First of all I want to speak about some faults I encountered while playing Steel Panthers: World at War. This list of course is far from complete.
1. Weapon Breakdown by rocket systems. It is truly impossible that a whole system is disabled if one single rocket should malfunction, at least as long as that rocket doenst explode, but in that case the whole system should be destroyed. Usually you only need to extract the malfunctioned rocket from the frame and you can insert a new rocket. Even if the frame should be damaged, the other rocket frames will still work and not be disabled too.
2. Many penetration values are at least inaccurate. For example the 7,5cm 40L48 of the german Sturmgeschütz has over 1000 m a penetration value of 85mm, not more than 100 as it stand in the penetration table of Spwaw.
3. Many armour ratings are at least inaccurate. For example nowhere in Spwaw they take account of the additional side armour-plates (Kettenschürzen) which many german systems (Brummbär, Pzkfw IVj, Stug G, some Tiger systems) had as protection against HEAT-ammo. At this point I should mention that it is amazing how often american tanks in the game have HEAT and APCR-ammo. I havent heard of any case american tanks used such ammo in WW2. (Before anyone asks the Side armour-plates were primarily a protection against Bazooka- and other one man rocket launcher systems.)
4. Oh and somebody might explain to me how for example it is possible to put 40 Wurfrahmen40 in a single 50x50m hex field. Can they put them in batches?
More things to come.
And now some anecdotes about the dreaded (american) heroism, which is so often described in this message board.
1. Battle of Tebourba 01.12-03.12.1942
3 Tiger E of the 1./501 and less than 20 Pzkfw III of the 10.PD destroyed 134 tanks of the Crusader- and General Lee-types.
2. I know about an event when 4 Tiger E encountered 16 Sherman M4. The Tigers shot down the first 4 Sherman tanks. After that the other 12 tanks stopped and were abandoned in panic by their crews. You can find a better description of that event in the book "Tiger - Die Geschichte einer legendären Waffe 1942-45" which is the THE standard book about the Tiger weapon. I will look the exakt date and location up later und post it then. However such behaviour shows how brave american troops truly were in their fight for freedom, peace and pin up girls when they didnt have a better friend to enemy ratio than 10:1.
I too know some really good anecdotes about american troops in NATO-exercises. Care to know how 4 german fast-boats were able to defeat a complete american cruiser task group consisting of 2 cruisers and 4 destroyers? Or how one german M113 with a group of 12 soldiers was able to defeat 4 american heavy tanks and 60 soldiers?
Oh, and if the american army is really so great, somebody may explain to me, why they in Vietnam used Agent Orange in areas where their own troops were stationed without (!) telling them of the consequences. (Cancer etc.) And its interesting how history repeats itselve. During desert storm american tanks used uranium-ammunition and nobody told the men, that the uranium dust, which is set free when such a grenade hits, will, after they inhaled it, stay in their bones. Some members of that tank crews now have cancer, some have fathered very sick children...
Well they fought with the M1A1, which is really crap compared to the Leopard 2 Mk5, but still, the idea to poison ones own troops to give them a (very slight) advantage in a fight strikes me as ridicilous.
And a nice bonus question: Which american admiral commanded during WW2 his ships in a dress?
And wasnt it Gregory "Pappy" Boington who said: "Show me an american hero and I´ll prove he´s a bum." That quote is better known without the word "american" in front of the "hero". I wonder why.
Greetings
JR
Some faults in SPWAW and some anecdotes about american heroism!
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
-
Jaques Rico
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Dresden/Germany
- Contact:
-
Belisarius
- Posts: 3099
- Joined: Sat May 26, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
- Contact:
Uh oh
This will be fun... :rolleyes:
Really, I have my doubts if this is a serious posting. It's a flamebait, if I ever saw one...
To keep it short: In SPWAW, the US army ain't that grand, and no matter what side you play you will stand a fair chance to beat your opponents. Really.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Belisarius ]
This will be fun... :rolleyes:
Really, I have my doubts if this is a serious posting. It's a flamebait, if I ever saw one...
