|
pzgndr -> RE: A few points from a real 3ID Tanker from 88-90 in FRG (1/22/2014 6:46:30 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Russian Heel
Well, I was an American tanker now I live in Russia with a father in law who was a Soviet tanker. Weird, I know.
I'm not trying to disrespect dads and fathers-in-law or anything. But comments about what "all" vehicles had or didn't have are too broad. Over the years the equipment of various CatA vs CatB vs CatC units changed, and also among the different Warsaw Pact nations. So I won't argue that some vehicles had radios and some didn't, but either which way at company level the battle drills would have been communicated somehow. And with this game the OPFOR is pretty much modeled at company level contained in a 500m hex, so it's pretty irrelevant HOW the comms worked.
A more fundamental question is who is trying to communicate with who. As I understood it, and I may be misinformed?, the Soviets and Warsaw Pact didn't exactly have an NCO corps like NATO and their platoon leaders were more like our squad leaders. I'm sure many were highly competent, but the overall doctrine of "orders type missions" did not support "mission type orders" so comms were mostly one way conversations from the bn/co commanders down to the squads/vehicles/guns. That unit-level aspect, rather than individual crew comms and gunnery, is much more important to this game's C2 model and limited orders cycles, etc. Of course, this is another can of worms to argue about!
Too many folks seem to get wrapped around the axle scrutinizing any one specific engagement. At the end of the day, a game like this modelling a group of squads/vehicles/guns engaging another group of squads/vehicles/guns over a period of time (ie, several orders cycles) and with variable LOS/LOF and other parameters does a pretty good job of capturing those fundamental doctrinal differences between NATO and Warsaw Pact. For this 1980's Germany game, but even so I've commented on some questionable AI behaviors that don't appear quite right. How well this can be extrapolated to other time periods and adversaries with less well defined doctrines remains to be seen, like banging a WW-III square peg into a WW-II round hole and wanting it to fit perfectly.
|
|
|
|
