General Jack Ripper

Before there's more discussion about how old the movie cast is, look at this man one more time and tell me what you see.
I mean really look at him.
Do you see a 20 year old man?
Do you see a man who would jump on someone and stab their eyeballs out in order to go home?
 
 
It's been commonly stated that prolonged exposure to combat has the tendency to turn young boys into old men. In the movie, the crew of Fury landed in North Africa in 1942. It is now 1945, and they have seen the worst of the war. I was especially affected when they sat down at the dinner table in the German girls apartment. After acting like a couple of dicks straight out of high school, there was then a story told about how they had driven through the Falaise Gap after the fighting, and had witnessed a scene of death "so enormous the mind cannot comprehend it".
 
So yes, I think the movie chose the correct cast, a few guys who looked like 900 miles of bad road.
 
In regards to the shooting of the prisoner, the scene is not unique in any way. Prisoners were shot in WW2, on all sides. I recall a section from the book The GI's War in which a man was wounded on D-Day, and his friend was killed. While he was waiting on the beach to be evacuated, another GI came down to the beach with some German prisoners. The GI offered up his Thompson and asked if the wounded guy wanted to take revenge by shooting the prisoners. He refused, but the point is the offer was made in the first place.
While we can sit here in front of our computers with our modern sensibilities and think "shooting prisoners? barbarians!". Us people that live today and go watch these movies have absolutely no idea how a war of extermination should be fought. WW2 was a war of extermination, we could only win by killing everyone who fought against us.
 
The movie does a good job hammering that point through the audience's thick skull, in an extremely intense and effective way.
 
Now that's all I have to say about that. I thought the movie was great. Not perfect by any means, but a great movie. 8/10

You were only just complaining about the movie being 'a string of WWII cliches'... yet the biggest deviation the movie makes from traditional WWII cliches is one of your moans, methinks you might be hard to please...
 
So, clearly they respect Pitt's character as a leader and a fighter, but he's also not the man they think he is - he speaks German too well for it to be merely 'a tool of war', and as man who derides his comrade's religiosity he sure can place a biblical quote, he waits until they are no longer watching then weeps and vomits in a corner alone - and instead of looting and whoring after a conquest he secretes himself away from the others to 'play house' with the enemy and the new guy and clearly resents their loutish interruption to leer at the women and **** the place up like pigs. They're angry he seems to think himself above them, that he still secretly percieved himself to be better than the savagery around him - hence they drunkenly arrive to remind him of the time they turned thousands of Germans into hamburger, and the indelible marks they all share which bonds him to them more closely than the civilized decent world Pitt still tries to hold on to. To say they didn't care for each other seems to contradict the actual script - the army is like a family, you don't get to choose your comrades, and the familial bond does not automatically mean you always get along well personally with them, that you never quarrel or resent - quite the opposite.

If your enemy is advancing over open terrain, find any spot that offers cover from your fire and put mines in it.
Preplaced shell holes, haystacks, ditches, small clumps of trees, river fords, road crossings, hedgerow gaps, narrow alleyways, holes in walls, dummy foxholes, etc.
Remember, mines will not STOP your enemy, but they will cause major delays or force your opponent to move onto different ground.
 
Whenever I'm placing mines, which admittedly is not often, I look at the map from the enemy's perspective, and try to shut off an avenue of approach.
Failing that, I will try to take away a piece of key terrain by mining it heavily.
 
While doing my terrain survey, if I find myself thinking "it would suck if the enemy showed up there" then I place mines on the spot in question.

If your enemy is advancing over open terrain, find any spot that offers cover from your fire and put mines in it.
Preplaced shell holes, haystacks, ditches, small clumps of trees, river fords, road crossings, hedgerow gaps, narrow alleyways, holes in walls, dummy foxholes, etc.
Remember, mines will not STOP your enemy, but they will cause major delays or force your opponent to move onto different ground.
 
