About the US military in ArmA

[nyles 11]

First I just wanted to post this as a short reply to the "Latest Screenshots available" thread. However as the word count exploded, I decided to put this into a seperate thread. I hope this is okay with the moderators.

All that follows is purely speculation and throwing around thoughts! I just want to present a dilemma, which I personally find a bit irritating and offer solutions, but in the end, it might just be me seeing it all like that. So please bear with me.

Personally, I think the US equipment that was presented to us so far, maybe isn't really the best choice for ArmA. So far, we have been shown equipment solely in use with the Marines (AH-1 Cobra), equipment currently in sole use with the Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (Stryker APC, ACU uniforms), US Army / National Guard specific wargear (M113, UH-60 Blackhawk), US military equipment that can be cross-used with either Army, National Guard or Marines (M1A1, Hummers, most of the small arms), US Army Special Forces aircraft (AH-6, MH-6), and lastly, outdated equipment like the M163 Vulcan, which is no longer in active service with the US military as far as I know.

Now, there are several possibilities how all these branch-unique units could actually be included in Armed Assault's storyline, so I won't say it's impossible to include these units, however it feels a bit weird to me right now. Limiting the available US military branches to 1-2 might have been a better way. At least it should be tried to seperate them somehow in campaign, creating missions around just some of the units and never get units of all of them into one single mission.

I assume (and this is indeed just wild guessing) that southern Sahari forces will be equiped with outdated western equipment like the M163, maybe a M113 variant and so on. Thus, the part about the outdated equipment is absolutely fine, as long as the US military does not use units like the M163 for air-defense, but instead get either M6 Linebackers, Avenger systems on hummers or the systems used in the USMC accordingly. As an alternative, leaving out dedicated US military AA systems and just providing man-portable Stinger systems could work as well, depending on how big the northern air threat will be.

What would be interesting to know is what forces BIS plans to throw into combat on Sahari. To justify the current unit list shown to us through several media, USMC, regular US Army units, US Army special forces, US Army 160th SOAR and units of the US Army Stryker Brigade Combat Teams would be required. Quite a lot of different army units for 400 square kilometers, if you ask me.

The question is, if the US forces stationed on the island to train the southern forces are special forces like Green Berets, just regular peacekeeping troops from either Army or National Guard, or maybe a mix of these? The use of the M113 as personal carrier for US troops hints at some second choice unit - maybe US National Guard? I am not sure, but the M113 really isn't included a lot in recent TO&Es of US forces anymore, although it seems that many are again brought out of storage to be used in Iraq for patrols in urban terrain, where there is a constant threat of roadside bombs and insurgent attacks (albeit not a good explanation for it's appearance on Sahari as the situation between North and South apparently looks stable enough to pull out troops. The M113 also still is in use with engineer units, so there could be some explanations why the M113 is on Sahari and why the M2 Bradley isn't. Still, it feels a bit weird - especially seeing it alongside the M1A1 Abrams in tank combat - a place where the US probably would never put that tin can in anymore. That's more the place for the M2 Bradley IFV. Another explanation could be that the M113 and maybe even the M1A1 are actually southern Sahari units and don't belong to the US military afterall - although the camouflage kinda hints at US heritage, so I think it's rather unlikely to be the case.

My guess about the story - mixed with the few facts we have received so far:

At first the US forces are pretty few soldiers with some outdated equipment. Most of their gear is already shipped home and they plan to leave with the rest soon as the situation between North and South seems to have stabilized. I'll just stick with that setting about a National Guard unit sent for peacekeeping, who are accompanied with some Green Berets acting as military trainers for the southern Sahari soldiers. William would be one of those special forces then, too, offering some interesting possibilities for missions during the campaign as you then also have a special forces character to change to for those commando missions behind the lines, like it was the case with James Gastowski in OFP:CWC. The presence of special forces would also justify the availability of the Littlebird helicopters we already saw and which are really only in use with 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment - the special forces flyboys.

