Tero

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Not much of a choice, really - being allied with the guys responsible for murdering 10 million people in mass shootings and gas chambers, or being allied with the guys responsible for murdering tens of millions via starvation and executions. The freedom of choice between the frying pan and fire. Which should Finland be prouder of allying themselves with? Good luck trying to prove beyond a reasonable doubt Finland was actually allied to either of them during or after the war. Quilty by proxy or age old propagandistic mantras do not quite cut it in either case.

Originally posted by Munter: The idea of being disloyal against your brothers-in-arms makes me puke. Be my guest, puke your guts out. I quess you are also of the opinion that it was a gross oversight and mismanagement of forces when our troops did not take part in the siege of Leningrad and did not cut the Murmask rail link. The only good thing with the Finns fighting Germans was that it wasn't decisive and there weren't much casualties worth the name (few hundred in 6 months). Well, it did start out as an orchestrated "Spring manouver" but since the Soviets would have none of it some shooting had to occur. Failure to do so would have incurred untold casualties. A shameful era in the Finnish history if you ask me, necessary or not. Where was the disloyalty and shame exactly ? Now, don't tell me I take it too personally Beats me. Are you taking it too personally ?

What about real historical events like former partners turning on each other ? Barbarossa is the obvious one of course but I mean Rumanian, Hungarian, Bulgarian and Finnish troops fighting against the Germans later in the war. And I do not mean in the Red Army OOB but on their own. [ 01-24-2002: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Joseph Porta: Hmmm...The war is soon over for most, yet there is little noise on the front...Where is everyone ? :confused: <hr></blockquote> ÜberFinns with built in stealth technology, remember ? You do not see it coming.

Will crew served weapons unlimbering from vehicles have the unlimber time added to their movement delays in CMBB ? There are times in CMBO when you get a 2" mortar or a gun status remain "unlimber 1 min" or something like that when the team moves away from the vehicle for whatever reason.

The good, fast machine back on line - bump.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by RMC: Masonry and plaster. Thickness varies with the age of the building. Modern building seem to be more efficiently built. On the older ones, you get a sense of over engineering because they weren't too sure what was right. Compared to the way europeans build houses even today, US homes seem downright flimsy.<hr></blockquote> A few remarks: The load bearing walls have to carry the weight of the edifice, including the roof and what is on it. The effects of the elements dictate also what the construction has to be able to carry: At 0 - +2ºC snow becomes waterlocked and VERY heavy. If there has been much snow you either have to built the edifice in such a way it can carry a normal load. Or you go out and push it down. It is interesting to see the increasing winds usually tear off the roofs off the new buildings, almost never off the old buildings. Cost effectivness: in olden days the life expectancy of a house could be anything up to several hundred years. If it was to be a permanent residence it was built to last. No reason to build it bad and then go on mending it if you could get it right the first time around. Not that there was much time for sloppy work either. Nowadays the life expectancy seems to be down to 50 years max. Also, the number of flaws that are accepted in the construction has gone up. You can build it sloppy and flimsy because you can build lots of them. [ 01-21-2002: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

I have asked this before: why is widrawal allowed only towards the home/friendly base line (=map edge) ? Widrawing perpendicular or opposite to that map orientation is a no-no which I can not understand. Why can it not be determined by the unit facing or some other factor ? Being outflanked does fall into the CMBO/BB timeframe and there are times when you'd really want to widraw towards some other direction than your base line.

Originally posted by Big Time Software: However, I am not aware of why the front should be kept active until the winter of 1944/45. Lapland War against the Germans.

The price is different each month of the war depending on historical reality. CM also has a National Rarity which determines how likely the player will get a Nationality (Germany, Finland, etc) and Branch Type (Waffen SS, Luftwaffe Infantry, etc.) for a particular Region (Finland, North, Central, and South) on a particular month of the year. Will there be a possibility to pick ahistorical forces and combos in inapproariate regions like hordes of better German armour (PzKw-IVG or better or even Tigers) helping out Finnish infantry in the far North/Finnish region with the rarity system off ? Also, will there be such nuances like SS Gebirgsjäger and Heer Gebirgsjäger or just plain Gebirgsjäger ? Oh, and yes, will there be Finns from June 1941 until the early winter of 1945 or will there be a cut off at the static phase ? [ 01-21-2002: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Mr. Johnson--: oh yeah those magnetic mine thingies, and the Lahti 20mm AT gun. <hr></blockquote> It is actually an AT rifle, not a gun. Could do AAA role too and was used that way too quite extensively after it had become obsolete against armour and there were no bunkers or strongpoints to bust. IL-2's with their wooden tails were a relatively easy target for them. [ 01-19-2002: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

Originally posted by Splash: What ever happened to Mensch anyways? If you read very carefully the last bit: unused tampons, absconded pills. He is propably taking lamaz classes. On the subject at hand: I usually take Stugs: cheap so losing them will not hurt as much as losing a Panther or a Tiger would. And deadly enough in case you get lucky. And do NOT leave baseline without a PAK38-40/Pupchen combo. A couple of pairs of those and you will have a fighting chance in case your armour gets whacked.