To keep it short: In SPWAW, the US army ain't that grand, and no matter what side you play you will stand a fair chance to beat your opponents. Really.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Belisarius ]
Got StuG?
-
Larry Holt
- Posts: 1644
- Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2000 10:00 am
- Location: Atlanta, GA 30068
JR,
I'll take a stab at your post.
It is not accurate that one if rocket tube malfunctions the entire system is out but that is a limitation of the game as a simulation. It is a battalion level game. It does not simulate down to the individual rocket tube level. You need to understand the limits of a simulation. The code could be reworked to do this but at what cost in a free game and at what added benefit of realism? Much cost, little added realism.
Side armor is in the game system. Paul Vebber has posted previously how this is done. I do not recall the exact details but its added on after the base is calculated IIRC.
As to American heroism. Heroism is an individual trait, no nation has a lock on it. You describe individual cases. These may be true but then again there are other cases that contradict what you list here. You should know that antedodal evidence is not good research.
You presume what you intend to argue for. There has been much publicity about DU but no science that backs claims made in the press. In fact the studies that have been done refute the rumors of DU induced problems. DU dust is only a hazard at the site of impact and there, the burning hulk and its attendant toxic threats from fuel, conventional ammo, etc. are of more concern than DU dust. Your claim that DU rounds only give a slight advantage is not factual. If you can show some sources that show DU penetration to be equal to conventional rounds or within the margin of error. I would like to see them.
Generally these forums are good places for people to exchange opinions. However for those opinions to carry weight they really need to be backed up by some good research or personal knowledge. I see a lack of both in your post. Merely posting negative opinions does not add much to the communal experience. Perhaps you can repost with some sources to back up your criticism.
I'll take a stab at your post.
It is not accurate that one if rocket tube malfunctions the entire system is out but that is a limitation of the game as a simulation. It is a battalion level game. It does not simulate down to the individual rocket tube level. You need to understand the limits of a simulation. The code could be reworked to do this but at what cost in a free game and at what added benefit of realism? Much cost, little added realism.
Side armor is in the game system. Paul Vebber has posted previously how this is done. I do not recall the exact details but its added on after the base is calculated IIRC.
As to American heroism. Heroism is an individual trait, no nation has a lock on it. You describe individual cases. These may be true but then again there are other cases that contradict what you list here. You should know that antedodal evidence is not good research.
You presume what you intend to argue for. There has been much publicity about DU but no science that backs claims made in the press. In fact the studies that have been done refute the rumors of DU induced problems. DU dust is only a hazard at the site of impact and there, the burning hulk and its attendant toxic threats from fuel, conventional ammo, etc. are of more concern than DU dust. Your claim that DU rounds only give a slight advantage is not factual. If you can show some sources that show DU penetration to be equal to conventional rounds or within the margin of error. I would like to see them.
Generally these forums are good places for people to exchange opinions. However for those opinions to carry weight they really need to be backed up by some good research or personal knowledge. I see a lack of both in your post. Merely posting negative opinions does not add much to the communal experience. Perhaps you can repost with some sources to back up your criticism.
Never take counsel of your fears.
-
monsternav
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Patuxent River MD, USA
- Contact:
1. You're right about that. It may be an inherant limitation of the game. I've had grenades malfunction. How can all 10-20 grenades in a squad go wrong at once?
2. Bring your facts and a reference to the oob forum. If you're right, they'll fix it.
3. a)Page 38 of the SPWaW manual: " The amount they add ranges from 100 percent to 300 percent of the skirt thickness, depending on the type of ammunition striking it.
b) The only HEAT round I know of for weapons are the 105mm howitzer armed tanks/SPG's (besides bazookas). They generally have a small number for bunker busting and self-defence.
c) Most nations had some type of sub-caliber penetrator. I don't know why you don't think the Americans didn't.
d) This is a war game forum, everybody knows what schurzen are.
