agusto

Seedorf81, i very much agree with your (edit: previous) statement.

It does not cover armoured operations, but this yt channel has some great helmet cam combat footage too. It is worth to check it out IMO. http://www.youtube.com/user/FUNKER530?feature=watch

White americans called their black slaves niggers, so that is probably where negative connotation comes from. So if you are white and call a black person a nigger, you imply that you regard him as a slave and to be of less worth than yourself.

How skinheads spend their spare time:

What have you contributed to civilisation so far? Well, if you dont have anything else to be proud of i guess you have to be proud of your skin colour. Guess what the admins here are going to do if you go on like that.

Well, i thought you were serious. It is sometimes hard to understand irony when communicated solely via a text based forum. 1) We are talking about 2 different matters: i was trying to arguement that the NS ideology has proven by itself that it is not a meaningful way to organize a state. As far as i know, there currently is not a single state on the world that organizes itself after the rolemodel of NS germany because such a state could not survive. You are talking about the NS idology as a way of thinking and that is something different, as the human thought is not subordinated excusively to logic. So even if NS was not a meaningful way to organize a state, people could still believe it would be. One does not rule out the other. 2) IMO what you said in 2) fits very well what i just said, except that: The early results (pre war) of the NS state that people perceived as positive were for example the decrease of unemployment or the "reinstitution of the german honour" when german troops moved into the Rhine area in order to spoil the versailles treaty. Lets talk about the decrease of unemployment first: Hitler overstrechted the german household to achieve that. Germany was nearly bankrupt in 1938, when he got his hands on new money with the annexion of Austria. For example the building of the Autobahn was a project Hitler conducted in order to give the people the employment that they wanted and to improve germanys economy by improving its infrastructure. However there had been no way for germany to keep making such large investions over an elongated amount of time. In 1939, Hitler needed the war he wanted in order to exploit eastern Europe. It was a now or never situation. Besides that, the war in the east had been planned for a long time by Hitler. If i recall correctly, it is even in Mein Kampf, wich he wrote in 1924. To understand the the other things, ie why it was so important for Hitlers supporters to spoil the versaille treaty was that it was perceived as unjust. One has to understand the mindset the people had back then. However i think i would really have a hard time to discuss that in english, so i would like to skip that . Exactley.

No, the theory of National-Socialism was wrong. I mean just logically, even if you completely ignore moral. That is a matter of fact. See, you gotta ask yourself: what is the purpose of a having a society organized in a state? What is a state? A state is a continuosley self-recreating process to wich every last individual within it contributes to in order to to increase the life expectancy and quality of life of everyone of its citizens. That is what people want from the state they live within: the health and saftey for themselves and their loved ones that only the masses can provide, independently of the type of government that state has or of wich ideology it is. Take the road net, for example. A single person could neither afford nor build a road on his or her own. But we work, we pay taxes to the state and the state then uses this money to build the road network from wich we all profit in one form or another. And this where the theory of National-Socialism fails. National-Socialism is an ideology based upon the scientificaly proven misbelieve that the aryan race, as the strongest race, has the the right to subdue the weaker races in order to increase its own quality of life and life expectancy. This was justified by taking nature as as an example: the bigger fish eats the samller fish in order to survive. He has the right to do so because he is stronger. That principle is also knowen as Social-Darwinism. However, with humans, it doesnt work that way because unlike fish, there are no human races that differ so significantely from each other in a biological way that one race can just eat up another without tremendous efforts to be made. In fact, since humans are all more or less equal in a biological way, overwhelming another human beeing is usually a very resource demanding action, it simply doesnt pay. And this is why the NS state failed: 1) It failed to keep itself alive. This is so because it failed to coexist with its more powerful neighbours. The reason, however, why it started a conflict it couldnt win anyways was the above stated misbelieve in the superiority of the aryan race: in NS theory, germany could not loose the war becaus ethe aryans, as the strongest race,must ultimately be able to defeat all weaker races. When Hitler started the sucidal attack on the USSR and later, in December 1941, declared war against the USA, he believed that the racial superiority of the germans alone will be enough to defeat his enemys. Obviously this was not correct. 2) It did not give its supporters what they wanted: an increased life expectency, personal saftey and health for themselves and their loved ones. In fact in led to the complete opposite: germany was destroyed, millions killed, the country was devasteted and and struck by famines.

