Is there any games where you can PROPERLY command a smaller force in guerilla warfare? It's like game developers cannot FATHOM asymmetrical warfare, even in games where it IS possible it's just very very clear that it's not the correct way to play the game.
I just wanna plan ambushes and escape into the mountains man... but no games have proper systems for doing that
only arma 3 antistasi
isn't that multiplayer, I'm no good with people
you can play antistasi all by yourself locally on your own computer to avoid the scary and mean people on the internet
I've always wondered what a game being a realistic Guerilla would be like.
Get your ass beat regularly but when you finally blow up a supply truck, it's the best shit ever.
>I just wanna plan ambushes
I suppose you want the AI to blindly walk into them as well, instead of avoiding them altogether, attempting to detect them, or just burning down whatever forest you're in and then shelling the mountains you ran to.
Yeah, OP obviously wants the fantasy underdog insurgents who draw first blood on some disorganized grunts, loot some rusted pistols and hope for the best until they become capable enough to fend off special forces without any losses. I liked that in Jagged Alliance 1.
Nobody wants to play as miserable lowlifes following impossible orders of suicidal leadership for a vague cause, taking a detour to massacre a village out of hunger, and falling into an ambush themselves because one of their demoralized comrades snitched.
Though the setting probably isn't what you're thinking of, the AI War games are the best example I can think of for asymmetric strategy vs AI. The AI's capabilities are wildly different from the player and are virtually impossible to defeat with brute force outside specific situations.
Unironically Highfleet
>always short on everything
>play intel game with the enemy
>use radio intercept, passive radar and local goatherder rumors to find enemy transports
>once you do, get an attack force in position for ambush or send something fast enough to intercept them before they can send a distress call.
>if you get detected, expect missiles, aircraft and strike groups to all head to your last known position
>your best bet is to vanish into the desert and hope the trail grows cold
>you can use towns to resupply, but if you loiter there you'll eventually be reported
>convincing local warlords to support your cause is vital to your success
Best roguelite ever made, you forgot about nuclear warfame too
While I absolutely adore Highfleet, it's merely intended to play like an underdog simulator, but not entirely balanced as such. Once you get gud at fighting and/or design some proper ships, you can take strike groups head-on and brute-force your way north with little consequence.
>this thread triggers the american
US lost 2 wars due to assymetrical warfare
Soviet Union lost one and almost a civil war
The problem is emulating the morale and home support attrition of the enemy caused by your forces, and also the huge casualties/destruction the player can suffer into a coheremt "story-telling"
he probably meant afghanistan, soviets won twice against the finns
>and almost a civil war
???
Legitimate schizophrenia.
Probably brown too.
america lost
Smells like curry in here
>Legitimate schizophrenia.
>the rest of the world faces when finding out americans have to pledge allegiance to the flag every day of school
>Probably brown too
>america
>white
i Argentina we pledge allegiance once in fourth grade, idk why they have to.do it everyday but itsbimportant for the integrity of a c**t that his habitants respect and defend it from threats
Didn’t Americans win their independence by heavily utilizing guerrilla warfare whenever they were able to?
>American Revolution
don't know, don't care
Not as such. Revolutionaries used light infantry tactics on a larger scale, because most of their militia had been trained in it. Loyalist forces struggled to deal with it mainly because the terrain posed challenges to European-style battle lines, which meant the revolutionaries were generally more successful at bringing force to bear.
Guerrilla warfare wasn't even coined yet.
>Didn’t Americans win their independenc
They won because of France
Like every insurrection ever, they succeeded because of foreign support
if they won because of france, ww1 and 2 were won because of the US. You can't have it both ways.
>ww1
Maybe hastened it a bit. But it was the public unrest that forced the leaders to sign the armistice
>ww2
Nobody (except for deranged rusbots and people who don't know about LL) claims otherwise
None of those were guerilla conflicts
>Maybe hastened it a bit. But it was the public unrest that forced the leaders to sign the armistice
Actually it was the complete and total collapse of the Germany army and their forces being successively routed back across the rhine by a combined anzac/canadian spearhead, mass-mutiny of german soldiers and NCOs and a popular revolution occupying Berlin and forcing the Kaiser to abdicate at gunpoint that brought about the Armistice. The Hundred Days offensive was the definitive combat action that decided the outcome of the war and America's role in it was subsidiary simply because they didn't have time to arrive and deploy in sufficient force by the time it took place.
Germany's defeat in WW1 was comprehensive and total. Had revolution not toppled the German regime, Entente forces would have marched across Germany virtually unopposed.
>Like every insurrection ever, they succeeded because of foreign support
How can this as a mechanic be added to a guerrila game? Something like AoE 3 where you can unlock stuff with victories or maybe doing special missions?
>The US lost...
>The US lost another war...
Again, assymetrical warfare contributed to the very nature of how the conflict was perceived by the home population, there were no drawn lines, clear pictures of enemy bases, trenches being taken or towns liberated. What people saw at home were young kids that should've been at school chasing ghosts and terrorizing what to their conception was an enemy under the guise of farmers and civilians ready to backstab them, but to the viewer at home they were nothing more than rice farmers.
>Didn't the Soviets also lost in Afghanistan? or was this another of those southern countries
>Soviet Union lost one and almost a civil war
>Soviet Union lost one and almost a civil war
I thought you were talking about the Finnish war, I don't really know why I thought that.
No, the militia sucked. It was the regular army that won the Revolution.
