Balance v realism?

[Bigglestheman]

I don,t really thick the USA soldiers at this time where really tactical,

indeed the Vietnam conflict has development drugs, such has cocaine. what definitives turn you soldiers into supposed ''kiling machines'', what in true they become extreme stupid and ''fearless''.

Also Vietcong where a lot more tactical for the environment, i mean a soldier how can dig itself is a big advantage in jungle warfare where camouflage and hiding give real benefits,

the USA army only started to become real Sirius after 1980, such prove of what i saing is they loose,

common face it kind, USA LOOSE Vietnam.

basic. in urban warfare USA soldiers win, in jungle Vietminh would smash then. my opinion.

and stop saying the USA soldiers are superior infantry. that,s not true. and even less true at this time, where the USA army has just a child compared to those days.

Do you have proof that US infantry is not great?
Did you participate in Vietnam? <-- I am guessing a huge no for this one.

Balance is fair but realism is also a great thing to have.

[Cassius]

Finally, an ontopic reply.

Yes, that's exactly the problem - political victory. How can one simulate the average american and his TV set in a video game like this. In the end, all comes down to tickets, meaning that the only way for VC/NVA to win is to drain their opponent of tickets.

I dont think its that complicated. Look at the parameters for victory used by the forces. Give the Americans all the assets in the world, but far less tickets.

[Spartan10k]

I don,t really thick the USA soldiers at this time where really tactical,

indeed the Vietnam conflict has development drugs, such has cocaine. what definitives turn you soldiers into supposed ''kiling machines'', what in true they become extreme stupid and ''fearless''.

Also Vietcong where a lot more tactical for the environment, i mean a soldier how can dig itself is a big advantage in jungle warfare where camouflage and hiding give real benefits,

the USA army only started to become real Sirius after 1980, such prove of what i saing is they loose,

common face it kind, USA LOOSE Vietnam.

basic. in urban warfare USA soldiers win, in jungle Vietminh would smash then. my opinion.

and stop saying the USA soldiers are superior infantry. that,s not true. and even less true at this time, where the USA army has just a child compared to those days.

The US military never lost a battle in Vietnam. We really messed up any Vietnamese military formation that was foolish enough to engage us on our terms. We lost because our politicians decided it was time to pull out.

[Arnoldio]

It doesnt matter. This topic is pretty useles. A BLUFOR soldier is killed per 189067593286759367 Insurgets killed down there in middle east, yet in PR we see Insurgents dominate the field.

Its just a game and both sides need to have their ups and downs.

Go watch a movie if you want someone to win allways.

[Jigsaw]

Versus threads are not allowed on these forums so thread locked.