As the peacekeepers are about to leave, the North strikes. (Personally, if I were the North, I'd wait till everyone is gone and invade afterwards. Makes things easier, but well) So those few remaining US peacekeepers (incl. the special forces around William) and the poorly trained southern militia have to face this onslaught and stand their ground. Sounds like a mix between the first half of the CWC campaign with a breeze OFP:Resistance to me somehow - which must not be a bad thing.

I assume the first half of the campaign will be from the position of the underdog, trying to keep the Northerners away from the southern capital. Missions would probably be a mix of standard combat missions between US forces alongside southern Sahari troops fighting the northern troops and commando missions that strike some important targets and delay the northern approach. Again the classic layout like seen with the campaign structure in previous BIS projects. After these missions, I assume we can expect US reinforcements to arrive in the south and that's again where things get interesting for the unit line-up.

From the units we saw so far, we still need to bring in three components for the whole thing to work. And that's exactly were the trouble starts: We need to consider the Stryker and ACU wearing soldiers. We need to consider the AH-1 Cobra gunships. And we need to consider the presence of heavy M1A1 Abrams tanks.

Personally, I have a hard time to see both USMC and a Stryker Brigade Combat Team rush to Sahari, but it could work as long as they don't mix too much. However, I'd prefer to just get some USMC units on the island as reinforcements to assist the south. That would mean no Stryker APC and no soldiers wearing advanced combat uniforms. So this is a dilemma as I can see BIS wanting to get these units in at all cost, because they look shiny and new. Especially the ACU greatly defines the look of Armed Assault in the press already and sets it appart from other present-day wargames, which is important.

So maybe it might be a good idea to kill the entire National Guard / poorly equiped US Army unit idea and replace them with the Stryker Brigade right away? I think it's the best thing to do, so let's start over with this idea. Are you still awake?  

Soooo, in the beginning there are elements of a Stryker Brigade Combat Team stationed on Sahari, who act as peacekeepers. Alongside them, a team of Green Berets (max 12 soldiers as per TO&E) is training the local militia so they eventually will be able too look after themselves. The situation seems to have stabilized recently and most of the assigned units from the Stryker Brigade already shipped home again. Now the north attacks out of a sudden and the remaining units have to stand their ground until reinforcements arrive. The southern army received some surplus equipment from US stocks to build up their own army, including some old tanks (M60, Leopard1 or T55 maybe), M113 APCs and M163 Vulcans. The US forces just have the Stryker APCs and variants like mortar and TOW carriers, some unarmed hummers and FMTV trucks on the island. So nothing that could really defeat a massive tank-supported invasion from the evil north, either. Their trump however are a couple of helicopters from 160th SOAR (UH60, AH-6 and MH-6) that give them a big advantage: Airmobility, allowing them to insert special forces and their southern Sahari auxillary into the enemy's rear and conducting raids and delaying operations.

So much for the initial setting and units involved. Now we come to the reinforcements again: As we already dealt with the SBCT, special forces and 160th SOAR, it would now be possible to introduce the Marines, allowing us to field heavy M1A1 tanks and cobra gunships. The problem here is that the Marines have their own unique equipment, so this would mean no M2 Bradleys, no AH-64 Apache gunships and no other fancy US Army equipment in ArmA. Personally I don't care, but I assume many others do. Just throwing in more Strykers as reinforcements wouldn't be a good choice as these units really are not meant for fighting tanks, so we need something more brutal - like the Marines.

