas in the south was much more presence than regular troops of the NVA.

Sorry for the bad english, i hope you can understand... BTW, IMO Osprey is a pretty good collection.

RdClZn wrote:Can i repply you!? Hope this isn't off-topic...
Well, the fact that the ARVN wasn't very effective does not imply that their presence or importance was reduced. Ok, the USA troops had the very difficult job to secure South Vietnam and support ARVN operations (that most of the time were a total failure without the presence of American forces) however, the large of the contingent on the big operations was the ARVN (except the USAF and USN operations). Some operations were conduced exclusive by U.S forces, but normally the bigger operations, city defence and border surveillance had a major presence of ARVN.

2 - Like you said, the NVA just acted clandestinely in South Vietnam until the U.S exit. You practically have no records of NVA armored brigades advancing across the border, large operations with regular units attacking the South... No. What we had was almost a guerilla war, with material and human support of NVA, but without its direct presence, so I insist that the VC guerrillas in the south was much more presence than regular troops of the NVA.

Sorry for the bad english, i hope you can understand... BTW, IMO Osprey is a pretty good collection.

I agree that ARVN needs to be represented, at least much more than it is currently. Just that while the Americans were around the USA pulled a lot of the weight in operations. Also, it was the Viet Cong that were more clandestine, seems you read my post wrong or I typed it out confusingly. Viet Cong did all the clandestine work with traps, ambushes, scouting, supplying, etc. NVA performed assaults on RVN/US bases and cities and whatnot. There were even at least two actions performed by NVA tank formations, the attack on the base at Ben Het (NVA PT-76s vs US M-48s) and the fall of the camp at Lang Vei where NVA PT-76 tanks overran the special forces running the place. Otherwise the NVA did not use many heavy weaponry, but they still did conventional assaults and battles and whatnot.

The above comments are in my opinion spot on. Depending on the area and time the nva split into small units. reinforced vietcong units and engaged american and arvn units in force. they where a very versatile force to be reckoned with.

Here is a good account of the Dak To battles and the experiment of the NVA at a hill trap manuaver. It involved a trap made up of 3 seperate nva infantry regiments in an attempt to wipe out a US battallion. it almost suceeded.

'Hill Trap' Maneuver

As for the ARVN in game i would like to see that. ideally i would like to see the ARVN to be against local force vietcong in early to mid 60,s both with light ww2 weapons and in the Mekong delta. lots of open paddies, ditches scrub and nippapalm treelines and villages as far as the eye can see. would be a good insurgancy game.

Hresvelgr wrote:I agree that ARVN needs to be represented, at least much more than it is currently. Just that while the Americans were around the USA pulled a lot of the weight in operations. Also, it was the Viet Cong that were more clandestine, seems you read my post wrong or I typed it out confusingly. Viet Cong did all the clandestine work with traps, ambushes, scouting, supplying, etc. NVA performed assaults on RVN/US bases and cities and whatnot. There were even at least two actions performed by NVA tank formations, the attack on the base at Ben Het (NVA PT-76s vs US M-48s) and the fall of the camp at Lang Vei where NVA PT-76 tanks overran the special forces running the place. Otherwise the NVA did not use many heavy weaponry, but they still did conventional assaults and battles and whatnot.

I think you didn't understood what i mean. Again, sorry, that's probably because of my terrible english.

When i tell "clandestine", i mean that the most of NVA contingent in South Vietnam wasn't on a formal unit normal condition of operation... They had to cross on foot forests to arrive in camps or villages provided by the Vietcong in South Vietnam or Cambodia. They were basically a guerrilla... That's my point!
While the major contigent of the VC was composed, in some periods, of NVA soldiers or peasants from North Vietnam, they still did not have the equipment and the organization that features a regular force! And the NVA itself was, without doubt, a regular force!
Are you understanding? They (VC) had good comand-chairs, a nice organization, and some heavy equipment (mainly artillery), but all of this was in a "clandestine" situation...
The major enemy of USA operations was VC, many operations of the war had a single aim: destroy training camps and strong points of the VC. I think Khe Sahn is a good exemple about what i'm talking about... A large number of NVA/VC troops, supported by heavy artillery from Cambodia, hidden on the forests, ambushing a US Air Base...
It isn't the normal procedure of a regular troop... My point is, we can't call these "clandestine" NVA units part of the NVA regular troops, since its structure was quite similar to the VC.

That's my point, hope you could understand this time

PS:. NVA hardware was pretty good! They had large battalions of soviet/chinese-made APC, like BTR-50, BMP-1 and a large number of BMP-1 and T-55 (but a even larger number of T-34) and self-propelled AAe. Just for example, North Vietnam had 36 S-75 batallions, and a little number of S-125 regiments during Linebacker II. VPAF was quite a structure too... But they had no chance to act pleny on USA presence. On the Spring Offensive is a good example of a large NVA mobilization.

The engagements around Highway 13 was a good example of typical VC operation, IMO.

