And I tought I knew every tactics... :)
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
-
RichardTheFirst
- Posts: 460
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Algés, Lisbon - Portugal
- Contact:
Well, I don't know if the game is so far from reality as that. Let's see:
- Engineer units (infantry and tanks) already have more mine clearing hability than all the other units (I just don't know to what extent). One should expect at least the double or triple.
- It seems that mine clearing hability to all other infantry units (including crews) improves with experience (again I don't know to what extent). This seems to be in accordance with reality as veteran units were able to do a lot more than green basic trained units in this area. Green troops shouldn't be able to clear any mine at all (again this I don't know).
- No unit can clear mines if they have been fired last turn. This I know from observing the game. I'm not sure but I think they cannot clear mines also if they are being observed by the enemy.
So: tell me - any of you got statistics about this? To prove your point that the game should be changed?
- Engineer units (infantry and tanks) already have more mine clearing hability than all the other units (I just don't know to what extent). One should expect at least the double or triple.
- It seems that mine clearing hability to all other infantry units (including crews) improves with experience (again I don't know to what extent). This seems to be in accordance with reality as veteran units were able to do a lot more than green basic trained units in this area. Green troops shouldn't be able to clear any mine at all (again this I don't know).
- No unit can clear mines if they have been fired last turn. This I know from observing the game. I'm not sure but I think they cannot clear mines also if they are being observed by the enemy.
So: tell me - any of you got statistics about this? To prove your point that the game should be changed?
LOL!
13 years of being/training/commanding Infantry soldiers should be good enough for "statistics" with regard to knowledge about mine clearing. I’ve spent months with Engineer units as well, and they’re the experts on mine clearing.
You start off with an incorrect assumption that crews are infantry. They are not. If they're crews from a tank, they're tank crews, and can re-mount their vehicle if abandoned. If they're AT gun crews, same goes for them. But dismounted crews are not infantry, you are confusing yourself with this initial assumption, and may be basing the rest of your hypothesis on this non-fact.
As far as “statistics” go, I think you’re looking for historical training records. I can send you the FM numbers and curriculum inclusions to show you that new Infantry troops (GREEN) are indeed trained on recognition and removal, but I doubt you'd understand half of what you're looking at without knowing what the task numbers and abbreviations stand for.
But perhaps you missed the point above. To get a well-trained tank crew, you train them hard in the field, you train them on gunnery tables in all kinds of conditions, you make sure they've got their soldiering basics down (through CTT and sustainment training), and you put them through conditions again and again that are as close to a combat environment as you can simulate (ex. NTC).
You don't get a regular block of mine removal training and a "refresher" annually at FT Knox IIRC. So it's not realistic to assume that vehicle crews (of all vehicles) are trained in mine removal. Again, contemporary methodology.
I think you're trying to assume that just because they're on foot, they should be able to clear mines, perhaps not as well as infantry or engineers, but they should be able to. That is also incorrect.
Consider this example: A 63-series MOS (one of the mechanic series) gets better with training and experience. As they progress in their careers, they get better at diagnosing and repairing equipment in their field. If they are extremely well-trained with combat experience, their diagnoses are faster, they may gain experience on repairing vehicles outside their normal specialty, and they may learn some good tactics for unconventional repairs. What they do NOT gain is an intimate knowledge of mine clearing procedures. They are not specifically trained on the procedure, and that training is not refreshed regularly.
An AFV crew may load quicker (higher ROF), rally better, spot better, even repair broken tracks with ease if they're "elite", but to assume that they've somehow been taught proper mine clearing techinques is a bit of a stretch. They'd be more likely to blow one up than detect and remove it.
You might not understand what it takes in terms of rounds and hours to train a veteran crew. There's precious little time to fit in all the practice and maintenance as it is, without training the crews as mine-clearing engineers, airborne alternates, or back-up field surgeons. Mine clearing is not as simple as poking a bayonet in the dirt. There’s a combination of clearing and marking done by infantry just to make a path wide enough for foot soldiers to pass through.