It's the worst myth about the US War of Independence. The Patriot militias were shit and largely useless against professional British soldiers. They were only good against Loyalist militias. The guerilla warfare the Patriot militias engaged in were ineffective, the British Army quickly adopted to North American Warfare and trained their regular line units in light infantry tactics. The British officer crops also had a good number of commanders who were veterans of the French and Indian War, such as Howe and Gage, who understood the best way to fight a war in North America.
This, the loyalists were stabbed in the back because the British public and members of parliament were pro-usa independence
They lost the war because of lack of political will, not because of military defeats
The war ended because most of the British army was surrounded and surrendered, limey.
The crowns revisionism will not stand in this Patriot board.
>The war ended because most of the British army was surrounded and surrendered, limey.
Thanks to the French Army and Navy
Sure, the Frogs kept you from running but it was American bayonets that drove the point home.
Now repeat after me,
>I pledge allegiance to the flag of israel, and the tribe for which it stands. All goyim, under zion, with oestrogen and Blacks for all
The state militias and volunteers continued to be pretty shitty even after the War of Independence. At the Battle of Bladensburg the militias proved to be almost entirely useless, and the most significant American resistance came from a small amount of sailors and marines.
Giving Indians internet access is the worst mistake modern civilization has ever made
>But I'm not-
You're brown and your ethnic group is impotent and irrelevant. You're Indian as far as I'm concerned
Got 'em.
>>The US lost one war because the public got sick of hearing about it and demanded the troops come home.
Fixed. This is what happened in Vietnam.
>>The US lost another war because the original objective had been accomplished but the US government and the defense contractors wanted to stay there forever and this eventually led to a fricked up withdrawal from the country that led to various tribal groups all allying with the now resurgent Taliban and overthrowing the central government we'd established.
Fixed, this is what happened in Afghanistan.
Please remember to use the toilet rather than shitting all over our nice clean internet, pajeet.
Mars Tactics looks promising
Midwinter felt very guerilla strategy, though you controlled each character individually. I really wish it got a modern remake or remaster, the low framerate makes it difficult playing.
There are some scenarios in SPWW2 and SPMBT with ambushes set up where you can control irregulars.
IIRC SPMBT even has VBIEDs and suicide bombers as units
Both games are free to download btw
you can crack them by removing a file but i can't remember which one, it was posted here in /vst/ but i don't know how to search the archives
DXAniTimer and DxScreens iirc, you needed to rename one of them and replace the other
I know OP asked for games where you command the guerillas, but being that games that properly model asymmetrical warfare at all are rare (even when you're playing as the occupying force), I'd recommend both Vietnam '65 and Afghanistan '11.
XCOM2 (at start)
Operation Flashpoint Resistance
Partisans
unironically Wargame: Red Dragon
the entire campaign is setting up your smaller force to withstand a huge bumrush of AI forces
when i was in high school most kids wouldn't say the pledge because bushhitler was president
Yeah that is represented by war exhaustion mechanics, since that's all shitty local insurgencies ever really accomplish. Eventually the big country gets tired of raping the little country and spending money to support them and pulls out. Insurgencies never defeat any government worth mentioning militarily. They just bleed them out with war exhaustion and financial drain.
So what you want is happening in many games , but it's just abstracted under stats like "resistance" or "unrest"
>the insurgents never win even when the insurgents win its not a real win because my moronic understanding of warfare means the only way to win a war is like in my paradox games by having a bigger number army than the other side
I wish EU4 had the rebels rise up according to the actual province dev and the unrest, instead of changed to being a 0.5x your Army limit ticker because of the forum morons.
Would make using spies worth a damn, after claims and cores were patched into irrelevance.
>Didn't the Soviets also lost in Afghanistan?
They withdrawn and government they prompted up survived another 8 or so years
Basically the same thing that happened to USA withdrawal from afganistan with the exception that ANA collapsed overnight
The important difference is that the soviets and their local collaborative government never had full control over the country and were fighting costly battles in the highlands right up until the withdrawal order.
The NATO intervention in afghanistan had 3 major phases; the initial defeat of the Taliban occupation, the guerrilla war fought in rural and border regions, and the 'cold' phase where the Taliban had withdrawn entirely across the border into Pakistan and combat was restricted to small infiltration groups crossing the border to carry out limited attacks. After a point, even those attacks petered out and there was a significant withdrawal of NATO personnel from the region simply because there was no longer an enemy to fight. The Taliban's guerrilla campaign failed utterly, and their eventual success came from withdrawing entirely from active combat, reconstituting into a professional conventional military force and attacking another conventional military directly in open combat.
That NATO failed to recognize the extent to which the Taliban was able to recruit and rearm while safely sheltered in Pakistan for a decade is a monumental failure, but ultimately it's a failure of military intelligence and long term political will. NATO withdrew from a commitment it no longer believed demanded an active military presence and allowed a once-defeated adversary to engage a weak and vulnerable ally on favourable terms.
>Did something happen in the US to hate on the hindus recently?
More like to the internet. Indians are all over IT and other cheap labor. Indians working call centers, Indians working as code monkies, Indians all over the place. They're basically the new Mexicans, except they get into online spaces too due to being tech aligned.
Ww2 China battlefield mod for the original (non-warband) m&b
I'm not even joking it's the best there is
You WILL get outgunned in every actual battle against the Japanese and its going to suck most of the time But on a very rare occasion you can pull off a big attack and it's glorious