Fabulous flying & firing machines in ArmA?

[martinovic 0]

Well for starters North Korea is 122762 square kilometers, Sahrani being 1/307th that size (at 400 square km), with "the North" being half that still.

Then there is the difference in population that comes with such a difference in land mass. We also dont know what (if anything) the Sahrani's have to export in order to boost their economy.

Comparing the two is nothing but silly...

When talking about the "North" you should consider that the "Northern, commie" part of Sahrani isn't the only place the country is supposed to be located at.

The rep. of sahrani is also on some other islands near Sahrani, the blog doesn't say how big those are but BIS probably doesn't want to give concrete info, for modding possibilities.

[dm 9]

When talking about the "North" you should consider that the "Northern, commie" part of Sahrani isn't the only place the country is supposed to be located at.

The rep. of sahrani is also on some other islands near Sahrani, the blog doesn't say how big those are but BIS probably doesn't want to give concrete info, for modding possibilities.

Still not going to come anywhere near the size of North Korea, unless BIS has a brain fart and includes 300 Sahrani sized islands in the chain (which I somehow doubt )

My point was that N. Korea is damn big, with a huge population to conscript from and industry to exploit. Sahrani isn't, so drawing a parallel isnt right.

[ricnunes 0]

Alot of people think just because North Sahrani is communist it will be poor, it might have valuable natural resources or a strong economy to support its military. And why should the North Sahrani have a old or obslete equipment?

and back to topic

Mi-28s and KA-52 should accompany there old counterparts like the mi-24 and Ka-50. One thing i also hope that the pilots use real attack formations.

When I mentioned poor, I mentioned comparing to other similar countries such and mainly like North Korea. North Sahrani should have a very similar political and military situations as North Korea but being it poorer (than North Korea) since North Sahrani is smaller and certainly as also a smaller population.

So yes, I think that North Sahrani should be the equivalent of a smaller North Korea.

About using modern equipment such as Mi-28 and Ka-50 I'm tottaly against it and I explained here in this thread several times why I'm against it. So instead of repeating myself I advise you to use "Google" (or any other source of info) to search info regarding the order of battle of the countries that use Russian equipment and you'll see that NONE of them use Mi-28s or Ka-50/52s (even Russia has only a very limited number of such helos). Look specially into North Korea or Saddam-era Iraq as good examples of how the North Sahrani order of battle should be.

And even other Russian very advanced equipment (such as the T-90 MBT) if found outside Russia, they are certainly only found in India or China which are very powerfull countries and the only ones that usually buy Russian equipment capable of affording for such equipment.

One thing that annoyed me the most until now is having simulations where the enemy order of battle is superior in terms of equipment quality that it should be or have! One example of this was F-22 TAW that had campaign in countries such as Sudan and than we would se as enemy equipment aircraft such as the Su-35 Super Flanker or Ka-50 which as you can imagine is totaly unrealistic.

So and because of this, I hope that the Armed Assault campaign doesn't have such advanced equipment for the North.

Finally someone mentioned that if North Sahrani doesn't have advanced equipment the game doesn't become balanced. Well I disagree even because BIS already said that the Northern forces will have a greater numerical advantage than both Southern and US forces combined (in the moment that the campaign starts).

So basically you'll probably have:

- North Sahrani -> More numerous military forces (more than US and South combined) but less advanced equipment (from Soviet cold war era)

- South Sahrani -> Quite less numerous military forces than the North and also less advanced US equipment or even some older European equipment.

- US -> Much less numerous than even the Southern forces but far more advanced equipment than both North and South.

Well, I think this is balanced enough!

[VISTREL 0]

Russia doesn't have many T-90s, however, India has lots of them. Most of russian weaponry goes for export. I personally would love to see KA-50 and Mi-28 in game.

[ricnunes 0]

Russia doesn't have many T-90s, however, India has lots of them. Most of russian weaponry goes for export. I personally would love to see KA-50 and Mi-28 in game.

But the T-90 was only exported to India and not to other countries. Any other country that uses Russian equipment doesn't seem have T-90s. And again India and China shouldn't be examples of how the North Sahrani order of battle should be. Good examples for this are North Korea, Saddam era-Iraq, Cuba or maybe even Iran.

