Sheesh - what a bunch of Germanophiles ;-)

[Brent Pollock]

On May 21, I posted two "vs AI" versions of a battle on the SD site. It pits Guards Cav vs SS Cav.

Here are the current download stats:

WBRP - Company Town (vs Ad AI); 85 downloads

WBRP - Company Town (vs Ax AI); 64 downloads

Both are still on the Current Submission table, so the apparent bias in favour of donning SS uniforms can't be due to "Marketing".

I noted a similar bias in download rates when they were imultaneously available on The Proving Grounds site, although I didn't record the numbers.

Discuss...well, discuss things other than the fact that I am a lousy statistician...

[Mad Russian]

Originally posted by Brent Pollock:

I noted a similar bias in download rates when they were imultaneously available on The Proving Grounds site, although I didn't record the numbers.

Discuss...well, discuss things other than the fact that I am a lousy statistician...

When I was with CSDT I released 14 scenarios on the 19th and 21st of August 2003. One of those was named CSDT SH12 A Soviet Hero. Of the 14 scenarios released on those 2 days guess which one has the lowest download rate?

Yes, the Soviet Hero scenario. It has 18 less than the next closest one so that isn't too bad. But is has 441 less than the best one. It also doesn't have any reviews done it. In fairness though, some of the others don't either.

It was obviously not the pick of the pack when it was released. In my own opinion that scenario is better than some of the higher downloaded scenarios. I learned from that though that the name you give a scenario can be crucial to it's success.

[annihilate_this_week]

uhh well the germens haf like kooler stuff like skulls and shtuff, rock! :~P

[Bigduke6]

Try searching a game at Scenaro Depot or Proving Ground for "vs. Allied A/I". Then do the same thing, just for "vs. Axis A/I".

I haven't, but I am convinced that there are at least twice as many "Vs. Allied A/I" as the other way around. Clearly, a majority of CM players likes to play Axis.

(Insert rant about history being unfair to Red Army)

Hard to compete with ueber-cats and black uniforms, and stuff.

[Pzman]

I enjoy playing as both sides, but that said in most games when I just want to do some bashing, I'll take the Axis. I think it may have something to do with the uber German stories that people hear when they don't know much about history and they just want to recreate that unrealistic uberness.

[DTrill]

I tend to prefer the Allied side myself.I don't even really look that closely at the name myself when I am scanning through the games, I think like it was said before, it's the cool stuff that the Germans have. Even my 10 year old son, when I see him playing CM is playing the German side for that very reason. And face it we are all just boys posing as men.

[Code13]

It is about the cooler stuff, but perhaps in a less obvious way than we think.

Most people play games to have fun, most people have fun by winning games without much thought.

Axis forces tend to allow the victory with little effort - most of the time we dont see Soviet spearheads against weak German positions, but against mobile defences with a couple of King Tigers, half a dozen Panthers, often crack troops.

Given that those big cats dont miss often and always kill when they hit, to a casual gamer it is much more fun to play that side than the one being torn apart at 2000 yards...

[Steiner14]

Because SS rulez!

[Der Kuenstler]

The Germans were trying to avenge WWI, expand, and conquer Europe which is more adventurous and exciting. Games for me are about that. The allies were basically trying to stop them and restore the status quo, which is morally sound but boring.

In my opinion the Germans had the coolest uniforms, coolest flag, coolest equipment. Practically the whole world had to gang up on them to beat them. And many of the major players who beat them had roots in Germany. (Eisenhower, Einstein, etc.)

I don't know of anyone who seriously approves of what the Nazis did to the Jews, but - think about it - we Americans did basically the same thing to the Indians - just read "Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee" if you want your eyes opened to that. We just did it more gradually and without the protest of other nations.

I'll play as the Allies "for a switch" but whenever it's my turn to choose a QB, I always pick the Axis.

[Earl Grey]

I completely agree. Great uniforms and stuff... also I´m a very great fan of the Panther tank (in my opinion one of the best tanks of all times - and guess what: the Germans are still building the best tanks ) and, after all, I´m German myself. And a little bit proud of what my grandparents achieved against overwhelming odds - though the cause behind the war and everything that went with it are highly questionable...

[Code13]

Wierd, personally I think the Soviet has the best equipment and the best look, and despite numbers, is really "doing it against the odds", out performed, out equiped and out led and yet they picked themselves up off the canvas and blew the swastica off the Reichstag.

Besides, nothing is cooler than a dozen T34's charging across the steppes

[Earl Grey]

With the numbers to waste, you can acomplish everything. Besides, the T-34 was a good tank. But we took the design ideas and made it still better.

[Dave H]

Originally posted by Earl Grey:

With the numbers to waste, you can acomplish everything.

Hasn't this myth of the subhuman Soviet hordes swamping the brave but doomed uber-Germans been laid to rest yet?

