danfrodo

Tiger

y'all have seen The Chieftain's video on US armor in WW2, correct?   He has some very interesting and surprising insights, much of it directly from US army archives and not just some mythology that we've all grown up with.  
 
 

y'all have seen The Chieftain's video on US armor in WW2, correct?   He has some very interesting and surprising insights, much of it directly from US army archives and not just some mythology that we've all grown up with.  
 
 

Barbarossa.  And winter 41-42.  And summer 42.  and Stalingrad.  And winter 43.  and summer 43.  and winter 43-44.   So one base game and six modules.  Can I pre-order as a bundle, with delivery in early 2022?

Barbarossa.  And winter 41-42.  And summer 42.  and Stalingrad.  And winter 43.  and summer 43.  and winter 43-44.   So one base game and six modules.  Can I pre-order as a bundle, with delivery in early 2022?

Hang on my friend Aragorn2002, I have plenty of disdain for american leaders also and praise for other brits (Air Chief Tedder was brilliant!).  Monty is intelligent and skilled, like you said, but he was also impossible to work with and in September 44 made one of the great military blunders of the war.  Having said that, there's plenty of americans I hate more than Monty -- the air force general who refused to bomb parallel to the beaches in normandy and in operation cobra is one (what was his name?).  MacArthur I detest, though mostly for his insanity in Korea.  Admiral King's refusal to use convoys?  And Ike did slap down Patton for a while.  
But point well taken, it's easy for me to take shots at Monty while ignoring his big, solid victories.

How did he put up with Patton assaulting an American servicemen or Bradley's childish temper tantrums all the time? He was mindful of the fact he was the boss of all these men and that he had to be responsible for his staff, which meant among many things that he had to be fair. Montgomery was an arrogant egomaniac but can you find a General for me in all of history who wasn't? Compared to the equally boisterous qualities of many of his equally famous peers Montgomery was not all that much worse in either the social or professional sense. 
The Press was a major factor back in 1940 and you had to factor it in since the war effort was a taxpayer funded thing directed by civilian governments in London and Washington. Montgomery pandered shamelessly to inflate his importance to be sure but plenty of his stardom was in fact promoted by Churchill who was rather well known for demanding his Generals prioritize the British Empire's prestige over sound strategy. Montgomery was the media's poster child for British Generalship during the war but for good reason. He was reassuring, charming, and confident and that counted for quite a lot, not only to the press but also to subordinate staff looking for their boss to set an example. 
He was a star baby, no less than the other big actors trying to grab the spotlight of the war, MacArthur, Patton, Bradley, Clark, yes even the German Generals Rommel, Guderian, Manstein etc. These guys didn't become Generals for being modest that's for sure. Which is a shame because in fact the best Generals on both sides of the war are frequently the ones you didn't hear all that much about. Eisenhower could only underline the value of guys like Simpson, Patch, Gerow, Truscott in a report while the war was winding down while i'm not sure the British even thanked Auchinleck or Wavell or Leese. 
Today's pop media has done very little to deflate the drama around any of the war's biggest personalities like Patton or Montgomery, in some ways its made things worse by asking honestly silly questions like "who's strategy was better" when strategy wasn't up to them. 
EDIT: To add, probably the angriest Eisenhower ever got was over the recalcitrance of an Admiral who wasn't even under his command, French Admiral Jean Darlan and his foot dragging over surrendering Vichy North Africa. Poor Ike actually yelled that he "needed a good assassin" at one point openly to his staff while smoking whole packs of Camels from the isolation of Gibraltar while what seemed like Darlan's ego was putting the entire invasion at risk. In the end ironically Darlan was assassinated but the crisis had passed by then. This event was not a proud moment for the Supreme Allied Commander who appeared to have lost his nerve, but such was the nature of the Invasion of North Africa that the Americans were totally new at all of this and there were problems top-to-bottom. Even Eisenhower had things to learn after all...

Remember, Eisenhower once worked for MacArthur. 

