Marlow

He's got a point there, Wildboy. I mean really, getting sent to North Dakota? [shudder] Being in the Marines must be so much better. Look at their history. They get sent to nice places like Halls of Montezuma (Mexico City) and get to guard places taken by the Army in battle.

Rune has never been much good at bringing up Cesspoolers, absentee Kaniggett that he is. Just makes em Squires, gives them a pointy stick and gives em a push at some other confused younster. No way to raise a young'en if your asking me. Look at my lot for example. I was the original latch-key squire. Imagine the horror of being alone in the pool, Seanachai at the front door, and only vague instructions from my Liege not let in strangers (and they don't get much stranger than you lot), and to bring him Croda's ears.

Yep. M18 served in Italy. Don't think the Jackson did, and that is going to make a couple of key Bulge battles difficult to recreate.

True enough, it really isn’t for newbies, the other two were better for them. I have only played Yelina stare from the Soviet side, and did find it difficult enough to be entertaining. I read some of the horror stories about the scenario, and was prepared to have real problems getting my troops to advance. I found that in the game, I could get both the green and regular troops to advance with enough coaxing, and only the conscripts turned out to be fairly useless (except to distract the Jerry MGs). The scenario did a nice job in showing an old CMBO hand some of the differences to expect with CMBB. I will admit that I had to restart the battle, as the first time I massed my troops at setup with some in the open, and the AI taught me a harsh lesson about turn 1 pre-planned artillery barrages.

Must be something wrong with me. I really liked Yelina Stare.

Welcome back Jake, Just did "SP-The Library," a nice little piece of Stalingrad. Designed for play against the AI, and has about two companies of troops to control. Plays fast and furious.

Quite a bit according to Doubler. "Closing with the Enemy" details not only the development of the hedge cutters, but more importantly the tank/infantry team tactics that were developed in late June/July to attack in hedgerow country. A number of units conducted training in these tactics right behind the front lines.

Right. Well then, time to annoy a gnome with an abominable little ditty. Isn't it awfully nice to have a penis? Isn't it frightfully good to have a dong? It's swell to have a stiffy. It's divine to own a dick, From the tiniest little tadger To the world's biggest prick. So, three cheers for your Willy or John Thomas. Hooray for your one-eyed trouser snake, Your piece of pork, your wife's best friend, Your Percy, or your cock. You can wrap it up in ribbons. You can slip it in your sock, But don't take it out in public, Or they will stick you in the dock, And you won't come back.

Had they known (and they should have. This was a huge intel failure), they could have developed the combined arms methods for bocage fighting that eventually did come to pass in July much earlier.

Making casts of your "love-viper" to show off to the rest of the Minnisota miscreants? Shouldn't take much material.

Good. So you'll be going away then?

Yes, Yes, Fear the Y-Wing and all. But the question is how many points is this thing going to cost from your artillery budget? Wouldn't a Sturmovik be more practical?

The only good LawnGnome is a Dead LawnGnome

Alrighty, your butt-kickin is on the way. Now if I was truely sadistic, I'd send and infantry only battle with you on the attack given your love of the BB infantry modeling. Instead, we'll have some fun in an armor only slugfest in a town. Gamey yet satisfying.

A while ago I actually took a look at the breakdown of American amphib. ops in the Pacific, and it is almost 50/50 Army/Marines with maybe a little more for the Marines. [ October 24, 2003, 11:40 PM: Message edited by: Marlow ]

OK, some bidness. BooBoo, Wildchild Updates! Where are the updates? I want blood and gore and Wildman a turn would be nice. * * * Earless one, I call you our laddie. You still owe me a battle from two forums ago. Send me any setup your little long haired (better for covering up the lack of ears) hippie freak heart desires. * * * As a final order of business, I claim the right to make the newest forum Grog “Dook” my own personal pet grog should he wander in here. He showed some promise in the CAS thread, and I’m putting my dibs in on him now. He has a little flair, unlike the rest of our dour humorless four horsemen type grogs.

Actually, I had in mind you as a light snack for Fred before he got started on the real work. Sort of like that self-proclaimed bear toucher that got eaten along with is girlfriend up in Alaska a few weeks ago.

Actually, I had in mind you as a light snack for Fred before he got started on the real work. Sort of like that self-proclaimed bear toucher that got eaten along with is girlfriend up in Alaska a few weeks ago.

Oh Raise Seanachai to a god is it? Well, I suppose it wouldn’t hurt too much to let him call himself a minor god, and let the rif-raf kowtow to him and sacrifice virgins (themselves?) at some discount store alter. We can give him a temple in one of the seedier sections of the Cesspool, maybe that building behind the strip joint that used to be methadone clinic. Yep that should do just fine. Of course he will be one of those tragic flawed minor gods that inhabit most pantheistic traditions. Any suggestions on what sort of nasty little problems we should saddle him with? If we do elevate him to a deity though, we should certainly do it in the Nordic tradition in honor of the various products of Viking Lust that inhabit this thread. Then, in fine Nordic tradition, at the battle royal at the end of time, the fabled “Pengnarok,” we will have him offed in some suitably awful way. Personally I vote for having him eaten by Fred.

