Physim

My best wishes, to her and her family.

It is usually about resources and power. Sometimes this is masked as ideology.

Well done Tripp. As a devotee of military history I wish my teachers had put as much effort and passion into teaching as you have, you are a credit to your profession.

Jason C has also made some good scenarios for training in Russian tactics that work up to combined arms. You should find a link in the same threads to these, I've found them useful in better understanding how to more effectively use units.

Fantastic Neitzche, truly great!

Congratulations on the birth of your son. I love your cartoons, they are great please keep them coming.

Aaww shucks it makes me feel all womantic and speak like elmer fudd

Very interesting posts, I dont pretend to understand everything you have written but it is food for thought and seems to back up my layman's observation that human activity does not support the level of increase postulated by doomsayers. Thanks for an enlightening read

I'm by no means knowledgeable on climatology, but a couple layman's observations. Firstly climate change. There have been many periods of extreme climate change, ice core samples at the poles have shown this as have fossil records. Homo sapiens had not yet even evolved so it wasnt us who caused them. As for extinctions, these have occurred throughout prehistory, there was the extinction aound 350 million years ago where 95% of species dissappeared, again evidence in fossil records, and of course the dinosaur extinction which was more recent. None of these were due to homo sapiens. I don't think we have enough data on our climate, most is no more than 100 years which is a blink of an eye in climatology, to make any predictions. The last ice age finished about 10 000 years ago, we could just be going through the normal warming cycle. Who knows? Just my 2c worth I claim no expert knowledge in this area.

I'll wait for Patboys Sharapova mod.

I would suggest the use of armour to move quickly across enemy flanks and cause encirclement is a tactic.

The French and the Brits had no counter for the blitzkrieg tactic, they had prepared for war like it was fought in WW1, once the static defences were flanked they were gone. As you rightly say the russians were helped by scale, this meant the initial blitz had to last longer. It stretched the German supply lines and gave the Russians time to prepare for a counter. I also think splitting the German offensive into 3 groups was a mistake, they should have concentrated on the South and held the oil fields this would have strangled Russian industry, Moscow and Leningrad were political and prestige targets not strategic ones and too many resources were wated on them.

In paying the blood price Russia had more to lose than the US in fighting Germany. I think people will aways fight harder for there own homeland than that of others, hence it is not surprising the russians fought more desperately. I think the grit of US soldiers was better represented in the Pacific.

Thanks for the replies, I managed to complete 112 without the heavy artillery but will go back to it and practice using it and then retry 200.

Played this one late last night. Ended up a tactical defeat when ceasefire called due to both sides low on ammo. Losing my tanks very early didn't help, but the lessons learned in the 110,111,112 scenarios helped my infantry capture and hold the first flag and give the AI infantry a hard time in the centre and on the right flank, my left flank was creamed. Two questions, once my mortars ran out of ammo I used the AT rifles as Heavy support to my infantry in attacking foxholes /trenches that held enemy infantry, I found them to be very effective in this task. Is this gamey or were they used for that purpose in real life? Also when I target using a spotter for offboard artillery it can sometimes take over 20 turns for the artillery to fire, is this normal or am I doing something wrong or is this the norm?