Quote:
Originally Posted by Suhiir
...
The overall USMC losses in WW II were much lower then those of the US Army, but there were far fewer Marines to start with and their losses tended to be very high percentage wise invading islands (90% in the first wave on Tarawa), then months of nada as they prepared for the next island.
You have to look at situation and circumstance. I totally agree massive losses vs a "second rate" enemy would be unacceptable. Everyone expected serious losses during Gulf I (1991) but circumstance intervened in favor of the Coalition.
Another thing to keep in mind is WinSPMBT is a wargame not a simulation, thus the entire concept in a scenario is to make it challenging to the player, that means losses.
|
Your Tarawa example is exactly what I was trying to say about WWII and WWI scale losses. I was in Africa before, during and after the first Gulf War, so did not pay it as much attention as I otherwise might have. The media, generally no nothings, might have expected heavy losses, but I wonder if the military really did?
Of course your last paragraph is entirely correct, but I was hoping to get scenario designers to set modern Western forces facing non-peer enemies (3rd world or whatever) victory conditions that require them to not lose too many men, while accepting that peer to peer combat is always liable to be very bloody.