Thread 63844236

Modern conflicts seem to be characterized by asymmetry to the point where it makes me wonder about the opposite.
What would a conflict between utterly equal parties be like? How do you plan around an enemy that has exactly the same air to air and air to ground capabilities as you, a fleet of identical size composed of the same types of ships etc?

Duh, if they're the same as you then the correct strategy is to do nothing and so will they
Wa la, no war

Probably focus on mind games and training

>>63844236 (OP)
>What would a conflict between utterly equal parties be like?
1.Russian invasion of Ukraine 2014-present
2. Iran-Iraq War

>>63844236 (OP)
You mean Iraq/Iran, China/India, most of the African conflicts, the South American wars... the Ukraine invasion is moving towards parity as well.

>>63844236 (OP)
It seems that subterfuge and intel operations are the true force multipliers in a conflict between relative equals, especially when it comes to targeting valuable assets. Turning a stalemate into a seal-clubbing if done on a massive enough scale.

>>63844236 (OP)
>Modern conflicts seem to be characterized by asymmetry
Ukraine seems plenty symmetric, tho.

The more people try to learn what this would look like the less they understand.

>>63844236 (OP)
the country with the bigger industrial base will win since they can absorb losses their enemy cannot

>>63844236 (OP)
wars are almost always asymmetrical, because both sides only accept battle when they believe they can win
this means both sides (believe they) have some kind of secret advantage, or tactic, and most crucially have different assessments of each other's strengths than what is the reality
welcome to the fog of war

>What would a conflict between utterly equal parties be like?
a long and protracted war with many skirmishes
we are essentially in a long war with China via several different proxies; Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, now Russia and Iran

>How do you plan around an enemy that has exactly the same air to air and air to ground capabilities as you, a fleet of identical size composed of the same types of ships etc?
a good example of this is found in several later WW1 battles, such as Passchendaele or Vimy Ridge. given that the frontline is static with equal opposing forces, you plan IN SECRET the ability to shift and build up forces in a selected area and then shift and overwhelm the enemy there

>inb4 that's human waves
it's not if you are clever about using your artillery, intel, etc to neutralise the enemy's theoretical ability to gun down your troops

>>63844236 (OP)
Air superiority

>>63844236 (OP)
/thread

>>63844236 (OP)
>What would a conflict between utterly equal parties be like?
trench warfare.

>>63848934
They fixed nukes surviving 3000g impacts

>>63844236 (OP)
Have you been in a cave for the last 3 years? The Ukranian conflict is as close to a symmetrical conflict as you can get, especially in the first year or so.
Tl;dr you get trench warfare

>>63844236 (OP)
Assuming no nukes an unreal amount of lossed would occur within the first 72 hours. All the missiles and drones are going to be expended at this time and the amount of losses in those few days would probably be the same as the entirety of the vietnam war.
After that if there is no winner it's going to be a slow Ukraine style tard war

>>63844236 (OP)
On the contrary I think we're getting the symmetry back. Israel started with ballistic missiles, reinforced with drones, only using air force now because they can. If Iran could fly their stuff over Israel it would guide bomb just like Israel is. Its not asymmetry its increasing elaboration of penetration of increasingly layered defenses.

>>63849657
>Ukranian conflict
>symmetrical
vast disparity of numbers and resources
the only reason the Ukes are surviving is because they're fully funded, equipped and trained by NATO, and for 3 years barely had any air force to speak of

>>63848934
what game

>>63850722
>fully equipped by NATO
>31 murrican tanks in 3+ years
>0 planes from the US

>>63850738
Nuclear Option

>>63850740
>NATO is only the US
>the Ukes manufacture all their own equipment

>>63850722
Interestingly enough the kikes have actually gifted us a look at how a conflict between Russian equipment and a country fully funded, equipped and trained by NATO looks.

>>63850754
>Either they were fully equipped by NATO or they are a perfect autarky

>>63850794
A dictionary doesn't help you understand the various uses of a phrase, Ranjeet.
The Ukrainians have pretty well exhausted their prewar arsenal and only have small-scale domestic weapons manufacturing which itself is funded by NATO. Yes, they are essentially fully funded and armed by NATO.

>>63850784
>Fully funded
the Israelis have a substantial domestic economy of their own, unlike Ukraine
>trained by NATO
they also have their own training and doctrine which is actually quite different, more tailored to their situation
>equipped
even here they diverge significantly in some areas: more extensive drone usage, for example
but yes, broadly speaking you could say their tactics are similar
>how a conflict between Russian equipment and a country fully funded, equipped and trained by NATO looks
we've had that in 1991 and 1973 also

>>63849622
they're getting parachutes in the next patch however

>>63852250
revoker bros, we're so back

>>63848934
I wanna play this so bad but my PC is too shit