Andreas

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mulga Bill: And Ben, isn't it amazing how some people can run around expending so much energy trying to deny what your father experienced? To them, personal experience is valueless. Unless they can read it in a book, it never happened. So, I'd suggest your daddy get writing, if you want this mob to believe you!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> My grandfather has a picture of a downed IL-2 Shturmovik (sp?). On the back it says 'Downed Rata'. Why? Because to him any plane shooting at him and his comrades was a Rata. According to your logic and standards of evidence, the plane is indeed a Rata. According to the standards of evidence of serious people, my grandfather's first-hand statement (from the time, no less) is wrong, and the plane is an IL-2. Which it is.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nabla: Who decides (and under what kind of conditions) whether the attack should be continued or not? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Brigade/Regimental command - a BN commander acting independently in such a situation will find himself in a desk job back in Blighty in no time at all. Withdrawal/breaking off a planned attack etc. of a BN could significantly affect divisional operations, and would therefore need to be authorised. A good example of this would be the successive battles for Buron that were based on wrong intel, and went in seriously understrength, or the withdrawal of 5th DCLI from Cornwall Wood, the decision for which was taken independently (by the Major commanding the BN after the death of the original commander) and this is discussed and justified at quite some length by the historian of the DCLI, showing how unusual that was.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann: Oh, oh. Ben Hall's most recent post will set the cat amongst the pigeons! Regards Jim R.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why? That is exactly the sort of info that is needed. Ben, thanks a lot for digging.

Standards of proof, and arguments with BTS: 1. Argument that worked: "Dear BTS, you have not given the Poles the Cromwell for their recce rgt, but the Stuart. This is historically incorrect, as this website shows (insert website here, can't be bothered). I also here have a shot of the GOC 1st Polish AD in his command Cromwell, and some more of the Cromwells. Would you mind fixing that?" Got fixed. 2. Argument that worked: "BTS, you have taken away the capacity of the Commonwealth to put a squad in an HT. Here are the floor drawings, accounts, and other stuff that shows you are wrong. Please fix it." Got fixed. 3. Argument that did not work: "My Panther got killed by a Stuart. I have never heard of that, I infer it did never happen. You are anti-german." Nothing to fix, nothing happened. 4. Argument that did not work: "The Allies had a lot of SMGs. I here have the total production run. From this I infer that there should be four per squad, not one. The Germans are advantaged by this, you are pro-German. Please fix." Nothing happened. 5. Argument that won't work: "I have two pictures of a Bren tripod used as ground weapon in Korea. I have lots of pictures of Bren tripods in the AA role and in training. From this I infer it was used in a ground role. You are disadvantaging the Commonwealth. Fix it." Nothing will happen. The problem is not my or your standard of when evidence becomes proof. Your problem is that your standard of evidence is not sufficient for 9/10ths of the people on this board who are being taken serious by BTS, and also your attitude, that equates questioning of your logic with being anti-Commonwealth.

Couple of points - first, I don't subscribe to your 'if you are not pro-Commonwealth, you are pro-something else' logic. I seem to have put into the drawer of being pro-German. I suggest you look at my posting history, that should disabuse you of that notion. Second - game without the Jagdtiger? Fine. No Sturmtiger? Even better. No Maus? Hooray! No IS-3? Brilliant. These are all things I don't care about, and that will be taken care of through the rarity system, and if I were playing QBs, you could bet your behind that I would only play with that function on. Panthers and 25-pdrs and their graphical representation? Apples and oranges. The Panther is an on-board weapon. The 25-pdr as on-board weapon is a rare exception. As it should be. How many cases do you know of 25-pdrs working in DF mode during the campaign? Ask me again what I think of the graphical mis-representation of the quad 20mm, because then we compare apples with apples. And the answer is: I don't care. How do I define combat? As in 'fired at the bad guys at some point'. I can not detect a hint of combat use in Ben's post, but you read in it what you like. Historically available? Maybe. Historically used? No, not on current evidence. So, by your standard the Maus or the IS-3 should probably be in CMBB? I absolutely object to either of them. You really need to get out of this 'if you're not with me you're against me' mindset.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dweezil44: [edited to wonder why Germanboy appears to have edited SlapPuff's post?] [ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: Dweezil44 ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, even a clearly decrepit and moronic life-form like you should eventually come up with the right answer. If not, then there is always 0900-IAMAMORON, to call for an answer to the question at hand, or to ask about how to breathe properly, something you no doubt find very challenging indeed. Apart from that, all I can say is that the gaseous emissions that go for posts in your little Dweezilwonderland are really so far beyond the pale that it makes me wonder if it is the care-in-the-community day again. If there was a planet with the likes of you as population, giving it the Vogon treatment would be too good for it. People like you make me wonder why anyone would want to save the environment. Maybe the Dinosaurs come back if we don't and the world will be better off for not having any Dweezils in it. As to the rest of what is going on in here - you had a beautiful chance to redeem yourselves in my eyes. You blew it. Not that I expected anything else, but honestly I think it is now time that Berli unleashes his hell hounds on you, to have you swallowed and tormented with pointed sticks by razor-tooth equipped three-breasted demons from the 7th layer of hell. The torment usually reserved for the slow-witted and hapless taunters, you know. Might be too good for you though. What this place needs is a fecking revolution, with a number of people put in front of a firing squad. I shall submit my list shortly. Not edited because it makes you weep and humble in the presence of my greatness.