Now, you also seem to be a bit confused about the way mine clearing is done by tanks and foot soldiers. Mine clearing tanks use rollers, flails, or dozer-like blades to clear mines. They have special equipment. Some Engineer vehicles nowadays even have explosive line charges that can clear mine fields quickly. But back to the point... Yes, a mine-clearing tank should be able to remove mines faster than a prone or kneeling infantry squad.
But the process is entirely different for foot troops. Engineers on foot have an advantage in clearing over regular Infantry because of the equipment they had. They had man-portable metal detectors that they swept in front of themselves with to aid in the detection of mines. They also had much more experience with mines (as they’re trained to lay and remove/disarm them). So, given additional equipment and additional training, yes, it makes sense that Engineer foot soldiers should be able to detect and clear mines better than other Infantry. But the fact that infantry troops are trained (and that it is sustained regularly) enables them to clear mines. They should clear better with more experience, but even GREEN infantry troops are trained in the skill. Vehicle crews are not, cooks are not, tank crews are not, AT gun crews are not, records clerks are not.
I think that I’ve made my point clearly, that the difference is in the equipment and training. Make sense?
Infantry have the training, therefore they have the ability. Engineers have both the training and equipment, therefore they do it better. The rest of the lot DO NOT have either, therefore, they shouldn’t be able to do it.
If you want to use “elite” status to mean any soldiers with that status become masters of all military skills, even those outside their MOS, then elite infantry should be able to mount and operate abandoned AFVs, right? And I don’t think anyone wants that.
Put that in your "statistics" pipe and smoke it, lil' fella :p. Actually, smoking's bad for you. Disregard
You start off with an incorrect assumption that crews are infantry. They are not. If they're crews from a tank, they're tank crews, and can re-mount their vehicle if abandoned. If they're AT gun crews, same goes for them. But dismounted crews are not infantry, you are confusing yourself with this initial assumption, and may be basing the rest of your hypothesis on this non-fact.
As far as “statistics” go, I think you’re looking for historical training records. I can send you the FM numbers and curriculum inclusions to show you that new Infantry troops (GREEN) are indeed trained on recognition and removal, but I doubt you'd understand half of what you're looking at without knowing what the task numbers and abbreviations stand for.
But perhaps you missed the point above. To get a well-trained tank crew, you train them hard in the field, you train them on gunnery tables in all kinds of conditions, you make sure they've got their soldiering basics down (through CTT and sustainment training), and you put them through conditions again and again that are as close to a combat environment as you can simulate (ex. NTC).
You don't get a regular block of mine removal training and a "refresher" annually at FT Knox IIRC. So it's not realistic to assume that vehicle crews (of all vehicles) are trained in mine removal. Again, contemporary methodology.
I think you're trying to assume that just because they're on foot, they should be able to clear mines, perhaps not as well as infantry or engineers, but they should be able to. That is also incorrect.
Consider this example: A 63-series MOS (one of the mechanic series) gets better with training and experience. As they progress in their careers, they get better at diagnosing and repairing equipment in their field. If they are extremely well-trained with combat experience, their diagnoses are faster, they may gain experience on repairing vehicles outside their normal specialty, and they may learn some good tactics for unconventional repairs. What they do NOT gain is an intimate knowledge of mine clearing procedures. They are not specifically trained on the procedure, and that training is not refreshed regularly.
An AFV crew may load quicker (higher ROF), rally better, spot better, even repair broken tracks with ease if they're "elite", but to assume that they've somehow been taught proper mine clearing techinques is a bit of a stretch. They'd be more likely to blow one up than detect and remove it.
You might not understand what it takes in terms of rounds and hours to train a veteran crew. There's precious little time to fit in all the practice and maintenance as it is, without training the crews as mine-clearing engineers, airborne alternates, or back-up field surgeons. Mine clearing is not as simple as poking a bayonet in the dirt. There’s a combination of clearing and marking done by infantry just to make a path wide enough for foot soldiers to pass through.
Now, you also seem to be a bit confused about the way mine clearing is done by tanks and foot soldiers. Mine clearing tanks use rollers, flails, or dozer-like blades to clear mines. They have special equipment. Some Engineer vehicles nowadays even have explosive line charges that can clear mine fields quickly. But back to the point... Yes, a mine-clearing tank should be able to remove mines faster than a prone or kneeling infantry squad.