4. I have never tried this, older SP games only let you put two units in a hex. Bridges supposedly have a limit to the number of units that can occupy it, but it hasn't worked in the past. We may be stuck with it the way it is. I don't know.
Take the rest of your drivel elsewhere.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: monsternav ]
2. Bring your facts and a reference to the oob forum. If you're right, they'll fix it.
3. a)Page 38 of the SPWaW manual: " The amount they add ranges from 100 percent to 300 percent of the skirt thickness, depending on the type of ammunition striking it.
b) The only HEAT round I know of for weapons are the 105mm howitzer armed tanks/SPG's (besides bazookas). They generally have a small number for bunker busting and self-defence.
c) Most nations had some type of sub-caliber penetrator. I don't know why you don't think the Americans didn't.
d) This is a war game forum, everybody knows what schurzen are.
4. I have never tried this, older SP games only let you put two units in a hex. Bridges supposedly have a limit to the number of units that can occupy it, but it hasn't worked in the past. We may be stuck with it the way it is. I don't know.
Take the rest of your drivel elsewhere.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: monsternav ]
Craig Homer<br />Semper Fidelis
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
Weapon breakdown is very generic. Same with some vehicle break downs (like motorcycles). Do you have details of the failure incidence of each type of rocket? I would be glad to see it. If not, you have to accept generic system failures by slot. The data to model to teh level you seek does not exist to my knowledge.
Penetration degradation depends on individual ballistic properties of different rounds. Lorrin Bird and Robert Livingston's WW2 Ballistics work has information to improve the modeling of penetration degradation with range. There previously has been insufficient information to properly perform those calulations. We use the same linear decay for all ammo in the game based on the function used in the original game. Lacking the information needed to specify each rounds rate of decay, we left the rate as it was in the original Steel Panthers game. There are many things in the game we wanted to upgrade but could not. Generic penetration decay is a failing of the original SP design, not our redesign, and one we will address in Combat Leader.
In general you will most penetration values about 10-15% higher than "book values" of pentrationin mm, that is because most armor did not perform to its "full RHA equivalency" when mass produced. Also the functions that determine "effective thickness" tend to on average overestimate by about 5-10%. So it "works out in the wash" that units have an accurate vulnerability to the limits of the accuracy of the data. Loorin and Roberts work will help us improve this greatly and I have had several discussions with Lorrin on these problems.
Armored skirts are indicated in the encyclopedia. Many armor ratings "look strange" becasue they represent a composite of several plates of various angle and thickness. So somtimes you will see familiar "book values" oter times you do not. Its a design call we made on each individual vehicel to best represent it.
Availabilty of ammo has been argued on these forums for over a year and the consenus is that we have teh availability generally correct, though the limits of unit avialability dates mean some are off a few months in availability, or linked to a specific vehicle type. Using reduced ammo will highly randomize availbility and generally reduce it.
In a 50 m hex you can line up a lot of equipment so stacking is effectively unlimited...if you are dumb enough to do so...hate to see whats left of your 40 Wurfrahmen if hit by a 155 shell...
As to the comments on the American Military, all I can do is laugh...
where is Ammo Sgt when we need her
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
Penetration degradation depends on individual ballistic properties of different rounds. Lorrin Bird and Robert Livingston's WW2 Ballistics work has information to improve the modeling of penetration degradation with range. There previously has been insufficient information to properly perform those calulations. We use the same linear decay for all ammo in the game based on the function used in the original game. Lacking the information needed to specify each rounds rate of decay, we left the rate as it was in the original Steel Panthers game. There are many things in the game we wanted to upgrade but could not. Generic penetration decay is a failing of the original SP design, not our redesign, and one we will address in Combat Leader.
In general you will most penetration values about 10-15% higher than "book values" of pentrationin mm, that is because most armor did not perform to its "full RHA equivalency" when mass produced. Also the functions that determine "effective thickness" tend to on average overestimate by about 5-10%. So it "works out in the wash" that units have an accurate vulnerability to the limits of the accuracy of the data. Loorin and Roberts work will help us improve this greatly and I have had several discussions with Lorrin on these problems.
