offensives typically result in 2:1 or 3:1 and Russia is using especially perilous assault tactics
Of note is the fact that this absolutely isn’t true. Russia’s tactics, for the last several years, have been a very casualty-averse, slow-moving crawl westward, operating on the assumption that this is a war of attrition and that capturing land does not matter nearly as much as depleting their opponents’ reserve manpower.
If your model of an entity’s behavior has no plausible explanation (why would Russia expend an extremely limited resource to take marginally more land?), then it is worth questioning your priors. “50,000 conscripts a day with one AK-47 between them, charging into open fields” is pretty obvious wartime propaganda.
Not going to engage on this point. If it does turn out to be say 1.5:1, do you think replacing infantry with ground drones is important, or does the highest value drone capability shift somewhere else?
Not going to engage on this point. If it does turn out to be say 1.5:1, do you think replacing infantry with ground drones is important, or does the highest value drone capability shift somewhere else?
Not going to engage on this point. If it does turn out to be say 1.5:1, do you think replacing infantry with ground drones is important, or does the highest value drone capability shift somewhere else?
Of note is the fact that this absolutely isn’t true. Russia’s tactics, for the last several years, have been a very casualty-averse, slow-moving crawl westward, operating on the assumption that this is a war of attrition and that capturing land does not matter nearly as much as depleting their opponents’ reserve manpower.
If your model of an entity’s behavior has no plausible explanation (why would Russia expend an extremely limited resource to take marginally more land?), then it is worth questioning your priors. “50,000 conscripts a day with one AK-47 between them, charging into open fields” is pretty obvious wartime propaganda.
Not going to engage on this point. If it does turn out to be say 1.5:1, do you think replacing infantry with ground drones is important, or does the highest value drone capability shift somewhere else?
Not going to engage on this point. If it does turn out to be say 1.5:1, do you think replacing infantry with ground drones is important, or does the highest value drone capability shift somewhere else?
Not going to engage on this point. If it does turn out to be say 1.5:1, do you think replacing infantry with ground drones is important, or does the highest value drone capability shift somewhere else?