If the Mi-28 and Ka-50 are included in Armed Assault they shoudn't be included in the campaign. For multiplayer or extra campaign purposes they're OK, but certainly NOT for the Armed Assault original campaign.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Still not going to come anywhere near the size of North Korea, unless BIS has a brain fart and includes 300 Sahrani sized islands in the chain (which I somehow doubt )

My point was that N. Korea is damn big, with a huge population to conscript from and industry to exploit. Sahrani isn't, so drawing a parallel isnt right.

Yeah, but I was talking about the DRS as a mini-scale version of North Korea. That makes more sense

[zedderzulu 7]

Finally someone mentioned that if North Sahrani doesn't have advanced equipment the game doesn't become balanced. Well I disagree even because BIS already said that the Northern forces will have a greater numerical advantage than both Southern and US forces combined (in the moment that the campaign starts).

So basically you'll probably have:

- North Sahrani -> More numerous military forces (more than US and South combined) but less advanced equipment (from Soviet cold war era)

- South Sahrani -> Quite less numerous military forces than the North and also less advanced US equipment or even some older European equipment.

- US -> Much less numerous than even the Southern forces but far more advanced equipment than both North and South.

Well, I think this is balanced enough!

Oh I didn't quite mean that - all I meant that I agree that NS shouldn't have weapons like the Mi-28, T-90 and so forth and would have numerical superiority, but the North has to have something to show for it in Multiplayer. In single player you can easily create the scenario for there being many more of them than anyone else, but in multiplayer, I'm guessing most battles will be evenly matched player-count wise, unless you can stipulate that the North will have twice as many slots and/or vehicles available or something.

I agree with you on the factor that if they are included, they should only be for Multiplayer. I don't have any huge reservations about seeing Mi-28s or whatever in multiplayer - just not in the main Campaign.

But yeah, as I'm sure others have said, stuff like the T-90, Mi-28, Ka-50 and so on and so on...they'll all be in Armed Assault within a month, regardless, and a TC addressing all concerns and inaccuracies about the single-player Order of Battle will be ready within 6 months at the most.

[ricnunes 0]

In single player you can easily create the scenario for there being many more of them than anyone else, but in multiplayer, I'm guessing most battles will be evenly matched player-count wise, unless you can stipulate that the North will have twice as many slots and/or vehicles available or something.

That's exactly what I meant. In Multiplayer missions (Team versus Team style) in Armed Assault should have more slots available for the North Sahrani side that for the US/South Sahrani. Or perhaps servers could have an option such as having something like 2 players for North Sahrani for each US/South Sahrani player!?

Anyway, I completly agree with your post.

[Ukraineboy 0]

Russia doesn't have many T-90s, however, India has lots of them. Most of russian weaponry goes for export. I personally would love to see KA-50 and Mi-28 in game.

Russia has 248 T-90 in service while India has 310 T-90S (downgraded export version) in service. That's not a big gap at all, and India does not have "loads of them".

Russia is also ordering another 140 T-90s or so (i dont have the article on hand) this year.

[Cifu 0]

And even other Russian very advanced equipment (such as the T-90 MBT) if found outside Russia, they are certainly only found in India or China which are very powerfull countries and the only ones that usually buy Russian equipment capable of affording for such equipment.

Nope, just several examples:

Algeria (current forces and pending purchases):

18+28 Su-30MK/MKA, 34 MiG-29SMT, 14 (?50) YAK-130

8 S-300MPU2, 30 Tunguska M1, 300 T-90S

Pakistan:

320 T-80UD (yes, not from russia, but ukraine)

Cyprus:

T-80U, BMP-3

Vietnam:

4 Su-30MK2V,

Indonesia:

Su-30MK

Malaysia:

18 Su-30MKM (deliver between 2006-2009)

These just examples. But back on track - Sahrani an fikcional island, as someone say earlier: why almost need to an communist (or whatever) "bad guy" state always equipped be poor and outdated weapons? Because thats the "screenplay" in most movies and games? Because thats how the "good guys" can play Rambo against poorly equipped mass of enemys?

[Cifu 0]

...I'm guessing most battles will be evenly matched player-count wise, unless you can stipulate that the North will have twice as many slots and/or vehicles available or something...

