Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Steiner14

  1. Steiner - where do you get 66 million victims from?

    e.g. Schwarzbuch des Kommunismus (Black book of Communism)

    And though I hesitate to say all the German civilians deserved death,

    You are so generous. :rolleyes:

    the military men knew what they were in for.

    Then this can only mean that today, with internet, also every US-soldier knew, that Colin Powell and the US-government was lying about WMDs in Iraq?

    But such claims are even more ridiculous if you look at the cicumstances: all german soldiers should have known what not a single secret service of the Alliies knew about!!! :D

    That's like saying: every US soldier knew, that Iraq had WMDs, while no secret service new about them.

    Come one, not even you would believe that. :P

    The Germans started the whole mess.


    You initiated the Holocaust.

    Sure! :D

    Btw, do you know when this word appeared BIG for the first time?

    You were rounding up British soldiers and shooting them as early as France in 1940.

    Being more specific would be necessary. I don't know what you mean.

    You firebombed Rotterdam

    Sure... But not only this, the "Hunns" also ate children and were indoctrinated, while in the western world people are free from propaganda and know the facts!

    Now, what are the facts?

    First it is important to notice, that Rotterdam was a defended frontier city (compare that to the criminal strategic bombing of cities only to hit civilians in the hope to weaken morale).

    A frontier city. On May 14th 1940 the Wehrmacht was negotiating the handing over of the city, otherwise it would be bombed at 3 pm. The negotiations were fobbed and as late at around 2 pm the negotiations were interrupted and the ceasefire was extended to 6 pm.

    In the meanwhile Kampfgeschwader 54, already on it's way, could not be reached anymore over radio, because they had already taken the radio pulline-antennas in. The flares that were shot were not seen from the first wave and only the second wave saw them and cancelled the attack. Therefore the first wave with 57 of the 100 bombers, in the believe the attack order would still be valid, dropped their bombs (97 tons).

    How such a tragic accident can be used as justification of using phosphorous firebombs and bombs with timers and second and third waves, timed that way, to hit a maximum amount of rescue teams of an undefended city, filled with fugitives, is beyond my understanding.

    and London, before your cities were bombed in a similar manner.

    I suggest you check, when the first cities in Germany were bombed by the RAF. And what kind of cities were that. And what was the target in these cities.

    Then check when was London bombed for the first time. And what the targets in London were.

  2. Let me guess: It's you who is the one talking higher mathematics and I'm the one claiming 2+2=555, right? :D

    But so far I have not seen a single argument from your side, what in my argumentation was not correct.

    Can you explain to me, how could you, the higher mathematician know that my calculation was wrong, if you refuse to check it? Andif it was wrong, shouldn't it be easy to show, what is wrong?

    Where is the "logic" behind all this absurdity in your thinking, that if you avoid free speech, you would INCREASE your KNOWLEDGE? You are acting like priests, that try to defend secrets of a religion, but you are not acting like rationale free man that DEMAND their right of free speech about everything, have free thoughts like the wind and are proud of to be freethinkers. You are proud to act like Pawlowian Dogs and think this was rationale behaviour.

    Congratulations to those, that achieved this!

  3. If Hitler won the war there would be no freaking London, Paris, Moscow. You'd be conversing with your inbred blonde blue-eyed Arian buddies on the internet, not us.

    Blonde blue-eyed people are inbred? Do I hear racism?

    And what the **** exactly do you mean by "Jewish Bolshevism"?????? Who is moderating this forum anyway?????????


    Official communist postcard "Leaders of the Proletarian Revolution".

    As historically educated I guess you know them?

    And would you say, that a Politburo with around 90% jews is jewish? :D

    Try to read good books, for example Alexander Solshenizyn, and consume less brainwashing-media then you would understand better, what is going on in the world. Instead of calling for censorship, and being an enemy of free speech, as soon as it is NOT against "blonde blue-eyed" people and the destruction of their people, you could discuss the facts and exchange arguments! :mad:

  4. Though ideologically the Soviets vs Germans was a 'war of annihilation' I think thats just really rhetoric.

    Wrong. Germany was destroyed. Totally. What today is called "Germany" has nothing to do with Germany. It is the FRG and has nothing to do with german culture, the german people, german history. It is an artificial re-educated consumerism Coca Cola culture.

    Finis Germania 1945.

