dieseltaylor

Bone Vulture said "The problem is that Soviet light tanks lack both cupolas and sufficient crew, so most of the time they're forced to acquire targets blind. It takes incredible skill and fortune to outflank German forces with Soviet light tanks, unless your opponent is completely unprepared for this tactic. Otherwise, light PAKs will usually dismantle any Soviet tanks that attempt flanking maneuvers." I find playing that Honey's particularly and Valentines can give the Soviets a potent light force for flanking - of course they need to have some cheap infantry to get rid of light German flank guards but then if you are lucky you may only be paying 70-80 points for your tank. Of course I am in the realm of large battlefields and 2000 - 3000 points where the flanks are large enough to exploit. With regard to flag sitters in the days of CMBO with ultra powerful infantry a friend's nephew occupied a village with all the flags and sat feeling pleased with himself. Amazing what 14" [350mm] shells can do to a village! : ) I vaguely remember it as 35 squads dead and 15 squad remmnants routed.

A Port for Patton would be an extremeely good double blind scenario. Enough troops, tanks and artillery for a few unlucky breaks to be evened out. BTW this should be played as the attacker : )

I suppose this should be in Scenarios or Tips and Technique...................... but.... I am being pasted By BigDork but as it is really designed to make him comfortable with PBEMHelper I am not fussed. Someone has said they won by shooting and scooting and I have a suspicion this might be the answer. The only time I have played it I snuck almost all my tanks down one flank deciding to skulk there and try and nobble some isolated guns. Getting bored I chanced my arm and lost about 6 tanks ruining the point ratio I was trying to wangle. I suspect it is not a game anyone can possibly win on a first play if they go in without any pre-knowledge! : )

I am pleased to hear that the higher the level pilot the less FF problem. After all I have just taken my delivery of three crack Panther A's. Admittedly as a Russian player I expect some form of immunity : ) [they have killed 4 Stugs for no loss so far] Of course captured equipment was used to by both sides ............. BTW where you under fire from the ground , or concerned about being bounced , when you were doing your flybys. I have a book on aerial recognition based on the US forces "magazine" printed in the war to lessen FF incidents. Identifying vehicles from the real life phots is not easy. Also you refer to bunkers ... they of all things you would expect to be very well hidden against air observation.

M Dorosh "As for the VC citations, I see no mention of anyone "shooting from the hip"." I am most upset! : ) I now have to check everything you say because you were out and out wrong. Depression ; (

No - I do not like night battles

Andreas "I think using Victoria Cross citations to support the argument that something was 'not that uncommon' is a bit problematic." I would have thought this was a reflecton of how easy it is to access the information on VC's, if it would make you happier I suppose one could work through the lesser medals, then start on battalion histories : ) Apparently the Bren was weapon of choice for this kind of stunt - and I really doubt that it was rare - but then I suspect you will want me to re-read all my histories and then work out in what percentages of all actions it took place.!! The trouble is that if it was reasonably common it may slip under the "noteworthy" level : ( BTW I felt a faint glow of pride to think I have travelled on the Dominion Monarch on which a VC had travelled.

