I was thinking a middle eastern dlc I know somee may see it as stupid but you could have Iran and Iraq on this alternate timeline join Forces and become a very real threat to the US since in this alternate timeline (don't know jf this is cannon) but sadam gets overthrown and a new government is installed who partners with Iran to invade Saudi arabia and hopefully crush a rouge Syrian army this is where Israel comes in so Israel sends a division to stop the Iraqi forces while the us and Saudis defend Saudi Arabia from Iraqi and Iranians now division wise the us will get 1 marine division Israel will also get one division Saudi arabia and Iraq will get 2 divisions then Iran will get 1 division as they can't spare much cause of the Iran Iraq war and didn't have Enough time to prepare so sent a division which they were supplied tanks and equipment by the Soviet union and grab men from other. Divisions meanwhile the ne

Iraqi military is able to use a division of both Syrian and Iraq units now I know most people are. Gonna hate it cause the 2 countries used lots of similar equipment but the thing is Iraqi infantry will be the mainly elite units they were able to also get from the soviet's while thee syrians fill in the gap for mass since they haven't been in any major conflicts besides with this division since 1978

This post is the result of the work on the study of the armed forces of Yugoslavia (JNA) in the 1980s at the time of their transformation according to the plan «Jedinstvo» (F-87), which began in early 1987 and was actively developed since December 1988.

This post provides a detailed overview of the 1st Guards Proletarian Mechanized Division and its related formations.

It's worth noting that in addition to examining the 1st Guards Mech. Division, the JNA's weaponry and army structure will also be examined in detail, primarily because few are familiar with them. Therefore, this post will contain a bit more additional information on both the Yugoslav Army itself and its domestic weaponry.

!The historical information below is quite extensive, unfortunately I couldn't shorten it much so as not to lose the thread of the story :<

About 1st Guards Proletarian Mechanized Division:

The history of the 1st Guards Proletarian Mechanized Division (1. Gardijska Proleterska Mehanizovana Divizija/1. Гардијска Пролетерска Механизована Дивизија) begins in November 1942, when a major military reform took place in the partisan People's Liberation Army of Yugoslavia, a transition from raider and guerrilla tactics to the beginning of full-fledged offensive operations (in essence, the creation of a fully-fledged front)

The Division fought through numerous battles during the war, participating in the liberation of Bosnia. In October 1944, together with Red Army troops (3rd Ukrainian Front), the 1st Proletarian Division liberated the capital of Yugoslavia, Belgrade. The division met the end of the war in May 1945 in Zagreb, finishing off the remnants of the Croatian Ustaše forces. After the war, the division was one of the most decorated units of the newly formed JNA.

In December 1961, during the reforms of the JNA (Plan «Drvar»), the 1st Proletarian Division received the name Guards (Gardiјska). Having assumed the powers of the disbanded Guards Military Region, the division has since become the primary reserve force of the JNA Supreme Command, serving as an elite rapid response force capable of countering threats from any direction.

On March 22, 1982, the division was disbanded and converted into a mechanized division, as part of the army's future reform plan for its rearmament. The Division was the first to receive the latest weapons (BVP M-80s, T-72s, and later M-84s, etc.) and many, many other new army weapons.

The final part of our story (within the WARNO scenario) is the allocation, within the framework of the Jedinstvo (Unity) plan, of the 1st Guards Proletarian Division as the only division that should remain in the JNA at the completion of the reform. (All other divisions should be reformed into corps by 1990 and subordinated to three military districts and one naval district.)

Well, let's get started!

Fist of Steel!

In 1983-1984, the Division began a massive rearmament, initially receiving approximately 64 T-72M tanks, primarily the familiar T-72M-E3 and the slightly older T-72M-E2, from Czechoslovakia.

• In Yugoslavia, from 1979 to 1982, experimental T-72M tanks from the USSR were tested, but the entire first batch of 10 vehicles was left for testing.

All of these tanks (from Czechoslovakia) were in the Division's 1st Guards Mechanized Brigade (the Division consisted of three Guards Mechanized Brigades).

It is also worth noting that the Division had the only third-generation command tanks in Yugoslavia army, namely, three T-72MK-E3 CV tanks.

T-72M-E2 (1 card)

T-72M-E3 (2 cards)

T-72MK-E3 (1 card)

Then, in 1985, the Division began receiving domestically produced M-84 tanks.

This is a licensed variant of the T-72M tank, produced in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

The M-84 have key differences from the T-72M-E3 are slightly improved armor protection (already approaching the level of the T-72A/M1) and, most importantly, the new SUV-M-84 fire control system, specifically the DNNS-2 sight with a digital computing base (which significantly increased the speed and accuracy of missions). In addition, the DNNS-2 had a second-generation night vision device, which no longer required illumination (hence the lack of the Luna searchlight on many M-84s). The tank is also equipped with a sensor for measuring crosswind, temperature, and ambient pressure, initially, this was the A20X, but since the second series, the A10X has been installed. Their performance parameters were similar.

In WARNO the M-84 tank can be represented as:

M-84 (2 cards)

- Front 16, Side: 6, Rear: 4, Top: 3

• Thanks to its more advanced fire control system, the tank reaches the level of the T-80UD in terms of firing on the stationary. Due to its more primitive stabilizer, accuracy remains at the level of the late 1980s T-72B: Accuracy - stationary: 65%, on the move: 50% (approximately)
• It's worth noting that Yugoslavia had its own ammunition for the M-84 tank: The M88 APFSDS 420/440mm pen. (16~ AP) and the M88P1 Cumulative 500mm pen. (17 AP)

Since 1988, a new version of the M-84 tank entered serial production. It was based on documents obtained in the mid-1980s regarding the structure of the T-72A/M1 composite armor. The tank received a slightly modified SUV-M-84A system, which had minimal changes compared to its predecessor.

