Jump to content

Frunze

Members
  • Posts

    230
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Frunze

  1. Originally posted by Zitadelle:

    However, also consider their opponents at the time (Poland, France, the Low Countries, early the British Expeditionary Force, Russia after the purges).

    Right - did Germany win stunning victories as much because of their early opponents' weaknesses as their own strengths?

    People have commented on how the political leadership (Hitler) interfered with good military strategy. But didn't political factors weaken many of Germany's opponents, also?

    (I think the political factors in war are often overlooked, or not explicitly analyzed enough. Odd 'cause everyone agrees in theory that war is the continuation of politics by other means.)

    E.g. Stalin's refusal to believe, initially, that the USSR was facing a full-scale German invasion, and to react accordingly. His policies that had turned so many non-Russian citizens of the USSR against it, to the point where some collaborated with the Germans. The purges. Etc.

    (On the other hand, was the USSR's economic system an advantage in terms of being able to completely mobilize the economy for war more quickly? Despite the "national socialist" label, German industry was mostly privately owned, though with a lot of state regulation.)

    Or France's internal political and class divisions: soldiers having little confidence in their political and military leadership, elements of the political and military leadership having little will to resist...just look how many of 'em ended up as collaborators.

    And without Hitler and Naziism, would Germany have been politically capable of starting the war at all? Without Naziism, would Germany have been able to keep fighting so long, and sustain such heavy losses, without domestic opposition forcing an end to the war, or reducing the soldiers' will to fight? (Obviously, this should not be taken as an argument for Naziism, if anything the opposite given the death and destruction caused by the war and the decision to fight to the end.)

    I don't mean to deny that the German army had some real strengths, not suprising as they'd been preparing for and intending to launch war for a longer time. (Also a political factor?)

  2. Smoke. Lots of smoke. If you have an artillery spotter, consider dropping smoke right on the enemy tank, letting you get up close, and most importantly, come at them from several sides at once. Uses up your arty, though (hopefully just cheap 81mm).

    If facing multiple tanks, smoking some will let you take on part of the enemy's force with only part of yours.

    Ditto what other people said about using every dip and little hill, together with every patch of trees and little building, to maneuver around them and get flank shots. Smoke can help with this too - cover that gap of open terrain you gotta cross. Tank smoke's good for that.

    Also ditto on infantry and 'zooks - make 'em button up, distract them, even kill 'em if you can get close. Smoke can help infantry approach too.

    Timing - making all my tanks come into LOS of the enemy at the same time - is what I have trouble with....

  3. Originally posted by tero:

    A Suomi SMG weighs 4,6 kg unloaded. A fully loaded 70 round magazine weighs around 2 kg (a 20 round magazine weighs 500g). 5 of the 70 round magazines make 10 kg. All together they weigh 14 kg. By comparison a Mosin-Nagant type rifle weighs around 4,5 kg. A 5 round strip weighs around 120g. 9 times that make just over a kg. All in all around 6kg total weight. The way I was tought math the weight difference is not 3-4 times.

    No, if the SMG ammo weighs 10 kg, and the rifle ammo weighs just over a kg, the weight difference is 9-10 times. If the two weapons are both around the same weight, is it likely the SMG trooper would carry 10 times the weight in ammo?
  4. Near as I can figure out, it was for flaming Fionn in his post of August 3, 4:11 PM, on page 4 of the thread "Clash of the Titans, Part 2". Personally, I like to read stuff for myself before forming an opinion about it, so here's a link for anybody else who wants to read it.

    Now flaming is a violation of forum policy, which says in part:

    1. No Flaming and/or Baiting. Strong opinions are welcomed but are required to be expressed in a way which is not abusive and/or emotionally charged. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. Chronic violators of this simple, civil requirement are not welcomed here and are at risk of being banned.
    So is Treeburst a chronic violator of this policy, then? Has he been warned before? Or did he just lose his temper once?

    And did Madmatt also lose his temper, maybe reacting a little more harshly than he otherwise mighta? Going by his posts at the end of the "Clash of the Titans" and "The Truth had to Be Made Public" threads (both locked now), he does seem to be reacting more in anger than in sorrow, so to speak.