Yes, and most of players then try to join for the south side, because they had scoped M4's, wich is great advantages against players with unscoped AK-47's or AK-74's, so easiest to play (and the other side first priority to get a scoped weapon).

And what is the average win ratio in a 2x M1A1 vs. 4x T-72M1 battle?

Yes, i know, there are servers, where enough players say "ok, we are up to the task, and play the hard way"... but not ordinary...

[ricnunes 0]

And even other Russian very advanced equipment (such as the T-90 MBT) if found outside Russia, they are certainly only found in India or China which are very powerfull countries and the only ones that usually buy Russian equipment capable of affording for such equipment.

Nope, just several examples:

Algeria (current forces and pending purchases):

18+28 Su-30MK/MKA, 34 MiG-29SMT, 14 (?50) YAK-130

8 S-300MPU2, 30 Tunguska M1, 300 T-90S

Pakistan:

320 T-80UD (yes, not from russia, but ukraine)

Cyprus:

T-80U, BMP-3

Vietnam:

4 Su-30MK2V,

Indonesia:

Su-30MK

Malaysia:

18 Su-30MKM (deliver between 2006-2009)

These just examples. But back on track - Sahrani an fikcional island, as someone say earlier: why almost need to an communist (or whatever) "bad guy" state always equipped be poor and outdated weapons? Because thats the "screenplay" in most movies and games? Because thats how the "good guys" can play Rambo against poorly equipped mass of enemys?

Ok, Cyprus and Pakistan have T-80s. I'll avoid discussing about the Su-30 or any other high performance fighter since I believe that what will be important for Armed Assault like it was for OPF are "ground battlefield" oriented units such as Tanks, Helicopters, soldiers weapons, etc...

But contries like Cyprus and Pakistan are exceptions for a rule (and even so these countries are totally diferent from what North Sahrani should be) and replying to your question:

"why almost need to an communist (or whatever) "bad guy" state always equipped be poor and outdated weapons?"

I have to say that this is the current and near future "rule". I think most here agree that fictional North Sahrani should be a scaled down North Korea and here is resuming the North Korea order of battle (vehicles only):

T-54/55/59 Tanks

T-62 Tanks

T-34 Tanks

BTR series APCs

Mi-8/17 Hip

Mi-24 Hind

Hughes MD-500

Su-25 Frogfoot

Mig-17/19/21/23/29 (I only posted this list of "High performance" fighter for comparison purposes only)

Cuba which is an another example where North Sahrani could be based on has even a "worse" order of battle than North Korea so there's a certainly a logic where North Sahrani should have a similar (and therefore "poor") order of battle.

Anyway, I think most agree that North Sahrani should have at least some or a few T-72s and BMPs (mainly BMP-1 and perhaps a few BMP-2s) so I think you can consider the inclusion of such units to be a bonus specially if compared with the order of battle listed above.

[Cifu 0]

I have to say that this is the current and near future "rule".

So the "rule" say dont attack anybody, who has advanced warmachines?

Iran or Indonesia be a safe place then.

Quote[/b] ] I think most here agree that fictional North Sahrani should be a scaled down North Korea and here is resuming the North Korea order of battle (vehicles only):

T-54/55/59 Tanks

T-62 Tanks

T-34 Tanks

BTR series APCs

Mi-8/17 Hip

Mi-24 Hind

Hughes MD-500

Su-25 Frogfoot

Mig-17/19/21/23/29 (I only posted this list of "High performance" fighter for comparison purposes only)

....

Anyway, I think most agree that North Sahrani should have at least some or a few T-72s and BMPs (mainly BMP-1 and perhaps a few BMP-2s) so I think you can consider the inclusion of such units to be a bonus specially if compared with the order of battle listed above.

So it's North Korea "light" or not North Korea?

North Korea has example PT-76 and PT-85 amphibious tanks, many type of chinese APC's, IFV's, but dont have T-72's, BMP-2's or BRDM-2's.

The equipments of North Sahrani forces mainly coming from the OFP (T-72, BMP-1/-2, Mi-17, UAZ's, etc.), and not from north korea. So i think the north korean link are not correct, at least in the equipments. The background of the ArmA story perhaps coming from the North Korean threat, yes. But thats not equal for using this "forced perspective".