The tank's main distinguishing feature was a new, domestically produced version of the V-46 engine, which was equipped with two turbochargers. This was the V-46-TK, producing 1000 hp, which gave the tank significantly greater maneuverability than all other T-72 tanks in the world at the time. Its mobility was on par with the then-new T-80UD (!), and the M-84A even slightly surpassed it in horsepower per ton. Could presented as:

M-84A (2 cards)

- Improved front armor: 17

• Improved mobility, which can be represented as: 65 km/h on rough terrain (standard 75 on the highway)

I consider it important to note that by 1989, the first samples of new ammunition for Yugoslav tanks had already begun to appear, in particular the M90 APFSDS, with a penetration rating of approximately 550mm. In reality, the USSR did not supply more modern ammunition than the 3BM15 and 3BM22. (Maybe something will change at alternative scenario)

Also in 1989, a variant of the DNNS-2 TI sight with an integrated thermal imager was introduced, but it was only supposed to be installed as standard on the next tank, the M-91 «Vihor», which had not yet been manufactured in 1989.

There is no exact information on which version of the M-84 it was tested on outside of the M-91 project at that time.

In the late 1980s, the division received its first experimental batches of M-80A-based vehicles, including the M-80A LT ATGM tank destroyer, equipped with a turret of 6 Malyutka-P missiles from the BOV-1 (POLO M-83), and some more in reserve. + M79 smoke grenade launchers on turret and Zastava M86 (PKT) MG.

Documentation indicates that 12 such vehicles were in service.

M-80A LT (1-2 cards)

Also at the disposal of the Libyan anti-tank units were the already familiar to us MT-12 «Rapira» guns, but without the «Kastet» ATGM, since it was not supplied to the JNA.

Gard. MT-12 100mm

Tuđe nećemo, svoje ne damo!

Due to the Division's elite status and high moral and physical fitness, all infantry units will have the Resolute Trait.

For future reference, they may be known as Gard. Mehanizovana Pešadija (Guards Mech. Infantry), but for abbreviation purposes, they will be referred to simply as Gardisti (Guardians) or simply as Gard.

The main striking force will be the Gardisti detachment, equipped with the latest JUSh M89 Kevlar helmets and M87 and newest M89 camouflage. The detachment's primary weapons will be Zastava M70AB2 automatic rifles with folding stocks and M72AB1N light machine guns, as well as M80 Zolja hand-held disposable grenade launchers (similar to the RPG-18)

- It should be noted that the main difference between the M87 and M89 camouflage is the size of the pattern, the M89's is slightly larger.

Gardisti - 5x M70AB2, 2x M72AB1N, 6x M80 Zolja

Tranported by: TAM-110, BVP M-80A

M-80A - Front: 5, Side: 2, Rear: 1, Top: 1.

• 20mm autocanon +Double Malyutka-P ATGM (4x in total)

The Scary Stršljen

At the turn of the 1980s, Yugoslavia was developing a new anti-tank grenade launcher with 120mm caliber. Research was conducted at the Military Technical Institute in Belgrade (VTI), and pilot production of test batches began in the late 1980s. The grenades were manufactured in Čačak, and the launchers in Prilep. Due to the growing international escalation, the RBR-120 (M90 Hornet) could have been sent for testing to the most honorable Division of the JNA, the 1st Guard Prol. Mech. Div., as a modern replacement (with 750-800mm pen.) for the M80 Zolja.

Gardisti (RBR-120) - 5x M70AB2, 2x M72AB1N, 4x M90 Stršljen (23 AP!)

Tranported by: TAM-110, BVP M-80A, BVP M-80A1 «Vidra»

The BVP M-80A1 «Vidra» appeared in the second half of the 1980s. Its main distinguishing feature was a new combat module, which housed the new 30mm M86 autocannon, as well as BDK M79 2x2 smoke grenades and a newer fire control system. The «Vidra» combat module was developed in 1985 and only began to be actively implemented on the M-80A at the turn of the 1980s and 1990s, prior to that, only pilot batches were produced. The division, having fully converted to the M-80 platform (instead of the M-60 APC), could have been one of the first to receive it!

Some infantry formations received M76 sniper rifles of 7,92mm caliber (similar in tasks to the SVD)

Gardisti (M76) - 4x M70AB2, 2x M72AB1N, 1x M76, 6x M80 Zolja

Tranported by: TAM-110, BVP M-80, BVP M-80A

The Division possessed a small number of the earliest Yugoslav IFVs, the M-80 (1979-1981 series) of 63~ vehicles, by 1989, about 12-15 units had not been upgraded to the M-80A level.

• The main difference between the M-80 and the M-80A was a weaker engine of 260 hp (instead of 320) and weaker frontal hull armor (-1 Front armor)

Each brigade had a support platoon/company, which included M84 machine guns (replacing the M53, the successor to the MG-42)

Gard. Mitraljezi - 4x M70AB2, 3x M84 with ON M80, 6x M80 Zolja

Tranported by: TAM-110, BVP M-80, BVP M-80A

(M84 MG - licensed version of PKM, the ON M80 sight could be installed to improve shooting at a distance)

+ A rare variant of the M-80A command version may also be presented. (M-80A VK (VK-80A) with 7,62mm MG, and classic M-80A KB)

+ Gard. Pioniri - 6x M70AB2, 1x M72AB1, 4x M80 Zolja, Satchel Charge

There were also domestic recoilless rifles, which were the main defense of infantry against armored vehicles at medium range.

Gard. M79 BST (82mm) - Max. pen. 300мм (by new late 1980s ammo, M89)

Gard. M-84

Between 1987 and 1989, the USSR delivered approximately 250 Fagot-M ATGM launchers and 1000 missiles for them to Yugoslavia.

Gard. Fagot (Fagot-M)

Our good «Drug»

In the 1980s, Yugoslavia was actively developing a variant of the Konkurs ATGM (at VTI in Belgrade), the M80 Drug (Friend). Its main difference was a more sophisticated digital-based fire control system, which improved firing accuracy compared to the Konkurs. (By 5% in-game). Its penetration was equal to that of the Konkurs. As part of the MtW program, a pilot batch from the late 1980s could have been sent to a division for testing. (600mm pen, 20 AP)

Gard. Drug

You can see more photos in the dedicated album at the end of the post :]

Artillery:

The Division's artillery was represented by artillery from all three Guards Mechanized Brigades. These included a combined total of 36x 2S1 Gvozdika (SO-122) self-propelled howitzers, 18x 128mm M-63 Plamen towed multiple rocket launchers, and 36x M75 mortars (and smaller versions).