Besides, the T-34 was a good tank. But we took the design ideas and made it still better.

Who is "we"?? Exactly how old are you? Doesn't making a tank "better" imply it is more reliable and spends less time in the shop? How did "we" forget that? Of course, all of the "better" tanks work perfectly when you're playing games.

[Earl Grey]

@Dave H: I think if the numbers had been more equal, the war might have turned out very differently. But that´s beside the point. Just using irony. Though it seems I have to admit I should cease to use it. I´m not understood when I do.

And, as I already told, I´m a German. Just 22 years old, but I take some proud in the technical accomplishments my country has achieved. And apart from being more reliable (and the G versions proved to be, from what I know), the Panther excelled in nearly every aspect. Regarding CM the T-34/85 seems indeed to be a better tank than the Panther. But if the panther was a bad tank, nobody would call it to be ´one of the best tanks - if not the best tank - of the war.´

[Bigduke6]

Earl Gray,

You're entitled to your opinion, and I think irony is great - clothes are wrinkled without it!

But T-34 was a very reliable machine, and from what I have read a lot more reliable than Panther. Automotive, electric, optics, drive train, suspension - the T-34 broke less, and was easier to repair when it did.

Part if not much of this was because the Panther was a more complicated, sophisticated machine with more to go wrong, of course.

But don't underrate Soviet weapon reliablity. These are the people that gave the world the AK-47, after all. The T-34's diesel would crank at minus 20, and it difficult for that machine to throw a track.

No question Panther was the more effective vehicle in tank-to-tank combat - assuming we are making a head-to-head comparison and not comparing cost per unit. The Soviets probably produced five or six T-34s for every Panther, and as good as the Panther was in a fight, I would take the six T-34s.

[MikeyD]

It's been said before, but comparing Panther and T34 isn't really fair. Better to compare Panther and IS-2, or at least KV1-S. T34's 'equivalent' in the German army could be considered the workhorse PzIV.

Germany had paper plans to returret the PzIV with a much simpler turret with more armor (80mm mantlet?) and no cupola, and there were even design studies for a sloping hull as well. On paper it looked like a pretty useful true 'medium' tank design. But the plug was pulled on new PzIV designs to keep the assembly lines going, and eventually it was decided to switch over entirely to JpzIV assault guns on the chassis.

[ June 15, 2005, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[Bigduke6]

Deleted for space reasons.

[annihilate_this_week]

I pretty much always play as Allies. Gegen Nazis! hahaaha

[Abbott]

These are the people that gave the world the AK-47

True, and the only people using them are the one's who cannot afford better quality weapons, the same can be said of the inferior ammunition that is exported with crude or ill refined powder. The huge export numbers of the AK’s reflect units that were given away by the millions or sold for what amounts to pennies.

The same could be said of the T-34 while it was a cheaply built vehicle the overall lack of quality in its production was always an issue. This same lack of quality stayed with the tank designs I have personally inspected up thru the T-72. I cannot comment on later designs but have no reason to believe the lack of attention to detail and overall lack of production quality and quality control has improved much as compared to western standards. The cheap units are much easier to produce and remain very inexpensive but the lack of quality is always present and does little to make up for their deficiencies in the field.

[Michael Dorosh]

Didn't the Germans give the world the AK-47? They called it the Sturmgewehr 44. They also gave the world the M-60, only they called it the MG-42...both the US and USSR used German engineering as the starting point for some of their postwar weapons development.

[annihilate_this_week]

I always thought it was a common belief that the AK was the best assault rifle int the world, way better then the M16 anyway. I don't have any "proof" I guess...maybe as someone who was in the Vietcong haha

[annihilate_this_week]

"Didn't the Germans give the world the AK-47?"

Not unless it was invented by a German named Kalashnikov, in 1947.

[Earl Grey]

@Bigduke6: But a Panther with a good crew is more than a match for your six T-34´s...

@Abott: Regarding the AK-47, I´ve heard different. True, it is cheap and maybe the ammunition ist not that reliable, but if the overall design had proven to be unefficient, it wouldn´t have been used as much, would it? And I heard from a reliable source (a man who used during his military service) that the Ak-47 is able to shoot anything smaller than 7.62mm WP ammunition - so just take more reliable ammo from captured enemies, 5.56mm NATO rounds, for example...

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Talk'scheap:

"Didn't the Germans give the world the AK-47?"

Not unless it was invented by a German named Kalashnikov, in 1947.

Not nearly what I meant, now is it.

The Germans also provided the world with that great Russian weapon, the RPG....or at least got them thinking about developing it themselves.

[annihilate_this_week]

"The Germans also provided the world with that great Russian weapon, the RPG....or at least got them thinking about developing it themselves."

Never heard of this. Besides, the greatest Russian weapon was the will of her people. Go jump in a lake and take Earl with you.