But the process is entirely different for foot troops. Engineers on foot have an advantage in clearing over regular Infantry because of the equipment they had. They had man-portable metal detectors that they swept in front of themselves with to aid in the detection of mines. They also had much more experience with mines (as they’re trained to lay and remove/disarm them). So, given additional equipment and additional training, yes, it makes sense that Engineer foot soldiers should be able to detect and clear mines better than other Infantry. But the fact that infantry troops are trained (and that it is sustained regularly) enables them to clear mines. They should clear better with more experience, but even GREEN infantry troops are trained in the skill. Vehicle crews are not, cooks are not, tank crews are not, AT gun crews are not, records clerks are not.
I think that I’ve made my point clearly, that the difference is in the equipment and training. Make sense?
Infantry have the training, therefore they have the ability. Engineers have both the training and equipment, therefore they do it better. The rest of the lot DO NOT have either, therefore, they shouldn’t be able to do it. If you want to use “elite” status to mean any soldiers with that status become masters of all military skills, even those outside their MOS, then elite infantry should be able to mount and operate abandoned AFVs, right? And I don’t think anyone wants that.
Put that in your "statistics" pipe and smoke it, lil' fella :p. Actually, smoking's bad for you. Disregard
-
RichardTheFirst
- Posts: 460
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Algés, Lisbon - Portugal
- Contact:
You could use all the fancy words you want, big fella. You can because you are probably English-speaker-born and I'm not.
Just because I made a mistake saying "infantry" and not "foot soldier" you made an entire theory around it and you wrote almost a book. Well, good for you. Hope your ego is shinning now.
My point stands: even for crews. Why? Because being a vet or elite troop does not come from the amount of training they had. Comes from experience. In combat situations.
Crews that were forced to deal with mines due to the cruel reality of combat gain expertise. Life expertise. Practise. They saw already comrades killed due to mines. They already had their tank several times stuck in minefields. They are VETS.
This is a game. It means it is a simulation from reality therefore you cannot expect it to be perfect. SPWaW is an amazing game in that because it goes very close. In mine clearing it goes very close too.
You can use all the intellectuality you want but you failed to prove your point. And being aggressive does not make you more intelligent, on the contrary. Think about it, big fella.
Just because I made a mistake saying "infantry" and not "foot soldier" you made an entire theory around it and you wrote almost a book. Well, good for you. Hope your ego is shinning now.
My point stands: even for crews. Why? Because being a vet or elite troop does not come from the amount of training they had. Comes from experience. In combat situations.
Crews that were forced to deal with mines due to the cruel reality of combat gain expertise. Life expertise. Practise. They saw already comrades killed due to mines. They already had their tank several times stuck in minefields. They are VETS.
This is a game. It means it is a simulation from reality therefore you cannot expect it to be perfect. SPWaW is an amazing game in that because it goes very close. In mine clearing it goes very close too.
You can use all the intellectuality you want but you failed to prove your point. And being aggressive does not make you more intelligent, on the contrary. Think about it, big fella.
All the points are valid, crews aren't specificlly taught to clear mine fields, however its a game and there are allot of unknowns, we don't know if it was a hasty mine field one that was prepared and month ago ect.
Crews clearing mines is a stretch but not impossible ( please don't start with the anything is possible argument ) So since there are several varible and unknows, we just have to live with the unlikly every once in a while. I'm sure the designers were limited by the mechanics of the game engine as well.
On a further note crews will be toned down in ver 8.0 or what ever the SPWAW Gods call thre new mod, they already are in the H2H, Leo has done a very good job IMHO. As Vat said they are not infantry and should not fight as such ( Marines are traind as basic infantry no matter what MOS they have, just a little note to poke fun at the Army guy's )
P.S. RichardtheFirst never play anyone from Portugal how about a game
Crews clearing mines is a stretch but not impossible ( please don't start with the anything is possible argument ) So since there are several varible and unknows, we just have to live with the unlikly every once in a while. I'm sure the designers were limited by the mechanics of the game engine as well.