Graaf Spee: It is well known the Swedes were fully prepared to fight to the last Finn. But that had been the case for centuries so no news there. Interesting. I've always wondered what the finnish people thought about Swedish politics durng the war(s). When talking about the war with swedes I usually hear one of two positions. The first is that we were backstabbing cowards who didn't do anything. The Swedes did give more help than most other countries that were not directly involved in the war on this front. And most people realized the Swedes had to take care of Sweden foremost. It was not the Swedes fault we were the ones with the frontier with the USSR. Furthermore much of the efforts to form the Scandinavian defence alliance were so fiercly objected by Stalin there was no way to make it work and get all of Scandinavia involved in the war against USSR. The second that Finlands supply line went through Sweden and that the Soviet union definately would have conquered all of Finland if it wasn't for that. You have misunderstood. It was not the supply line that saved us. It was the possibility the Swedes could have allowed the Brits and the French to transport troops across Sweden to Finland to fight the Soviets. Your position seems to fall in between. Am I right? Pretty much. Much of the period opinions and apprehentions date back to 1809. The Swedes did more than most to help us. But there was a limit and I think Finnish leaders at the time realized that. Is it safe to discuss the war with finns or should I keep my big mouth shut? Sure it is safe.

Originally posted by Swift: Yes, but I don't want to rub it in No foul, no harm I am, of course, only joking. I think that the Finnish effort during the winter war was truly heroic and I can understand that they joined forces with Germany in ’41 for a chance to get even. That is true. But a very powerful motivation was also the will to survive. We had to pick a side because after the Winter War was over the Soviets maintained pressure and a very hostile attitude.

Originally posted by Andreas: I am sure this should really be in the general forum. I agree. For some reason Slappy though it prudent to bring it up so I replied. I think you are over-estimating the German interest in Finland by a wide margin. We were used to getting bad press more than good press so any comment, good or bad, was blown out of proportion. We had reportedly polar bears walking the streets so that might explain our being so toutchy and twitchy. 'Finlandisation' was used (rarely) whenever the left suggested that it maybe a good idea to not deploy nuclear weapons that would go off on German ground, or that maybe we should accept that the re-establishment of the borders of 1937 was not really a realistic goal of foreign policy, or that we should just talk with East Germany and the Soviets. Convenient stick to get out for the right, and beat the left with. That is my undestanding too. And we must not forget in those days the men in power were veterans of the war for the most part so such a term already had all the necessary mental connotations to form a perfect weapon. I trust Göbbels had made it sure our name was soiled before the end came. I never understood what was so bad about Finland anyway We had not been true to the cause ? We had been tretcherous and betrayed the friendship offered by a peace loving nation. And we had maintained our freedom and could claim to had survived an enemy the German army could not survive. y the same token, of course most of the memberd of the party had joined the party out of external pressure and conformity, not of their own free will.

Originally posted by Abn_Ranger87: On the subject of captured equipment. I have read and listened to (being a member of the VFW has it's rewards...) accounts of American troops utilizing German armament. Problem with using such systems is that friendlys are usually quite aware of the differing signatures produced by enemy weapons and would be quick to pour surpressive fire into your area before checking to see the operator's nationality, so their employment would be a risky affair... This is a valid point. Generally. The überFinnish army used the same arms and ammunition the Red Army used so these critreria do not apply in this case. Except for the LS-26 LMG and Suomi SMG all other arms sounded the same. It was standard practise to exchange poor quality or broken weapons to captured ones on the spot. FP and ROF were also enhanced in this fashion when semiauto rifles and LMG/HMG's were picked up during the fight. It was also standard practise to take ammo replenishment from the enemy. Arty pieces were also taken into use whenever they were captured in a working order. If CMBB modelled all this historically accurately that would mean the überFinn squads in CMBB should have its ammo supply topped up (ie become virtually unlimited) and have its FP and ROF rating enhanced whenever they come into close contact with Red Army squads which are dead, routed or have taken casualties and are not dug in.