Whenever I'm placing mines, which admittedly is not often, I look at the map from the enemy's perspective, and try to shut off an avenue of approach.
Failing that, I will try to take away a piece of key terrain by mining it heavily.
 
While doing my terrain survey, if I find myself thinking "it would suck if the enemy showed up there" then I place mines on the spot in question.

Before there's more discussion about how old the movie cast is, look at this man one more time and tell me what you see.
I mean really look at him.
Do you see a 20 year old man?
Do you see a man who would jump on someone and stab their eyeballs out in order to go home?
 
 
It's been commonly stated that prolonged exposure to combat has the tendency to turn young boys into old men. In the movie, the crew of Fury landed in North Africa in 1942. It is now 1945, and they have seen the worst of the war. I was especially affected when they sat down at the dinner table in the German girls apartment. After acting like a couple of dicks straight out of high school, there was then a story told about how they had driven through the Falaise Gap after the fighting, and had witnessed a scene of death "so enormous the mind cannot comprehend it".
 
So yes, I think the movie chose the correct cast, a few guys who looked like 900 miles of bad road.
 
In regards to the shooting of the prisoner, the scene is not unique in any way. Prisoners were shot in WW2, on all sides. I recall a section from the book The GI's War in which a man was wounded on D-Day, and his friend was killed. While he was waiting on the beach to be evacuated, another GI came down to the beach with some German prisoners. The GI offered up his Thompson and asked if the wounded guy wanted to take revenge by shooting the prisoners. He refused, but the point is the offer was made in the first place.
While we can sit here in front of our computers with our modern sensibilities and think "shooting prisoners? barbarians!". Us people that live today and go watch these movies have absolutely no idea how a war of extermination should be fought. WW2 was a war of extermination, we could only win by killing everyone who fought against us.
 
The movie does a good job hammering that point through the audience's thick skull, in an extremely intense and effective way.
 
Now that's all I have to say about that. I thought the movie was great. Not perfect by any means, but a great movie. 8/10

A few words of wisdom from me:
 
Combat Mission Shock Force: "Oh sh*t the mission briefing DID say I.E.D.s. Whoops. I guess I wasn't using that Abrams anyway."
 
Combat Mission Battle for Normandy: After playing The Blue and the Gray and The Road to Montebourg for three days straight, I emerged from the darkened confines of my bedroom with a thousand-yard stare. I then realized I hadn't eaten for three days.
 
Combat Mission Fortress Italy: It's the one with the Italians in it. That's all I know about that.
 
Combat Mission Red Thunder: This is the one you buy if you're a secret communist, or if you like to shoot communists.
 
Combat Mission Black Sea: If you read Red Storm Rising and think to yourself "I want to do that!" then buy this game!

Well, I think it may be the same as when people mention the AK-47. Sure, it has its flaws and something more modern may be better. But it still shoots bullets that hurt.
 
Basically, even older gear can be used effectively under certain conditions. As long as you stick to those conditions, the older gear can still be deadly.

I haven't finished reading the whole thread. I'm on page 25 and it's 2:45am, I doubt I'll finish reading this tonight.
 
I just wanted to see if everyone was aware, VICE News has been covering the war in Ukraine from the very beginning, with a series of dispatches titled "Russian Roulette".
 
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLw613M86o5o5zqF6WJR8zuC7Uwyv76h7R
 
Anyone who is looking for an independent, alternative viewpoint of the events in Ukraine might start here.

Givi's situation reports from the Donetsk airport are fun to watch.
 
I start to giggle like little girl every time he or his subcommanders start to comment Ukranian forces. They are described like Germans in old Dirty Dozen movies, and in the other hand like Spielberg's title Saving private Ryan.
 
They are either stupid, poorly trained and motivated, and can't stand to the "real men of separatist forces" in a real and honest man-to-man fights. And always killed like flies in huge numbers. Only time when Ukranian forces prevail are situations where they use unfair advantage of superior firepower or manpower and "unfair" methods of fighting like snipers, boobytraps and mines.
 