Amusingly apposite "The Trial of German Major War Criminals Sitting at Nuremberg, Germany 12th March to 22nd March, 1946 Eighty-Fourth Day: Monday, 18th March, 1946 (Part 2 of 9) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Page 175] DR. SIEMERS (counsel for the defendant Raeder): Q. The prosecution has submitted the diary of General Jodl as Document 1809-PS. In this diary there are two entries from the first half of 1940, in regard to which I should like to have your opinion. These two entries concern Russia at a time when Germany and Russia were on friendly terms. I should like to say in advance that the substance of the intentions which are contained in these entries sound rather fantastic and that is why I would like to have your opinion as Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force. I quote the first entry dated 13th February, 1940: "Have learned from Admiral Canaris that the squadron Rowehl is to be employed in full force going from Bulgaria toward the Caucasus. The Air Force must explain with whom this false idea originated." The second entry of May, 1940, reads as follows, and I quote verbatim: "Fuehrer rejects request of the Air Force to set up a listening post in the Caucasus." I would like you to tell me what the thoughts were which guided you in these plans as Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force and what facts were the basis of your thoughts. A. If these entries were made on the basis of a report by Admiral Canaris, who was the Chief of Foreign Intelligence, and if they were entered by Jodl in connection with the special long reconnaissance squadron Rowehl, it is because of the latter's connection with this squadron (to whom he himself frequently assigned Intelligence or espionage tasks) that he had heard of my intention to use it - which was something which I wanted to have kept specially secret. He [Page 176] apparently informed the High Command of the Wehrmacht, where this action, or the intended action, met with complete misapprehension and rightly could not be understood. My intention in this connection - and I had personally ordered it - was entirely clear. The statement that it was to do reconnaissance in or in the direction of the Caucasus is not quite correct. It would have been more correct to say in the direction of the Caucasus, Syria and Turkey. But this mistake may have occurred in the report transmitted by Canaris. I had received more and more Intelligence reports to the effect that from Asia Minor actions were to be undertaken against the Russian oilfields of the Caucasus - Baku - and likewise actions for the purpose of gravely disrupting the oil supply from Roumania to Germany. As Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force I was the one chiefly interested in bringing in Roumanian oil, as well as the Caucasian oil, more precisely petroleum and gasoline, on the basis of a trade agreement with Russia, because at that time the refineries were not completed and not working to capacity. A disturbance in either one of these supplying regions would have greatly damaged my Air Force. Therefore I had to watch this closely. I anticipated disruption of the oil regions in the Caucasus. I had the agents' report checked by very reliable people and found that in Syria an army was actually formed under General Weygand which had the name of "Orient Army." I was more interested, however, in the concentration of squadrons of aircraft in the Syrian area, not only of French but also of English squadrons. As far as I remember I received these reports about the intentions of the Franco-British air squadrons through informants in Turkey - that is to say, from Turks, because there had been negotiations with Turkey regarding permission to fly over her territory in order to carry out the intention of the English-French air squadrons of suddenly bombing the Baku area and thereby severely damaging the Russian oilfields and eliminating deliveries to Germany. I therefore had to, or rather I was obliged to, find out constantly, through long-range reconnaissance flights, the extent to which the airfields in Syria were becoming more active than before. There could be no other reason for massing aircraft there exactly at this time, for it was not a theatre of war nor was there any threat from Germany at that moment. On the contrary, it would have been understandable if all British and French aircraft had not been needed in England and France. If, therefore, my long-range reconnaissance flights established the fact that the aerodromes in Syria were being used more than ever, and further confirmed that possibly the East Turkish airfields were being increased, this would have been, and actually was, a confirmation of the alleged intentions. In this case, as soon as I had recognised this clearly, I would have to point out to the Fuehrer that Germany should draw Russia's attention to the danger threatening her. The second remark, the establishing of "listening posts," not in the Caucasus but in front of the Caucasus, naturally served the same purpose, namely that of setting up secret radio stations along the general flight direction Syria- Caucasus, Syria-Baku, East Turkey-Baku, one, two or three, in order to find out whether preparatory flights of the Franco-English Air Forces were taking place in this direction, that is to say, first of all reconnaissance on the oilfields, etc. in order to get more information that way also. Since at the time I had not yet conclusive and final proof in my hands, I kept these things to myself and only dealt with them in the offices responsible to my sector of the Air Force, until I could obtain a clear picture. Only later, after the termination of the French campaign, absolute confirmation of these intentions was obtained by the discovery of the secret reports of the French General Staff and of the meetings of the Combined Supreme War Council of England and France, a confirmation of the fact that my information was entirely [Page 177] correct and that a plan for a surprise bombing attack on all the Russian oilfields had been prepared. In the meantime the confirmation of the plan to eliminate the Roumanian oilfields, already known to us, was communicated to the Roumanian Government, and this attack in neutral Roumania was then prevented. Q. I understood you correctly, did I not, that these plans were made by both England and France? A. Yes. Q. And that the intelligence you received was to the effect that the attacks on the oilfields were directly aimed at the then neutral Russia and also, indirectly, at Germany by the cutting off of her oil supply. A. Of course. DR. SIEMERS: Thank you.

Stalin ... "pp. 35-36 FROM PREMIER STALIN TO THE PRESIDENT, Mr. ROOSEVELT In taking this opportunity to send you a personal message through the courtesy of Mr. Standley, who is leaving for Washington, I should like to say a few words about U.S. military deliveries to the U.S.S.R. The difficulties of delivery are reported to be due primarily to shortage of shipping. To remedy the shipping situation the Soviet Government would be prepared to agree to a certain curtailment of U.S. arms deliveries to the Soviet Union. We should be prepared temporarily fully to renounce deliveries of tanks, guns, ammunition, pistols, etc. At the same time, however, we are badly in need of increased deliveries of modern fighter aircraft-such as Aircobras-and certain other supplies. It should be borne in mind that the Kittyhawk is no match for the modern German fighter. It would be very good if the U.S.A. could ensure the monthly delivery of at least the following items: 500 fighters, 8,000 to 10,000 trucks, 5,000 tons of aluminium, and 4,000 to 5,000 tons of explosives. Besides, we need, within 12 months, two million tons of grain (wheat) and as much as we can have of fats, concentrated foods and canned meat. We could bring in a considerable part of the food supplies in Soviet ships via Vladivostok if the U.S.A. consented to turn over to the U.S.S.R. 20 to 30 ships at the least to replenish our fleet. I have talked this over with Mr. Willkie, feeling certain that he will convey it to you. As regards the situation at the front, you are undoubtedly aware that in recent months our position in the South, particularly in the Stalingrad area, has deteriorated due to shortage of aircraft, mostly fighters. The Germans have bigger stocks of aircraft than we anticipated. In the South they have at least a twofold superiority in the air, which makes it impossible for us to protect our troops. War experience has shown that the bravest troops are helpless unless protected against air attack. October 7, 1942