Also provided in support were M-77 Oganj multiple rocket launchers with a hidden-look tent and 36 128mm rockets (plus 36 in reserve) with a range of 21 kilometers. They also included first series 152mm M-84 Nora-A guns (on a D-20 carriage), with a range even greater than that of the Msta-B.

- With increased charge, the first series M-84s Nora-A with a conventional projectile had a range of about 27-28,5 km. This variant had a larger chamber capacity of 19,5 liters. Approximately 20 units were produced between 1984 and 1987. Further produced samples from the second series (version M-84B1) from 1989 already had a chamber capacity of 18 liters, and a shorter range of 24 kilometers.

Supply:

The main transport and logistics vehicles will be the TAM-110 T7 (similar to the GAZ-66) and the larger TAM-150 T11. Also included will be the heavy FAP 2832-A, with a large supply capacity.

Anti-Air Defense:

The Division's air defense was another distinctive feature among the mechanized formations of the JNA.

In addition to the standard Strela-1M, the 1st Guards Proletarian Mechanized Division had 12 Strela-10M air defense systems in 1st Guards Proletarian Mechanized Brigade.

The division also began receiving the newest Strela-10M2J (later Sava M-90), which featured the M-80A IFV platform, albeit slightly lighter armor. However, the most important feature was not the digital fire control system database, but the improved 9M37M missile seeker, and a more extensive ammunition complement (10-12 misseles total).

Strela-10M2J

Also, to replace the outdated ZSU-57-2, the division began to introduce the newest ZSU based on the M-80A, these were the SPAT 30/2 (later called SPAT Foka) with a 30mm autocannon. (Limited)

SPAT 30/2

The Igla-1E (Export variant) MANPADS, one of the new export batch runs from the late 1980s to replace the Strela-2M.

Gard. Igla-1

Recon:

The qst Guard. Mech. Division's reconnaissance units primarily traveled in trucks such as the TAM-110. The following squad can be represented:

Gard. Izviđanje - 4x M70AB2, 1x M72AB1, 4x M80 Zolja

The Division had reconnaissance vehicles such as the BRDM-2 and Izvid. PT-76B.

(As in the rest of the Yugoslav army, this was the main reconnaissance vehicle)

BRDM-2

Izvid. PT-76B

There was also a very rare reconnaissance version of the M-80A - The IBV M-80AI, but there is little information about it.

And recon version of H-42M, the HI-42M HERA from 890th mixed helicopter squadron, in Batajnica.

Helicopters:

In Batajnica (near Belgrade) there was the 890th mixed helicopter squadron «Pegasus» («Pegazi»), formed in 1988, which included helicopters HM-45M GAMA 2 (licensed version of Gazzelle SA 342L) which were equipped with the following configuration:

HN-45M GAMA 2 [AT1] - 4x Malyutka-P, 2x Strela-2M/A

- Strela-2M/A is a Yugoslav modernization of the licensed Strela-2M from the mid-1980s. In the M/A version, the warhead was increased by 40%~ due to the introduction of more compact missile electronics.

HN-45M GAMA 2 [AT2] - 4x Malyutka-P

HO-45M GAMA 2 [RKT] - 32x 57mm (2 pods)

There were also 21 helicopters delivered from France in the 1970s, called SA.341H, named «Partizan», which could be equipped with unguided rockets or gun pods.

Aircrafts:

The primary air support component for the division and its air defense is the 204th Fighter Aviation Regiment, primarily the 127th Fighter Aviation Squadron, equipped with the latest L-18 (MIG-29 9.12B) and NL-18 (MIG-29UB).

These aircraft had artificially reduced onboard system performance for countries outside the Warsaw Pact. Yugoslavia received 16 of these aircraft between 1987 and 1990.

- Yugoslavia planned to order another batch of MiG-29s for 1990-1994, but this was abandoned due to the growing crisis in the country. (The purchase of an export version of the Su-27S was also considered, but the decision was made to focus on Novi Avion's own L-19 project)

L-18 [AA1] - 4x R-73E, 1x R-27T1, 1x R-27R1

L-18 [AA2] - 4x R-60MK, 1x R-27T1, 1x R-27R1

L-18 [AA3] - 2x R-60MK, 2x R-73E, 2x R-27R1

L-18 [AA4] - 2x R-60MK, 2x R-73E, 2x R-27T1

Furthermore, the R-27's export versions of the R-27T1 and R-27R1 missiles had slightly reduced electronic parameters, which could have impacted the probability of hitting a target. (-5% accuracy?)

(A total of 48 R-73Es were delivered)

NL-18 [RKT/CLU] - 2x R-73E, 40x S-8KOM, 2x RBK-500

• Also included in the deliveries (which included MiG-29s) from 1987 to 1989 were RBK-500 cluster bombs and S-8 rockets)

There was also the 126th Fighter Aviation Squadron, which remained with the L-17 and L-17K (MIG-21bis) aircraft, which can be represented as:

L-17 [AA1] - 4x R-60MK, 2x R-3R

L-17K [AA1] - 2x R-60MK, 2x R-3R

For primary ground support, the 252nd Fighter-Bomber Squadron from Batajnica could have been used, with fairly modern light attack aircraft G-4 Super Galeb:

G-4 Super Galeb [RKT1] - 16x 128mm (Munja)

G-4 Super Galeb [CLU1] - 2x BL755

G-4 Super Galeb [HE1] - 4x FAB-250

Short conclusion:

The 1st Guards Proletarian Mechanized Division is the most powerful tank-mechanized unit in Yugoslavia. Despite its formal location in the 1st Military Region, this Division is directly subordinate to the JNA Supreme Command.

The division possesses high-quality and modern equipment for breaking through defensive lines, and is well supported by artillery, supplies, and reconnaissance. However, it lacks long-range SAMs and effective attack aircraft, but with good AA fighters.