The advantage of using the Marine Corps as reinforcement would be a fresh change in looks for the US side, compared to early in the campaign and also compared to Operation Flashpoint. It would require some effort for the storytelling department to make this clear to the player, but it's absolutely do-able. The Marines would be a good choice as we are talking about reinforcing a combat zone situated on an island. Naval infantry isn't a bad choice for that, I'd say. We still get our M1A1 tanks to blast the northern armour pool, just like we could with the US Army and could furthermore concentrate on the LAV series of vehicles fighting alongside the Abrams and continue with the airmobile aspect with UH-1 and CH-46 helicopters. There is just one slight problem with the Marines, which should be considered: Your basic infantry squad in the Corps consists of 13 soldiers, if I'm not mistaken, requiring some adjustment for the limitation of only 12 soldiers allowed per squad in OFP. But as the real Marines seem to not have a problem with that when training with VBS1, I suppose it's acceptable. It might also be important to note that the Marines, albeit also US military, are using a slightly differing rank structure - mainly for NCOs - compared to US Army units. A staff sergeant in the Marines has a different role than a staff sergeant in the US Army. Nothing big, but it should be considered anyway.

So, to summarize:

- Old equipment like the M113 and M163 should be Southern Sahari exclusive and not be used with US forces.

- US troops stationed on Sahari should be SBCT, Green Berets and 160th SOAR army aviation. A pretty light force, suited for peacekeeping but not war.

- US reinforcements, arriving later in the campaign, should be USMC only and offer heavy equipment better suited for fighting a war and turning the tide.

I think this pretty much sums it up. I don't know if all of this makes sense. Afterall I am not in US service and can only judge this from the outside. Overall it seems to make sense like that, though. I'd like to get some thoughts and ideas on this matter. Would be interesting to see who agrees or who comes up with a better solution on how to fit the units we already saw in several screenshots and videos together, so it all makes sense in both a perspective focused on the overall authenticity of the setting and one focusing on telling a story.

Shoot ahead.  

[Ukraineboy 0]

Just because we haven't SEEN a bradley in any previews doesn't mean it's not there.

[nyles 11]

True. All of the above only takes information into account that have been presented to us. It's very likely that we will still see some other wargear, but the problems displayed about some equipment being used by some army branches exclusively and how to fit all this into a authentic storyline, are still there. No matter, if there will be a M2 or not.

[stgn 39]

I thort the M113 was quit common dosen't US army has a shit load of em.

STGN

[martinovic 0]

I think the north will have airsuperiority for the first half of the campaign, until the reinforcements arrive. Although Sahrani is very near Europe so the US could send troops relatively fast to Sahrani. The people on Sarah are white, so the climate can't be too far from Europe, i think the island might even be in range of AA weapons launched from Europe. Europe lost it's testicles long ago so they won't send anything anywhere without lots of bitching by all sorts of organisations and the US.

Maybe there will be some political delay to the approval of sending US troops, but since US soldiers will already be tangled into the action, it's unlekely that the US wouldn't quickly approve atleast some form of rescue mission.

The story seems a lot less likely then the one in CWC that's for sure.

[mr reality 0]

I'm hoping the vehicles that we've seen in the videos are "placeholders". I would prefer a more realistic contingent with regards to the units that have been deployed on Saharia. As you've already mentioned, the majority of vehicles could belong to the southern forces. I asked a question earlier regarding types of vehicles but the responce was "It doesn't have to be exact, and the community will mod it anyway". My responce to that is-why should the community have to make realistic varients when it shouldn't pose too much of a problem to get it right the first time.

I prefer realistic units but there are others who don't care and there philosophy is-a soldier is a soldier and a tank is a tank.

I would also like to know how large the northern forces could be as the island size tells me it couldn't be more than a 1000 strong-that's including conscripts. There airforce would be virtually-for want of a better word-shit..There naval strength would be laughable so i'm assuming the north has some southern rebels acting as terrorist units.

I personaly think the campaign will be aimed at newcomers to the OFP genre-hence the "switching characters". This will keep the "rambo" players happy and unfortunatly the realism fans like myself will be left feeling a little letdown.

[Donnervogel 0]

well...

