upcoming tactical RTS Wargame: Red Dragon

i think most of us here have experience with mainstream RTS games, but i wanted to point out a specific one.

Wargame: red dragon is what i feel the closest thing you get to a simulation of how units fare in a conflict between east and west in a cold war gone hot.

it still remains a game of course, but the game is a graphical marvel and the combat is impressive and tactical awareness plays a big part. for example, you can send your tanks into an open field where they might have superior range. but might be taken under fire by a guided missile team firing at them from the treeline. and like in real life tanks do not fare well against AT-missiles. besides a lot of tactical concerns to keep in mind you need to keep an eye on logistical matters too, as you will need refuel, repair and restock ammunition of your troops if you expect to make a difference in the long run. the game sports a huge amount of units ranging from the beginning of the cold war to supposedly the 1990's according to the game info.

red Dragon will feature various nations (NATO + PACT and according allies in europe and asia). and according weapons. infantry, aircraft, vehicles and in red dragon also naval units will be introduced. its expected to release somewhere around March/April.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAnR1ZtMyJo

its predecessor Wargame: airland battle is out for a while and i play that one occasionally. the campaign sucks but skirmish is fun enough.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:I've been playing the wargame series for quite some time. What really bugs me about it is the really unauthentic stats on many units(especially pact ones) always put in the name of "balance"(such as the vulca being more accurate than the Gsh-23 , abrams to have faster ROF than T-72B, T-80B armored less than the chieftain and the ITOW gets more AP capability than the konkurs, etc.

It could really help if some people with military knowledge like yours  could come to the wargame forum to debunk a bunch of so called "experts" there trying to justify the completely unauthentic stats in the game with some historical justifications.

For example one idiot there said that the Su-15 shouldn't be ingame since it was barely used in the far east and was somehow inferior to all western fighters, yet he has no problem with adding the MiG-25  

i agree with both points, "balanching" is a thing that certainly was annoying at first. like the vulcan (Pivads) versus the "shilka" ZSU-23-4. and its indeed rediculous that the m1 is faster firing than the t-72(b). in real life, the M1 is not as great as it sounds either. the americans just like to portray its like the holy grail of MBT's while the t-90 and Leo2A7 are more potent nowadays...not to mention more affordable and you propably wont get cancer in your ass after serving in the latter two. the M1 armour is made of depleted uranium after all.

and i really dont know why, maybe its because the game is made by a civilian staff without someone with millitary practical knowledge of both east and west. im dont know. it still remains a great game tough in my opinion. and i cant wait for the game-speed adjustable function in red dragon so i can enjoy the spectacle more of MI-24's firing and armor rolling in line formation over a field while firing.

lol, well...we got such armchair-general experts everywhere. even here!! . im really sorry but my days trying to talk some sense into such people is done. or their justifications on bullshit. its pretty much a never ending argument really. in the end of the day it just matters how its applied in real-life war.
people like acting like an armchair-general jerk like you said we have them in the airsoft-world too. we have a team in airsoft that likes to act like they are "millitary proffesionals" too. and yes, they got their hardware pretty good sorted out and in general got good tactics. but...whenever it suits them they play outside the rules. shooting people in the face up close, ignoring hits and propably my favourite.....disrespecting combat veterans that organised the event by saying "we pay your salary and did not thrown away our education to a proper life".

just trying to make a point people like that are everywhere. they got internet, watch a few youtube vids and wiki-posts and suddenly they are experts. and even if they are wrong they twist it untill it sounds like they are right even if they are not. and they have no practical experience in the millitary to base any claims on.