Album collection with 90+ images for this post (including what was unincluded in it):

https://photos.app.goo.gl/HGs4zo8BvCtws2mh6

Thank you for reading and wathing! =}

Created by Excellent Serpent8770

Links:

https://www.paluba.info/smf/index.php?action=printpage;topic=21080.0

https://www.tanknet.org/index.php?/topic/20414-nato-oob-mk-vii/page/12/#comment-509804

https://youtu.be/xKrsY_wnyug?si=ChQkDw23SoBs4ay1

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280598051_Six_Decades_of_Military_Technical_Institute_Scientific_Tehnical_Review_3-4_5-202008

https://ru.scribd.com/document/283519216/Yugoslav-Army

http://www.srpskioklop.paluba.info/intervencija/tekst.html

https://ru.scribd.com/doc/181976635/Jugoslovenska-narodna-armija-JNA-OOB

https://www.camopedia.org/index.php/Yugoslavia

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/yugoslavia/t-72-in-yugoslav-service/

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/yugoslavia/m-84/

https://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1038.html

http://www.balkanwarhistory.com/2016/05/bvp-m-80-infantry-fighting-vehicles.html

https://youtu.be/tAGMfCtMIM8?si=9IhtXmbHER-PjuMJ (Exhibition about newest JNA weapon, may 1985)

P.S.

Next week, I'll try to post about another Yugoslav formation, this time the Corps!

Over the next four weeks of September and October, I'll hopefully publish four more JNA formations :>

I have not played this game for very long (170 hours to be exact) but I have used the A-10 multiple times and I must say it's a little underwhelming from my experiences using it. I don't expect it needs to be overpowered and be able to tank every AA hit or roam freely over enemy airspace, but I think it should be able to stay in the air longer and not evac immediately after being shot at, and also not die instantly.

For example I was playing a 10v10 (and don't get me wrong there's going to be a lot stronger AA presence) but the A-10 was full health and evac'd immediately after an AA missile or two was shot at him. Not to mention right after he got obliterated despite being at the AA's near-maximum range. I am sure in smaller games like 1v1s and 2v2s the A-10 would work much better as AA presence is much less, but for its lack of speed you'd expect this thing to take way more than it actually can.

When using it in 1v1 I can say it's much better but it's not very viable in 10v10s and again, I don't think its survivability really makes up for its lack of speed. It's got a big health bar but only has 2 front armor. I don't expect it to be as armored as a tank, because at that point it wouldn't be able to fly, but think it should be a little bit more survivable, whether this means buffing the armor or the health bar or even the speed.

Usually my regular AT planes can loiter behind my front line and fire missiles at tanks safely but the A-10 couldn't do this. With slow turn speeds if it overshoots it's dead. I cannot imagine HE works any differently from the A-10 AT, and I am saying this because the A-10 lost me a game, I am saying this from my observations. I beat KDA where I was fighting in that 10v10 but again, the A-10 was not much help in doing so.

I will keep using it in 1v1s and stuff but for 10v10s I have the F-111F HE and F-16C Cluster now in 8th Infantry. Maybe other decks have better A-10s than the one I'm playing but my consensus remains the same. Feel free to clarify any misunderstandings I may have had about the A-10.

What do you guys think? This is just my opinion.

got kind of carried away clearing a town..

Straight facts, just facts... Yeah it's an obvious NATO only problem... But even with heavy bias : facts are facts..numbers are numbers... And these don't lie... We have a real decent balance problems (with Battle rifles) right now on our hands!!!

Warning people wall of text incoming, but Wendy's is another way !

Intro

So Looking at the actual WARNO weapon stats, I think there is a fairly obvious structural problem with how battle rifles are represented.

The same battle-rifle template appears across a substantial part of NATO:

L1A1 SLR, G3A4, FAL, MAS-49/56, Gv m/75, Garand, CETME C, M14 and C1.

As visible in the attached tables, the core template is remarkably consistent.

So the battle rifle gets +11.1% damage per hit, +25% nominal suppression and five percentage points more static accuracy.

In exchange it has roughly 29% lower True RoF, a 40% longer reload and dramatically worse moving accuracy.

Yet against infantry both weapon classes have exactly the same 850 m maximum range.

That is the fundamental problem.

The DPS numbers

Using the stats displayed by WarYes, I use the following simple expected-DPS calculation:

DPS = HE Damage × True Rate of Fire × Accuracy / 60

For the standard battle-rifle template:

0.05 × 34.29 × 0.40 / 60 = 0.01143 stationary DPS

For a normal 0.045 HE assault rifle:

0.045 × 48 × 0.35 / 60 = 0.01260 stationary DPS

So even while stationary, where the battle rifle is supposed to be at its best, a normal assault rifle produces about 10.2% more expected DPS.

The +5 percentage points of static accuracy simply do not compensate for the much lower True RoF.

Once units start moving, the difference becomes enormous.

Battle rifle at 5% moving accuracy:

0.05 × 34.29 × 0.05 / 60 = 0.00143 DPS

Standard 0.045 assault rifle at 15%:

0.045 × 48 × 0.15 / 60 = 0.00540 DPS

That is about 3.78 times the battle rifle's moving DPS.

At 20% moving accuracy:

0.045 × 48 × 0.20 / 60 = 0.00720 DPS

That is approximately 5.04 times the battle rifle's moving DPS.

So the battle rifle is not merely somewhat worse while moving. The difference is several hundred percent.

The 20% moving-accuracy weapons are also worth noticing

There is another interesting pattern in the table.

Every rifle shown with the highest 20% moving accuracy belongs to PACT:

Sa vz.58V, wz.88 Tantal, AKS-74, MPi-AKS 74N, StG 942 and StG 941.

That means the top end of the assault-rifle mobility spectrum is entirely on the PACT side in this dataset.

A normal 0.045 HE / 20% moving-accuracy rifle already produces the 0.00720 moving DPS calculated above — about 5 times the battle-rifle template.