IMHO BIS doesn't put much important on such accuracy. I think they're just gonna throw in pretty much all of the units/vehicles we know from OFP/VBS plus some shiny new ones to get funky pics in game magazines and to sell their game. I don't have much hopes for the campaign also... it probably will be some massive onslaught where they try to include all kinds of units for the "boah" effect to new players. But to be honest I don't care much about that also. I want new features for the modders/mission makers and then, hopefully we will get everything we ever wanted from the community After all there is reason why I only played FDF mod in the last 1.5 years where there aren't many BIS units/mission left

[Friedchiken 0]

Somehow I also know that BIS is just trying to get in all their units into the campaign. It's a bit of a bummer the idea that most fans of the military will see these anachronisms right away. I also hope that the press will be retarded enough to not notice such odd unit combinations.

Well, the campaign should be fun, and newbies to the franchise probably won't understand our collective consternation.

About the 13 person unit: is it possible that "1" could just be another team mate instead of the leader. I have never needed to select my own man for any purpose. So actually 1-12 would be 12 commandable men, perfect for the USMC.

[nyles 11]

About the 13 person unit: is it possible that "1" could just be another team mate instead of the leader.  I have never needed to select my own man for any purpose.  So actually 1-12 would be 12 commandable men, perfect for the USMC.

Very good point there, you just need to change the squadleader's designation to "0" or "leader" or whatever else is appropriate.

[Friedchiken 0]

Well, either way it would be nice to be able to command two six-man fireteams.

I wonder how much code needs to be changed in order for this extra team-mate to become a reality.

Oh well, I won't be too traumatized if I have to have another useless "1" slot. Only a little.

[Ukraineboy 0]

Ugh again, OFP was never that realistic to begin with. Sure it had lots of realistic aspects, but this mixed with gaming aspects too. Im sorry but the game that everyone jerks off too about Simulation aint that realistic. I can list of plenty of unrealistic crap about it. Also, the whole campaign, you thought the one in OFP was realistic? It was horrible. Every mission you were a one man army, usually it was "Oh heres some LAWs, go kill those T-80s" or "Here's some satchels, go kill those T-80s". Or "Sneak into the base, and blow up the tanks". It was all retarded. What made this game was its community and its engine that could PROVIDE realism. Not the default game itself.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Ugh again, OFP was never that realistic to begin with. Sure it had lots of realistic aspects, but this mixed with gaming aspects too. Im sorry but the game that everyone jerks off too about Simulation aint that realistic. I can list of plenty of unrealistic crap about it. Also, the whole campaign, you thought the one in OFP was realistic? It was horrible. Every mission you were a one man army, usually it was "Oh heres some LAWs, go kill those T-80s" or "Here's some satchels, go kill those T-80s". Or "Sneak into the base, and blow up the tanks". It was all retarded. What made this game was its community and its engine that could PROVIDE realism. Not the default game itself.

All in favor of beating up Ukraineboy...

When you will you learn the difference between accuracy and realism, young man? The way you talk about "realism" would make BF2 seem like the most realistic game on the planet, just because all of the vehicles were right. The reality is that BF2 is very UNREALISTIC, not because of what the developers chose what or what not to put it, but because of how bad it tries to simulate a realistic experience. OFP is all about this experience, and when some vehicle name is wrong or some weapon is out of place, nobody is going to give a shit as long as it feels real to them. What ever happened to simulating a fictional situation? Is that still not simulation? It is, and sometimes simulations can be of things that we would never be able to experience in real life, and that doesn't change the fact that it still feels real to the person experiencing it, I mean that's what a simulation is supposed to do - feel real. Back to our vocabulary; I would like to introduce to you a friend of mine; the English dictionary:

accurate:

1. Conforming exactly to fact; errorless.

2. Deviating only slightly or within acceptable limits from a standard.

realistic:

1. Tending to or expressing an awareness of things as they really are.

simulate:

1. a. To have or take on the appearance, form, or sound of; imitate.

   b. To make in imitation of or as a substitute for.