    But everything else you write is wrong, too:

    First, the biggest genocide in history was committed after the Germans laid down their weapons with around 11 million victims. In "peacetimes", committed by the united globalists, the bringers of peace to the world.

    And when this "liberation" was taking place, strangely also the biggest wave of suicides EVER happened with over 200.000 dead. Probably because of joy.

    Then the biggest cultural destruction and censorship ever began. Never before in history that many millions of books were burnt, cultural art destroyed or stolen, the whole educational system of a nation destroyed, every factory, that was not destroyed by bombs, plundered.

    Also the biggest economic looting in history was committed, also in the biggest industrial scale with over 50.000 stolen german patents.

    But what I find most fascinating, is, if someone really can believe in Anti-Nazi propaganda, when he looks at European cities like Paris or London today.

    Isn't it interesting, that those, who proclaim Hitler was an enemy of the Russian or other people, are the ones who are commiting a genocide against the Russians with mass immigration?!

    It's the same in the EU: The ones who claim to be "Pro-Europeans", are the ones who demand anti-european mass-immigration!

    Orwellian Speak, nothing else.

    Can anyone with his right mind really believe, that if Hitler would have won the war, London, Paris, Moscow or any other EUROPEAN city would look like this today?


    Finis Europae 1945.

    And if someone takes a look at the transformation of the USA, he maybe will also recognize, how correct Patton was, when he recognzied - although way too late - what really had happened.

    Of course had the Nazi's prevailed, I'm sure you would have seen something close to annihilation for most of the Russian population.

    :D Therefore at the end more than 10% of the Wehrmacht already were Russians and other nations from the Soviet paradise? Joining the side, that probably was not going to win anymore!

    And who knows, maybe the Ukrainian HOLODOMOR was a bolshevik gift, too!

    Like the 66 million victims of Jewish Bolshevism that do not count.

    Still - the Soviets won and there was no large scale annihilation of the Germans.

    Yupp, the 11 Million Germans don't count, like the 66 million victims of Jewish Bolshevism in the globalist's matrix...

    Just because one war has a bunch more casualties than another doesn't mean necessarily the combat was any less intense.

    You obviously never have talked to a veteran who fought in the east and west, if you talk such BS. How brave the Russian soldier was and what alone the Russian Winter means for men, animals and machines, you obviously have not the slightest imagination.

    Show me a single german veteran who was a Ostfrontkämpfer and later fought in the West, who supports your chauvinistic Hollywood-invented imagination! And you probably will also find not a single Russian one, too.

    I have talked to countless german veterans and there was not a single one who was impressed by the Western Alliies - quite the contrary - but each and everyone was full of respect about the bravery (and stubbornness) of the Russian soldier - despite their often non-legal war practices (although it was not formally non-legal for them, since the Soviet Union had not signed the Geneve convention, but vice versa, also Germany was not bound to it in the fight against the Red Army).

    The huge dimensions, the wheather and the (non existant) legal framework was one of the reasons, why the war in the east was taking place in another dimension and why it is so incredibly stupid to compare it with the conventional war in the west.

    Another reason was the Soviet politics of scorched earth (that already had broke Napoleon's Army the neck). What this meant for the own people in villages during the Russian Winter (before all their seed, corn and cattle had been confiscated), is hard to imagine and maybe gives the uninformed a taste what it meant to fight in the East, if the Bolsheviks were treating their own people that way...

  5. That's a 4-5 minute traverse.

    Hm, that's some time but maybe not that bad, if you additionally can threat his tank on 509 from the side? A good timed faked attack directly over a smoked top of 509 with an infantry unit with AT weaponry, while your tank attacks him in the flank?

    Conducting this maneuver with both tanks maybe is a bit risky, because he could decide to roll over the crest while your tanks are on the move. Tehrefore a further away overwatch tank protecting the move of the tank closer to the hill, seems the much safer variant.

    Also, remember that there is an overall plan here, despite the apparent madness of bringing less tanks than Bil. The plan is to use artillery against the bulk of his infantry, rather than hunt them with my couple of tanks.

    I know and I understand this. But my personal preference would be to solve the tank problem first, before going into offense with infantry. You have his infantry there under mortar fire and until your tank arrives they probably are shaken already and not a big threat to the tank.