Who is up for it? Email me (in the profile). We can discuss Band of Brothers or why the English team gets an automatic diving qualification thrown in with their World Cup qualification. No mention of Bren tripods, unless Aussies attend, in which case we make an exception.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JonS: huh. Well, there's my new thing learnt for today. Back to my corner.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Shoo

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terence: That's Punkah Wallah, you miserable pudknocker.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Don't knock the Messiah, you are not worthy.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JonS: Either the Krautkid has made a major scientific discovery, and come up with a new species (genus? breed? evolution?) of prehistoric man, or he kan juzt sbell guid lyke teh rist off uz <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I suggest you think about where the Krautgit hails from, and then look up 'Neandertal' on Yahoo.de. The fact that some sad Latin speaker insisted on some poncey spelling does not mean that a Gifted Giant of Thought and Learning™ like me has to conform to it. The lad was found in the Neandertal in Germany, hence calling him Neandertaler is quite alright. I do not call people from Berlin Behrliner either. Joe, what is it? Difficult to accept the sad truth? Can't cope with Reality™? Try drugs then. Not edited because I am too smart to make mistakes.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Iskander: [[edited 'cause I'm not NEARLY as smart as Andreas] [ 10-08-2001: Message edited by: Iskander ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Selbsterkenntnis ist der erste Schritt auf dem Weg zur Besserung. To the rest of you bunch of retarded troglodytes (although that is a tad harsh on your average Neandertal man), not only would the abysmal quality of your taunts fail to qualify you for entry into Taunting pre-school, but you also produce such a miniscule amount of them that the bloody waste of time that this thread has become thanks to you is in constant danger of falling off the front page. You truly are beyond salvation, and generally not worth of being my toilet roll holder or Pukka Wallah. The amount of what would be the verbal equivalent of uncontrolled drooling going on here is impressive quantitatively. The absence of inspiration even more so. Congratulations, you have all passed the Witless Taunting 101 degree course, and are well on your way to a job in the advertisement industry. Not edited because I like to show you how dumb you all are.

Okay, I promised to myself I would stay away, but this thread is like a bad traffic accident. First things first - Brian still does not understand the difference between 'evidence' and 'proof', unless Australians have a totally different concept for these terms. Also, in the spirit of admonishing people who dare to use US terminolody when talking about Commonwealth equipment, can I please insist that anyone wanting to talk about German stuff has to use the correct German terminology in the future. Otherwise I take that as evidence that they are not worth talking to Now, regarding giving the Commonwealth commander in the future the choice of using the Bren tripod. Why? Nobody here has proven that they were regularly used (or used at all for that matter) - we have one snippet (thanks for that Ben, very useful) of their employment as part of a defensie position that for all we know may never have been attacked. Which brings the number of documented combat uses to what? Oh, 0 ('zero' for the hard of reading). So - if you give the Commonwealth commander the choice of using these weapons, what would you achieve in a game which should go towards more and not less realism? Nothing, it would even be counterproductive on current evidence. As for 'the Commonwealth got shafted' - that is just ridiculous nonsense, and I am mincing my words here. Which nation in the game has no airburst capacity? Which not entirely rare US vehicle did not get included, despite documented combat use? Which German gun that was not uncommon to be used in in indirect fire role does not have that capacity in CMBO? Which nation is most affected by the absence of trenches in the game? I said that a long time ago, but it needs saying again: there are things missing in CMBO that affect all nations. There is so much griping going on about this from all sorts of people that I think the balance was struck right, based on just reading this board. Comparing the Bren tripod to e.g. the Puma is nonsense, since the Puma was used in combat, and for the Bren tripod, well see above. Graphical representation of the 25pdr as an example - German trucks, German quad 20mm gun are all off to some degree. I am sure there are other things from e.g. the US that are not 100% accurate - so what? Brian, I still suggest you pick up a book on qualitative research, you may learn something. If you want to get the Bren tripod included, so far I bet BTS is not even prepared to look at any further arguments from you, since you are just rehashing same-old same-old. Now changing tack to the 'Commonwealth got shafted - boohoo' track is getting old too.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CMplayer: The world at large doesn't know how much a 'stone' is supposed to be. (not to mention local shoe sizes). What's that in kilos, or at least pounds? thx,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 139.71kg (@6.35kg/stone) 308 pounds (@2.2 pounds/kg)