Armored skirts are indicated in the encyclopedia. Many armor ratings "look strange" becasue they represent a composite of several plates of various angle and thickness. So somtimes you will see familiar "book values" oter times you do not. Its a design call we made on each individual vehicel to best represent it.
Availabilty of ammo has been argued on these forums for over a year and the consenus is that we have teh availability generally correct, though the limits of unit avialability dates mean some are off a few months in availability, or linked to a specific vehicle type. Using reduced ammo will highly randomize availbility and generally reduce it.
In a 50 m hex you can line up a lot of equipment so stacking is effectively unlimited...if you are dumb enough to do so...hate to see whats left of your 40 Wurfrahmen if hit by a 155 shell...
As to the comments on the American Military, all I can do is laugh...
where is Ammo Sgt when we need her
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
-
Supervisor
- Posts: 5160
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 12:00 am
>...(Kettenschürzen) which many german systems (Brummbär, Pzkfw IVj, Stug G, some Tiger systems) had as protection against HEAT-ammo...<
Actually it was for protection against Soviet anti-tank rifles. Just read this in Osprey New Vanguard #39 - "Sturmgeschutze (sp?) III & IV" by T. Jentz, et. al.
As for the rest of your post...well, whatever. :rolleyes:
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Al ]
Actually it was for protection against Soviet anti-tank rifles. Just read this in Osprey New Vanguard #39 - "Sturmgeschutze (sp?) III & IV" by T. Jentz, et. al.
As for the rest of your post...well, whatever. :rolleyes:
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Al ]
-
Jaques Rico
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Dresden/Germany
- Contact:
@ Larry Holt
While it is true that the penetration value of Uranium ammunition is greatly enhanced, I doubt that it was needed against irakian tanks. But there is a high danger for the crews by using it. Ive seen some reports in which they showed the amount of Uranium stored in the bones of american tank soldiers. And you should have seen some of their newborn children, they were hardly recognizable as humans anymore. But if you like I will look that reports about the victims of the uranium dust up.
And I would be really glad if you could tell me where that article about the calculation of the additional side armour plates can be found. The Url would be nice.
@AJH
No german troops in desert storm? Well, you may then tell me who cleared the last 3% of the irakian mines, which the american specialists couldnt find? I will help you a bit, it was a german unit...
@ monsternav
to 3c: Normally a granate can destroy the armored skirt. Than it will explode and the effect of the explosion will dissipate in the cavity between armored skirt and main armour. And that is the reason why I doubt that the calculation of the armored skirts in correctly done. I assume a sub-caliber penetrator is a grenade who can penetrade both armour plates. But such multiple warheads which can overcome the cavity between 2 armour plates were first invented in the 1980 (5 years more or less). They didnt exist in WW2. But there are much to much first hit kills by hitting on the side armour of systems with armoured skirts in Spwaw. (Or at least it seems so.)
Greetings
JR
While it is true that the penetration value of Uranium ammunition is greatly enhanced, I doubt that it was needed against irakian tanks. But there is a high danger for the crews by using it. Ive seen some reports in which they showed the amount of Uranium stored in the bones of american tank soldiers. And you should have seen some of their newborn children, they were hardly recognizable as humans anymore. But if you like I will look that reports about the victims of the uranium dust up.
And I would be really glad if you could tell me where that article about the calculation of the additional side armour plates can be found. The Url would be nice.
@AJH
No german troops in desert storm? Well, you may then tell me who cleared the last 3% of the irakian mines, which the american specialists couldnt find? I will help you a bit, it was a german unit...
@ monsternav
to 3c: Normally a granate can destroy the armored skirt. Than it will explode and the effect of the explosion will dissipate in the cavity between armored skirt and main armour. And that is the reason why I doubt that the calculation of the armored skirts in correctly done. I assume a sub-caliber penetrator is a grenade who can penetrade both armour plates. But such multiple warheads which can overcome the cavity between 2 armour plates were first invented in the 1980 (5 years more or less). They didnt exist in WW2. But there are much to much first hit kills by hitting on the side armour of systems with armoured skirts in Spwaw. (Or at least it seems so.)
