Bulletpoint

I don't think this is new information though? There were two lines, each with two pipes (A & B). Nordstream 1 had both pipes destroyed, Nordstream 2 only had one pipe destroyed. But, interestingly, there were four explosions. Nordstream 2 Pipe A was blown up two times at two different times, in two different locations. Leaving Pipe B intact. All this is on the Wiki. To me , this suggests that whoever was behind the bombings intended all four pipes to be destroyed, but that they made a mistake and hit the same pipe twice. Probably because they were in a hurry and there was poor visibility in the water.

Same issue with mortar halftracks in the WW2 titles.

Michael Clarke is a popular military expert who is often interviewed on TV. If he squinted a bit, he might read the small letters on the image of the press conference, which was held in January 2023. The news he is commenting on is a year old.

I know that was Fawlty Towers, but I was combining references to British comedy... to us, it's all part of the same thing

Alright, but I think the main point still stands: What we see as useless foolish and wasteful assaults are seen by the Russians as reconnaisance in force.

As I understand it, they use convicts and penal battalions for the constant meat assaults, but the actual (more or less) professional soldiers are kept in reserve for exploiting breakthroughs when a weak point is found.

Never mind.

Another episode of Keeping up Appearances Don't mention the war!

Yep, some of the smallest scenarios I've played have also been the hardest.

For testing, I just made a "shooting range" scenario. And I really advise people who are new to the game to avoid quick battles in order not to get a bad impression of the game. Instead, I think they should play the tutorial campaigns.

IMO quick battles are only good for games against another human player.

Good if he survived. I must say I thought he was killed instantly from the way he dropped. Also, that group was either very lucky that three kamikaze drone strikes caused so little damage, or they had more casualties off-camera than the video admits.

The better the graphics become, the more the basic flaws and shortcomings in the game will stick out. So I would prefer that they work on improving those instead of adding photo realistic visuals.

I'm not saying the offensive will be successful, only that I think an offensive will be ordered.

I completely agree, but I think this was essentially what got Zeluzhny fired. Now, with the new general, I expect to see a new and more brutal offensive by Ukraine in the spring. And this time, they won't call it off even when the casualties really start to mount.

I'm just saying there might not have been this whole clever PR plan behind it. Just that Putin believes in his own message and he wants to tell that message.

This argument seems to hinge on Putin being a Western style politician who does what his PR guys tell him what to do.

And if it gets shot down on the way, it will double as a coffin. A big part of why drones are so successful is that they are so small that they are almost impossible to spot and hit at range. This one, not so much.

The pincers of the pocket are now approximately 5 Km apart. How close would they need to get before you would consider the pocket in real danger of encirclement? Not arguing here, just curious.

I think the disagreement between them began when the Ukrainian offensive stalled and casualties were piling up. The politician Zelensky likely wanted to continue the offensive, but the military man Zaluzny wanted to call it off. Because he could see that it wouldn't break through, and he didn't want to reinforce failure and sacrifice many troops for basically nothing. Then later, Zaluzny gave an interview where he said : “Just like in the first world war we have reached the level of technology that puts us into a stalemate,” he says. The general concludes that it would take a massive technological leap to break the deadlock. “There will most likely be no deep and beautiful breakthrough.” This went against the message of Zelensky who had kept upbeat and positive that Ukraine could do it. And he has to. Zelensky knows that western backers won't keep funding the war if they start to see it as unwinnable. Before that interview, we were still arguing here on the forum about whether or not Ukraine's offensive had failed or not. I also remember prominent youtubers claiming that the offensive "had not yet culminated" even even though no real progresss had been made for two weeks. But after the Zaluzny interview, the narrative changed overnight and most people began openly saying that the offensive had failed.

Maybe I'm fixating too much on the two roads. It might be that they can bring in supplies across the fields, too. And withdraw that way also, if need be.

Hopefully this major win won't end with a major loss if a similar number of Ukrainians end up encircled and destroyed.

Despite massive casualties, the Russians keep inching closer to encircling Avdiivka. They are now less than 1 km away from the main road into the city. To my eyes, the situation doesn't look good. Not sure how the Ukrainians can keep supplying their positions in the fields east of Avdiivka even now. Time to pull back, or am I overlooking something important here? Apart from the huge Russian losses.

I think the only real advantage shells still have is that they have much longer range than the average small drone.

Well, even if it had to be a fantasy scenario, I would still prefer it to be a historical fantasy scenario, such as Unternehmen Seelöwe. Always wondered how the Brits would have defended their island against a German invasion. Another interesting scenario is if the Soviets had not stopped and continued westwards. Or if the Germans had managed to press on to Moscow. Yep, I feel the same. CMFB is as late in the war as I want to go.