Wargame: Red Dragon

[leibniz]

Anyone else playing this?

I bought this recently. Expected it to be hard, but it still surprised me, there is lots of stuff going on.
Destruction seems easier than conquest.
Didnt play too much though, I've been busy.

Is there a way to git gud? I cant really find lobbies for beginners.

[ColonicAcid]

I got this as well. Like 4 months after the Op but whatever lmao.
I'm waiting for the Panzer Prince of Wuttenburg to teach me but soon I'll be the best damn cold war commander this side of the west has seen just you wait.

[Cipher3]

I've played European Escalation and I want Red Dragon.

[Snake2512]

Anyone else playing this?

I bought this recently. Expected it to be hard, but it still surprised me, there is lots of stuff going on.
Destruction seems easier than conquest.
Didnt play too much though, I've been busy.

Is there a way to git gud? I cant really find lobbies for beginners.

Best way to get good is to grab Claudio and have you two blokes flog it out with me.

Fight people who are better than you, that is how you get good. Chuck us a steam name and ill help you out.

[ColonicAcid]

mememememeemeememe



serbians are fucking stupid in terms of anti air.

they are literally the best anti air nation... THE BEST ANTI AIR NATION ARE THE SERBS.


so why the FUCK did good old bill clinton manage to carpet bomb the shit out of serbia uh???

[Lumbermancer]

That's because they shot down F-117 that one time.

[Sometinyprick]

i just fuck about in singleplayer and then go and get myself ruined in multiplayer lobbies cause I don't know jack shit

edit
just realized i'm a dumbass and this was a fuckin necro

[1g88a]

That's because they shot down F-117 that one time.

Its funny reading up about the conflict and knowing all the impressive stuff their SAM crews managed but then when it comes to their airpower it was almost repeatedly something like "The mig-29s deployed were either shot down by NATO fighters (and possibly friendly fire by AA forces) or returned to base due to severe malfunctions (mostly the latter)"

[Bolien]

Is this game still shit? Because like it was so shit when it came out.

Arty spam and a lack of a sensor system for planes/SAMs was cancer.

Single player was alright I guess.

[1g88a]

Is this game still shit? Because like it was so shit when it came out.

Arty spam and a lack of a sensor system for planes/SAMs was cancer.

Single player was alright I guess.

The main problem the game currently has is that Israel is fucking overpowered, but other than that its fine. Arty spam is only a problem if you play the scrub mode (destruction) IDK what you mean about a lack of a sensor system though.

[XSI]

I´ve got this and suck at it.
Not a huge suck, but still enough to fail pretty often

It's really not that hard, there's a lot of tricks to learn and most of my trouble is wrestling with the interface and reaction times.
Also fuck Israel

Game is pretty good. Bit expensive maybe but it works well enough. Kinda simplistic for my tastes but still decent

[Bolien]

I'm referring to no real modeled sensors in terms of ECW and ECM.

[1g88a]

I'm referring to no real modeled sensors in terms of ECW and ECM.

Oh right ECM is just a debuff to AA accuracy that planes can have, sorta like how a vehicle that is classed as Small is harder to hit (though ecm can vary much more wildly in effectiveness) in addition, some SEAD aircraft have modest stealth ratings.

e:
[youtube]_fUkGFEvVr0[/youtube]

[Cik]

""""""""""""""""""""modern combat game"""""""""""""""

>NO SENSOR MODELLING

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

WHY WOULD YOU TRY TO MODEL AIR COMBAT PAST ONE NINE SIX ZERO YEARS WITHOUT A SENSOR MODEL HOLY SHIT FUCK EUGEN STUDIO OF FUCKING IDIOTS

>NAVAL COMBAT
>A GAME DICTATED BY OVER-THE-HORIZON SENSORS
>NO SENSORS

FOR
WHAT
PURPOSE

[1g88a]

""""""""""""""""""""modern combat game"""""""""""""""

>NO SENSOR MODELLING

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

WHY WOULD YOU TRY TO MODEL AIR COMBAT PAST ONE NINE SIX ZERO YEARS WITHOUT A SENSOR MODEL HOLY SHIT FUCK EUGEN STUDIO OF FUCKING IDIOTS

>NAVAL COMBAT
>A GAME DICTATED BY OVER-THE-HORIZON SENSORS
>NO SENSORS

FOR
WHAT
PURPOSE

Naval was a mistake and I'm not sure how you'd work "realistic" sensor systems into a RTS of this type without making it terrible. While Wargame certainly has MORE "realism" than many other RTS games it isn't a sim like those Combat Mission games.

For instance, and I'm surprised none of the people wanting more sensor simulation haven't noticed this, is that cluster munitions ingame are all of the AP HEAT variety and cannot harm infantry for balance purposes, and thermobaric weapons are also represented as HE bombs with the NAPALM attribute. So instead for air sensor modeling you get a flat Air Detection stat for each plane and an Air Detection stat for mobile AA units and radar based AA can be targeted by SEAD planes with anti-radiation missiles but you can avoid this by turning the radar off until you're ready to fire like in real life.