I really can't recommend Valera's site enough. What he has performed is the really great service of making the struggle of the Red Army accessible to English speakers. One of my all-time favourite sites out there.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stuka: "Bloody well don't need to"? How terribly, awfully posh of you old boy. One would never know that you were a dastardly Gorman would one? One does believe that there are treatments avialable for 'Brit envy', what? Toodle pip!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The Brits are indeed quite envious of my ability to speak their language. The best I have heard of a native English speaker mutilating my native tongue thus far has been 'Wo ist der Strassenbahner?'. One of your fellow countrymen still believes I am a Brit with German envy. You sure have your fair share of morons in Australia. BTW, how's the cricket? Today is a good day, because Railtrack will go into receivership tomorrow. I hope they shut down the railways in this country completely. Will be interesting to see if anyone notices a difference. Not edited because I am smarter than you all. Then again, so is your average lobotomised cockroach, so it does not mean much.

Trust the justiciar to jump on anyone coming along and displaying inspiration and providing a sparkle of amusement. Jesus Christ on a fecking crutch, to borrow the immortal words of the shell that once was a pod, what has this place come to? Not edited because I could be a blind/deaf/mute monoglot analphabet Mongolian with no arms and still post funnier stuff in better English than 150% of you.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by YK2: Consider it started..... And you did it with such style. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What can I say? Apart from that the rest of wussies here obviously needed a Scots lady to come to their rescue. Ha!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by YK2: BTW GermanBoy you do realise that every post you now make is being checked and double checked for the slightest hint of a mistake..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If I made were to make it, it would be no mistake, but starting a trend. Apart from that, I think I would have more to fear from the kids of a creche for blind children with illiterate parents looking over my posts than I do from the unbelievably dull-witted and mind-numbingly inane group of individuals frequenting this thread (myself excluded). You should all consider yourself lucky I decided to pass by and let you see what you can not even aspire to in a particularly wild, drug-induced frenzy of a dream. Dazzling brilliance, wit, and above all, the knowledge that there will be a fried breakfast for me in my near future. Then again, I could just be called unnecessarily cruel for doing that to you. Showing you lot off is about as much of a challenge as tearing the legs of a beetle would be - a disgusting and vile dungheap beetle maybe, but a beetle nevertheless. Scottish people excluded, because I like Scotland. So there. Not edited because I bloody well don't need to.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by redwolf: Just to get that straight: There is the EM series of rangefinders, which is just a barrel of some length and then there are the Sf devices, which are the "periscopic" things the artillery used? The Sf are made for range-finding as well (so far I assumed the point is to observe without exposing yourself). Correct?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Uh - dunno. If you have a look at the second picture on the site I linked to, you can see a picture my grandfather took through his Sf14z. I have no clue whether you could do ranging with that. I'll ask him whether it sung and danced when I see him in a few weeks.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Feldgrau: Yeah, yeah, sure.... like I haven't heard that before.... What ever happened to the pics you were going to scan and send to me from that 79'th AD book you spent 49 pounds on? I'm still waiting on those so I have some historical precendant to add an a/c recognition star to the turret top like you've been yammering on and on about.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Woops, bugger. My lame excuse would be that I was busy scanning other stuff out of a book that I have to return soon. You get the picture later today.

I can't believe I spent all the time scanning pictures and the bandwith to send the pictures to you for this. Drop-dead gorgeous. BTW - the Churchill at Bovington has 9th RTR markings. As soon as I get the picture developed I send it to you. Edited because I am worth it. [ 10-06-2001: Message edited by: Germanboy ]

Jeff, you've got mail.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Duquette: Just some additional thoughts on German range finders.... The Sf14z [snip]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Did someone say Sf14z? Sfz14 On this website are the pictures I posted in the 88L56 accuracy thread, but there have been so many new folk...

This is an excerpt from an AAR by Hauptmann Friedrich Stück, Sturmgeschütz Brigade 276, from a fight in a village named Babin(?) on the Rowno-Nowgorod-Wolynsk road. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I could not say how long the matter lasted. We had used all our aproximately 80 rounds; maybe that's a sign how long it lasted?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hauptmann Stück's Stug knocked out three T-34s in a knife edge fight, firing at point-blank ranges (one T-34 attempted to ram his Stug after the cannon was knocked out). Another was knocked out by an AT gun, the last by another Stug. The one that was knocked out by the AT gun was driven back by Stück using HE, which made some of the T-34 crew bail. I know, it is not a Tiger, and it does not prove anything, but it is a good illustration as to what can happen in a close-range firefight. They just fired, any round that came to hand of the loader. ~80 rounds gone for three T-34s (three-and-a-half if you feel generous). The account is in 'The Combat History of Sturmgeschütz Brigade 276'.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael emrys: Why should mine clearing tanks only be available for breach battles? Seems to me they could be useful in assaults as well, as I am assuming that an assault, in this context, means an attack against a prepared defense. Just wondering. Michael<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think when I say breach, I mean assault in your terms. Assault to me (coloured by 79th AD) is a more deliberate attack. But you are right, should be available there too.