    Now I'll admit I'm interested in this partly 'cause Treeburst is running a tournament I'm participating in (and which will continue, I hear, BTW.) But I'm not suggesting Treeburst should get any special treatment because of the effort he puts into running these tournaments - the rules have to be the same for everyone. I'm more questioning whether anybody should be banned for one flame - shouldn't they be warned first?

    And I know this forum isn't a democracy, and decisions aren't made by majority vote, but I felt like I oughta say something, and since I'm probably not the only one who feels that way, why not have a thread for the discussion rather than having it take over other threads...

    [ August 04, 2002, 09:57 PM: Message edited by: Frunze ]

  5. One way to avoid leaving out any units, if you're having a problem with that, is to click on one, then scroll through all of them with the + or - keys. The tab key (view lock to unit) is helpful for orienting yourself (where on the battlefield am I?) as you jump from unit to unit. I recommend camera view 4.

    The show all moves/targets key (Shift-P, I think) gives you an overall view of your orders, though I haven't used it so much...

    In CM, you're not just standing in for the battalion/company commander, but for lower-level officers as well. This is almost unavoidable, as no AI's been written that I'd trust with command of my platoons. Just look how the computer opponent puts Platoon HQs out in front of the squads and does other stupid things.

  6. Originally posted by Ales Dvorak:

    ....what represent this thing in real life....

    You're being sarcastic, right? 'Cause this sounds like a bug to me. ("No, it's not a bug, it's a feature!")

    Just a little side effect of units not being able to fire while they are passengers on vehicles.

  7. Originally posted by zukkov:

    what about the russians? did they have gas as well? i suppose even if they didn't, hitler would have feared that if he used it in russia, the western allies would still retaliate...

    The USSR did have gas. Fear of other states' possible retaliation didn't help the Ethiopians gassed by the Italians, or the Iraqis gassed by the British, or the Chinese infected by Japanese biological weapons.

    "The Italians, Hungarians, Japanese, French, English, Russians, and Americans, as well as the Germans, all perfected mustard, phosgene, and similar agents during World War II. Although never used in the conflict, these nations amassed such huge quantities of chemical munitions that their disposal presented a practical problem, one that would be virtually insurmountable in today’s more environmentally conscious world. In those more naive times, however, the munitions simply found their way to the bottoms of almost all the world’s oceans in the holds of expendable ships."

    Federation of American Scientists

    Also biological weapons:

    "Many of the WWII belligerents developed BW programs, either in the interwar period, or in the case of probably the most significant program of all, that of the United States, during WWII itself.[1] Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Russia all developed BW programs. Italy, France and Germany did not advance to the stage of fielding military biological warfare units, or of initiating a BW warfare training program."

    ....

    "Only Japan used BW, in China, beginning in the mid-1930s.[6] Delivery mechanisms varied, but included aerial bombs and vectors. Agents included plague, typhoid, cholera, anthrax and other traditional pathogens. The instances of use were apparently widespread. The number of deaths resulting from individual attacks is disputed, but appears to have been low. (Estimates vary drastically: from a thousand to over 222,000, but there appears to be no available documentation. The Japanese also used captives for experimental purposes, and estimates of the number of people killed in this fashion range between 5,000 and 10,000.) What is most important is that the effort again had absolutely no identifiable military consequences."

    Another Federation of American Scientists page

  8. Wouldn't bad sight conditions (especially night or fog) give an advantage to the defender, if deployed properly?

    The defender could more easily deploy units to have LOS on the bridge itself, but not the far bank. So they couldn't be suppressed by the attackers' direct fire from the opposite bank, and the attackers artillery might be forced to wide target. But units crossing the bridge, or immediately after crossing, could come under fire from several sides.

    I don't think I'd want to cross a well-defended river at night. Anybody tried this?

  9. I was once pleasantly surprised to see an Engineer Squad credited with killing a Panther - which was also under attack by 'zooks and Shermans at the time. The squad was about 20 meters from the side of the tank. I presume a demo charge was involved - the movie showed something being thrown at the tank.

    Not something to count on - I only expected the squad to make the Panther button up - but a nice lucky break occasionally.

×
×
  • Create New...