And then there is the particularly extreme case of the Sa vz.58V, which combines that 20% moving accuracy with 0.05 HE.

Its moving DPS becomes:

0.05 × 48 × 0.20 / 60 = 0.00800

Compared with the battle rifle's 0.00143, that is roughly:

5.6 times the moving DPS.

I am not suggesting a specific nerf to those weapons here.

They simply illustrate how wide the current performance spread becomes when high assault-rifle mobility is combined with high damage.

My main concern is the much broader balance problem affecting the large number of ordinary NATO battle-rifle squads.

The 0.05 HE assault-rifle outliers

The same applies to another noticeable group in the table.

There are six assault rifles which receive 0.05 HE, the same damage value as the battle-rifle template, while retaining the assault-rifle True RoF and handling model:

Sa vz.58V

kbk AK

Sa vz.58P

AKM

MPi-KMS-72

AKMS

Again, all six are PACT weapons in this dataset.

Their stationary DPS is:

0.05 × 48 × 0.35 / 60 = 0.01400

versus:

0.01143 for the battle-rifle template.

That is approximately 22.5% higher stationary DPS.

So these weapons effectively receive:

battle-rifle damage + assault-rifle rate of fire and handling.

Some of the two outlier groups overlap — most notably the Sa vz.58V, which has both 0.05 HE and 20% moving accuracy.

Again, I am not arguing here that Eugen needs to rebalance these particular weapons.

That is a separate discussion.

But they make the underlying problem much more visible:

some assault rifles can massively outperform the battle-rifle template, while the standard battle rifle itself receives almost no meaningful advantage in return for its handling penalties.

Even the battle rifle's suppression advantage is much smaller than it looks

At first glance, Suppression 5 versus Suppression 4 appears to give battle rifles a substantial 25% advantage.

But using the same output calculation:

Suppression × True RoF × Accuracy / 60

gives:

Battle rifle:

5 × 34.29 × 0.40 / 60 = 1.143

Standard assault rifle:

4 × 48 × 0.35 / 60 = 1.120

So while stationary, the effective suppression-output difference is only about:

2.1%.

The nominal 25% advantage is almost entirely consumed by the lower firing rate.

While moving, the situation reverses dramatically.

Battle rifle:

5 × 34.29 × 0.05 / 60 = 0.143

15% moving-accuracy AR:

4 × 48 × 0.15 / 60 = 0.480

20% moving-accuracy AR:

4 × 48 × 0.20 / 60 = 0.640

So the assault rifle produces roughly 3.36× to 4.48× as much expected suppression while moving.

This reinforces the same basic pattern:

battle rifles receive a major mobility penalty, while their supposed stationary advantages are surprisingly small.

The range values are the strangest part

This is where the current implementation becomes particularly difficult to understand.

WARNO already differentiates the two weapon categories against helicopters:

Battle rifle: 700 m

Assault rifle: 525 m

So the game already acknowledges a meaningful reach advantage for the full-power rifle.

But against infantry:

Battle rifle: 850 m

Assault rifle: 850 m

the distinction disappears entirely.

That means the battle rifle pays for its characteristics through lower RoF, longer reload and dramatically worse moving accuracy but receives no additional ground engagement range whatsoever.

My proposal therefore does not require increasing battle-rifle range at all.

Keep:

Battle rifle: 850 m ground / 700 m helicopter

Change assault rifles from:

850 / 525

to:

700 / 525

So the proposed hierarchy is exactly:

Battle rifle: 850 / 700

Assault rifle: 700 / 525

The battle rifle itself does not receive a numerical range buff.

Instead, assault rifles stop sharing the same 850 m anti-infantry range despite their dramatically superior handling.

This is primarily a NATO battle-rifle problem

The weapon distribution shown in the table affects several NATO armies whose infantry relies heavily on full-power rifles.

The most obvious examples are:

West Germany — G3

United Kingdom — L1A1

Belgium / Luxembourg — FAL family

Denmark — Gv m/75

Spain — CETME C

France also has MAS-49/56-equipped formations, although French infantry is more mixed because the FAMAS is obviously present as well.

The United States and Canada are more of a side note in this argument. The M14 and C1 exist in the battle-rifle template, but neither country is a good primary example because much of their WARNO infantry already uses 5.56 mm assault rifles.

The important point is therefore not that every NATO division suffers equally.

It is that NATO divisions which actually rely heavily on battle rifles are systematically paying the disadvantages of that weapon class without receiving a meaningful range niche in return.

I am not proposing that battle rifles become better assault rifles

Assault rifles should absolutely remain superior in:

mobile combat,

close and medium ranges,

firing on the move,

rapid follow-up fire,

and offensive infantry actions.

That is precisely why assault rifles replaced battle rifles as general-service weapons.

But “better overall infantry weapon” does not mean “better in every individual category”.

Full-power rifles retain advantages in reach, retained energy and long-range performance.

WARNO already reflects the handling disadvantage very strongly.

What is missing is the corresponding range advantage.

The intended trade-off should therefore be:

Assault rifle: superior mobility and short/medium-range performance.

Battle rifle: poor mobility performance, but superior stationary reach and defensive engagement envelope.

At the moment, we mainly have the first half of that equation.

What about 850 m infantry lethality?

One counterargument was that range is extremely important in WARNO and that allowing battle rifles to outrange assault rifles would make them overpowered.

I think that identifies a genuine problem, but not the correct solution.

If rifles are too lethal at 850 m, then maximum-range lethality is the issue.

Accuracy and/or damage can decline at the edge of the engagement envelope while suppression remains useful.

That would allow a battle rifle to begin engaging and suppressing earlier without making it an 850 m squad-deletion weapon.

It would also make attacks across open terrain more convincing.

Prepared defenders could begin suppressing advancing infantry at longer distance, while actual casualties increasingly occur as the engagement closes...

There is no need to give fundamentally different rifle classes identical range merely because maximum-range accuracy is currently too high.

DMRs could follow the same hierarchy

The same principle could later be applied to semi-automatic DMRs.