    As long as the enemy has his tanks everywhere, you can't use your infantry offensively. I'm a fan of fast and mobile tank maneuvers. Being patient and accept longer moves usually offers better engagement possibilities and many oponents are more static players and do not react equally flexible. But it's your game ofcourse and what you do must fit to your gaming style where you feel comfortable.

    But i think the possibilities of this move are very attractive: :D

    Although this attack would be conducted only with one tank, you nevertheless should be able to avoid a russian roulette but beautifully outmaneuver him into the flank.

    Additionally if this maneuver would work, you immediately could rush around again and solve the tank problem between 509 and Piualta with two against one tank, while he probably will stay put and being shocked instead of retreating his tank as quickly as possible and accept the failure of his plan. The beauty is, you do not need to wait what he does, but you can act. You dictate what happens next (except for the small time window, until your tank would be moved around).

    The opportunity IMO could be nothing less than your left side not only being stabalized, but conolidated and it would be not possible for him to take the objectives anymore. The battle would be (almost) won (if you don't make suicide attacks on the right and be patient until the tanks are free to support the final attack on the right).

    At least for this turn, I'll wait to see what his next move is before rushing anywhere...

    Sure, take my ideas only as suggestions. I do not like to sit and wait with tanks, if I see the possibility to seek initiative - in this case maybe a battle decisive initiative. But it's always easier to talk than to do and good plans in theory can work not at all on the map.

    BTW, it might be nice to at least concede that my choice of position for my tanks is not turning out as completely useless as you made it out to be ;) It was lucky that my first shot hit, but it wasn't an accident that my tanks have a hull-down view to that location...

    Ofcourse I congratulate you, but IMO it was pure luck: It seems his tank was not forced to button down prior, maybe he even saw your tank first, and I may be wrong but can it be that he was hulldown, too? :D And it was IMO a always to avoid one on one duel and this was even done while you have numerically inferior forces. :eek: That was like russian roulette with three, bah, four bullets. :D But nevertheless you suceeded and ofcourse I can easily talk from the distance.

  6. Note that I do not know that he has only a single tank at 523. You may know that, but I do not.

    The only info I have is from the pics you posted.

    Ofcourse I did not read Bil's thread - and I have stated that. Otherwise I wouldn't have discussed tactics with you, ofcourse. :rolleyes:

    So do not try to suggest, that my conclusions were built on more info.

    IMO moving to the centre was your best option left, but quite a mistake was, that you have not engaged immediately. Even if he would have withdrawn, you would have decimated his infantry already quite a bit.

    Now his infantry is unhamred, his tank is ok and additionally the PzIV are placed on the forward slope of 509 where they seem to be without any keyholing possibilities and seem to be forced into a totally passive role there.

    The idea of 509 as I mean it is, that it allows to quickly shift on the reverse slope from one side of the top to the other and threat almost every direction of the map from a relative secure hulldown position.

    If you would have stayed with the tanks on the right side, 509 and the whole left side (and with them all the forces), would probably be lost already, while you would be sitting in a pocket that would be threatened with much more tanks from three directions.

    He has more tanks and therefore he can allow to support his infantry with them (which is your chance, because that's the reason why he spread them all over the map). You can't support your infantry with tanks, you don't have enough. But you can hunt single tanks. IMO still the best plan and the only chance you have.

    Over and out.

  7. Yes, just to confirm that I played the 1:08 turn, and took screenshots, and sent it t0 Bil to keep things moving

    You send your screenies to Bil?

    I guess this is food for thought for future demo AARs: maybe the forces need to be more controlled by the organiser, since the participants have to choose the best weapons they can :D

    For me the inequality makes it interesting.

    It appears that Bil did a massive rethink, suddenly, on my right hand flank.

    The Sherm that came barraging into the P523 valley reverse back equally rapidly, and I can also see men scurrying back behind P523.


    I'm honestly not quite sure what's behind this - I don't have insight into what the thinking was in pushing that tank forwards, nor into what I did that made him change his mind.

    I'm quite sure that he recognized that he has no chance against your big force on the right for now and therefore IMO did the only right thing: cancel the planned attack and decided to hold 523 on the reverse slope and let you come. For now.

    This could also give him the opportunity to free up the tank(s) to strenghten the top of 523.

    I'd especially find it problematic, if he would recognzie the importance of the top of 523 and would not only have one, but two or three tanks defending this pillar. He would sit high and dominate everything.

