Jump to content

Frenchy56

Members
  • Posts

    558
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Posts posted by Frenchy56

  1. 5 hours ago, Freyberg said:

    As to the question of whether Churchill was a competent military strategist, well he was and he wasn't.

    The invasion of Greece was a disaster, except... ...that it and the revolution Yugoslavia delayed the start of Barbarossa by just long enough to prevent Germany from winning in 1941.

    The invasion of Italy, likewise, was a pointless, bloody adventure except... the collapse of Mussolini's government came at just the right time to break Hitler's nerve in the Battle of Kursk.

    For a lousy strategist, he had an uncanny ability to choose strategies that had unpredictably beneficial outcomes.

    The Dardanelles campaign. Heh.

  2. 36 minutes ago, Boche said:

    Wasnt one of the points of adopting 5.56 was that it was less lethal than 7.62?

    I often hear even people in the Army repeat this.

    5.56 was for standardization in NATO (really it's just the US that adopted 5.56 and NATO followed suit, among them some very angry Brits who had spent a decade designing an intermediate cartridge and a rifle to fire it from scratch).

    Its advantages over 7.62 were that a grunt could hump more ammunition for the same weight. This is definitely more important to an infantryman than making sure you're wounding your enemy, who might be left behind anyway, and the 7.62 round's power was judged too excessive due to its effective range usually exceeding today's usual combat ranges, especially since these days where urban combat is much more common, and is an integral part of combat training today, unlike during WW2 for example where people just tossed grenades and went in guns blazing with rifles and SMG's.

     

    In fact, the first 5.56 rounds fired in Vietnam, the M193 Ball, created wounds that were judged as too gruesome by the US military. They tumbled inside the target's body and made gory exit wounds. It was replaced by the Belgian SS109, the M855 in the US.

  3. 26 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

    For awhile, a couple decades ago, the trend was to design weapons that only maimed instead of killed. Because a dead soldier doesn't tie up logistics and resources.

    Do you have any proof of this? Weapons have never been designed to maim, they only do so because they've failed to kill. "Weapons" that are designed to maim are torture devices.

    Anyway, I believe wounds in this game do not need to be detailed further than "this wounded man can fight on" and "this wounded man cannot fight on and must be evacuated" or "this man is dead". Because in the end that is all that matters to a commander.

  4. 1 hour ago, Jumpete said:

    I was checking the new R2V TO&E and I discovered that some of the incoming vehicles are currently in FI+GL (v2.02). This is the case of the Pz IV J early, Brummbar (mid) or M4A1. Can this be a mistake on the R2V website store? Could somebody of BF team please reply to that? Thanks.

    I'm pretty sure you can get R2V without GL, which would make sense.

  5. 1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

    Mods definitely are having an effect here, because the uniforms patently do not look like that in the stock game. 

    They might look different, but they don't turn junior officers into enlisted men. If you don't believe this, see for yourself in the scenario editor using any rifle formation. I would say that every formation needs to be checked, since they appear properly in only a handful, like cavalry or SMG units.

  6. Communist resistants (Francs-tireurs et partisans) did not make up most of the French resistance, even if that's what they claimed. They overinflated their contribution as much as the Germans, who were glad to be getting rid of communists, though it isn't tiny either. Just the fact that they only started resisting after the 22nd of June 1941 should tell you that. Before that they were almost favorable to the Germans due to their relations with the Soviet Union at that time.

    Vichy French troops in North Africa did not exactly know if they should have responded to Operation Torch by throwing down their weapons and greeting US troops with open arms or by shooting at them, since it was still technically an invasion of French soil by a faction that is neither friend or foe to them, keep in mind what we call Vichy France today was just the official French government to the average French soldier, and knowing that their British allies bombed the fleet in Mers-el-Kebir among other attacks in French colonies might have made him lean towards the 'shooting at them' part, however he may have not forgotten that Germany was the cause of it all. Some commanders decided to fight for the opening days, others changed sides immediately. At the end of the day Vichy French troops in North Africa fought the Germans alongside the Allies.

    Also, be careful with the name "Free French". For example the Vichy French who fought the Axis in North Africa did not immediately become "Free French". Quite a few French military units which fought the Axis were not actually Free French and did not answer to de Gaulle, they in fact leaned more towards the Vichy government.

    As for the colonial troops, let's just say France has a habit of rewarding their colonial war heroes with... well, nothing. (I say "has" because some of them are still alive and have barely gotten even a slight amount of concern from the French government)

  7. 42 minutes ago, Myles Keogh said:

    MJKerner did make an American uniform mod specifically for CMFI (ie. works with the 2.0 upgrade uniform changes), but it's only for Sicily scenarios: just tropical uniforms.

    Nope, he did a mainland Italy one as well. Take a longer look at CMMODS.

    Ez made that old mod, mjkerner simply added divisional patches to them. They look sorta dated so I'm sticking to the former to which I've added div patches myself and modtagged the relevant scenarios. (Sadly not much I can do for the campaigns apart from moving files around)

×
×
  • Create New...