On a further note crews will be toned down in ver 8.0 or what ever the SPWAW Gods call thre new mod, they already are in the H2H, Leo has done a very good job IMHO. As Vat said they are not infantry and should not fight as such ( Marines are traind as basic infantry no matter what MOS they have, just a little note to poke fun at the Army guy's
)P.S. RichardtheFirst never play anyone from Portugal how about a game
-
RichardTheFirst
- Posts: 460
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Algés, Lisbon - Portugal
- Contact:
VikingNo2:
I generally agreed with your comment.
Regarding the game: I'm in the middle of Desert Fox now and would like to finnish it first. But after that I would be delighted. Send me your e-mail please.
Regarding "Statistics"
Just to clarify that I was asking for statistics regarding SPWaW not life situations. Example:
- Mine clearing ratio for engineers (with % increase for experience)
- Same for crews and infantry units
- Any other rellevant statistics
I really don't have the time or I could get it myself with tests.
I generally agreed with your comment.
Regarding the game: I'm in the middle of Desert Fox now and would like to finnish it first. But after that I would be delighted. Send me your e-mail please.
Regarding "Statistics"
Just to clarify that I was asking for statistics regarding SPWaW not life situations. Example:
- Mine clearing ratio for engineers (with % increase for experience)
- Same for crews and infantry units
- Any other rellevant statistics
I really don't have the time or I could get it myself with tests.
My email
gregoryjj@hawaii.rr.com
can't help you with the request, I normally don't play with too many mine, Capt Pixel maybe able to help
gregoryjj@hawaii.rr.com
can't help you with the request, I normally don't play with too many mine, Capt Pixel maybe able to help
Geesh
Mouthy punks are the last thing I tend to tolerate well, in any language. The tone of my post was light-hearted ribbing. Notice all the smiley faces? I tried as politely as possible to tell you that what you’re suggesting is unrealistic. And now, you want to puff up and throw your chest out? :rolleyes:
You didn't mis-speak, stop using that "second language" crutch. There are plenty of folks who don't have English as their primary language and communicate accurately.
Your THEORY is WRONG. How's that for simple?
Crews are not infantry, and they're not "foot soldiers" either. They're trained to operate a specific vehicle, gun, mortar, or other system. Because they leave their **** equipment behind (for whatever reason) does NOT transform them into trained mine clearers, like Infantry soldiers or Engineers.
If you read my above post and didn’t get that point, you need to re-read it. Clear as day. I never once said SPW@W wasn't one of THE best games out there. I'd pick up the pom-poms and cheer right beside you for what the folks behind this have done. So stop throwing smoke and stick to the facts at hand.
You say:
Think about it. Are you trying to say that EVERY Elite crew has had the experience of being stuck in a minefield Richard? Using your reasoning, they gained that ability from doing it or seeing it done previously. Because EVERY crew in SPW@W has the ability to remove mines once knocked off their gun, or out of their AFV. And I think that that's a load of crap.
Your whole argument that “they’re Elite therefore they should be able to do anything” is full of holes. How damned unbalanced would the game be if any Elite troops could do anything they wanted? Why not let them re-crew abandoned vehicles or weapons systems they’re not trained on? It’s the same non-logic you’re suggesting. How about letting them crew up abandoned enemy vehicles? Using your argument, they can learn anything because of their all-powerful battle experience. Bah! I think that's ridiculous.
When the crews gain experience, they get better at target acquisition and reload rates, or changing distance and deflection, or firing a familiar weapon while moving. But a platoon of SS troops, just because they’re Elite, does not know how to adequately man and operate an abandoned Wirblewind.
Mine-clearing is a trained skill, Infantry and Engineers receive it, as do infantry variants (SF, Airborne, etc.). Who doesn’t get that training? Barge Carrier drivers, for example. But hey, they’re a crew, let ‘em clear a few mines, right? Because they’re Elite. Where are your statistics?
Stop equating Hollywood with combat reality. I've been there, done it, do it, and know what I'm talking about on this one. You, I'd venture to say, do not.
You want it all, you’re into finding out all the exploits to “game” better. Bet you’re a big fan of moving and shooting with the big AA guns too, aren’t you?
