Ukraine

[Mad Russian]

If we could do Red on Red in the game we could do Ukraine 2014. There may be a way to do that by creating an OOB for the Ukrainians independently of the Soviets.

I'll check into that.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Tazak]

Terrorist???? who's calling them terrorists these days - nevermind noticed it was made by the Ukraine government [;)]

[SwampYankee68]

Clearly a totally hypothetical scenario, as the Russians are only sending in humanitarian aid... Perhaps you can create a scenario in which the Russian "Aid Workers" must successfully deliver their teddy bears & ginger snaps? [:'(]

[Tazak]

ORIGINAL: Swamp_Yankee

Clearly a totally hypothetical scenario, as the Russians are only sending in humanitarian aid... Perhaps you can create a scenario in which the Russian "Aid Workers" must successfully deliver their teddy bears & ginger snaps? [:'(]

delivery options include BM21 rockets and 2S7 shells free of charge

[SwampYankee68]

Those are some dangerous teddy bears...

[Richie61]

I am loving the equipment being used over there!







[:D]

[TheWombat_matrixforum]

That stuff might be from a museum, but you're still just as dead if you get shot by an old machine gun....

[CaptCarnage]

I wouldn't mind if you spend your efforts on different things than on current affairs. Historic events, fine - alternative histories, all good. But a conflict that hasn't been resolved yet will lead to endless discussion about who is stronger, weaker etc. Be careful not to be seen as picking sides.
Ukraine 2014 doesn't add anything good to the mix.

[zakblood]

bit one sided maybe[X(][8|]

[Richie61]

Agree. Did you notice the rifle the guy is holding? Check out the type. It isn't Soviet [;)]

I like old rifles too [:D]

[Phoenix100]

What type of rifle is it? For those as ignorant as me.

Picking sides? Yes, as Devs wishing to make money (and avoid offending possible customers) you would certainly have to be careful about picking sides (though that financial reason is surely the only one to avoid picking sides?). But I don't think that would be difficult. The present game doesn't seem to pick sides at all.

As for adding something interesting into the mix - I disagree - I think it would be topical and very interesting, and I assume not so one-sided if NATO was in with Ukraine. That Ukraine is a currently unfolding tragedy makes it different to WW3, of course, which was no tragedy at all, but many here happily play WW2 games etc without worrying about what that might 'mean' in terms of respect for the real human participants. Me included. There are Ukraine scenarios over in CMANO (which actually do appear to take sides) which seem popular.

[Richie61]

ORIGINAL: phoenix

What type of rifle is it? For those as ignorant as me.

He's holding a German K98 Mauser like mine (top gun). On a side note the bottom gun is a Soviet 1941 Mosin Nagant in my picture.

[Phoenix100]

The pic seems to have disappeared, Richie.

[lee perry]

Beware, it could be the first game in which terrorists win in the end [:D]
Not really politically correct [:D]

[CaptCarnage]

The original alternative history Flashpoint is balanced and doesn't pick sides because the Devs want it to be.
Mad Russian has repeatedly said scenarios are designed so we the players can't win by much. Balanced - a design choice.

Try now to make a Ukraine-scenario balanced. Red on red won't work because of balance - Russians are way more powerful. Wait? Russians? They are not involved in this conflict. Who is the foe then? Separatists? No one knows what kind of equipment they have? Who is the foe in your scenario, Mad Russian?

Russia hasn't admitted that separatists are using their equipment so any scenario is picking sides because we all don't know what's going on. Historical scenarios are nice because we have Orbats and know the outcome. Alternative histories work nice because we have realistic Orbats and you can let your fantasy go nuts on scenarios - which is what makes Flashpoint work with balanced scenarios.

CMANO scenarios include NATO assets to introduce balance - but that wouldn't be red on red anymore, right? It's a different thing. Just stay out of Ukraine for a while, I'd suggest. Flashpoint is a strategy game for fun, with challenging scenarios - it's not a what-if wargame simulator.

[SwampYankee68]

Russia hasn't "admitted" it but unless NATO and US Intelligence are fabricating information it is pretty clear Russian equipment AND forces are involved in the fighting...

[Richie61]

ORIGINAL: phoenix

The pic seems to have disappeared, Richie.

The guy on the right with the flip flops one [:D]

[Phoenix100]

Flashpoint is all 'what-if'. And CMANO is for fun too, no? Ukraine plus NATO versus Russia plus separatists would be this particular 'what-if', I assume. That would be balanced, wouldn't be taking sides (because it's 'what-if') and I think it would be fun. I'd like some reassurance that as, in Real Life, Russian initiatives to recoup what it considers its appropriate territorial sphere of influence, and as European nations continue to fail to respond and fail to spend even pledged amounts on NATO to put Russia off, somehow blind to the fact that parts of Europe are within what Russia considers its own rightful spheres of influence - I would have fun getting some 'false' reassurance from a what-if scenario where NATO actually did something about it.

[CaptCarnage]

ORIGINAL: Swamp_Yankee

Russia hasn't "admitted" it but unless NATO and US Intelligence are fabricating information it is pretty clear Russian equipment AND forces are involved in the fighting...

That is an extremely Western thing to say. If Devs go along with this, they are picking sides, convicting Russians of doing things they themselves say they are not. That's picking a side and taking a political stance at the same time.

Flashpoint isn't really what-if, it's Alternative History. And it's balanced by design. Throwing NATO in the mix now to balance it would ridicule a reallife situation. It's really better just to focus on Historical what-ifs, not current-day events - because we simply dont have all the info.

[Tazak]

What can NATO do these days, the old massive military camp that was West Germany no longer exists, most western countries have whittled down their armed forces to the extent that their only barely capable of fighting anti terror operations.

The UK is a prime example where at least 1 senior military commander has stated we could not fight the soviets these days with the cutbacks having ripped out the guts of the British army, I think we're down to little more than 200-300 active Challenger2's compared to the 800+ MBTs we could field mid 80's and early 90's .

Does the US have much in the way of REFORGER left in-situ or has the majority of that kit being downgraded or withdrawn. IF Putin lifts the veil of war and wants to have the buffer states that they have had for the last 100 years he's not going to wait 5 months while NATO rebuilds its forces.

What size forces does Russia have these days?, nowhere near the millions of troops and 10,000s of tanks they had in their peak, and have their current tank designs closed the technology gap, what of their training levels, with a more streamlined army that is less reliant on conscription plus learning lessons from recent conflicts they aren't the same old GSFG foes we're familiar with. What about their AD systems, is it still the view that they have the most dense and sophisticated AD system in the world, how will NATO pilots react when faced with a AD system that is generations ahead of what they have faced to date.

Lots of what if questions and a modern European setting can generate some interesting and fairly even scenarios