A Canadian Cat
-
Posts
16,514 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
55
Posts posted by A Canadian Cat
-
-
28 minutes ago, kevinkin said:
Note the terms used: "seems to be advocating."
No, you reached a conclusion of your own. You can make the argument that such decisions would do that but you cannot claim they think that is the outcome.
I think they are right that providing more weapons would not cause a nuclear war. You might think it would. I'd ask what your concern is based on but a) you have already made thar case so no real need to do it again and b) Steve asked us not too.
-
7 hours ago, kevinkin said:
Thanks for the report. I jumped to the conclusion and the writer seems to be advocating pushing Russia to the brink of nuclear war in an effort to call their bluff.
I have not read the full thing yet but nothing you quoted says anything about calling Putin's nuclear bluff. Seems like you are jumping to conclusions there.
7 hours ago, kevinkin said:The writer seems to be inferring the US election and results could be a factor. Well yes they are. But that should not drive the overall strategy. I don't think the policymakers in DC are going to "abandon Ukraine or, if possible, Europe altogether".
I think everyone should be extremely concerned about one of the possible change in presidential scenarios and it's effect on the war in Ukraine.
I think you are correct that a lot of the political wheels will not want to abandon Ukraine. But they don't get the final say. The damage to international relationships recently done is not repaired and another round of helping Putin is not going to be neutral to Ukraine's position at all.
-
33 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Ukraine not having a clear cut victory does not mean Russia somehow won.
Which was in part my point. And other people's. We are viamently agreeing
33 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:The question about what "winning" means for Ukraine is an entirely different discussion requiring an entirely different analysis.
And that was what I thought we were talking about. Again in part. Can Ukraine be happy with a victory the includes a frozen conflict? Do they get all that they want if the Russian army still controls some territory? Maybe it looks better if they cut thier losses off and let them keep some sliver but what about the Russian bills that claim whole provinces as part of Russia? Can they still get NATO membership in that situation?
Of course it is Ukrainian's decision in part but if Ukraine wants NATO membership these issues matter to how well the Ukraine wins.
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
The war could end tomorrow with Ukraine surrendering on terms favorable to Russia or the war could continue in a frozen state for another 10 years and the fact is that Russia will still be a loser by its own standards as well as more objective ones.
I am totally in board with the notion that Russia/ Putin has lost. I'm just not sure a frozen conflict with Ukrainian territory under Russian control could be counted as a victory for Ukraine.
Personally I hope this discussion is mute and Ukraine gets what it wants.
-
6 hours ago, Hapless said:
Of course, Mexico might be unable to regain it's international borders and a frozen conflict might develop... but that isn't going to make the US less crippled and Mexico less undefeated.
Correct but I think the pessimist point is that it would prevent Mexico from joining the SATO alliance and since the is the main thing they want Mexico still looses.
Personally I think the bit that @Butschi missed is that regime change is extremely likely if the the RA looses that much territory as is an RA collapse. This kid of frozen scenario is my big fear but I have had a lot less worry about that in recent weeks because the UA seems to be doing the right things and working towards eventual success.
-
On 7/28/2023 at 2:19 AM, Paper Tiger said:
I had a quick look at the 'Tiger' mission and the attacking Pioneers' morale is Extreme
Oh good point. I totally forgot that motivation will effect this too. Duh
-
4 minutes ago, Sojourner said:
Russians stage plasticine protests to oppose war
This kind of humorous and minor thing can gain ground and change minds. Some of it is covered in this book: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/153412252-how-to-start-a-revolution
4 minutes ago, Sojourner said:"Ukrainians ... are not particularly impressed: Plasticine will not stop bombs."
A sentiment that is entirely understandable.
-
I was going to post these guys have to be journalists first but you covered that.
5 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:If Ukraine deliberately targeted these "journalists" then that is theoretically a war crime. However, if there was a trial the defense would quite understandably ague that these guys weren't journalists.
They don't even have to go that far. Where they travelling in a vehicle marked "PRESS" on all sides? Could anyone on the UA side have believed this was a RA recon unit? I'm going to bet the answers are No and Yes. If so then case never opened because they looked just like a legit target.
-
12 hours ago, Kinophile said:
https://sp.rmbl.ws/s8/2/I/A/K/6/IAK6k.caa.mp4?u=th8n9&b=0
3rd Brigade Mech Infantry Assault With Armor
Not sure if posted previously.
I cannot tell what kind of tank that is. Could it be one of those T55 variants with the NATO 105 gun?
-
8 hours ago, womble said:
One thing those packages will probably have to include will be guarantees rather than the (largely worthless, and they knew it) "assurances" which were all Ukraine got.
Except that really cannot happen. If things break up into small pieces the US really cannot guarantee anything to a tiny city state sized place land locked in the middle of a sea of other such places. So, the controlling war lord will have to do something else with the handful of nuclear warheads they picked up when they took over the the local air base from Moscow.
-
10 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
I still marvel at how any curious or adventurous child manages to make it to adulthood
Only those that make it to adulthood are able to marvel at how they got there.
-
LOL lots of people have made such a post before. Me included. I usually have a chuckle because I remember how embarrassed I was.
I try to always toggle smoke off for very limited time periods because if you forget the only indicator is bad things happening and you don't know why.