Some other situations they are described as "bandits and rogues" or nearly as cannibal child eaters who get satisfied only, when they destroy civilian targets and kill, abuse and torture helpless civilian population. 
 
I'm quite sure that things ain't that simple. So naive propaganda, who the hell even believes that?  

You lose.
Sorry.

As the OP I would humbly ask people to refrain from turning this thread as argument war on nature of NATO/WP/Modern day Russia and instead let us focus on the tactical and strategic plausibilities. Thank you. 
 
-H1nd

FWIW, Bil sent me back the turn in which my US reinforcements arrive last night.  I will take some time catching my turns up before returning it to him so that we can try to release the 'mayhem turns' fairly simultaneously.   I really owe "The Teacher" one on this though, as my reinforcements arrive on-map undeployed, in beautiful Red Square'esque Parade Formation, hubcap to hubcap.  Should be interesting to see if I can get them uncoiled without major losses.  Looks like a mech-heavy team in the North and a tank heavy one in the south, along with BN CDR, XO/S3, rest of the scouts, 2 ravens, 1 Gray Eagle, Mortar PLT, 2 firing PLTs of Paladins, an Apache and a couple Jets.  Will be interested to see if Bil gets reinforcements as well.  Could make TG 22 highly vulnerable, if they have entrance locations like mine.  If he does not get substantially more stuff, I am feeling pretty confidant.  I have 3 PLTs of Abrams on map now, and stand to get a fourth if needed.  Seems almost like overkill, but I don't want to be over arrogant about it.  Current decisions facing Power 6:
 
- His tank is the single most exposed of the entire force.  Pop smoke now as initial action or wait for the APS to launch upon getting lased?  Back up to map edge, or bound forward fast for covered position (and potentially eat a T90 round or two enroute)?
- Burn an arty fire mission on southern MRC?  Starting mortars on hill 347 is a no-brainer, although the stuff on that hill may not last long enough for them to hit.  FA on the south will  take 5 or 6 minutes by which time Bil will likely have adjusted, but if I go slow/deliberate it could still fall on some of his stuff.
- Launch a raven now, or wait to see if I can zap both Tunguskas first?  I am pretty sure the one on Hill 347 is too far forward to live long, but the one in the south could back out, haul ass into the hinterlands and take substantial hunting to find and extinguish.
- Suppress Southern MRC, maneuver north and over hill 347 to swing everyone across the northern fields, and seize the river crossings?  Or seize 347 from the North, base of fire oriented SSE and bound the tank heavy team through the close terrain to overwhelm the enemy in the south?  I am leaning towards the former, as I don't relish the fight through the heavy draws in the south, but might go that way if I think crossing the northern fields would be too costly.  In either case, I am placing tank and Jav fires all over the north/south side of 347 w/in 3 turns.
- How much of the Infantry to dismount immediately against the possibility of Brads eating tank fire?  Don't want to lose any more Javs than I have to, though I have a LOT of them.  They actually represent a bit more lethality than the Brads they are riding in.  (Micro-spoiler:  SPC O'Brian is going to NAIL a T-90 soon!)
- Do I need any immediate screening smoke anywhere to cover initial moves?
 
Note that his decisions combine personal interaction with the battlefield with decisions affecting his entire force.  This is typical of a front-line tactical commander, and something fascinating that CM is able to present in perspective.  Looking forward to this, and I'll post out of content discussion of the decisions ongoing as I get the story caught up over the next few days. 

I figured I'd get back into some Combat Mission, but I'm not feeling up to continuing The Road to Montebourg yet.
I got ahold of the Euroscape mod and fired up Task Force Thunder for a bit of fun.
Aside from needing to swap out some weapon sounds (damn "brass tinkling" sound effect gives me a headache) I had a lot of fun.
 
Check it out.

Thank you for the compliment.
I actually did a search on YouTube for the Euroscape mod before I recorded this and got no results. I figured it might help such a large mod if people could see what they're getting.
I think I might record a few more videos of some random battles to show off the mod a bit more, the mod is very impressive.