Michael Dorosh Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Originally posted by Dillweed: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by fytinghellfish: I would give my right nut for a NATO/WP game. Maybe with modules for '62, '79, '85 and '89. Woot. Think those would require "vastly differnt units" and thus different titles. If we are going hypothetical tho, I'd like to add one to the list '45. T-34s v shermans *shudder* </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 I don't think tanks are the end all be all. You will admit, at least in CM if the opponent has tanks and you don't have any method of taking them out you're going to be in for a world of hurt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Originally posted by Dillweed: If we are going hypothetical tho, I'd like to add one to the list '45. T-34s v shermans *shudder*If they ever get around to doing Korea 1950, you may just get your wish. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Tank equipment wise, the 1945 setting would have been quite even. Artillery wise, the same. Air power is where the westerners would have had an edge, while Soviets fielded a larger total force. But in the end, we are forced to ask the question: would it have made any sense? Did either side have even a theoretical capacity to gain from a new war something more valuable than what restoration of peace could give? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: But in the end, we are forced to ask the question: would it have made any sense? Did either side have even a theoretical capacity to gain from a new war something more valuable than what restoration of peace could give? Agreed, but that doesn't prevent it from being intresting, on a tactical level. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renaud Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Any confrontation between east and west in 1945 would be decided by Long Toms, 105s, and the venerable 25-pounder. Superfortresses carrying atomic bombs would have cut that war short. :eek: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Originally posted by Renaud: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Any confrontation between east and west in 1945 would be decided by Long Toms, 105s, and the venerable 25-pounder. Superfortresses carrying atomic bombs would have cut that war short. :eek: </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
**YK2** Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: Needless to say, I completely approved of his action and regret my initial miscalculation. Michael Glad to hear it.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Renaud: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Any confrontation between east and west in 1945 would be decided by Long Toms, 105s, and the venerable 25-pounder. Superfortresses carrying atomic bombs would have cut that war short. :eek: </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Yes, Sergei is indeed correct, but of course, Germany was just as exhausted in 1945 and kept fighting because of Hitler. I suppose if Stalin woke up in an odd mood one day in August 1945 he could have started a ruckus if he wanted to... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Yes, Sergei is indeed correct, but of course, Germany was just as exhausted in 1945 and kept fighting because of Hitler. I suppose if Stalin woke up in an odd mood one day in August 1945 he could have started a ruckus if he wanted to... Yeah. I really can't form an estimate of how irrational Stalin was apt to be in 1945, but my readings to this time suggest to me that it might have been Truman who was more apt to wake up in an odd mood and decide to heed his more jingoistic advisors. He never did, and that may have something to do with why we are still around to speculate on it, but he never really told them to can it either. This set a pattern that continued at least though the presidency of JFK. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Stalin was a smart, ruthless politician. He would not have started a war, unless he was certain of winning. In 1945, the Soviet Union was in no shape to fight another war: -they had lost between 20-40 million killed; -about 30-40% of their pre-war industrial capacity was gone; -the whole area of the USSR which had been fought over was devastated. In many towns, not one building was still standing and famine was rampant; -only lend-lease supplies of weapons and food had prevented the USSR from collapsing and these ended as soon as the war was over; -the Red Army was fighting a guerrilla war in western ukraine against anti-communist partisan groups; -in eastern europe, most countries were ruled by coalition government, where the communist party was often in the minority. It would take a few more years to turn them into proper soviet puppet states; and - the USSR did not have the atomic bomb. 1950 however, would have been the ideal time, alot of these problems were resolved and Western Europe had very few troops. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Once again, Combat Mission is not a political/economic simulator. Just because a Western/Soviet war was not bloody likley doesn't mean that there would not be some damn intresting tactical chestnuts to crack at the company/battalion level. I mean, anything this hypothetical is pretty much pissing into the wind. I mean from what I know of history there are just way too many little variables to figure what would have happens if even some little ones (let alone big ones) were different. That being said, however, I understand there were some pretty tense moments near the end of the war. I can imagine a stressed yet invincible feeling COL with extreme political views doing something very foolish as a result. And these things do have a way of spiraling out of control... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Originally posted by Dillweed: Once again, Combat Mission is not a political/economic simulator.But having a credible backdrop is the only way to make it play credibly. Otherwise BFC has only wasted their time trying to figure the same for an intervention in Syria. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Yes, Sergei is indeed correct, but of course, Germany was just as exhausted in 1945 and kept fighting because of Hitler. I suppose if Stalin woke up in an odd mood one day in August 1945 he could have started a ruckus if he wanted to... Yeah. I really can't form an estimate of how irrational Stalin was apt to be in 1945, but my readings to this time suggest to me that it might have been Truman who was more apt to wake up in an odd mood and decide to heed his more jingoistic advisors. He never did, and that may have something to do with why we are still around to speculate on it, but he never really told them to can it either. This set a pattern that continued at least though the presidency of JFK. Michael </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dillweed: Once again, Combat Mission is not a political/economic simulator.But having a credible backdrop is the only way to make it play credibly. Otherwise BFC has only wasted their time trying to figure the same for an intervention in Syria. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kellysheroes Posted November 26, 2005 Share Posted November 26, 2005 All I wanna know is when does the SECOND module come out, I'll be bypassing this first one definitely. I'll download the FREE demo though. hehe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyCity Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 Originally posted by DASman: Yeah, Mike, just got a nice new contract on GIC, I'm laughing all the way to the bank.... E Yet another shocking revelation by E, its all about money [ November 27, 2005, 06:05 AM: Message edited by: WindyCity ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyCity Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 Originally posted by Madmatt: Wow, if that doesn't illustrate the core differences in motivations between why we make games and why he does, nothing will... Madmatt Funny thing is , he post more on your forums then his own 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogface Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 lol ya I noticed that. His sig line at fg also quotes soddy. And its a quote from this forum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DASman Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 yes, I love his forum, but I do past more on DAS's (it isn't my forum) E 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.