EDIT:
Oh, and Viking, I agree whole-heartedly with the Marine approach. I think that all MOS's should be trained in soldier basics first. That's one thing I can't argue with my Marine friends, and one thing I lament about our training doctrine. BTW, I'm considering F9-ing in that huge battle, as I can't reinforce. Once you've punched through, there's nothing behind it
.
Well-played. Next time, it'll have to be a H2H match, I still dream about your darn M9 Bazookas and wake up screaming. :p
You didn't mis-speak, stop using that "second language" crutch. There are plenty of folks who don't have English as their primary language and communicate accurately.
Your THEORY is WRONG. How's that for simple?
Crews are not infantry, and they're not "foot soldiers" either. They're trained to operate a specific vehicle, gun, mortar, or other system. Because they leave their **** equipment behind (for whatever reason) does NOT transform them into trained mine clearers, like Infantry soldiers or Engineers.
If you read my above post and didn’t get that point, you need to re-read it. Clear as day. I never once said SPW@W wasn't one of THE best games out there. I'd pick up the pom-poms and cheer right beside you for what the folks behind this have done. So stop throwing smoke and stick to the facts at hand.
You say:
Well, yes, crews gain battle experience. That's the typical definition of a "veteran". However, there are a few guys at the VFW here whose only combat experience was throwing ropes on a pier. Not once did they face hostile fire. They're officially classified as veterans, because they were in-theater. They probably became very good at tying up ships, but I'm willing to bet they still lack a bit when it comes to clearing mine fields.Because being a vet or elite troop does not come from the amount of training they had. Comes from experience. In combat situations.
Think about it. Are you trying to say that EVERY Elite crew has had the experience of being stuck in a minefield Richard? Using your reasoning, they gained that ability from doing it or seeing it done previously. Because EVERY crew in SPW@W has the ability to remove mines once knocked off their gun, or out of their AFV. And I think that that's a load of crap.
Your whole argument that “they’re Elite therefore they should be able to do anything” is full of holes. How damned unbalanced would the game be if any Elite troops could do anything they wanted? Why not let them re-crew abandoned vehicles or weapons systems they’re not trained on? It’s the same non-logic you’re suggesting. How about letting them crew up abandoned enemy vehicles? Using your argument, they can learn anything because of their all-powerful battle experience. Bah! I think that's ridiculous.
When the crews gain experience, they get better at target acquisition and reload rates, or changing distance and deflection, or firing a familiar weapon while moving. But a platoon of SS troops, just because they’re Elite, does not know how to adequately man and operate an abandoned Wirblewind.
Mine-clearing is a trained skill, Infantry and Engineers receive it, as do infantry variants (SF, Airborne, etc.). Who doesn’t get that training? Barge Carrier drivers, for example. But hey, they’re a crew, let ‘em clear a few mines, right? Because they’re Elite. Where are your statistics?
Stop equating Hollywood with combat reality. I've been there, done it, do it, and know what I'm talking about on this one. You, I'd venture to say, do not.
You want it all, you’re into finding out all the exploits to “game” better. Bet you’re a big fan of moving and shooting with the big AA guns too, aren’t you?
EDIT:
Oh, and Viking, I agree whole-heartedly with the Marine approach. I think that all MOS's should be trained in soldier basics first. That's one thing I can't argue with my Marine friends, and one thing I lament about our training doctrine. BTW, I'm considering F9-ing in that huge battle, as I can't reinforce. Once you've punched through, there's nothing behind it
.Well-played. Next time, it'll have to be a H2H match, I still dream about your darn M9 Bazookas and wake up screaming. :p
-
RichardTheFirst
- Posts: 460
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Algés, Lisbon - Portugal
- Contact:
That's it?
You respond to a good-natured opinion counter to yours with hostility. You complain that I don't provide a point, or state anything clearly.
Then, when I take the effort to make what I'm saying painfully clear, instead of having the brass to rebut/debate your theory you insult me and sign out?
Bah X 2. Take your ball and go home then little fella. If you can't back up your opinions with facts, or if you can't debate theories without getting personal, then you should think twice before posting them. Alternately, I'd recommend you continue to post, just grow some thicker skin. If what I wrote first came off as mean-spirited to you, it was unintentional.
