Sgt Joch

The reason why there are no SS Heavy Panzer Battalions in 1944 is because there were none in the East, all were on the western front, so it is not an oversight, it is working as designed. 3rd SS Panzer division "Totenkopf" did have an attached unit, but my understanding is that it never had more than a handful of runners on any given day.

this is the most recent unclassified info on Russian forces. https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/Russian-Forces-in-the-Western-Military-District.pdf

Yes, it has been posted before a reminder is always good. Very good overview of the current state of Russian forces. If you are loking at something more Cold War focused, a good over view is FM100-2-1: The Soviet Army: Operations and Tactics (wikimedia.org)

On Bagration, “Soviet Blitzkrieg” by Walter Dunn is also very good.

if someone wants to discuss Afghanistan, we are having a lively discussion here: https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/thefgmforum/threads/us-withdrawal-from-afghanistan-your-thoughts.33410/#post-319695 TGFM is a good club if you are looking for MP games as well...

@DownSized join a gaming club, like thefewgoodmen linked above and you will find all the PBEM games that you want. They also organize competitive tournaments.

JasonC summarizes it well. The only thing I would add is that Panzer Brigades were an emergency formation created to deal with an emergency. In the summer of 1944, both fronts were collapsing in France and Russia, most Panzer Divisions were pretty much wiped out and the Germans needed something quick to try to hold the tide. Hitler is the one who came up with the idea to quickly raise new Panzer Brigades. Problem as as been pointed out is that they were green formations who suffered badly in action. It would have been better to send the tanks as reinforcement to existing Panzer Divisons since they still had a cadre of experienced tank commanders/tank crews. However, since it was Hitler's idea, no one was going to argue with him that it was a stupid idea. As it was, most Panzer Brigades were disbanded in the fall of 1944.

The reason both sides avoided use of chemical weapons in WW2 is because it was a Pandora’s box, each side had enough to cause massive casualties to the other side so there was no long term advantage to be gained. What was more likely to be looked at in the Cold War was the use of “tactical” nuclear weapons. Now that a lot of documents are becoming de-classified, you see that, for example, the U.S. military explored the idea of using tactical nuclear weapons in Vietnam. Westmoreland had plans drawn up in 1967-68 called “Fracture Jaw” to use tactical nuclear (and chemical) weapons to defend Khe Sanh if the Vietnamese attacked and it looked like they might overrun the base. At the height of the Tet Offensive in early feb.68, he cabled that he might have to get immediate Presidential approval to the plan.

Operation Barbarossa did pretty much as well as it could, starting a few weeks earlier or capturing Moscow would not have made a difference in the long run. The Op was based on the belief that the Communist regime would implode. That was not the case in hindsight, but at the time it seemed a reasonable assumption based on opinion of Russian emigres, the purges in the Russian army and Russian performance in the Finnish war. US and UK in 41 also expected Russia to collapse. Once it was obvious Russia was fighting on, the Germans had to face the fact that the logistic challenges made it impossible to conquer all of Russia. Based on pre-Op planning, the Germans estimated that the maximum that they could supply their troops was 500 km from the bases and that is where the initial offensive petered out in July. After that, they had to move bases forward to support additional offensives. Problem was the railroad network was inadequate, not just the type, but the number. The Germans needed at least one dedicated rail line per army, they fielded around 10 armies, but they could only count on really one rail line per Army Group, so troops on the front line were always short of everything. Best example is winter clothing. The Germans had all the winter clothing they needed for the entire armies in the east in storage in Germany and Poland, problem was the entire rail capacity in Russia was taken up by fuel, ammo and food so they were unable to transport winter clothing to the front line troops.

This is not a new development. Russia is not worried about the Taliban and Afghanistan as such, but they are worried about rising islamic radicalism among the muslim populations along their southern borders. There is a large number of migrant workers from that area that regularly come to work in Russia so the potential for political unrest/terrorism is high. I see they are also planning to activate a base in Tajikistan. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/07/07/russia-says-ready-to-activate-tajik-military-base-amid-us-pullout-taliban-advance-in-afghanistan-a74450

I also had a chance to walk the Battle of Chateauguay and Chrysler’s Farm battlefields, both in 1813, many times over the years. Both are national historic sites. During the 200th anniversary, I had many discussions with Yankees about the war. I was interesting to see how both sides have a totally different interpretation. Canadians view it as a heroic struggle where an outnumbered mix of British/Canadian troops stopped the invasion of Canada by numerically superior U.S. forces. Americans view it as an heroic struggle where U.S. troops held off the invasion of the USA by British troops. I blame this...