Quote[/b] ]Cuba which is an another example where North Sahrani could be based on has even a "worse" order of battle than North Korea so there's a certainly a logic where North Sahrani should have a similar (and therefore "poor") order of battle.

Oh, come'on, then why we not even call back the Grenada-invasion? Short, painless, successfull.

There are many "not-to-worse" example of battle orders, countrys, like Iran, Indonesia, etc.

Anyway, this is a fictional war, so what they put in, is only matter of fantasy, dont need to copy any real countrys order of battle...

[echo1 0]

Alot of reason why Russia is giving high tech weapons to various countries is that they owe alot of money to their governments. I know for certain tha places like China, S. Korea and possibly Cyprus got stuff for free in exchange for themwiping off part or all of Russia's debt.

However, I agree with the folk who are saying that they should hav e good weaponry to balance out America's stuff. They seem to be a regular army, not a terrorist operation so I hope that they get something to balance out with American Abrams and whatnot

[Ukraineboy 0]

And what is the average win ratio in a 2x M1A1 vs. 4x T-72M1 battle?

M1A1 would win each time. The T-72 was never designed to face modern USA MBTs, they were simply production filler and second line tanks. And ofcourse export. Plus its a shitty T-72 export version with no nightvision equipment.

[Cifu 0]

And what is the average win ratio in a 2x M1A1 vs. 4x T-72M1 battle?

M1A1 would win each time. The T-72 was never designed to face modern USA MBTs, they were simply production filler and second line tanks. And ofcourse export. Plus its a shitty T-72 export version with no nightvision equipment.

Ofcourse, but not this is the meaning of my post.

My point is what is the chance of the north sahrani side players against the south sahrani side in ArmA Multi-player, even if the numbers become 2:1 against the south sahranians.

[Spetz 0]

What I mean to say is that the north sahrani should have old equipment but the latest equipment leading the advance. Many people think that if the north sahrani have the T-90 it will be their only MBT. If north sahrani was under the soviet influnce during the cold war it should be using soviet tactics. A division equiped with modern equipment would be leading the advance into west germany using T-80s and T-64s. The T-72s would be used to fill the gaps and advance behind. The T-72 is meant to be a cheap, realiable mass-produced tank, while the t-80 is meant to be a quality gas powered tank. The T-90 is a continuation of the T-72 program using the cheap features of the T-72 and the advanced features of the T-80. If the north sahrani do have access to modern equipment it should be limited. But not mixed like it had been in OFP, one T-80 and 3 T-72s. If you look in many divisions in a military they use the same equipment. You will not see a armored division using 2 different tanks. The equipment is not mixed and matched around. Unless you expect it to be a rag-tag army of africa/asia. Now how will you amerikans will feel if the US had only M60s and m113s?? Or if they have no choppers???

Also when we play multiplayer, many of the original maps have a balance issue. BMPs Vs M60 pattons in the demo were slightly baised for the west.

[zedderzulu 7]

I agree, I'd go along with the idea that there are areas of the SLA that do have more up-to-date equipment available to them - like those spearheading the advance, and also groups of elite units, which as I've said already I do think the SLA will have - like Guard Divisions or something and their Special Forces (though I have no evidence this will be the case).

But I hate to say it, even then, I still don't believe the elite units etc should be sending T-90s and Mi-28s our way.

T-80U is probably the best MBT NS could have - but that still packs a hefty punch, and initially would do well against the South/US's under-strength forces.

The most up-to-date stuff would probably be in the small arms the elite forces can use - AK103s perhaps etc. But small arms are the only things I can really think a country like North Sahrani should be able to buy in any large quantity from post-Soviet Russia.

That's just my opinion. But I mean, if you look at the screenshots, BIS already seems to be leaning towards the whole "Cold War throwback"; all the SLA seems to be is AK-74s, RPGs, T-72s, BMP-2s and the odd Ural and Hip - I mean, have we even seen a North Sahrani T-80 in the screenshots yet? (I can't remember, feel free to remind me)

[Cifu 0]

The most up-to-date stuff would probably be in the small arms the elite forces can use - AK103s perhaps etc.

Well, then why AK-103?

AS Val, AN-94 much better choice.

Quote[/b] ]I mean, have we even seen a North Sahrani T-80 in the screenshots yet? (I can't remember, feel free to remind me)

Nope, nor T-80, nor Mi-24 screens from ArmA at the time...