Stop spewing the venom, and don't assume you know it all.
In this instance, I know how my soldiers have been trained, how our combat support soldiers have been trained, and how I've been trained. I've worked with live mines, armed and disarmed them. I know how much tolerance you have to work with, and it's not a comfortable level IMO in a training environment. Add bullets, noise, and a hundred other distractors and it's downright dicey. I personally don't feel that your average crewman (AFV, AT, Mortar, Truck, etc.) could pull it off time and time again. Or that they'd even have the brass to try. Currently, every crew in the game can and will, and I feel that's unrealistic.
And if you're going to close with one statement, be a little more concise. What was it that indicates that I've been in service a day too long?
Then, when I take the effort to make what I'm saying painfully clear, instead of having the brass to rebut/debate your theory you insult me and sign out?
Bah X 2. Take your ball and go home then little fella. If you can't back up your opinions with facts, or if you can't debate theories without getting personal, then you should think twice before posting them. Alternately, I'd recommend you continue to post, just grow some thicker skin. If what I wrote first came off as mean-spirited to you, it was unintentional.
Stop spewing the venom, and don't assume you know it all.
In this instance, I know how my soldiers have been trained, how our combat support soldiers have been trained, and how I've been trained. I've worked with live mines, armed and disarmed them. I know how much tolerance you have to work with, and it's not a comfortable level IMO in a training environment. Add bullets, noise, and a hundred other distractors and it's downright dicey. I personally don't feel that your average crewman (AFV, AT, Mortar, Truck, etc.) could pull it off time and time again. Or that they'd even have the brass to try. Currently, every crew in the game can and will, and I feel that's unrealistic.
And if you're going to close with one statement, be a little more concise. What was it that indicates that I've been in service a day too long?
Ahem...
That I do...
It's been sitting open at my house since lunch.
(read the post two back from me, the "EDIT" portion).
I'm in dire straits in our game. I've been pulling in units from other areas on the board to reinforce against your pushes in the center. Since I can't reinforce, you're going to roll through like dominos when a portion of my line breaks. I am weighing my options, but the turn will be sent to you this evening regardless. I may fight it out to the bitter end, but our next go-round, I want a somewhat smaller map, too much for my n00b brain ATM.
I actually do like the larger ones, but they turns take much time if you're going to try and move smartly. These large games are a HUGE learning opportunity, but I've been pinched for time of late. I just lost a soldier in Iraq, came out of command, and have about 3 more irons in the fire currently. Not much time to breathe. I've got a bit of down-time during the day (the whole "hurry up-n-wait" routine).
Genuinely sorry for the wait. I looked at the board for a 1/2 hour today trying to see if there was anything I could salvage. I'm convinced that if I move forward in the South, you've got your backfield prickling with AT guns (grrrr...). I'll have to see what the PEN of your 57mm's and 3" can do in the encyclopedia. Tigers are thick, but at what distance...
It's been sitting open at my house since lunch.
(read the post two back from me, the "EDIT" portion).I'm in dire straits in our game. I've been pulling in units from other areas on the board to reinforce against your pushes in the center. Since I can't reinforce, you're going to roll through like dominos when a portion of my line breaks. I am weighing my options, but the turn will be sent to you this evening regardless. I may fight it out to the bitter end, but our next go-round, I want a somewhat smaller map, too much for my n00b brain ATM
.I actually do like the larger ones, but they turns take much time if you're going to try and move smartly. These large games are a HUGE learning opportunity, but I've been pinched for time of late. I just lost a soldier in Iraq, came out of command, and have about 3 more irons in the fire currently. Not much time to breathe. I've got a bit of down-time during the day (the whole "hurry up-n-wait" routine).
Genuinely sorry for the wait. I looked at the board for a 1/2 hour today trying to see if there was anything I could salvage. I'm convinced that if I move forward in the South, you've got your backfield prickling with AT guns (grrrr...). I'll have to see what the PEN of your 57mm's and 3" can do in the encyclopedia. Tigers are thick, but at what distance...