Greetings
JR
Ammo is right here Paul .. your covered .. maneuver . I am on the 50....
Actually the standing joke around German III Corp the 5 years I supported them was..
How do you tell an American Squad from a German Squad ? ........ When a shot is fired the Germans hit the dirt ..and the Americans all jump up looking around asking "what was that" .. it's German Joke .. they usually just make fun of folks from Hessia .. i don't know
Actually the standing joke around German III Corp the 5 years I supported them was..
How do you tell an American Squad from a German Squad ? ........ When a shot is fired the Germans hit the dirt ..and the Americans all jump up looking around asking "what was that" .. it's German Joke .. they usually just make fun of folks from Hessia .. i don't know
"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which
Welcome to the forum, Jacque: Many of the posters here are vets of lots of other boards. If you came here to have some flame fun, you'll be really diasppointed. You know, my Uncle's favorite war story is about how he spent two weeks running from the German's during the battle of the Bulge. His big concern was how to protect his Xmas cookies from is buddies. Funny thing about the cookies..It took just three days to get From San Fransico, Ca to the Front lines...Crazy Americans!...LOL
All Hail Marx and Lennon
-
Jaques Rico
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Dresden/Germany
- Contact:
@ Paul Vebber
First I would like to thank you for informing me about the reasons the penetration calculation is done like its done.
But about the armored skirts some things remain unclear:
For example, you wrote: "Armored skirts are indicated in the encyclopedia. Many armor ratings "look strange" becasue they represent a composite of several plates of various angle and thickness. So somtimes you will see familiar "book values" oter times you do not. Its a design call we made on each individual vehicel to best represent it."
I looked in the encyclopedia and found no clear indication which unit has AS and which not. For example in the encyclopedia the Pzkfw IVh and IVj are displayed with AS and the game stats a side armour of 30mm. But in truth only the Pzkfw IVj had these. And as a result the effective side armour rating of the IVj should be a bit higher (approximately 50) than of the IVh, but that is not the case!
And about the stacking abilities in 50x50m. In such an area it is in reality not possible to stack more than 4 to 6 Wurfrahmen, if they should still be able to fire.
Well, in the game the AI shoots very foreseeable. Against a human player I probably woulndt place to much units in one hex, but against the AI there is no danger in doing so.
Oh and about american military, I often laught too about that.
@ AI
I explained the reason behind the armored skirts further above. It works of course against other anti tank weapons in the same way as described there. But you are right, HEAT ammo was so scare, that is was no true danger.
Greetings
JR
First I would like to thank you for informing me about the reasons the penetration calculation is done like its done.
But about the armored skirts some things remain unclear:
For example, you wrote: "Armored skirts are indicated in the encyclopedia. Many armor ratings "look strange" becasue they represent a composite of several plates of various angle and thickness. So somtimes you will see familiar "book values" oter times you do not. Its a design call we made on each individual vehicel to best represent it."
I looked in the encyclopedia and found no clear indication which unit has AS and which not. For example in the encyclopedia the Pzkfw IVh and IVj are displayed with AS and the game stats a side armour of 30mm. But in truth only the Pzkfw IVj had these. And as a result the effective side armour rating of the IVj should be a bit higher (approximately 50) than of the IVh, but that is not the case!
And about the stacking abilities in 50x50m. In such an area it is in reality not possible to stack more than 4 to 6 Wurfrahmen, if they should still be able to fire.
Well, in the game the AI shoots very foreseeable. Against a human player I probably woulndt place to much units in one hex, but against the AI there is no danger in doing so.
Oh and about american military, I often laught too about that.
@ AI
I explained the reason behind the armored skirts further above. It works of course against other anti tank weapons in the same way as described there. But you are right, HEAT ammo was so scare, that is was no true danger.