Jason C Thanks for the detail of the fuel production. I do not think anybody would disagree with your arguement on a total war footing being vital for Germany if it were to compete to win. That is such a big arguement that it makes all other discussions irrelevant - I think there is not much arguement there. That is why we look at history post 1940 and accept that Hitler is as he was and what could have happened politically. The further we go from 1940 the more difficult it gets with what-ifs. We could do the small level - what if they never attempted to capture major cities etc. I am interested in the benefits to Germany from Britain being knocked out and the consequent downside to Russia. I think it slightly better than evens that the USA would have provided Russia with strategic resource. If they had not, and the Germans and their allies attacked earlier and with more men that is the real biggy .....

Jace "Why does everyone look for the determinants of the outcome in obscure secondary matters instead of the obviously largest issues (grand strategy, learning&doctrine, major operational decisions) affecting outcomes on the obviously most important front (Russia)? What on earth is the "bee in bonnet"-hood about it? Would someone please explain it to me? Are the critical variables just too well known and boring, or what?" What no comment on the very boring materials? I consider them very important. And you still seem to be arguing on the basis of what happened in the war as not allowing any change to what might have happened if we start from the position postulated. AEB assumes that Italy does not invade France, I assume the opposite and we may end up with a useful fleet in the Black Sea early in Barbarossa .... The thread is not would Germany win by itself but would Russia beat the "Axis" - whatever that may have been in our alternate history. We make assumptions to what if ..... is not that what the thread is about. To talk of Bagration is to assume that that operation will happen. I mean no disservice to the Russians at all - I prefer playing as them : )

I think I have spotted an error in the list on the last link which lists one type of steel provided as 425,331,742 tons which must have been remarkable value for 39 million dollars - and put in hoc world production for number of years ..... I think it should be lbs. [Approx to 200,000 tons]

Jason C Very dismissive Jace, but surely we were in hypothetical land anyway. Your splendidly marshalled argument talks about the total war effort as it transpired - I am following the argument from the point of view that what could have happened if , effectively, the UK is out of the war in 1940. The value in timing of the arrival of the Lend Lease tanks etc early in the war rather than in as a percentage in 1945 of total production is not addessed - why not - is the adage a stitch in time valueless. Franco may have reasonably taken a view that GB was not in a position to go to war over Gib - a possibility. Turkey I believe would stay out but transhipment across its territory - a la Sweden is certainly not fanciable. To argue that a defeated Britain would be able to exert the same kind of awe over the Iraqi's after losing a war is fanciable. We might think of the possibility that the Germans would forment the problem and tell the UK to butt out. The fact that it is relatively unimportant in itself , other than as an option to cause worry to the USSR is something. The effect on other colonies might be far reaching ..... A possibility, but then it is an alternative history we are looking at so lets try to expand the subject before shutting it down by quoting what subsequently happened for real, Lendlease trucks 2.5 ton trucks = 151,053 jeeps = 77,972 75 mm sherman = 2,007 76 mm sherman = 2,095 only 10-15% of those manufactured in Russia. SEE http://www.1jma.dk/articles/1jmaarticlelendlease.htm re trucks http://www.1jma.dk/articles/1jmaarticlesRussiaproduction.htm The links above show the effects of the invasion on Russian production of raw resources and food - building your army is fine if you can feed your population and assuming that the UK and US were not providing the stuff then I think Russian effectiveness would have been substantally reduced. The famines of the 30's would suggest that the Russians did not have an overabundance of resource stockpiled so for those who want to see the real deal in Lend Lease http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/lend.html lets just mention that in the list of thousands of types of product that there is a million tons of meat .....