It has a KV-1, the first major production model of the T-34/76, the T-34/76 M43 and the T-34/85. All but the last are nasty looking critters long in the field, whereas the T-34/85s look almost brand new, are in a kind of pale olive paint scheme, rather than the typical dark green, and sport crisp clear turret markings to boot. The M43 and the T-34/85 are both too early for the 1942 period of the film, but from a treadhead gloriousness perspective, despite being anachronistic,  I doubt you'll care. There are some military technical problems many of you will spot, but again, not movie breakers, and there's so much to see am pretty sure has never been so fully depicted in a war movie. The panzers are well-executed conversions, which is why their fire control arrangements look just like those of the Russians. Suspect special tank interior sets were used, too, but it may be that the typical small stature generally of the Russians makes them look so roomy. Through the Cold War, at least, Soviet tankers weren't allowed to be taller than 5'5", but there's a guy in the film they probably had to grease to fit him in, a task made easier by being TC in a T-34/85. 
 
Regards,

John Kettler

circling back to our old pal Stalin -- did y'all know he even murdered the genius that designed the diesel engine for the T34?   I mean, he was killing everyone

jeebus, it's just an action/adventure movie set in WW1.  Why try to read so much into it?  And it a really good action movie.

sorry - just joking...

To give a contrarian view, was thinking that the above has become an accepted "politically correct" cliche spouted by everybody these days.  Maybe it's time for a film to promote the "joyful, fun and positive" aspects like "comradeship, and opportunities for advancement" (for the sake of balance etc.)?

Very good points, Bluecher

circling back to our old pal Stalin -- did y'all know he even murdered the genius that designed the diesel engine for the T34?   I mean, he was killing everyone

And then Stalin did everything possible to wreck that huge military.  Killed all the officers.  Forced them to defend dense, highly vulnerable forward lines.  Continually gave idiot "no retreat" and "attack at once" orders with no idea what he was doing.  So Soviet Union should have been ready for war, but losing 3.3 million men in three months rather says something different.
If Stalin hadn't killed most of his officers and if the armed forces were used with even marginal competence, then Germany would've been lucky to get to Smolensk. The Russians had numbers but were controlled by an utterly anti-competent lunatic.

And then Stalin did everything possible to wreck that huge military.  Killed all the officers.  Forced them to defend dense, highly vulnerable forward lines.  Continually gave idiot "no retreat" and "attack at once" orders with no idea what he was doing.  So Soviet Union should have been ready for war, but losing 3.3 million men in three months rather says something different.
If Stalin hadn't killed most of his officers and if the armed forces were used with even marginal competence, then Germany would've been lucky to get to Smolensk. The Russians had numbers but were controlled by an utterly anti-competent lunatic.

Very true, but I’d break that down further and say that not all of Normandy is bocage either so really one can have the experience one finds most interesting.

oh, three cromwells.  I thought that's what would be in a troop.  Not much for the task at hand.  You are making this battle sound fun!  I am thinking about unpacking this battle from the campaign and giving myself more cromwells and armored cars.
Good luck and thanks for the continuing updates

It seems like I didn't get punished for losing the first one, so I might continue on w this campaign sometime.  If you try to win this you'll probably get awfully chewed up.  Unless lots of cromwells.  Anyone know how many cromwells show up?
Good luck Bluecher.  I actually had my main force moving to the center left, where on your picture it says "phase line goose".  I was bypassing the german armor.  It's a long walk but was pretty easy up to the point where I quit.  Maybe there was stiff opposition ahead, maybe not?  I got to the open field w very minimal casualties (where your map shows "(30 pts)"

That was my experience also.  And at the end it showed that we were even in men.  But the germans were in stout buildings w MG 42s and artillery support.  Would be great fun with more armor & men, though the casualties would be high.

Well, then, I do stand corrected.  If I'm not punished for not winning that first one I'll definitely go on.  I was a tad hasty in my earlier comments I think.  I was mostly just tweaked about having used up my weekend playing time on it.  

Brummbär explodes.



Really hope no civvies were still in that ville...
 

(So does this mean Fire & Rubble pre-orders are open or not???? )
When they came out w modern stuff I thought "oh, not my favorite, why didn't they do more WW2 first?".  then I bought & played SF2.  Holy f*&k is that a fun game.

That was my experience after having CMBN and thinking, CMFI? Really? who cares? And now, I love it!