Aswell we lost several more unit, like AH-64A, A-10A, Su-25, Ka-50 or M60A3.

[Ukraineboy 0]

The most up-to-date stuff would probably be in the small arms the elite forces can use - AK103s perhaps etc.

Well, then why AK-103?

AS Val, AN-94 much better choice.

Quote[/b] ]I mean, have we even seen a North Sahrani T-80 in the screenshots yet? (I can't remember, feel free to remind me)

Nope, nor T-80, nor Mi-24 screens from ArmA at the time...

Aswell we lost several more unit, like AH-64A, A-10A, Su-25, Ka-50 or M60A3.

AS VAL is not an ARMY assault rifle, it's a special purpose one. AN-94 has only been issued in Russian Army for Spetsnaz, it's unsuitable for army replacement because of it's complicated internels.

[VISTREL 0]

you can always hook up good old AK with scope, and you have special forces weapon

http://www.bhigear.com/productimages/ultimak.gif

[echo1 0]

@ZedderZulu: The T-80U is actually more expensive than the T-90, as T-90 is an upgraded T-72, and T-80 has best electronics. AS Val is a silenced weapon and doesnt have much range.

@Cifu: AN-94 is too expensive and isnt much better than AK-74, except on its burst mide which requires alot of training to use properly.

Weapon of the Elite Guard? Either AK-103 or AK-107. If the regular SLA are using AK-74 as it seems from the screenshots, then it would make sense to issue AK-107 or AK-74M as they use the same mags, but have advantages over regular AK-74s AK-103 cause its cheap but still better than regular AK-47s.

[ricnunes 0]

@ZedderZulu: The T-80U is actually more expensive than the T-90, as T-90 is an upgraded T-72, and T-80 has best electronics.

Not exactly.

The T-90 is in fact a development from the T-72 but it was designed to be a replacement for the T-80. This is because after the Soviet Union fall the T-80 became an Ukranian Tank (it's designed and built in Ukrania) while the T-72 became a Russian Tank (designed and built in Russia) so for the obvious reasons the Russians don't want to rely on Ukraine to build it's best MBT and spare parts so the Russian designed the T-90 which while developed from the T-72 it incorporates many of T-80 features such as its heavier armor an electronics.

[ricnunes 0]

Quote[/b] ]So the "rule" say dont attack anybody, who has advanced warmachines?

Nope, the "rule" says that any country which have the profile of North Sahrani (being it a communist state - kinda like North Korea which have great dificulties in modernizing their military after the Soviet Union fall) shouldn't have very advanced/most modern equipment such as T-80s, T-90s, BMP-3, Mi-28s or Ka-50s.

For this reason North Sahrani should have at best Mi-24 Hinds, T-72s or BMP-2s (and these again should be the BEST North Sahrani units).

Quote[/b] ]So it's North Korea "light" or not North Korea?

North Korea has example PT-76 and PT-85 amphibious tanks, many type of chinese APC's, IFV's, but dont have T-72's, BMP-2's or BRDM-2's.

Probably there's something wrong with my English. I previously said that North Sahrani should be BASED on North Korea and NOT a clone of North Korea.

When I (and others if I'm not mistaken) implied that North Sahrani should be something like a "light" North Korea (as you put it) it was mainly meant to be in terms of numbers (Since North Sahrani is an island).

Anyway I said and repeat that North Korea should be a good example for North Sahrani. Ok that North Korea doesn't have T-72s but putting this Tank into North Sahrani order of battle isn't definitly unrealistic but by the contrary, for example Saddam's-era Iraq which is also a good example of how North Sahrani should be had T-72s.

So resuming, what do I think that North Sahrani should be? Well I think that it should be a mix of North Korea (mainly) together with Iraq (Saddam's era) and perhaps Cuba.

Finally it's curious that you give the examples of both Iran and Indonesia but if I'm not mistaken neither of those countries have T-80s or T-90s and much less Mi-28s or Ka-50s.

[martinovic 0]

I just played a game called T-72 balkans on fire and was wondering if the T-72s of the north sahranians will have AT rockets, you know those guided missles. I mean, if the Croats Serbs and Bosnians had these then north sahrani should also.

Pretty good against low flying enemy helicopters in the distance.