8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: Joel Billings, Sabre21

Post Reply
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Hortlund »

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

The tank factory ran once we crossed the Dnepr - everything else was left behind! I'll let the good citizens of Kharkhov know you do not consider them important!
They better all be out in the fields as partisans!
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
User avatar
Telemecus
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:32 pm
Contact:

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Telemecus »

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

ORIGINAL: Telemecus

The tank factory ran once we crossed the Dnepr - everything else was left behind! I'll let the good citizens of Kharkhov know you do not consider them important!
They better all be out in the fields as partisans!

Starving as those supply planes will not be flying?
Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Hortlund »

In two turns they will!
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
User avatar
thedude357
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:13 am
Location: California

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by thedude357 »

All those useless vehicle factories were left to be captured, so he could free up all the heavy industry to produce tanks. Tanks, tanks, and more tanks. They certainly don't need crews, supplies, ammunition or fuel...you see no truck drivers were ever deemed heroes of the soviet union.
Stelteck
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:07 pm

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Stelteck »

And noone speak for the poor SU-2 ?

The SU-2 is an awesome plane. In fact the worst tactical bomber is better than the best level bomber. [:D]

And SU-2 is not the worst at all.

As we can see from this footage of a parallel world taken end spring 1942, the most important planes for ground support are I-153 and SU-2.

Image



Brakes are for cowards !!
User avatar
M60A3TTS
Posts: 4797
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 1:20 am

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by M60A3TTS »

ORIGINAL: Stelteck

And noone speak for the poor SU-2 ?

The SU-2 is an awesome plane. In fact the worst tactical bomber is better than the best level bomber. [:D]

And SU-2 is not the worst at all.

As we can see from this footage of a parallel world taken end spring 1942, the most important planes for ground support are I-153 and SU-2.

Image




Well you fly U-2s so your input is already discredited. [:D]

Sorry Dinglir.
User avatar
thedude357
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:13 am
Location: California

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by thedude357 »

Stuka sirens INTENSIFIES
User avatar
Telemecus
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:32 pm
Contact:

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Telemecus »

Panzer rumbles LOUDER
Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT
User avatar
M60A3TTS
Posts: 4797
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 1:20 am

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by M60A3TTS »

At least this time, the Soviet side has been making headway. Just about 2/3 done.
User avatar
Telemecus
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:32 pm
Contact:

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Telemecus »

ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS

At least this time, the Soviet side has been making headway. Just about 2/3 done.
Oh wow and splendid! Our stukas and panzers are ready, waiting and eager for action!

Remember to let us know who we are playing against?
Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT
User avatar
thedude357
Posts: 87
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 5:13 am
Location: California

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by thedude357 »

I think the Soviets are hoping for a 1942 invasion of Normandy.
User avatar
Telemecus
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:32 pm
Contact:

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Telemecus »

ORIGINAL: thedude357

I think the Soviets are hoping for a 1942 invasion of Normandy.

not the north German coast? [:D]

Actually when you read Churchill's account of the war he details when Stalin suggested sending 80 divisions to the Soviet Union. Churchill insisted it was not logistically possible. But with the western allies sending that many to Mesopotamia/ Sahara/ Malaya I think the Soviets were right to say it was mostly political.
Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT
Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Zorch »

Suppose Kibo Butai entered the Baltic and made an all out strike on Berlin? Or Moscow? [;)]
User avatar
M60A3TTS
Posts: 4797
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 1:20 am

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by M60A3TTS »

ORIGINAL: Telemecus
ORIGINAL: thedude357

I think the Soviets are hoping for a 1942 invasion of Normandy.

not the north German coast? [:D]

Actually when you read Churchill's account of the war he details when Stalin suggested sending 80 divisions to the Soviet Union. Churchill insisted it was not logistically possible. But with the western allies sending that many to Mesopotamia/ Sahara/ Malaya I think the Soviets were right to say it was mostly political.

Before you judge the validity of Churchill's conclusion that sending divisions to the USSR posed difficulties, you might read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy_PQ_17
User avatar
Telemecus
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:32 pm
Contact:

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Telemecus »

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Suppose Kibo Butai entered the Baltic and made an all out strike on Berlin? Or Moscow? [;)]

Earlier lowsugar brought the whole u-boar fleet to lake Pskow - so anything is possible!
ORIGINAL: M60A3TTS
ORIGINAL: Telemecus
Actually when you read Churchill's account of the war he details when Stalin suggested sending 80 divisions to the Soviet Union. Churchill insisted it was not logistically possible. But with the western allies sending that many to Mesopotamia/ Sahara/ Malaya I think the Soviets were right to say it was mostly political.
Before you judge the validity of Churchill's conclusion that sending divisions to the USSR posed difficulties, you might read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy_PQ_17

If you are British based you may have seen the BBC documentary which solely covered this event. [Edit: Just seen it is freely availiable on vimeo - but remembered Jeremy Clarkson presented it!]

But I was thinking more in the South. The British did deploy divisions to the north of Mesopotamia in case the Soviet defences collapsed in the Caucasus - why not send the divisions to the Caucasus! After Persia was conquered the troops not needed for garrisons could have gone north into Russia, not South. Both are just as far in supply terms. Even if not eighty why not eight? Why zero?!

In another context I was reading the complaints of our continental allies during the Napoleonic wars that while they were fighting the big battles in Europe, we sent our infantry to Buenos Aires! Yes it would have been a bit part player in central Europe, but that was where every little helps. Instead we preferred to be a big fish in a little pond somewhere else. I do think it reflects long term British dispositions to which the first world war was an exception.

On another side though the few naval and airforce staff the British kept at the arctic ports in Russia had a terrible time. So it is not altogether certain the Soviets really did want western allies on their soil.
Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT
User avatar
M60A3TTS
Posts: 4797
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 1:20 am

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by M60A3TTS »

STAVKA has our save for final review and changes.
User avatar
Hortlund
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2000 8:00 am

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Hortlund »

Im just taking a last look and will send the turn tomorrow morning (so, in about 12-14 hours)
The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..
User avatar
Telemecus
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:32 pm
Contact:

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Telemecus »

Great and thanks! The Axis team will be revving up. I know you have had team changes this turn so it is an achievement to get through with all the turnover.

By the way who are we playing now?
Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT
Lictuel
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 7:35 am

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Lictuel »

I'm the southern commander as of this turn, m60 is northern command and Sardaukar is central command. I hope this does not fall under opsec Hortlund
User avatar
Telemecus
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:32 pm
Contact:

RE: 8 player multiplayer - THREAD FOR BOTH SIDES

Post by Telemecus »

Welcome Lictuel! I was wondering what happened after your post on the sign-up thread - so am very glad to see you onboard!

Our team - with some quotes of what they have said in-game

North - lowsugar "this is famous german Blitzkrieg!"
Centre - Stelteck "Ho, did i made a mystake on her name ? it is difficult to remember all of these berlin's cabaret artists."
South - thedude357 "The strategy is simple: we kill Batman"

M60A3TTS - I PMed welcome before, I feel welcoming you now on the forums is too late, you seem to be a grizzled old veteran already! [:)]

So I guess both sides commanders ToEs are on 100%. Game on!
Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”