Greetings
JR
-
Jeff Norton
- Posts: 506
- Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: MD, USA (You're not cleared for specifics...)
- Contact:
JR,
You can dangle the hook, so, I'll bite...
1) Yup, the Tiger was impressive.
2) Okay, it could beat Shermans. But, there were over 20,000+ of them made. How many Tigers???
But, remember: Who was left standing when the smoke cleared? Who was flying over Germany (and, in most cases, with nothing left to bomb...) when it was over? Who was there when it seemed the Reds would stream thru Fulda and straigt to Frankfurt?
Yea, NATO is a group of countries bound by a common interest for self-preservation and defense (at the time) of Western Europe, but they needed US GI's to give them the backup to put on a brave face for the WP. Or else, the WP would have rolled over them and the Atlantic would be the only thing that could have stopped them.
American brothers have 'crossed the lake' twice last century. First time, they said they were repaying Lafayette, second, they were participating in 'the Great Cursade'. We might not have been in it at the start, but we finished it. And, they stayed on after it was time to leave. Could Berlin survived if the Air Bridge was not created and maintained? We will never find out, because they did what needed done. We encouraged West Germany to recreate their Army for the purpose of self-defense, even though the German populus did not like the idea.
If you must know, I was a GI. Even trained with German Infantry in Hammelburg. They told us we were wild-men and would hate to be on the wrong side, again.
In a flame war, leave the BIC at home and bring a flamethrower and NOMEX suit, 'cause its gonna get hot, baby!
-Jeff
You can dangle the hook, so, I'll bite...
1) Yup, the Tiger was impressive.
2) Okay, it could beat Shermans. But, there were over 20,000+ of them made. How many Tigers???
But, remember: Who was left standing when the smoke cleared? Who was flying over Germany (and, in most cases, with nothing left to bomb...) when it was over? Who was there when it seemed the Reds would stream thru Fulda and straigt to Frankfurt?
Yea, NATO is a group of countries bound by a common interest for self-preservation and defense (at the time) of Western Europe, but they needed US GI's to give them the backup to put on a brave face for the WP. Or else, the WP would have rolled over them and the Atlantic would be the only thing that could have stopped them.
American brothers have 'crossed the lake' twice last century. First time, they said they were repaying Lafayette, second, they were participating in 'the Great Cursade'. We might not have been in it at the start, but we finished it. And, they stayed on after it was time to leave. Could Berlin survived if the Air Bridge was not created and maintained? We will never find out, because they did what needed done. We encouraged West Germany to recreate their Army for the purpose of self-defense, even though the German populus did not like the idea.
If you must know, I was a GI. Even trained with German Infantry in Hammelburg. They told us we were wild-men and would hate to be on the wrong side, again.
In a flame war, leave the BIC at home and bring a flamethrower and NOMEX suit, 'cause its gonna get hot, baby!
-Jeff
-Jeff
Veritas Vos Liberabit
"Hate America - love their movies" -Foos Babaganoosh - Anchor - Jihad Tonite
Veritas Vos Liberabit
"Hate America - love their movies" -Foos Babaganoosh - Anchor - Jihad Tonite
Greetings and salutations,
I am debating on whether or not to bite on the "hook" presented here. Part of me wants to stick up for my country when it is blasted, but I'm not sure I could do so in the extremely level-headed manner I have seen here so far (very impressive, BTW). I also do not have anywhere near as much knowledge about the military and military equipment as is regularly displayed here.
Another part of me wants to ignore the flame on the US military...you know...to ignore that which does not deserve a reply. Maybe I am already breaking that little "rule" by posting this. That's a question for the philosophers.
Just a little bit of a moral dilemma on my part here, that's all. Sorry this little rant doesn't really add anything to the discussion.
I am debating on whether or not to bite on the "hook" presented here. Part of me wants to stick up for my country when it is blasted, but I'm not sure I could do so in the extremely level-headed manner I have seen here so far (very impressive, BTW). I also do not have anywhere near as much knowledge about the military and military equipment as is regularly displayed here.