2. To create a representation or model of (a physical system or particular situation, for example).

Get your words right, stop complaining, pull your head out of your ass, and please stop with the redundant, perpetually negative posting!

You know what they say; if you don't have anything good to say...

[Guest Ti0n3r]

KyleSarnik, you nailed it

[Average Joe 0]

Quote[/b] ]You know what they say; if you don't have anything good to say...

try and eat your own head?

I agree with the engine comment Ukraine made being that its so flexible great mods have came along and made it more of a milsim then it ever was to begin with.

[AdmiralKarlDonuts 0]

ACUs aren't indicitive of just the Stryker Brigade anymore. I've seen pics of soldiers from the 101st, 82nd, 1st Cav, 10th Mountain, 1st Armored, 4th Infantry, and even some ANG/Reserve units with ACUs.

But remember that not every piece of gear that gets "replaced" is removed from service...the ANG and Reserves have 113s and M1A1s, and it's pretty much a given that if the US military deploys in force somewhere, you're going to see ANG and Reserves.

I'd also point out that the Rhode Island Army National Guard operates AH-1 Cobras and has a couple of Special Forces/LRRP units, and plenty of M113s sitting around. I think we still have a couple of OH-6 Loaches somewhere too...there's some wiggle room in who uses what, after all.

[mr reality 0]

Ugh again, OFP was never that realistic to begin with. Sure it had lots of realistic aspects, but this mixed with gaming aspects too. Im sorry but the game that everyone jerks off too about Simulation aint that realistic. I can list of plenty of unrealistic crap about it. Also, the whole campaign, you thought the one in OFP was realistic? It was horrible. Every mission you were a one man army, usually it was "Oh heres some LAWs, go kill those T-80s" or "Here's some satchels, go kill those T-80s". Or "Sneak into the base, and blow up the tanks". It was all retarded. What made this game was its community and its engine that could PROVIDE realism. Not the default game itself.

The problem with that is ArmAs will be more or less the same unless the AI has been updated. It was because your squad had been killed (admitidly this pissed me off about OFP) that YOU had to retrieve the law from your buddies dead body to finnish of the tank. How else could you do it, restart the whole mission-i don't think so...I would also like to know how you actually went about retrieveing the AT weapon. Did you run rambo style into the open to get it then equip it and fire it. I don't think so pal-because you would of had your nuts shot off from the 7.62 ak round that you never even heard coming....One man army this game isn't...If you accomplished a mission on your own it's because you used your brain-unlike many other games where you just use your right hand (and i'm not talking about leisure suit larry either   ).

@SEAL84

I know some units still have the outdated vehicles pressed back into service but we've had those in OFP and although they look better textured and modeled there basically the same. Unless BIS are hideing some content from us then i'll keep quiet about this but i'm not holding my breath.

[nyles 11]

Like I said, the problem is not that some stuff is outdated but more the mix between the latest in technology mixed with equipment that has been dumped on reserves decades ago.

It's the consistency that seems off in some areas. As long as there is either just old equipment or either just new equipment, it's alright, but mixing the stuff too much like I am afraid might happen in Arma - especially mixing vehicles from different branches like Army, Marines and special forces, makes for a weird combination.

The only thing I intended with this thread was to point this dilemma out and offer some possible solutions how to get things to work out nicely for both authenticity and story. That's all. So please concentrate on these points in your replies.

[mr reality 0]

Well Nyles the only way this will happen is with the community made addons. As i see the vehicles in ArmAs to be what we've seen already.

I'm thinking that we wont see a Bradley or a linebaker or vehicles like this because of the USARMY1 pack. We all know how much that cost and to give ArmAs a vehicle list similar to that of the USARMY pack at a much reduced price would have VBS1 haters laughing there tits off. Maybe i'm wrong but it's just a thought..