Note there are free demos for all the games so you can try them out before you buy.

guilty pleasure. standard story, but well told and well acted.

little known, but actually well made film.

Some of my favourites

I don’t know if there is enough of a market for a pure sci-if game. What I would personally like to see would be a near-future game, say in the 2030-2050 time frame. It is close enough that you can make educated guesses on what technology and weapons could be available.

Check in the CMSF2 forum. Basically you register the game at Slitherine and they give you a Steam key.

The one who could answer this the best would be Steve. He has posted on QB pricing various times over the years. As I recall, pricing is not just a function of the inherent qualities of the AFV, but it’s availability as well. Allied units pretty much always had AFVs available and at full strength while German units had limited availability and even armour formations were rarely at full strength. All U.S. infantry divisions in NWE 44-45 had a Tank battalion attached and usually had more tanks than a German Panzer divisions. German infantry divisions often had zero AFVs in support or at much a Stug unit. For example, the German 7th Army total armour strength in the initial phase of the Battle of the Bulge was 15 stugs.

Well HMS Defender entered Russian territorial waters with all weapons loaded, everyone at action station, prepared to defend itself, ignoring all orders from Russian authorities and not recognizing that Russia even has jurisdiction. That is not "innocent passage" by any stretch of the imagination. The much better legal argument is the one made by Haiduk that Crimea is still Ukrainian territory and HMS Defender had the legal consent of Ukraine to enter the territory. But even that is a legal fantasy which ignores the reality of the ground. Crimea is now part of Russia and will be for the foreseeable future. Trying to analyse this from a legal point of view misses the point. Russia seized Crimea by force and now must use force to hold on to it until the fact is eventually recognized by the rest of the world. The issue for Russia is more how to act or react. Firing on or seizing Ukrainian vessels is one thing, sinking a RN ship would be a major escalation which could trigger WW3. OTOH Russia has to enforce its borders if it wants the rest of the world to respect them. This is a major game of chicken and the question is who will blink first.

Again, not the same thing. Under the convetion of the law of the sea, the right of "innocent passage" is subject to many restrictions, for example, it can't be done for propaganda purposes or pose a threat to the territorial integrety of the coastal state or be done for intelligence gathering purposes and has to abide by all the laws and regulations of the coastal state. The HMS Defender mission did not meet any of those criterias to qualify as an "innocent passage".

not the same issue, those subs were outside UK territorial waters. UK and USA would react differently if a Russian vessel entered the 12 miles limit. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/russian-bombers-intercepted-miles-us-airspace/story?id=71171943 Remember Turkey shot down a Russian jet and it was over its territory for only 17 seconds.

The fact that most of the international community does not recognize the annexation is pretty much irrelevant, what counts is the facts on the ground. Crimea is "de facto" part of Russia and it looks like it will be that way for a long time to come. To maintain any kind of international credibility, Russia has to enforce the borders they claim around Crimea. They can't allow NATO ships or aircraft to just ignore its borders. That is why I don't see this as being anything other than a one-off. The last thing NATO wants is to get into a shooting war with Russia over the status of Crimea. Given the fact that the NATO naval exercise will be next week, I wonder if this was part of it to see how the Russians would react?

yes, it has been confirmed that HMS Defender deliberately entered Russian territorial waters. UK denies Russia fired warning shots near British warship - BBC News Not sure what the point was unless it was a one off publicity stunt. Is Boris trying to prove the Royal Navy is still relevant?

Steve had mentioned once that game manuals were one of the most expensive items for them since they had to get them printed up and always had to try to plan for the correct number to not be stuck with extra ones. Digital download is way better for the Devs since there is zero additional cost when you sell extra copies. I still have the original CMSF1 and CMBN manuals, but think they stopped after that.

just did a quick test in 2.16, 7 Oplot vs 7 T90AM, regulars, day clear, buttoned, stationary, facing each other at 2500 meters. all spot one tank within 2 to 20 seconds, most around 12 seconds. I don't see any noticeable difference between the Oplot and the T90AM. I don't see any bug with spotting by the Oplot. If someone wants to run an actual test and they have something that can be reproduced that shows a bug, we will be glad to take a look at it, otherwise this issue is closed.