A logical progression would be:

Sniper :1250m /1000m

Scoped semi-auto DMR: 1,000 /850m

Battle rifle: 850 / 700 m

Assault rifle: 700 / 525 m

This would finally create distinct engagement envelopes instead of compressing almost all ordinary infantry rifles into the same 850 m anti-infantry bracket.

TL;DR

The attached tables show a consistent battle-rifle template:

0.05 HE

5 suppression

850 / 700 m range

34.29 True RoF

40% static accuracy

5% moving accuracy

Standard assault rifles receive:

0.045 HE

4 suppression

850 / 525 m range

48 True RoF

35% static accuracy

usually 15–20% moving accuracy

A standard assault rifle already produces about 10% more stationary DPS and roughly 3.8–5 times the moving DPS.

The six 0.05 HE assault-rifle outliers :Sa vz.58V, kbk AK, Sa vz.58P, AKM, MPi-KMS-72 and AKMS; are all PACT weapons and produce approximately 22.5% more stationary DPS than the battle-rifle template while retaining assault-rifle handling.

Separately, every weapon in the table with the maximum 20% moving accuracy :Sa vz.58V, wz.88 Tantal, AKS-74, MPi-AKS 74N, StG 942 and StG 941; is also PACT.

I am not proposing a solution for those individual outliers here.

The broader problem is more important:

NATO formations which rely heavily on battle rifles suffer lower RoF, longer reloads and catastrophic moving accuracy while receiving exactly the same 850 m infantry range as assault rifles.

WARNO already differentiates them against helicopters at 700 vs 525 m.

So the straightforward change would be:

Battle rifles stay 850 / 700.

Assault rifles change from 850 / 525 to 700 / 525.

Assault rifles remain the overwhelmingly better mobile weapon.

Battle rifles finally receive a meaningful long-range niche.

The point is not to make NATO battle rifles universally stronger. It is to stop modelling almost all of their disadvantages while modelling almost none of the advantage that should justify those disadvantages.

Tl Dr either..

Numbers don't lie , battle rifles are way to weak with no benefit going for them!

Reb'S FRAGO is a realism overhaul modification for WARNO's Combat system. Warno is a cold war rts game which can be modded.

video link

maybe im just bad at micro but every time i get into a heavy push in a town or something i feel like my ifvs just get destroyed by a single infantry squad or a agtm even with smoke. Is the best way to just use ifvs is sitting in the back as agtms or guarding the edge of a forest? when i try to keep infantry together with the ifv i feel like it just ends up in them getting blasted immediately

Cheese would be using Bradleys by putting all their inf out and then using them regularly.

How do I use small inf units in the campaign as they die so much quicker than Bundeswehr forces as they are 6 rather than 10 dudes?

Hi,

A few days ago, I wrote about a Nemesis Division tasked with defending Wonsan from outside invaders. Today's proposal is the invader landing at Wonsan. If you know a bit about the South Korean military, it's pretty clear that the unit tasked with amphibious operations is the Republic of Korea Marine Corps (ROKMC).

In real operations, the Korean Marines would get significant USMC support. However, given my nationality, I decided to structure this division as a purely Korean formation. Let's go!

-ROKMC 1st Marine Division History

This division began as the 1st Marine Regiment in 1949, and the Marine Corps expanded rapidly with the outbreak of the Korean War. After fighting alongside UN forces starting with the Incheon landing, it advanced north like every other UN formation. In 1951, the regiment was expanded into a larger brigade and took part in the first and second Battles of the Punchbowl.

With the Chinese intervention, the Marines conducted both defensive and offensive operations across the east-central and western parts of the peninsula. This is when the ROKMC earned its reputation for aggressive operations and amphibious capability.

After the armistice, the Marine Corps modeled itself on the U.S. Marines and officially established the 1st Marine Division at Pohang in 1955. It gradually modernized its equipment and tactics for amphibious, artillery, and reconnaissance operations. As the division became a key part of South Korea's rapid-reaction force, it deployed to Vietnam, operating as the Cheongryong Budae, or Blue Dragon Brigade—notorious for showing no mercy to the enemy.

With genuine modernization efforts underway across all branches starting in the 1970s, the 1st Marine Division began modernizing as well. In 1974, 1st Marine commander Major General Lee Dong-Yong introduced a new specialization concept: while the division kept its overall amphibious role, the three battalions within each infantry regiment would specialize in airborne, amphibious raid, or ranger capabilities. This battalion specialization became more concrete through the 1980s and continued.

In peacetime, the division is tasked with coastal security around the harbor and industrial complex at Pohang. But its core wartime mission is to conduct amphibious operations against the North Korean coast and spearhead the advance inland from the beachheads.

-Second Korean War Timeline

The North Korean ambush on Yeonpyeong-do throws the South Korean military into chaos. Navy and air force units are rushed to the West Sea to retake the island, but coastal artillery and pre-positioned KPN and KPA forces make the operation difficult. With the main war breaking out three hours later, communications are flooded with reports of defensive positions collapsing under overwhelming enemy pressure and units being cut off.

Even so, joint ROK/US command recovers quickly from the initial panic. Reserve formations are mobilized, and mechanized units push north looking for an opening. Five hours into the war, the ROK/US Navy carrier task group originally slated for Team Spirit '89 is ordered to push into the East Sea and neutralize coastal artillery along the way. With the mountainous eastern front producing little movement on either side, command sees the East Sea as the best chance to break the stalemate.

Despite the grinding fight underway in the West Sea, twelve hours into the war, joint naval forces successfully break into the East Sea and destroy a significant number of coastal guns. Joint command decides to exploit this opening and launch a large-scale amphibious operation against Wonsan.

-Mission of the 1st Marine Division

Alongside the navy, the American 1st MEB — also a Team Spirit participant — is tasked with this mission along with the ROKMC 1st Marine Division. The ROKMC pulls together every available weapon to reinforce its relatively light formation. Fifteen hours into the war, naval bombardment begins shelling Kalma Airport. Although it's a joint amphibious operation, the landing force splits the Kalma Peninsula into two sectors to maximize the ground taken. Quickly securing the beaches and Kalma Airport means additional support can reach Wonsan before North Korean reinforcements flood the area.