-
Belisarius
- Posts: 3099
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Geesh
Originally posted by Vathailos
Mouthy punks are the last thing I tend to tolerate well, in any language. The tone of my post was light-hearted ribbing. Notice all the smiley faces? I tried as politely as possible to tell you that what you’re suggesting is unrealistic. And now, you want to puff up and throw your chest out? :rolleyes:
Uh, not to pick sides, but I have to say that for all the light-heartedness in your post Vathailhos, you were quite condescending. :rolleyes: So don't bare your teeth for being approached in the same manner.
That's all I have to say.
Got StuG?
-
Belisarius
- Posts: 3099
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Originally posted by VikingNo2
Depends on the mine, but its just the opposite ( IMO ) AT mines can be burried deeper and normally take much more to set them off, however I'm not as well versed in WWII era mines as some around the forum
Neither am I, but that will be a correct assumption. A WWII regular AT mine is useless against infantry, a soldier isn't heavy enough to set it off.
Caused the Afrika Korps quite some troubles many times in NA as marching infantry stepped right through the minefields.
As for the 'crew-mineclearers', I guess this is one area where SPWaW stretches the reality features a bit. Crews wouldn't be too slick at digging for mines. B'sides that I guess if you're crew and have to abandon your ride, the last thing you'll do is to stick around looking at the ground...
Got StuG?
-
RichardTheFirst
- Posts: 460
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Algés, Lisbon - Portugal
- Contact:
To Vaithalos,
Alright, since you insist I'll be crystal clear. I don't like talking or debating with people that say things they wouldn't have the courage of saying it if they were face to face with me.
You started with that lil fella thing, with that hairy chests (btw: are you gay or something?) and that general tone. And now you say I insulted you? Don't make me laugh.
I don't have the patience or inclination to debate things with rude, coward or bad mannered people. That's why I'm trying to sign off with you. Have I made myself clear?
Alright, since you insist I'll be crystal clear. I don't like talking or debating with people that say things they wouldn't have the courage of saying it if they were face to face with me.
You started with that lil fella thing, with that hairy chests (btw: are you gay or something?) and that general tone. And now you say I insulted you? Don't make me laugh.
I don't have the patience or inclination to debate things with rude, coward or bad mannered people. That's why I'm trying to sign off with you. Have I made myself clear?
-
Frank W.
- Posts: 1040
- Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
- Contact:
folks: drink a beer and calm down 
crew can clear mines in SPWAW,because they are treated like inf in the game. so it is. don´t know if there will a change in this in the new version ( if it ever comes ).
if not we must live with it.
btw: i noticed that MKIII tanks can carry 8men while panther´s,too can carry 8. quite unrealistic IMHO. i´ve seen the size difference of those 2 in reality......
crew can clear mines in SPWAW,because they are treated like inf in the game. so it is. don´t know if there will a change in this in the new version ( if it ever comes ).
if not we must live with it.
btw: i noticed that MKIII tanks can carry 8men while panther´s,too can carry 8. quite unrealistic IMHO. i´ve seen the size difference of those 2 in reality......
Bel:
Point taken, condescension unintended. But I was adopting the tone of Richard’s (what I thought was) sarcastic tone above, where he responded that he didn’t like someone who had just disagreed with him (Melon?). Mine was intended to be, like I said, a good-natured “here now, young fella” type of commentary. A tongue-in-cheek variation of a presentation that I’ve heard all too often myself. When the old MSG winds up and starts with the “back in my day” type of yarn. If you’ve ever heard one of those before, you’ll know what I mean. When someone tries to sell me opinions as fact, then gets pissy when I don’t buy, I don’t typically take that with teeth hidden. I’ll disagree with more tact, add less humor to cloud my message in the future, but I won’t suffer arrogant children who think they know it all.
And AP mines were laid with AT mines IIRC, weren’t they? I know they are now, but things change.
Richard:
Now you're trying to play tough with the "say it to my face" board warrior BS? :rolleyes: You're fooling no one but yourself. Act as brave as you want, but I've seen the same playground bravado mentality get plenty a 17 year-old’s head stuck up his 4th point of contact fast when he tries that worthless posing in Basic. You haven’t learned that lesson yet. If you act IRL as you’re doing here, you’ll learn it soon enough. Pity I won’t be there to see it.