I hope that i clarified my point, now. Thank you

NVA hardware was quite good, yes. Just most of the stuff like howitzers and tanks and aircraft stayed in the North. But from what I can tell a lot of it was actually superior to what the West was using. AK-47s were quite envied, for example, and MiG-21s brought down many American planes. Although in the early days they mostly used SKS rifles and the Vietcong probably would've mostly been using Mosin-Nagants! I think it was 1967 when the NVA in the South started having units go into Cambodia on a rotational basis to switch out their SKSs for AKs (mostly Chinese Type-56s actually), and the Vietcong got what the NVA ditched, as usual.

And you are right about the NVA mostly moving about on foot and stuff and mostly using mortars, recoiless rifles, and rpgs as artillery, just that they conducted more conventional operations after entering the South. Apparently the typical NVA unit saw less action than most Americans did, conducting about 3 major operations a year. The reason was probably the high cost and risk in their assaults. But they weren't exactly guerrillas.
The VC were guerrillas (though I did mention from 1964 onwards there were huge numbers of NVA in their ranks, sometimes comprising of 90% of a unit, but I think they still did VC actions). To really count as guerrilla warfare, you have to fight a specific way. There is a pattern. The VC would typically target the South's infrastructure and ambush and harass Western troops to tire them in guerrilla fashion whereas the NVA would typically conduct large scale battles for strategic goals and whatnot.

Most of the big battles that are well known, it probably would've been mostly NVA conducting the operation, like the Battle of Ia Drang, or Khe Sanh or Lang Vei. But there are many crucial battles done by the Viet Cong that need to be represented, like Ap Bac where a couple hundred VC (no NVA involved as far as I know) thrashed a South Vietnamese force (with only a few American advisers) in the thousands with few losses. But aside from things like Ap Bac, VC battles in PR:V should be markedly different from NVA battles, which would probably have more because the VC was decimated after 1968.

EDIT: Suffice to say, I think there should probably be even representation of NVA and VC. In the early days of the war, like early 1965 and before it seems like the NVA was a minor presence, but afterwards their involvement seems to have scaled the hell up and the VC slowly became more and more irrelevant up until they were decimated by the Tet Offensive, which was actually a Northern victory no matter how you put it because militaries only exist to further political goals, and politically the North was clearly a winner in that and in addition that their losses were affordable and they saw the VC as expendable at best, and a nuisance that needed to be rid of as soon as they were not needed at worst. But anyways both should still be rather evenly present for variety's sake. Also wondering if the Dac Cong (NVA elite commandos/sappers) are going to be in it.

Using this definition: "Guerrilla warfare is irregular warfare, conflicts in which a small group of combatants uses military tactics, like ambushes and raids, to harass a larger and less-mobile traditional army."
You could use many of the large VC/NVA operations as part of a Guerrilla tatic.
And as you said, VC units existed until the end of the war officially, despite that the large losses implied in a tranfer os NVA soldier through south. As you know, many large battles were fought by VC, mainly on Tet, but after it too...

Ok, i understand your point, NVA equipment and personnel has reached the majority of VC structure in some periods, but what i mean is that the typical condition of battle of NVA, before U.S exit, forced it to reduce it's hardware to the point of almost a typical guerrilla. Just infantary units, bad supplied, with terrible (or none) comunication equipment and virtually no heavy hardware... Their units became, during the "clandestine ops" on South 'Nam a mobile and light troop. This is much closer to VC than the regular NVA.

Think i can't be clearer than that.

PS:. I think that's kinda difficult to put the operations of Dac Cong on the PRV, it's like put the Spetsnaz capture of Kabul airfield on PRM... But Spring Offensive and Hue are MUST BE contents.

Cant wait to own some french fries in Vietnam x)
--------------
PLZ TELL ME THAT U WILL MAKEZ BETAH GRAPHICS? X(

Edi1314 wrote:Cant wait to own some french fries in Vietnam x)
--------------
PLZ TELL ME THAT U WILL MAKEZ BETAH GRAPHICS? X(

the graphics will be the same as of PR/vbf2, maybe more detailed weapons, vehicles and maps, but nothing more

sell wrote:I hope, the French Foreign Legion, will be in pr v.

The only part of France that doesn't surrender because they are not French

Navy SEAL (est. 1962)
US Army
US Marine Corps
ARVN (South Vietnam)
Vietcong
France vs. Vietminh
North Vietnam

I believe these would be the more historically accurate factions for the game.

'[F|H wrote:NitroViper007;1478441']Navy SEAL (est. 1962)
US Army
US Marine Corps
ARVN (South Vietnam)
Vietcong
France vs. Vietminh
North Vietnam

I believe these would be the more historically accurate factions for the game.

Dont forget the Aussies second largest non veitnames combat force

Bigglestheman wrote:The only part of France that doesn't surrender because they are not French

Seriously, you're not yet done with this (really bad) joke?
You should open an history book... French military history doesn't begin in 1940...

Back on topic: A Dien Bien Phu like map would be awesome for french... (even thought it's a french defeat)

I hope the mod will refer to the 'NVA' as PAVN and to the Viet Minh and 'Cong' as NLF. Can't wait for this mod

'[F|H wrote:NitroViper007;1478441']Navy SEAL (est. 1962)
US Army
US Marine Corps

If they add Navy SEALs, I think it could be interesting to add the green-berets. You know, it could add to some interesting gameplay, US Officer + 5 Locals vs NVA or something like that?

Spec-ops=DEV hate

MIKE force, anyone?