    IMO you have to get his tank at 523 knocked out ASAP, as long as it is a single tank. If he gets two or three tanks there, things become problematic, because you probably will not be able to knock out his tanks there anymore without losing your two tanks.

    IMO your major advantage was, that you could develop your tank force faster, while he had decided to spread his tanks all over the map. Although overall in the numerous disadvantage, it allows a 2:1 local superiority against his single tanks.

    But the longer his tanks survive, the better he will probably develop his tanks and the more difficult it will become for you to go for single tanks.

  8. One option is to put the PzIVHs on P509. There is a nice view of the Sherm from there...


    However this is unlikely to succeed, because the whole of this side of P509 is exposed to Bil's men in the main valley:


    Why do you care what his infantry in the valley spots at this moment?

    This would have been perfect IMO. I guess even hulldown. If you time it to the turn's end, it should be all over until Bil can react in the next minute: 2 PzIV against 1 Sherman that has been forced to button down i guess @~800 m. Doesn't matter what his infantry sees at this moment.

    And his inf. in the valley would probably have been toast two minutes later before being able to react.

    His whole plan for the centre would have been destroyed and only two or so minutes later you could have dealt with his far right flank and the Stuart. Afterwards you would control the centre and the left, while your main pincer is on the far right. Trap closed.

  9. Because there are always questions about what is free and what is necessary, I have written a simple schematic overview.

    It is more meant to give aschematic idea, how a simple graphic in the shop could look like, to give (potential) customers at one glance the info they need. It's not meant to be 100% correct.

    I guess many potential buyers are driven away, because they do not know, what to buy quickly and probably only a tiny minority is registering or searching forums to get this information.

    Maybe BFC find's it helpful.



    Download of the word document:


  10. T10exposed.jpg

    Oh, didn't notice that. Could it be, that he is really thinking about trying to move along the street and attack Garabinesa from the SOUTH (argh, stupid me, i will never ever get used to CM's "compass")?! This would be too good to be true. :D

    Where is the red carpet? :P

    But be prepared, that this is only a trick, while he plans to go for your naked infantry at the edge from NE.

  11. Faster, faster! :D

    I have to say it's darn nice to have someone agreeing with what I'm doing, because right now I seem to have problems wherever I look.

    So it seems. :D

    But as long as you don't lose any of the tanks and 509 as pillar, I think nothing is lost yet. But probably lots of patience will be needed.

    Even worse he could avoid any tank duels and use them only as support for his infantry while your infantry is naked.

    The southern yellow part at Mt.Garabinesa can be seen well from 509?

    The northern yellow part of Garabinesa is secured?

    You don't have a HMG at 509 available, do you?

  12. I see. Thanks for the explanation.

    Could still be enough time:

    I'd pause the advance on the right flank now and would move the tanks to 509. I think you need to get rid of the Sherman(s) at 523 first, if you don't want to attack with infantry over a ridge with enemy tank support on the reverse slope and maybe even more support from other high ground spots.

  13. Not really. It depends at which level you stop the game from simulating command. "Major! You will attack the enemy with your battalion at 0600. You MUST gain control of the village by 0730. Now, look around the division and let me know which units you want." Um, not in real life.

    There are not only divisonal reserves and every attack has it's reserve.

    It would be great, if scenario designers could remove the tactical reserve from the map and let the player decide if he wants to use it or not.

    It was not unusual that regimental reserves could be called within the CM timeframe or that the divisional reserves and tanks/StuGs/TDs were available for a quick request but not placed directly at the battalion's sector.

    It would also be great for gameplay, if reserves would become something the player can influence and benefit by not requesting additional units.

    New kind of scenarios would become available, where we no longer could quite well judge from the units we get on map and as scheduled reserves what we can expect.

    For example, instead of light tanks suddenly a heavy tank shows up. The player no longer could judge from his units, how many more tanks he could expect. Will his tank be sufficient or will he need a certain reserve? What kind of reserve should he request? The company reserve of the half platoon? The battalion's reserve with the platoon and on field mortars? The regimental antitank platoon or the divisional reserve with the StuGs or TDs or the pioneers?

    Or in the case of a successful attack: we wouldn't know, if after the lost five tanks of the oponent, if he would not be able to get additional divisional reserves.

    The variety of scenarios could be greatly expanded.

  • Create New...