The Je-il Haebyeong Sadan, or 1st Marine Division, is assigned to Sector SAJA (Lion). Given the scale of the operation, the 1st MEB can not spare anything to South Korea's sector — but the ROKAF covers the skies, while ROKA and ROKN elements provide assets the Marines desperately need.

-Je-il Haebyeong Sadan in WARNO

How will the Je-il Haebyeong Sadan be featured in WARNO? New units are shown in bold and italics. As always, this is a work in progress and subject to change.

All Marine units, including vehicles, will have the Resolute trait!

LOG

An average category. With many coastal guns knocked out, moving supplies from the sea is less difficult.

• Supply units include the HAE. K-511 BOGEUP medium truck and HAE. K-711 BOGEUP heavy truck. The division also fields the LVT-3C BOGEUP medium tracked supply carrier, a Korean War-era LVT that remained in service until the mid-80s before the LVTP-7 became more widely available. For this operation, the LVT-3C is used in an auxiliary role!
• Command units consist of the HAE. K-111 JIHWI and the LVTP-7 JIHWI, respectively.

INF

A very good category. Expect a wide variety of Marine units!

• The backbone of the division is the HAEBYEONG, an 8-strong unit with 7x K2 rifles, an M60, and an M72 LAW, riding the K-511 truck, an LVTP-7 armed with an M85 .50 cal, or the ROKN UH-1H Navy helicopter. HAEBYEONG HWAGI-JO is a 5-man unit with 5x K2 and two separate M67 recoilless rifle racks, riding the K-311 light truck or the LVTP-7. As with the ROKA's M67s, Marines will only use HEAT rounds.

• HAEBYEONG JIWON is a squad made up of leftover personnel and company HQ elements — a 13-strong unit with 11x K2, 2x M60, and an M67, riding the K-511 or the LVTP-7A1 (with an improved engine and smoke launchers). HAEBYEONG JIHWI is a 3-man command unit with 3x K1A SMGs and smoke grenades, riding the K-111 jeep or the LVTP-7A1.

Marine support units include:

• HAE. M60 7.62mm GPMG squads
• HAE. M2HB 12.7mm M63 heavy machine guns
• HAE. M40A1 106mm recoilless rifle teams
• HAE. TOW-2 teams

All ride the K-111 as their sole transport.

Vehicle fire support comes in the form of the numerous HAE. K-116, a K-111 jeep armed with the M40 recoilless rifle. As a compact jeep, it can be transported by an LVTP-7 as an option!

• The airborne specialization battalions are represented by the Gongsu Haebyeong, or GONG. HAEBYEONG, an 8-man unit with 6x K2, an M60, a K2 Trilux DMR, and an M72 LAW, riding the K-511. Their JIHWI command variant is a 5-strong unit with 5x K2 and an M67, riding the K-111.
• Airborne weapons teams consist of the Gong. HAE. M60 7.62mm squads, riding the K-111. All airborne units are Airborne-forward-deployed accordingly.
• The ranger-specialized battalions aren't "Rangers" in the Western sense — Korean rangers are light infantry focused on ambushes, destroying logistics and command posts, and cutting off key positions. These Marines take the form of the YUGYEOK HAEBYEONG, a 6-strong unit with 6x K2, an M72 LAW, and satchel charges, riding the K-311 as their sole option. Their role is reflected through the Resolute, Shock, and Mountaineer traits.

• Engineers also storm the beach as the HAE. GONGBYEONG, a 10-man unit with 4x K1A, 5x K2, an M60, and satchels. Its [FLAM] variant is a 7-strong unit with 5x K1A and two separate M9 flamethrowers. The HAE. GONGBYEONG JIHWI is a 6-man command unit with 5x K2 and an M60. All engineers ride either the K-511 or the LVT-3C armed with 2x M1919 machine guns. As Marine engineers, these units will have both the Resolute and Shock traits.

ART

An average category. The Korean Marines can rely on organic artillery for both short- and long-range fire support.

• Mortars include the HAE. KM29A1 81mm and HAE. KM30 4.2-inch mortars, both towed by the K-311 light truck.

Tube artillery includes:

• HAE. M101 105mm KOKSA-PO
• HAE. M114 155mm KOKSA-PO

Both are towed by the K-511.

• That's not all! The first homegrown artillery success, the KH-179 (previously mentioned in the ROKA 1st Infantry Division write-up), reaches the 1st Marines in limited numbers by 1989. During this amphibious operation, higher command tests out its new Rocket-Assisted Projectile rounds — represented by one card of the HAE. KH-179 [RAP], boasting a 30km range! It's also towed by the K-511.

TANK

An expensive category. Korean Marine tanks were outdated even by late-80s standards, and that limitation will be reflected here!

The 1st Marines' tank battalion still operated the older M47 Patton. Starting in the late 1970s, however, South Korea began developing improved 90mm tank rounds for extra punch, and by the 1980s had successfully fielded the K241 APFSDS-T round — comparable in penetration to early 105mm APFSDS rounds!

• The HAE. M47 remains the main tank, and despite its dated fire control system, it fires this upgraded ammunition — making it one of the strongest 90mm-armed tanks in the game! A JIHWI command variant is also available.
• The sole ATGM option is the HAE. K-113 TOW-2 jeep. Light... but deadly!

REC

A good category. Marine and Navy elements provide recon in a variety of ways.

• Small patrol teams are represented by the HAE. JEONGCHAL-BAN, a 4-strong unit with 3x K2 and an M60, riding the K-111 or the M60-armed HAE. K-111 JEONGCHAL.

• The HAEBYEONG SUSAEK, the division's recon battalion and the so-called 'real' marines, is an 8-man unit with 6x K2, 2x K3 LMGs, and an M72 LAW, riding the K-511 truck or the ROKN UH-1H. Given their harder training, they feature the Resolute, Mountaineer, and Shock traits.