Originally posted by Slapdragon: I find it extremely ironic that the term "Finlandization" means to fold without a fight when faced with a alrger enemy after having scared away all your friends. Assuming this is relevant: First of all your definition of the term is inaccurate and inflammatory http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary Main Entry: Fin·land·iza·tion Etymology: Finland Date: 1969 : a foreign policy of neutrality under the influence of the Soviet Union; also : the conversion to such a policy But: was Finland Finlandized or Mexicanized ? Mexico is the only country which had been in an even remotely similar situation: having a long border with a superpower, winding up in a "minor border dispute" with the more powerful neighbour and losing some territory in the armed clash that followed. After that both Finland and Mexico assumed a policy of minimal friction when it came to foreign politics and taking into account the views of the neighbour. The fact that all this happened 100 years before WWII is irrelevant. Second: http://virtual.finland.fi/finfo/english/after.html fold without a fight when faced with a alrger enemy When ? The entire situation and phenomenon was a direct result of a refusal to fold without a fight. after having scared away all your friends Which "friends" would those be ? The British and the Americans ? They had abandoned us already in 1939-40. Friendly they were but their indefference to our fate and their inability to help us in matters other than diplomacy was glaringly obvious. Other Scandinavian nations ? They understood our situation and we understood their situation. They were not scared away, they kept their distance for reasons all parties understood. The Germans ? I find it ironic they were the most avid users of the term in a time when their country was divided into occupation zones, one of which formed an separate, hostile, state. They had a bone to pick with us for not being loyal to them. Their sour grapes were obvious and their friendship not really sincere. [ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

Originally posted by Swift: Well, you lost the first try, didn't you! In the most strict sense of the word we "lost" both tries. But what does it really mean to lose a war ? Our army was not disarmed, it was demobilized and it got to keep all its arms (until when they were modernized in the 90's ). If you care to list the warring European capitals which were occupied by a foreign army during or after the war you will find Helsinki (our capital) is not on that list. In CM terms we snatched a tie from the jaws of defeat. In some of the Western histories the story goes our army miraculously recovered after the blow the Red Army gave it at the start of the summer offensive. In reality the retreat was in fact systematic (if somewhat chaotic) and the reinforcements were deployed on a place of our choosing, it was not fed in piece meal in an effort to stop the assault by holding on to each defensive position to the last (which is what the Germans did in both the Eastern and the Western front).

Originally posted by Swift: Yes, normaly they wait for 10 seconds before they cut you with their knife... Have you seen Ameican movies ? They always come in guns blazing, shoot first and expect no questions are asked later. At least we have the courtesy to hear the guy out before starting a fight. And I think that the ûberfinn thread started around 1941 or so You ignoramus !!! November 30th, 1939 is of course the correct date.

Originally posted by Jussi Köhler: Just wondered where and when it started so I could sleep better Another time honoured tradition (which goes way beyond the überFinnish tradition): do a frigging search ! You can use my member number as a criteria and you will find numerous interesting topics and debates on the überFinns and related subjects. [ 01-16-2002: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

Originally posted by Gyrene: I thought the Finns knocked out T26's by picking them up and throwing them at other T26's, or by swinging mighty trees like golf clubs and sending the Russian tanks back to where they came from. Nonononono. We needed the tanks BAD so why not take them from the enemy for free when they cost and arm and a leg on the free market.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by KwazyDog: Thanks for the info tero! Dan<hr></blockquote> You are wellcome. While you are at it (not necessarily pertaining outward appearance only): - the T-26E. Vickers 6ton brought up to T-26 standards by arming it with a 45mm gun taken off dug in BT's or wrecked T-26's. Main characteristics the same, some (all ?) had a hull SMG (9mm Suomi) installed. - OT-130/133 flamethrower tanks converted to gun tanks. These had a 7,62mm DT hull MG installed. - the Swedish Landsverk Anti II AA-tank, 40mm Bofors gun - T-20 Komsomolets tractor transport class so it can haul the PAK-40 AT-gun (it was underpowered and had great difficulties in hauling the piece over anything but roads)

If you kept it off the Top 10 list (most hits) you may have managed to stay under the radar. Have you tried if the ban is from your workstation only ? [ 01-13-2002: Message edited by: tero ]</p>

Originally posted by KwazyDog: Oh, and all vehicles on that list are unique vehicles...a finnish stug looks pretty much like a German one except for colouring and makings, hehe. Actually, there is one clear difference. The remote control MG was removed and a "regular" shield was put in (along with the DT MG, the MG-34/MG-42 was not used by the Finns). Those who visit the Bovington museum can take a look at what the conversion looks IRL (except the ex-Finnish vehicle is passed for a German one with a new paint job and a MG-34 in place of the DT ). BTW: the logs were used by the Finns, the Soviets and the Germans all alike.

Originally posted by Juha Keratar: I feel that Tero will soon bring our game to a premature end. Please stand still so my guys can shoot straight.