Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Snowbart

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    189

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Snowbart

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Originally posted by Andreas:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Snowbart:

    You have been pushing my buttons in this thread for weeks now, [...]

    How? By asking for facts instead of accepting and unsupported spewing forth of stream of consciousness posts emanating from little more than an unshakeable belief in the superiority of all things American? Is that response by you the equivalent of running for mummy telling her that the bad man asked you to support statements by sources and that she should please do something about it? Well, tough. Maybe you need to find yourself a forum where an opinion supported by nothing more than an attitude is somewhat valued. If you can't even support what you post, what is the point of sharing it. This is not the local pub where your mates hang on every one of your words.

    So, to reiterate - where does the opinion that 'The U.S. was still fairly fresh, and I personally believe we could have/should have beat the piss outta the damn red horde.' come from? Could it come from an analysis of that superb asset of the US Army that was the Repple-Depple system? From reading first person histories such as 'Roll Me Over' and 'Company Commander'? From an analysis of the force requirements estimated for the invasion of Japan? From looking at the contribution that UK/Canadian forces could have made to attacking the Soviet forces in eastern Europe? From estimating the role of air-power in such a conflict? From looking at the proficiency levels of armoured units on the Soviet and US sides, respectively, and passing judgement on the likelyhood of who would have persevered in battle? From looking at the logistical capabilities of the US and Soviet armies? From studying the battles of the Red Army in Poland and Romania?

    Inquiring minds want to know. </font>

    0

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    andreas,

    So now I'm an idiot? I have no time for this ****. I am at work and this is a waste of my time. I am sorry that i cannot quote you exact sources of my claims that the Red's were sending in kid's towards the end of the war. I suppose this is not a place for oppinion, and i will never again make any statement here w/out knowing my freaking page numbers.

    I had enjoyed these forums because there was no mindless garbage, no personal attacks, etc. I see that is not the case with you Andreas. By the way, I did not start this crap, I just stated an oppinion that the U.S. could have handled the Russians. You have been pushing my buttons in this thread for weeks now, and I am quite sick of it. Maybe you should go to the general forum and roll your eyes at someone there, because it is you who started this by acting childish and insulting me.

    0

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Originally posted by Andreas:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Snowbart:

    Andreas,

    This is for you

    :rolleyes::rolleyes:

    two is better than one, right?

    Thanks for the insiteful post

    About as insiteful (sic) as yours. Construct a non-rambling argument and you get a decent response.

    In the non-rambling argument, address matters such as US and UK commitments in the far east, the impact of the Soviet Manchurian operations, the infantry shortage of Commonwealth forces, and the question of whether Soviet operational art was superior to anything the western allies understood about modern combined arms warfare. Then you can have a response. Until you have done that, I assume you are just rambling cluelessly, and a " :rolleyes: " is a response commensurate to the thought that went into your original post. </font>

    0

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    I agree with Marlow......this thread is like beating a dead horse.

    On a side note, by the fall of Berlin, the Ivans were sending in 14 & 15 yr olds into battle. The Germans, bled white themselves, had put a serious thrashing on the manpower the soviets could muster. The U.S. was still fairly fresh, and I personally believe we could have/should have beat the piss outta the damn red horde. Could have easily prevented the fall of eastern Europe to the red's........prevented the splitting of Germany, etc.

    0

    Biltong's Campaign Rules

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Originally posted by 88mm:

    Cannot use your solution, the maps do not load.

    However, can't i make the QB with random map and during the setup save it, load it into the editor and adjust the exp.

    Save it and load the scen and begin battle ?

    I believe you could. What i do is use the BCR Maps they've made. Simply find the right map according to the parameters you rolled up(hilliness, tree coverage, rural/village/city, etc)and load that map in the editor, buy your units, and save that file in the QB Maps folder. Also, if special circumstances like you have "Infantry only" as your Force Mix, but you rolled points for armor, i buy these units in the editor too since the QB won't let you buy them. The same thing if say you have 800 points to spend on arty, but the QB generator will only let you buy 500. Go to the editor and get them! :D
    0

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    I think you equip some guys w/ MP-40's, some w/ StG44's, some 98k's, and keep the squad's LMG's. This gives you a lot of diversification, which is very good in most things in life, and you can adapt to different situations more easily as they arise.

    Anyone ever seen those modified StG's for firing around corners in street fighting? The barrel is actually bent to the left(or right, i forget which). Supposed to only last a few hundred rounds before you burn the barrel up. One of those funky German mod's :cool:

    0

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    I agree that i might not have been a good idea to strip squads of their LMG's to arm them with the StG44's. I was envisioning stripping away some of the 98k's and giving these guys the assault rifles. You might reduce the squad's maximum firepower if you strip away the LMG's, even if you arm these guys with Stg's. Now, in street fighting this may be a good thing. But otherwise, I want that MG-42 with me. :D

    0

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Michael, I totally agree with you. smile.gif

    Even large scale disribution and equiping of units with the MP-44 would have made no difference. This thread is too small to go into all those reasons why it wouldn't have made a differnce, but basically, Germany bit off a little bit more than it could chew.

    But on a small scale, small unit fights, I believe it would have been quite effective. I am not saying the Stg44 would replace anything completely, but would compliment the squad's current arsenal. I suppose that would mean equiping 2 or 3 of the riflemen that were using 98k's. The Stg44 would just add to the firepower that the squad could produce, which Germany needed more than ever in the later years of the war. The riflemen would still be there, making up a hefty portion of the squad.

    I still think Germany needed a semi-auto rifle to replace the 98k. A rifle like an M-1. I think reequiping all riflemen with a weapon like that, by the second half of the war, would have been very wise. Ammo consumption/production/distribtion is a huge factor to consider, but I believe it's possible if you simply keep it the standard 7.92mm round. Germany was able to supply ammo for the MG's, firing up to 1200 RPM. I think Germany could have adjusted production of ammuntion to coincide with an expected rise in consumption if necessary. If ammo was too short, remember it is just a semi auto rifle. You can save your ammo and only pull the trigger once. smile.gif But for that time you needed the extra firepower, it was there.

    0

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Originally posted by Andreas:

    When people are finished telling each other how great the US Army is, how about addressing some of Mike's questions? :rolleyes:

    Or just answering my simple question - would you rather be with a squad of Marines with Springfields, or a squad of Taliban militia with Kalashnikovs?

    Here, have a 'Rara USA' from me thrown in as well.

    That is why in my earlier post I said "all things being equal, he who puts out the most lead will have a serious advantage"

    Your example of Marine's vs. Taliban just does't support your argument, as you're comparing great troops with armed idiots. "All things being equal".....well they just aren't in your example. I have been contributing my opinion's towards what Michael has said for quite a while in this thread, and I am not sorry if my being proud of my country upsets you. :rolleyes:

    0

    MP44

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    The simple fact is that replacing an outdated bolt action rifle with the worlds first assault rifle would have greatly improved the units' effectiveness in combat simply by the sheer amount of lead it could put in the air.

    PS- hitting a can at 75 yds w/ pistol is pretty damn good!

    0
×
×
  • Create New...