Naval combat however was just a mistake and doesn't even work on a gameplay level for various reasons, which is why nobody plays with naval enabled.

[Cik]

i could think of a dozen ways to implement sensors in a game of this type, half of which are probably less unwieldy than the way they are implemented already

also >aircraft >no altitude simulation
>SAS with blowpipes shooting down nighthawks

lmao wut

god why this game is a sin against warfare

the worst part is, i could actually like it if it did a decent job of being balanced, but as it is (at least, last time i played) the balance was ATROCIOUS PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF SENSORS

>30 a-4 skyhawks everywhere because they outnumber the missiles of the """""""SAMs""""""" you can use in this game, attacking things with PINPOINT ACCURACY WITH ZERO PERCENT CHANCE OF FRIENDLY FIRE

>said skyhawks can ACTUALLY FIND THEIR TARGET BECAUSE THERE IS SOME SORT OF RIDICULOUS PANOPTICON DATALINK THAT SOMEHOW WORKS ON SOMETHING WITH 1960s TECH

>lowtech > hightech because hightech PAYS FOR THINGS THAT AREN'T EVEN MODELLED

RE

[XSI]

Yeah, it really is a game

And with it come the flaws of shit balancing
It's still fun, but lets be entirely honest here. If you take it as a simulator you're not going to enjoy yourself

[Cik]

>patriot system is a standalone TEL

it just launches missiles without a radar

anyway yeah i complain mostly for show i got over the fact that it was going to be dumber and dumber as it went along and they would never bother to fix any of the game's growing systemic problems.

[1g88a]

i could think of a dozen ways to implement sensors in a game of this type, half of which are probably less unwieldy than the way they are implemented already

also >aircraft >no altitude simulation
>SAS with blowpipes shooting down nighthawks

lmao wut

god why this game is a sin against warfare

the worst part is, i could actually like it if it did a decent job of being balanced, but as it is (at least, last time i played) the balance was ATROCIOUS PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF SENSORS

>30 a-4 skyhawks everywhere because they outnumber the missiles of the """""""SAMs""""""" you can use in this game, attacking things with PINPOINT ACCURACY WITH ZERO PERCENT CHANCE OF FRIENDLY FIRE

>said skyhawks can ACTUALLY FIND THEIR TARGET BECAUSE THERE IS SOME SORT OF RIDICULOUS PANOPTICON DATALINK THAT SOMEHOW WORKS ON SOMETHING WITH 1960s TECH

>lowtech > hightech because hightech PAYS FOR THINGS THAT AREN'T EVEN MODELLED

RE

Fun fact: Autoloaders are modeled (anything tank with a 10 round per minute rate of fire or higher) in that such tanks do not receive morale penalties to rate of fire. A high end units are actually good. If you want to talk about something really weird, but I guess somewhat sensible in a way, its how infantry are way better "meatshields" than the apcs they rode in on, since the average tank gun does 3/4 HE damage and the average squad has 10 men(health), but anything with a high AP value will instantly kill a lightly armored vehicle.

In a way this makes sense, you wouldn't want a BMP to take a LAW to the side right off the bat, leaving your motostrelki squad without fire support, you'd want the squad to keep the enemy infantry out of LAW range of it so that it can provide fire support. Lowtech>Hightech only really happens in cases like the video I posted where a gang of crappy tanks (or in this case, Stugs) get in real close to a superior tank and through combined firepower/range bonuses to kinetic AP. The biggest problem from a gameplay+"realism" standpoint imo is how two APCs with automatic grenade launchers can stunlock (and in the process, chip away at it and inflict crits that do everything from lower accuracy to blowing up all the ammo and inflicting heavy damage) a heavy tank until they're out of ammo.

Also the SAS get stingers, and the only way you're getting that many skyhawks is if you were like playing 10v10 and everyone on your team quit.

[Lumbermancer]

Planes were a mistake. So were ships. European Escalation was the best.

[Cik]

planes are fine, but they need semi-realistic limitations and strengths.

the whole fucking problem with them is that they are extraordinarily strong pinpoint accurate and can concentrate 500 points of force on the map at any point

meaning flanking maneuvers or breakthroughs are fucking impossible because >lolplanes fuck you

if there was anything resembling radar / ground mapping radar / limitations, talk-on limitations, ToT limitations, or realistic weapon gimbal limits this would vanish

it's the same core problem as artillery; enormous force concentration ability without ANY OF THE REAL LIFE LIMITATIONS

no wonder the game is a aircraft swarm/artillery city when none of this shit is modelled, it's like allowing tanks to shoot through hills, obviously it's going to cause problems.

[1g88a]

Planes were a mistake. So were ships. European Escalation was the best.

Planes are good. Breakthroughs and whatnot are totally possible. Planes can only target ground units that your other ground units see, so flanking is possible. It only turns into people turtling and exchanging arty/bombs when its Destruction mode because nobody wants to risk any units because any unit lost adds to the opponent's score. In Conquest, the true mode, this problem vanishes as its all about taking control of the map.

[XSI]

>Not playing total destruction where you need to either conquer the entire map or literally destroy every single unit the opponent has