"Let's do a what if scenario shall we? It's May 1940 and the British agree to a cease fire after the Dunkirque evacuation as Hitler hoped they would. Therefore when Operation Barbarossa begins later that year or in 1941 the German Army can focus entirely on the eastern front. It's unlikely the United States will fight against Germany anytime in the near future" There have been arguements, seemingly off the basic premise postulated, which says Russia wins. This may be so but nobody has covered the morale effects of Britain being out of the war. Could the Germans had a more willing occupied territories labour force, more volunteers, marginal effects to be sure. A better prepared psywar showing a crusade against communism as a western civilisation necessity ............. On the military side I think the dismissal of the strategic raw materials and transport provided too glib. Four million tons of food must have been exceedingly useful given that the most productive areas of Russia were not producing for Russia.The comparison of Lend Lease to total production figures seems to ignore the timing of the leased equipment arriving and bad logic. The Italian Army, for what it is worth would have been available, the Mare Nostrum would have facilitated trade. The Spanish government might have considered it time that Gibralter was returned..... The revolt in Iraq must be assumed to succeed - a curious thought about how easy it might be to bomb into the Russian oilfields from Iraq .... just an idle thought. Transhipment through the Balkans via Turkey could supply the material for the attempt. I do not see it as a Russian win as we also have to take into account the Germans getting to nuclear power before , and if, Russia overwhelms them. Given they held out to 1945 fighting all the Allies it would seem a reasonable chance. Jet engine technology and rocjketry may also had more resource ... so nothing is certain. My 2cents worth

UK/CW for invention in artillery and funnies! 17pdr and 6pdr and APDS - if you consider where we might be without them !!! AVRE & Crocodile and Merlin was magic for the Mustang!! let alone any other plane.

In todays TCP/IP my 17pdr takes out 4 Panther G's [crack] at 1100 metres to 909 metres. It was superb - and the crew only a regular too! The 5 tank was immmo behind a house and I had just blown it down ready for my 5th and final and he surrendered. This was played on a huge map 2000pts - the first three in four minutes and one of those was fast on a road.

Parabellum Do you get a big adrenalin rush when playing?. We used to play 1 or 2 minute turns depending on the points involved. [1500-3000] Company moves for speed relying on the AI , and cocentrating more accurate mangement on hot spots.Fast and inaccurate play but balanced for realism as borg spotting became substantially less effective. You simply did not have the time to precicely place all your troops to answer every possible siting or check ALL your lines of site across the board.

On the question of TCP/IP or LAN games how many people have played any? Please post even if your answer is no. : ) I have probably played 20 on the net and 30 on LAN

Mine was in a Finnish set game where my forces were under attack from a company of SMG's and two T34/85. To bolster my defence around the flag I had a Flammpanzer. The T34's came stalking, the nearest one came around a bump in the ridge on my right and one coming from the behind a wood left, confident of the right result a squad was moving from in front of me to my woods. I flame the right hand tank for half the turn, I think it fired and they bailed, the other tank not in my line of sight decides to back off leaving me free to flame the squad. What a minute!! I have kept the film.

I think that in the situation of working along a typical European street of linked buildings, faced with going out of a front door and in at the next, or going through the walls. The latter is actually quite attractive - provided you can get far enough away from impact and you do not bring the roof down. BTW I cam get 9 metres from my furthest wall and that would presumably be quite a reasonable distance to escape debris from the shell/bomb. Mr. Tittles - given the spring had 200lbs/90 kgs of pent up energy I cannot agree with your: " I doubt the spring added any velocity to the projectile but was just an igniter and a launching rod the bomb shot off of." Might aswell just used the cartridge then!! : ) I suspect someone has the suitable formula for how far a 1.35kg projectile flies if you release 90 kg against it. I am guessing accurately approx 100metres : )

How far away from a wall can you get inside your house? : ) In my study - given the PIAT is slightly over three feet long the muzzle will be all of 3 metres [9 feet] from the target. Believe me I really really would not like to try it.

i cnt quit dcide to goto th lowst lvl of riting cos im lzy n let pple that reed it desifer it.i kan wast thr time insted of krrecting my tiepin. i no they wll tek myideas mor cerously as Ive masterd th kybored. REVS I see you say that the Allies do not have great vehicle choice -- I am think the allies - particularly the Brits has a huge range to choose from. Perhaps its hte people you play? : ) Game Requirements My numero uno is the ability to have fire for effect orders!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please, please

Good interpretation Ant. I had not considered that aspect .... wonderful how unclear writiing can lead to so much fun decades later! : )

Curiously whilst mentioning how hard it is to cock the spring you would think that on the ground you would have the advantage of being able to use your leg muscles against the T piece of the stock rather than rely on the arm muscles. The forum requires a someone who has been trained in using them !

Mr Tittles The trough in which the round lies takes up only 25 % of the length of the weapon. The rest of the tube therefore provides the area for the spring to be compressed into . Recocking achieved or not the gas would then be vented from the upward facing large trough in the front of the Piat. Weighing 14.4kg 32lb there was a very large monpod on the front end to carry the weight when aiming.