Red Army = most effective force !

[whdonnelly]

So far, in my games, the Red Army usually does very well up until the mid 80s, for 2 reasons. Most NATO tanks don't seem to be able to take a punch very well, and the cheaper Soviet units always seem to allow enough reserve to mop up after the main engagement has worn out the units that open the fight. That last rifle company with RPGs is deadly to tanks and TOWs that just slaughtered the AFVs.
Maybe I need to work on my doctrine, but my NATO usually gets overwhelmed.
Will

[RVPERTVS]

Regarding soviet MBTs in the game: I can�t believe they don�t pack TIs until 1993..I know there's always Mobhack but, is that historically accurate? That�s an important soviet handicap against NATO tanks during the 80�s, so I don�t know if it�s "the" most effective army in the game.....I keep playing as the ruskies anyhow.

[PlasmaKrab]

The first Russian (not Soviet) tanks to use TI sights were upgraded versions of the T-90 and T-80UM series using nonstandard imagers based on the imported Catherine sensor technology (I think). SO it does look like the Soviets hadn't put much research into thermals until too late. As far as I can recall, some of the clip-on ATGM TI sights were based on domestic technology, but with the fall of the USSR, the service schedule turned out to be much the same.
The last generation of Soviet tanks (T-64B/72B/80B & T-80U) used much-upgraded night sights with cascaded image intensifier and active IR converted (shorter wavelength than TI), which were way cheaper than Western thermals and quite possibly better than represented in the game regarding range and resistance on obscurants (don't quote me on this though).

[Alpha]

Pls. post in the new thread created by me !

WP/Nato polls + discussions )))

1. Infantry (now active !)

Later:

2. Missiles (AA/AT)
3. Arty
4. Tanks
5. Engineering/reliability of equipment
6. Training/hardness of troops

[Artur]

Very good initiative gents. I played a lot with NATO WP armies in the mid 80�s. IMO NATO rules because of the TI once NATO troops run out of smoke and the visibility is high then WP has advantage otherwise NATO kicks ***.

Artur.

[Kuklinovsky]

Dear guys!

Soviet Army wouldn't have encountered any difficulties in conquering Western Europe in the event of CONVENTIONAL war with NATO. It goes without saying for many self-evident reasons and both Soviets and NATO knew that very well. That is why NATO took cover under its nuclear umbrella in fear of Soviets. Well, the Soviets weren't sure if NATO could really use nukes in conventional war but price was to high for them to check it. Therefore Cold War had never changed into hot war up to the USSR's downfall.

Of course, from purely economic point of view such NATO military strategy was very effective tool because nuclear weapon is far more cheaper than conventional one. Thus NATO countries were able to be rich and secure but Soviets became more and more poorer due to necessity of maintaining huge and practically unuseful army. The end of this history is known...

One main lesson taken from this history is that if you build a powerful army you must use it better sooner than later. Otherwise you shall lose without one shot and go down in flames!

[Smersh]

nvm. don't want to get into a cold war fight

[mr_clark]

In MBT I made the experiance that from the 70s to the early 80s and the massive increase of TI equipment in western forces the Red Army is indeed a formidable force. Though the training level is not too good you get decent hits with your equipment being close to always being the most modern on the battlefield.
Though against massive unsuported tank rushes ATGM (especially TOW) can be a real killer.
I love playing small '78 campaigns with, playing a company of first tier T-80s... It's amazing how the obsolete 90mm and non SABOT 105mm rounds bounce of the forward armor. (Well except those from the British and German guns...)
But well you have loads of arty to deal with that...

[Marcello]

"Soviet Army wouldn't have encountered any difficulties in conquering Western Europe in the event of CONVENTIONAL war with NATO."

It depends on the timeframe.In 1979,likely. In 1989, not so much.

[Smersh]

It depends on the timeframe.In 1979,likely. In 1989, not so much.

do you mean strictly technically or also considering the political situation of the warsaw pact.