Hortlund

I dont really see what the big fuss is about. You have two snipers, one with a .50 cal and one with a 7,62. Depending on target range and various other factors, either the .50 cal guy is the shooter and the 7.62 guy is the spotter or vice versa. The third guy is just additional security. He is not a spotter, just a backup or whatever you want to call it. He is not spotting for two guys at the same time, and the two snipers are not shooting at the same time unless something has gone horribly wrong.

One of my favourite storys from Iraq re: using snipers.

Ardennes *drool*

Zetterling/Franksson see Prokhorovka as July 12th and 13th. If I remember correctly. I have the book right here, but only if you really want me to will I check that. I actually had no Idea Carell and Rotmistrov had those figures...but they are truly absurd. Ive never read their books on Kursk. Ive only read Carells book on Barbarossa, and while that was interesting and cute in a way, it was more along the lines of a childrens adventure-book (like Biggles or something) than something Id want to use in a serious discussion. Rotmistrov is russian, writing about his own actions, and his book was written during the good old days so...lets just say Im not totally convinced about his qualities as an impartial author on the subject.

Best. Post. Ever.

According to Franksson/Zetterling, that version is not too far off the mark. 334 Soviet tank losses at Prokhorovka vs 25 German. Or if you want to compare Zitadelle totals, 1600-1900 USSR vs 280 German. Edit: With "loss" Franksson/Zetterling means total write-offs.

Ok, thanks. You know...if at all possible, it would be a really really great feature. It would make multiplayer a really wonderful game.

About multiplayer, is it possible for two players to play against eachother during a campaign, and BOTH retain their suriviving units, gain experience, award medals etc? Or is it more along the lines of one player playing a campaign, retaining his units etc, and just having a human opponent instead of an AI-opponent? [ August 03, 2006, 01:55 AM: Message edited by: Hortlund ]

Still, I think you get my point.

Grozny? Kabul? I'll grant you, the Israelis may be in that treacherous middle zone: just enough to be ineffective. </font>

The only thing that is saving the hezbollah is the rules of engagement that is tying the hands of the Israelis behind their backs. If the Israelis were to let military cinsiderations dictate the RoE, the Israeli casualties would be minimal, the hezbollah losses heavy, but also the civilian losses. For example, instead of going house-to-house in a Lebanese village, the village would be flattened with artillery, and then the IDF armor would enter the town. In that scenario, you would have minimal IDF losses, while Hezbollah and civilian losses would be heavy. Do not kid yourself about the usefulness of light infantry vs a modern army. The battle only looks equal because the modern army chooses to fight with one hand tied behind its back. It is always sad to see people arguing that Israel is no better than the terrorists, knowing that Israel could wipe out southern lebanon in a single afternoon if they wanted to. Knowing that the IDF are taking heavy casualties right now simply because they try to minimize the damage to Lebanese civilians. To watch people argue that Israel is no better than the terrorists is like listening to a bunch of 10-yearold boys from Wisconsin who has never been outside their hometown arguing how to best get laid in Bangkok. Its amazing in a very painful and twisted way. [ August 02, 2006, 08:19 AM: Message edited by: Hortlund ]

Bah, Swedish girls are the most beautiful girls in the world. Everyone knows that.

Hey, not everyone likes to play a computer game like the energizer bunny you know. Especially not a tactical wargame that is supposed to present somewhat more of a challenge beyond "click and drag-select your entire OOB and send them to the victory objective". So the feck what if I want to pause the game every fifth second when I play? YOU dont have to play against me. But if you remove the pause feature from the game, you kill the game for me. While if we add the pause feature to the game, you only have to avoid using it not to be bothered by it. Seems like a pretty obvious desicion to me.

Pegasus Bridge anyone?

Heh, if we get Marines vs Japanese on Iwo and Okinawa in an addon, Im prepared to buy 10 copies of ToW myself.