Oh Raise Seanachai to a god is it? Well, I suppose it wouldn’t hurt too much to let him call himself a minor god, and let the rif-raf kowtow to him and sacrifice virgins (themselves?) at some discount store alter. We can give him a temple in one of the seedier sections of the Cesspool, maybe that building behind the strip joint that used to be methadone clinic. Yep that should do just fine. Of course he will be one of those tragic flawed minor gods that inhabit most pantheistic traditions. Any suggestions on what sort of nasty little problems we should saddle him with? If we do elevate him to a deity though, we should certainly do it in the Nordic tradition in honor of the various products of Viking Lust that inhabit this thread. Then, in fine Nordic tradition, at the battle royal at the end of time, the fabled “Pengnarok,” we will have him offed in some suitably awful way. Personally I vote for having him eaten by Fred.

[ October 17, 2003, 10:55 PM: Message edited by: Marlow ]

It is 3 million, and if you read the posts in this thread, I did address this. However, we can look a little closer. We’ll start with the numbers provided for the Soviets in this thread(not total manpower, since you say it is irrelevant) . I have no idea if they are correct, but nobody has seen fit to challenge the original poster. 230 divisions and 18000+ tanks. How do the Western Allies stack up? As I already posted in this thread, the Americans, Commonwealth, and Free French bring 90 divisions (I may be underestimating by 10 or so). Note that this does not include divisions from the Pacific theater, those from Continental US, rearmed Germans, Newly raised French division, or Polish. These divisions are often twice the size of the Soviet divisions, so we’ll call this 150 Soviet Division equivalents. (I’m going with 150 rather than 180 just to allow some error in favor of the Soviets). Also, as I already posted in this thread, the Americans had a very significant amount of combat power outside of their divisional structure. 45% vs. 20% for the Soviets is the figure I’ve seen. These separate units (only counting the ones in Europe) consisted of 32 separate tank batts. 52 separate TD batts (more than 90% SP by mid 1945). About 5 divisions worth of separate cav units and about 10 divisions worth of separate infantry. Broken down this works out to about 30 divisions (mostly armored divisions) worth of troops. Add another 60 Soviet division equivalents to the equation for a total of 210. The soviets (with 20% extra divisional strength) get another 46 divisions for a total of 276. 210 vs 276 is a lot different from the 3 to 1 odds proposed by some. Some other factors to consider. You must examine the state of the opposition before you can assume that the Soviets would have the same kind of success against the WAs as against the Germans in 44/45. An average US Infantry division had twice the infantry troops as a late war German division (even one with a full complement of troops), and attached an independent tank and/or TD battalion. This would provide an armored force of between 40 and 90 tanks or TDs. What was the typical establishment of armor for an average German division in late 44 or 45? Bet the average American infantry division could call on as much or more armor than the average late war Panzer division. Almost forgot to compare the total number of tanks available. Lets see, 15 US armored divisions at about 200 tanks each for 3000. 32 separate batts with about 50 each, for another 1500, about 50 SP TD batts with about 40 TDs each (anti-armor of a tank), for 2000. US total in theater is about 7500. Now we add in a couple of French units – avout 500. Add in the Brits, I’m only guessing now, but I’ll say 3500 (half the number of divisions, so half the armor?). Out total is 11,500. 18000 to 11500 is a lot better than 3 to 1 [ October 17, 2003, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: Marlow ]

God spare us from morons.

Exactly which of my posts are you reading? Please point to a spot where I said anything negative about the Soviet Army. I've a great deal of respect for what the Soviets acomplished with their Army in WWII. My points have been focussed on three areas. 1. Several people here are stating over and over "OPERATIONAL ART! OPERATIONAL ART! DECEPTION! DECEPTION!" Fine, but words don't do squat. From what I've read (and I've read a fair number of Glantz' books/articles, and am working my way through Erickson), Soviets were pretty good, but you need to consider the state of their opposition in 44 and 45. My "ninga trains" comment was directed to the posters who place an almost mythic quality over Soviet "operational art" and such. Not much different than those who assume that the German soldiers always kicked ass tactically. 2. That the Soviet air force was ill equiped to deal with the airforce of the WAs, both quantitativly and qualitatively. I've backed up both with numbers. 3. That the manpower difference wasn't 3 to 1 as some suggest. Now where did I say that the Red Army sucked? [ October 17, 2003, 10:23 PM: Message edited by: Marlow ]

Where do people keep coming up with this 3 times the number of troops figure? In April 1945 the US Army had 3 million troops deployed in Europe, and another 2.2 million in other overseas locations (according to US Army published figures). This does not include those that could be mobilized from the United States. Add in the numbers for the other Western Allies, and the Soviet manpower advantage is probably 1.5 to 1 at best. Too much of the calculations here are counting divisions. As I have said twice, this is not a valid measure. Many WA divisions were twice as large as Soviet divisions. Further, large parts of the combat strength of the US army was not in divisions, but rather in seperate units (e.g. seperate tank and TD battalions). This is not included in the 61 divisions in Theater at the end of the war. Thirty two separate tank batts. were sent to Europe. Another 30 or so were located elsewhere. This is enough to equip 10 armored divisions in Europe. There were 52 separate TD batts. In Europe, most of them SP. Not tanks, but this represents about 18 divisions worth of armor. About 5 divisions worth of separate cav units were in Europe. About 10 divisions worth of separate infantry units. A metric buttload of separate arty units were in Europe, but this is probably similar to most armys. Overall, the US Army was supposed to have the greatest amount of non-divisional fighting strength of any WWII army. Figures I’ve seen put the number at 45% of strength outside of the divisions vs. about 20% for the Soviets. [ October 17, 2003, 12:43 AM: Message edited by: Marlow ]