Vietnam '65 Next Month

Matrix Games announces March 5th is the release date for Vietnam '65, the upcoming strategy game which takes players into the Vietnam War before it jumped the shark. They plan to celebrate the news today with a livestream on the Slitherine Twitch channel at 1:00 pm EST. Word is the game is now in the late beta testing phase:
Early 1965 – the Cold War turned hot in Southeast Asia. The US Army dispatches men and military equipment to prevent Vietnam falling under communist dominance. It was the beginning of an unconventional conflict in which technology and resources were not enough to ensure victory. By mastering the jungle terrain and conducting guerrilla operations such as ambushes and raids, the Viet Cong managed to disrupt US plans and resist this giant superpower!

Vietnam ’65, the new counter-insurgency strategy game by Every Single Soldier, aims to capture the essence of the Vietnam War. At the head of the US forces, the player will have to forget what they have learnt from other strategy games and think differently to achieve victory. Building a safe logistics chain, gathering intelligence from the local villagers, calling in air support on time, revealing the Ho Chi Minh trail, and minimizing casualties will be crucial to securing political support and eliminating the invisible Viet Cong threat!

Thanks to fruitful weeks of in-depth testing, the game has now entered its late beta phase. So the time for traditional war will come to an end on March 05th, the official release date of Vietnam ’65!
View : : :
15.
 
Re: Vietnam '65 Next Month
Feb 11, 2015, 18:01
15.
Re: Vietnam '65 Next Month Feb 11, 2015, 18:01
Feb 11, 2015, 18:01
 
jdreyer wrote on Feb 11, 2015, 17:35:
Trainwreck wrote on Feb 11, 2015, 13:10:
Task wrote on Feb 11, 2015, 09:52:
Only US side? If I can't play as the Vietnamese who won their deserved victory, then its a no go.

Dude, if you had any idea what the communists who "deserved victory" were actually like, you'd know how completely fucked up that statement is. I'm not saying America should have got involved (we shouldn't have) or that we didn't blunder our way through a lot of it with high cost to life (we did), but the communist unification of the country in the 1970s was absolutely nothing to celebrate.

Better idea for a game: take America and its other non-Vietnamese allies and make them tangents to the story at best. Focus on Vietnamese protagonists from both sides and show how fucked up a civil war really can be.

The South Vietnamese government and military was rotten and corrupt. It was a military dictatorship. So there really was no good option for the people of Vietnam.

As an intellectual exercise, playing a strategic game of the Vietnam war sounds interesting. How could it have been done differently? Still, even if the North had been defeated (and I don't see how you do that without invading the North and triggering a Chinese counter-invasion) the result would have been a clusterfuck, just like we're seeing in Iraq currently.

The main problem with the US' Vietnam strategy was "search and destroy." You need to take and hold territory. You can't win by trying to kill enemy soldiers (then retreat) until there are no more when the North has basically an endless supply.

This is actually a problem that we haven't solved yet. Insurgency from both nationals and foreign entities is something that even after 40 years America hasn't learned how to deal with. We have a strategy we *think* will work but hasn't yet: Shore up the government and then GTFO and let them deal with it for the next 20 years or so. But we're spectacularly bad when it comes to creating a government out of whole cloth.

If you have a Roku, PBS has a Frontline episode on the clusterf*ck that is Iraq and how we basically screwed up as badly as you could imagine there. We almost literally grabbed the first Iraqi who didn't want to spit on us and said "hey how'd you like to lead the country?"

But yeah, we're terrible at counter-insurgency. Part of it I think is that we're a culture that doesn't understand that other cultures are so oppressed, or in such a crappy quality of life, that dying fighting is culturally preferable to rotting in misery. We think that inflicting an obscene amount of casualties will win wars, but as we saw in Vietnam that doesn't always work. We killed well over a million people in that war and it didn't achieve strategic victory.

I honestly don't know if there *is* a military solution to insurgency. The popular thought is that there only is within the scope of giving a government time to establish itself and develop infrastructure and a military. Which, you know, works on paper, but finding someone to lead a government, relatively fairly, who is friendly to us, and is liked by the people, and isn't corrupt, is something we really haven't learned how to do yet. If it can be done at all.

Edited because I looked up casualties for Vietnam.
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
2.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
3.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
4.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
5.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
6.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
12.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
7.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
8.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
18.
Feb 12, 2015Feb 12 2015
19.
Feb 12, 2015Feb 12 2015
20.
Feb 12, 2015Feb 12 2015
9.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
11.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
14.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
13.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
 15.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
   Re: Vietnam '65 Next Month
10.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
16.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015
17.
Feb 11, 2015Feb 11 2015