No, I’m not gay. The “chest” comment was in my SECOND post, after you’d responded like a snotty little child. But thanks for another favorite teenage insult though, they love to use the homosexuality insults. I’m surprised you didn’t say something about my mother. Pathetic little punk.
And neither am I cowardly, or rude. I just have a low degree of tolerance for little arrogant teens who want others to unquestioningly take their uninformed opinions as facts, and who puff up at the first sign of disagreement.
Back to topic…
You say that the game simulates mine clearing “very close too”. Let me ask you this question:
Do you have ANY experience clearing mines yourself? Or are you just talking out your a$$ about that also?
You say it like it’s fact, but it’s only your opinion, with no facts at all to back it up. When someone else provides information that might disprove your assumption, you get pissy, and storm off.
You say that “being aggressive does not make you more intelligent, on the contrary.” Well, that's just laughable. Now you're trying to sell us on the fact that if someone agressively disagrees with someone, they're unintelligent.
Ever heard any of George S. Patton's conversations with his peers/subordinates/superiors (or seen transcrcipts)?
Would you call him a pacifist? No?
Well, is he a moron? No?
Well, guess that statement’s about as accurate as the rest of the BS you try to pass off as “fact” here.
You were wrong about crews being “infantry” OR “foot soldiers”. Your argument about their elite status has been shot full of holes, and so you result to insulting now, because you have nothing left. Quit posing, and stick to your initial promise. If you can’t rebut the argument about the facts, quit your name calling and shut the hell up already.
Point taken, condescension unintended. But I was adopting the tone of Richard’s (what I thought was) sarcastic tone above, where he responded that he didn’t like someone who had just disagreed with him (Melon?). Mine was intended to be, like I said, a good-natured “here now, young fella” type of commentary. A tongue-in-cheek variation of a presentation that I’ve heard all too often myself. When the old MSG winds up and starts with the “back in my day” type of yarn. If you’ve ever heard one of those before, you’ll know what I mean. When someone tries to sell me opinions as fact, then gets pissy when I don’t buy, I don’t typically take that with teeth hidden. I’ll disagree with more tact, add less humor to cloud my message in the future, but I won’t suffer arrogant children who think they know it all.
And AP mines were laid with AT mines IIRC, weren’t they? I know they are now, but things change.
Richard:
Now you're trying to play tough with the "say it to my face" board warrior BS? :rolleyes: You're fooling no one but yourself. Act as brave as you want, but I've seen the same playground bravado mentality get plenty a 17 year-old’s head stuck up his 4th point of contact fast when he tries that worthless posing in Basic. You haven’t learned that lesson yet. If you act IRL as you’re doing here, you’ll learn it soon enough. Pity I won’t be there to see it.
No, I’m not gay. The “chest” comment was in my SECOND post, after you’d responded like a snotty little child. But thanks for another favorite teenage insult though, they love to use the homosexuality insults. I’m surprised you didn’t say something about my mother. Pathetic little punk.
And neither am I cowardly, or rude. I just have a low degree of tolerance for little arrogant teens who want others to unquestioningly take their uninformed opinions as facts, and who puff up at the first sign of disagreement.
Back to topic…
You say that the game simulates mine clearing “very close too”. Let me ask you this question:
Do you have ANY experience clearing mines yourself? Or are you just talking out your a$$ about that also?
You say it like it’s fact, but it’s only your opinion, with no facts at all to back it up. When someone else provides information that might disprove your assumption, you get pissy, and storm off.
You say that “being aggressive does not make you more intelligent, on the contrary.” Well, that's just laughable. Now you're trying to sell us on the fact that if someone agressively disagrees with someone, they're unintelligent.
Ever heard any of George S. Patton's conversations with his peers/subordinates/superiors (or seen transcrcipts)?
Would you call him a pacifist? No?
Well, is he a moron? No?
Well, guess that statement’s about as accurate as the rest of the BS you try to pass off as “fact” here.
You were wrong about crews being “infantry” OR “foot soldiers”. Your argument about their elite status has been shot full of holes, and so you result to insulting now, because you have nothing left. Quit posing, and stick to your initial promise. If you can’t rebut the argument about the facts, quit your name calling and shut the hell up already.