-
7 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:18 hours ago, IanL said:
I would call it a bug.
I think that you are being generous. I'd call it sloppy design work, that should have been fixed before Final Blitzkrieg was released.
Right what I said
-
23 hours ago, Pericles said:
I was really hoping my file was corrupt. What kind of explanation does Battlefront give for not removing land that surrounds buried buildings? Is there a good technical reason?
Probably not. Doors don't work in those situations and that is not cool. Some buildings certainly can have partially covered first floors but then there should be no doors there and the obstruction is high enough possibly no windows either.
I would call it a bug. As in a bug in the scenario map.
-
I was going to say it would matter in terms of recovery. Knocked out could be candidates for recovery and repair in a campaign while destroyed is a total write off. However, that only works if you can see the different statuses in game - for your own side. That I cannot remember.
Can you have tanks and vehicles that are listed as knocked out as well as destroyed on our side?
Dang I cannot check right now.
-
13 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:
With the latest Crimea bridge strike we are in a whole different ballpark than 240kg.
That is my point though. I don't think we are. The size of the explosive is only one variable. The shape of the change matters, the point of impact matters and (I think the most important here) the confined or openness of the space matters.
I used to study rail accidents. The same amount of material spilled on the ground and set a lite is spectacular and dangerous. The same amount or, worse, less confined inside a rail car is way way more dangerous and can cause fatal effects much further away. Not just because parts of the rail car can fly multi hundred meters away (record I found was 3000m) but because the explosive effect itself is even bigger. A large energy release in the open is nasty, the same energy release in a confined space is devastating.
The only caveat is I don't have good understanding of the other variables because I'm not an explosive expert but the confined space under that span will have a multiplicative modifier on the effects of the explosion. My guess is that was why that section of the bridge was targeted with this type of munition.
-
3 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:
Not "pointless" when you compare the aftermath of the latest strike. No matter the placing, it is going to take multiple tons of explosives to get those results.
Nope, pointless comparison.
The truck bomb explosion can be huge but how much would be directed at the bridge? Beats me but a lot less than the full ride because the explosion has so many places to go that are not hurting the bridge.
This time nearly every Kg of explosive was going to hurt that bridge either directly at the point of impact or on the under side of the road deck.
I'm no military explosive expert but the effects of a confined explosion are significantly more powerful than an unconfined explosion. Spill a bunch of hydro carbons onto the ground and watch it go boom - it will suck to near by. Confine that inside a building or a rail car and watch it go boom and the range where your life will suck is so so much larger.
-
20 hours ago, dan/california said:
Not worth the PR hit, and what Ukraine really wants is the people in Crimea who are from Russia, or have the closest attachment to the Russian government, to leave.
100 percent.
a) the Ukrainian government wants those ****ers to leave. GTFO and stay out.
b) the Ukrainian government does not want to go near the "both sides are just as bad BS" they need to stay on the high road even if their anger is justified.
The moment I have to explain to friends and family that some Russian civilians dying is not as bad as the number of Ukrainian civilians dying I'm going to be really worried about international support. So, far it has never come up.
-
On 7/17/2023 at 10:34 AM, The_MonkeyKing said:
That thing has a 240 kg payload.
Last year bridge explosion had around 22 tons of explosives (this figure is from Russians)
Even if we go with the Russian numbers a truck bomb exploding in the open above the road deck is way less effective than one that gets up close and personal with a support pillar and goes of in a confined space under the road deck.
Comparing raw explosive yield is utterly pointless between the two contexts.
-
On 7/17/2023 at 11:37 AM, The_Capt said:
The biggest reason to not push any of these buttons yet (and yes, this would be a form of diplomatic escalation that we do indeed control) is that we are not sure who is actually in charge in Russia right now.
I would say this ^ is the second reason. The first reason is the UA offence is still building. This time next year we might be just using the old Ukrainian borders from 2007 or so.
-
On 7/17/2023 at 2:23 AM, NPye said:
I made a set of British Infantry from WW1...
So the quality of the AI images is in the prompts the better the prompt the better the image, love or hate it it is here to stay.... Very scary on a grand scale and this is just the beginning?
Nice now those are actually worth looking at and I can see a path to being useful when presented with some examples that make sense.
Just skip over the utter trash form the OP.
-
Scenario designers don't have direct control over this but they do have some tricks they can use. The auto surrender uses the condition of all forces in the scenario. A designer can create a reenforcement group that arrives after the time runs out and those forces are part of the condition of the AI forces. That means they can arrange it so the surrender is never triggered due to casualties of the forces actually in battle.
-
9 hours ago, FogForever said:
The multi-update activated all the DLCs. Unfortunately, none of the DLCs show as activated w/i the game. Main SF2 works but none of DLC scenarios appear activated w/i game.
This sounds like an activation problem not an install problem. Don't download more stuff. Open a support ticket.
-
6 minutes ago, pintere said:
And when Ukrainian reserves begin to tear the "main line" in the South and get stuck there, they hope to hit...
But will it be as successful as the taking of Bakhmut
11 minutes ago, pintere said:it means that the Russians certainly don’t seem to be short on combat potential and/or aren’t overly concerned about the situation getting out of hand in any of their defensive battles
Or, hear me out, it all a lie.
Combat photography: Photos from the front..
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
LOL now if one or both of those tanks misses high...