National Socialism is proven to be an irrational ideology. If one would consider national-socialist germany a social experiment, conducted to prove the theory of national socialism beeing a meaningful way to organize a state, it was failure. It even was a failure if measured by its own misconception of the survival of the strongest. The national socialist state did not survive. The racial theorys on wich the national socialist ideology was wholly based upon are today scientifically proven to incorrect. They even were doubtable back in the 30s.

EDIT: accidential doubleposting

Couldnt North Korea be considered a country of Nazi-Stalinist ideology? NK combines the worst of both worlds: - concetration camps - purges - secret police - famines - the dear leader - "total war" like economy

Oh my god .

If it is marked green it means that all of its mines are detonated, ie it has no mines left. At least it should be like that... http://combatmission.wikia.com/wiki/Mine

Is it just my mind or do you see it too?

AFAIK vehicles cant move through marked minefields without triggering them. The mines are not removed or disarmed, just marked.

If you look closely, i think you can even see him beeing throwen out of the turret during second 0:13. He hits the ground at 0:14. Go to 0:12 and watch the sequence between 0:12 and 0:14 several times in 1080 HD. He is doing a salto. After reviewing the video several times, i am pretty sure its the crewman who is ejected at 0:13. I also think that it is possibly not injury that makes him hold his arms the way he does. I think the explosion ripped his pullover or what ever he wore partially over his head and arms. Also look at his feet. Shoes and pants are burned off. That perfetcly fits the scenario in wich he is about to leave the tank and has his upper body already out of the hatch while his lower body is still inside. We cant really see him opening the hatch due to the smoke around 0:11, though. It is absolutely unbelieveable he was still able to leave the scene on his own feet.

2nd thing: if you plot a waypoint and then use the target command, it only shows you if there is anything intervening between the center of the white waypoint dot and the target you point to. It does not show you the actual LOS or LOF of your unit once it reaches the waypoint.

Mass did play an important role, though. AFAIK, western allies for exampe believed that they would be better off with producing a larger number of medium tanks like the m4 and its derivates instead of a lower quantity of heavier vehicles. The germans on the other hand followed more or less the opposite production policy wich resulted in ridicolous projects like the maus or the landcruiser P1000. I am sure that one reason why the USSR was able to turn the tables during the course of the war was its ability to replace human and material losses much more easily than what the axis could ever dream of. No, we dont always think that. I think what you want to point out is that factors that did play a role during particular phases of the great patriotic war were not of such great importance that they had changed the outcome of the war. It is matter of fact though, that the Wehrmacht was unprepared for the winter of 1941 due to its leaders failure to anticipate a winter war. It was believed by the german command that the USSR would be defeated within 3-4 months, wich was obviously an error.

You dont know that, the counterattack is an intentional surprise. You also dont know that you will receive emergency reinfocements. In the mission briefing it says that you are likely to only meet the few survivors from the previous battle but that was bad intel. I found that kinda cool, really. This mission was one of the very few vs the AI where i had had serious dubts that i will be able to win. I won the mission during the first attempt but losses were horrible (almost a complete company + most of the recon patoon). @ Bridndlewolf: No, the Shermans dont appear the same time as your panthers. It depends on your speed of advance when you meet them (the americans). I received the reinforcements only 10 -15 minutes after i first met the shermans. Since i didnt expect reinforcements, i prepared to fight to the last man and die where i stand. The battle was incredibly fierce, i loved it.

Hmmm...you cant say that in general. IMO that depends on the scenario. In my current campaign in CMFI i cant spend more than 2-3 turns in contact with the enemy until spotting rounds start falling next to me. The AI really makes sure i either stay on the move or out of its LOS. Now since the current battle is a 3 hours scenario, this means i am constantly dodging one arty strike after the other. But its true, the AI does not always handle its arty that well. I remember that i once saw it striking an empty field that was no where near my troops again and again and again.

Camoflagued fortifications (and camouflague of stationary positions in general) could be abstracted by camo nets a players could buy and then put onto the same action spot as the fortification or something else he wants to be hard to spot. They would give a similar camoflague bonus as wooden terrain but without limiting the field of view of the units inside. I think that could be pretty cool. Just a random thought i had.

Rokko, Just in case you are interested: http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b24/hybenamon/LAND/MISC/Ultra%20Close%20Killing%20Of%20Tanks/lung.jpg This concept probably comes closest to an "anti-tank spear".

(light MG42 defending against the american attack on Triona. Sicily, 1943)

The germans had a purpose-built throwen version of the Panezrfaust, the Panzerwurfmine or PWM (litterally "throwen anti-tank mine"):

Range finding, maybe. After ~200m, the color changes, for example.