Search Results
6/16/2025, 8:54:12 AM
>>95879644
>who TF wants to play the gooks? No one. It's like playing Zulus, you're just playing the fodder that the other players gets to mow down
Only if you're playing a Vietnam game that isn't at all based on history.
A good wargame will be nicely balanced regardless of how asymmetrical the forces are. the NVA/VC may not have helicopters or on-call artillery and air strikes, but they have tunnel networks, intimate knowledge of the area, are stealthy at moving through the terrain, often have local support, are lighter than the US, and made extensive use of booby traps.
Many of the Vietnam engagements I read about that weren't clearing out bunkers consisted of the NVA/VC ambushing US forces, inflicting significant casualties, then attempting to melt into the jungle before the artillery or air strikes showed up. They'd take their casualties with them too so the US couldn't get any body count.
I don't remember reading much about VC/NVA hordes - I'm guessing this is just a way for more basic games to 'balance' things without including any of the non-hardware strengths the VC/NVA possessed.
The US on the other hand were incredibly noisy and undisciplined, which made them a very easy target for ambushes. US LRRPs said they learned more from going on a patrol with ANZACs than they did from most of their training and jungle experience so far.
ANZACs on the other hand were crack jungle experts, and would watch the VC/NVA while remaining hidden.
A good Vietnam wargame will give you a balanced game and a good feeling of how combat in the period went down. I'm guessing a bad game will give you hordes of VC that need to be gunned down as they run at machine guns in the open.
>who TF wants to play the gooks? No one. It's like playing Zulus, you're just playing the fodder that the other players gets to mow down
Only if you're playing a Vietnam game that isn't at all based on history.
A good wargame will be nicely balanced regardless of how asymmetrical the forces are. the NVA/VC may not have helicopters or on-call artillery and air strikes, but they have tunnel networks, intimate knowledge of the area, are stealthy at moving through the terrain, often have local support, are lighter than the US, and made extensive use of booby traps.
Many of the Vietnam engagements I read about that weren't clearing out bunkers consisted of the NVA/VC ambushing US forces, inflicting significant casualties, then attempting to melt into the jungle before the artillery or air strikes showed up. They'd take their casualties with them too so the US couldn't get any body count.
I don't remember reading much about VC/NVA hordes - I'm guessing this is just a way for more basic games to 'balance' things without including any of the non-hardware strengths the VC/NVA possessed.
The US on the other hand were incredibly noisy and undisciplined, which made them a very easy target for ambushes. US LRRPs said they learned more from going on a patrol with ANZACs than they did from most of their training and jungle experience so far.
ANZACs on the other hand were crack jungle experts, and would watch the VC/NVA while remaining hidden.
A good Vietnam wargame will give you a balanced game and a good feeling of how combat in the period went down. I'm guessing a bad game will give you hordes of VC that need to be gunned down as they run at machine guns in the open.
Page 1