[meyamoti 0]

Even so..if addons are indeed portable to AA then we don't have much to worry about,they would have advaned scripting,physics,collision and normal maps,doesnt sound like it would keep too many addons away.

One thing I don't understand..you Ukraineboy,if you seem to dislike the game so much then why do you stay? And yes OFP has its unrealistic points..however its what you make it,if you feel like telling your squad to stay in one place and try to go rambo then thats just dandy,or you can be more realistic and stay with your squad and use them as the human shields.

[Daniel 0]

Wow meyamoti, you make AI sound so useful.

[Ukraineboy 0]

Ugh again, OFP was never that realistic to begin with. Sure it had lots of realistic aspects, but this mixed with gaming aspects too. Im sorry but the game that everyone jerks off too about Simulation aint that realistic. I can list of plenty of unrealistic crap about it. Also, the whole campaign, you thought the one in OFP was realistic? It was horrible. Every mission you were a one man army, usually it was "Oh heres some LAWs, go kill those T-80s" or "Here's some satchels, go kill those T-80s". Or "Sneak into the base, and blow up the tanks". It was all retarded. What made this game was its community and its engine that could PROVIDE realism. Not the default game itself.

All in favor of beating up Ukraineboy...

When you will you learn the difference between accuracy and realism, young man? The way you talk about "realism" would make BF2 seem like the most realistic game on the planet, just because all of the vehicles were right. The reality is that BF2 is very UNREALISTIC, not because of what the developers chose what or what not to put it, but because of how bad it tries to simulate a realistic experience. OFP is all about this experience, and when some vehicle name is wrong or some weapon is out of place, nobody is going to give a shit as long as it feels real to them. What ever happened to simulating a fictional situation? Is that still not simulation? It is, and sometimes simulations can be of things that we would never be able to experience in real life, and that doesn't change the fact that it still feels real to the person experiencing it, I mean that's what a simulation is supposed to do - feel real. Back to our vocabulary; I would like to introduce to you a friend of mine; the English dictionary:

Actually you didnt disprove anything, you're arguing the same thing I am. What Im arguing against is this nitpicking of every single small aspect of ArmA all in the "name of realims". We're on the same side here. Also a dictionary isnt the end all source of the meaning or connotation of words. Realism has a much larger connotation and use then what the dictionary says. What my argument isnt that "rarr OFP was shit" its that using the whole annoying argument of "RARR ARMED ASSAULT IS SUPPOSED TO BE REALISTIC, THERE BETTER BE 546 STITCHES ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE ACU JACKET OR IM NOT BUYING THIS GAME!". Or this bullshit about Marines and Military. Who cares!? Just like you said, the game is about the EXPERIENCE and FEELING, not the "realism"

[NeMeSiS 11]

"RARR ARMED ASSAULT IS SUPPOSED TO BE REALISTIC, THERE BETTER BE 546 STITCHES ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE ACU JACKET OR IM NOT BUYING THIS GAME!". Or this bullshit about Marines and Military. Who cares!? Just like you said, the game is about the EXPERIENCE and FEELING, not the "realism"

Well, i have to agree with you (Damned, second time today...)

People should make a difference between realism in gameplay, graphics, setting(story), and the stuff you just described.

While realism in gameplay is most important to me, and a realistic setting is nice aswell, graphics and weapontype/version/number/UCUstuff don't matter at all to me, i dont see the difference between a m16a3/a4, and i dont know who is supposed to wear what camo anyway...

[Daniel 0]

EDIT: Ah scratch that, it came out wrong.

[Ukraineboy 0]

Plus the whole realism issue will be solved by our Modding community. Want your ACU jacket to have exactly 5,567 pixels on it? Go ahead.

[meyamoti 0]

Daniel @ May 27 2006,01:55)]Wow meyamoti, you make AI sound so useful.

Hey...Operation Human Shield (or AI shield) has been a success time and time again ..the only problem is casaulties.

Hmm,yeah i suppose you have a point there Ukraineboy..