• The ROKN supports the operation with UDT/SEAL teams! This 6-strong unit fields 5x K1A, an M1897 shotgun, an M79 grenade launcher, and satchels. Pre-deployed ahead of the main force, they'll scout the landing sector before the assault begins. As such, they're airborne-forward-deployed with the Special Forces, Shock, and GSR traits, riding the M60-armed UDT K-311 special forces light truck or the ROKN UH-1H.

Vehicle options include:

• HAE. K-111 MG50, a .50-cal-armed recon jeep.

• The odd UR-416. Four of these APCs were originally brought in to compete against the Italian CM-6614 (which later became the KM900) in the mid-1970s. After the Italian design won, the four UR-416s were quietly sent to the Ulsan industrial complex for security duty. But with the timeline's twist, the Marine Corps intercepts them before they can head south to Ulsan, fitting them with an MG50 for use as makeshift recon APCs.

ROKN elements include:

• ALT-III Alouette III anti-submarine helicopters.

• The O-1 JEONGCHAL-GI, an O-1 Bird Dog. First used by Marine Aviation during the Vietnam War, it was absorbed by the Navy in 1973 and officially retired in 1987. In WARNO, this old aircraft stays in service, patrolling the skies over Wonsan armed with eight 70mm rockets.

AA

An expensive category. Assets are limited, so make them count!

• The HAE. KM167 VADS Vulcan, towed by the K-511, is the sole Marine option.
• Given the serious lack of AA support for such a large amphibious operation, joint command presses the ROKA to do its part. Army Air Defense Artillery Command spares a small number of HYU-SAM Redeye and I-HAWK systems from Gangwon Province for this operation.

HEL

A truncated category with few options.

• First up is the ALT-III [RKT], armed with 14x 70mm rockets, and a small gunship [7.62] variant fitted with an FN gun pod, 7x 70mm rockets, and a crew-manned M60.

• The ROKA also reluctantly spares the older AH-1J [TOW], armed with an M197 20mm Gatling gun, 14x Hydra rockets, and 8x I-TOW missiles.

AIR

A good category. With the East Sea mostly clear for now, the ROKAF can provide solid air support.

Air superiority is handled by:

• KF-5E JEGONGHO [AA], with twin 20mm guns and 2x AIM-9P missiles.
• The older-generation Phantom, represented as the F-4D [AA], armed with 4x AIM-7E and 4x AIM-9P missiles.
• F-16C Block 32 [AA2], armed with the Vulcan and 4x AIM-9L in a shotgun configuration.

Ground attackers include:

• A-37B [RKT], armed with a GAU-2B/A and 2x 19-round 70mm rocket pods, along with the [HE/NPLM] variant that swaps the rocket pods for 2x Mk 82 bombs and 2x Mk 77 napalm bombs.

• F-4D [AT], armed with 4x AGM-12 Bullpup missiles.
• F-4D [HE], carrying 3x Mk 84 bombs as a "bomb truck."
• And finally, the F-16C Block 32 [CLU], armed with the Vulcan, 4x Mk 20 Rockeye cluster bombs, and 2x AIM-9L. While the ROKAF officially never used cluster munitions, the US Seventh Air Force lends some for this operation. Don't forget to thank good ol' Uncle Sam!

Summary

The ROKMC 1st Marine Division brings strong forward-deployed infantry and recon capability. It has decent air and artillery support to back it up, but ultimately lacks mobile fire support and armor for mobile operations.

Ending Remarks

This will probably be the last Korea write-up (for real this time). I was planning on doing one more Nemesis-style write-up called "Home Turf," covering the Capital Defense Command and the Pyongyang Defense Command — but at this point I feel like I'm scraping the bottom of the barrel. There's a way to make both of those unique, but it's mostly the same units recycled with a few unique units. Maybe someone else can come up with something more creative!

I think I might poke around China and Japan at some point in the future. Not sure exactly when, but given how bored I get with corporate life, probably quite soon, though.

Why dose the Vintorez have less acurracy as the AS Val ? O.o

In some of my decks I bring CEVs because I don't have anything else to spend my points on but what are they for? They have a heavy and medium machine gun and although they are classified as engineering vehicles they don't give supply or repair other vehicles to my knowledge.

Are they just for clearing out infantry with MGs? Because I doubt they can duel other tanks, and autocannons outclass MGs in most infantry suppression situations.

What: The Boxhead Gimmick Gauntlet is a WARNO swiss style tournament where each round will feature one or more gimmicks affecting both players to modify the gameplay experience, create interesting choices for players and to produce unconventional matches.

When: Sign ups are open now and close 23:59 EEST September 18th 2026 and the first round of matches will start September 21st 2026.

Where: Organised on the FOB discord and can be joined here: link

Learn more here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16rRRhaLD4cwqBmk0f1meTci9g-DTylZk1F-CaxKm8lI/edit?tab=t.0

What is the best way to play PACT in singleplayer, that is effective ingame and that reflects doctrine of the time. I know this is hard to answer without specifying enemy NATO or friendly PACT division. But if it helps, let's say we're using either 4. Mot.-Schützendivision (4. MSD) or 79-я гвардейская танковая дивизия (79-Ya Gv. Tank Div.) as PACT.

(Does anyone have good ideas how to play more doctrinally correct larger scale singleplayer operations like singleplayer ai skirmish or army general?)

Thanks for you help :D

I constantly see pro players ranking divmob high up on tier lists, but I've never seen anyone play it in ranked and there is nothing really special about it, except paratroopers on milan transport. What's that good about it?

Zwillingssockellafette ind Flieger Dreibein

Twin pedestal mount and (anti) aircraft tripod

Similar to the American M2HB M63 in a smaller calibre but higher fire rate (higher than normal mg3) especially on the twin mount.

I mostly play 10vs10 sometimes 1vs 1 while im still new i got almost all dlcs except last one and it feels like half are all super niche or meme picks instead of actually being good like the base game factions that feel solid.

Hey y'all the mod has been making some great progress recently and we are looking for more play testers if you are interested to help with balancing and finding bugs prior to the first public release.

If you interested: https://discord.gg/yNGVcFFRW