Another part of me wants to ignore the flame on the US military...you know...to ignore that which does not deserve a reply. Maybe I am already breaking that little "rule" by posting this. That's a question for the philosophers.
Just a little bit of a moral dilemma on my part here, that's all. Sorry this little rant doesn't really add anything to the discussion.
"Welcome to the human race."
-Snake Pliskin
-Snake Pliskin
well Jaques, your biggest challenge here will be that this flame material has been debated here so much that its more tired than my horse after a big jumper round.
I will make a confession though vis-a-vis American heroism. While playing the Saving Private Ryan scenerio, i did manage to save Private Ryan but could'nt resist aiming some friendly fire at Tom Hank's character.
Unfortunately i missed. :p
A piece of advice too. It serves no useful purpose to simply say something is wrong and then not give specific info it. you gave a few examples but not enough
finally, coupling flame material in with game critisims will cause you to not be taken very seriously.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Nikademus ]
I will make a confession though vis-a-vis American heroism. While playing the Saving Private Ryan scenerio, i did manage to save Private Ryan but could'nt resist aiming some friendly fire at Tom Hank's character.
Unfortunately i missed. :p
A piece of advice too. It serves no useful purpose to simply say something is wrong and then not give specific info it. you gave a few examples but not enough
finally, coupling flame material in with game critisims will cause you to not be taken very seriously.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Nikademus ]
-
Jaques Rico
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Dresden/Germany
- Contact:
@Jeff Norton
Well it was a victory, but surely no heroical victory. If you win while having a material advantage of more than 10 to 1 and you still take heavy losses, I would say there is something wrong.
And about GI´s as Europes backbone, please!! Without the threat of a nuclear world war no GI would have stopped the russian army.
I too was in the army, but of course not in the invincible american one. And I too was in Hammelburg. I have a question for you. Can you tell me why american soldiers allways went over the combat course without weapons and Luggage? Do they fight with their bare hands, so that they dont need such utensils? Or perhaps they take branches and stones for weapons.
It may well be that the GI´s are wild men, but Ive seen them defeated in exercises often enough. You should have seen the great american heroes after the 200km march with luggage in Belgium. That was a sight to behold.
Greetings
JR
Well it was a victory, but surely no heroical victory. If you win while having a material advantage of more than 10 to 1 and you still take heavy losses, I would say there is something wrong.
And about GI´s as Europes backbone, please!! Without the threat of a nuclear world war no GI would have stopped the russian army.
I too was in the army, but of course not in the invincible american one. And I too was in Hammelburg. I have a question for you. Can you tell me why american soldiers allways went over the combat course without weapons and Luggage? Do they fight with their bare hands, so that they dont need such utensils? Or perhaps they take branches and stones for weapons.
It may well be that the GI´s are wild men, but Ive seen them defeated in exercises often enough. You should have seen the great american heroes after the 200km march with luggage in Belgium. That was a sight to behold.
Greetings
JR
-
Jaques Rico
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Dresden/Germany
- Contact:
@ Jeff Norton
As a little afterthought:
What are 20.000 Shermans against more than 34.000 T34? A force able to stop them? Barely!
Do you know the Sherman M48? If you want to have something to laugh about, use this system. It needed a gasoline motor to start its diesels engine. Given the fact that it was build after WW2 one wonders a bit about american military science.
Greetings
JR
As a little afterthought:
What are 20.000 Shermans against more than 34.000 T34? A force able to stop them? Barely!
Do you know the Sherman M48? If you want to have something to laugh about, use this system. It needed a gasoline motor to start its diesels engine. Given the fact that it was build after WW2 one wonders a bit about american military science.
Greetings
JR
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
C'mon now guys, this is an exhibition in trollish-ness, not a competition...
...PLEASE no wagering...
On skirts the encyclopedia indicates if a vehicel has skirts right under the line about smoke dischargers - its a statment not a value. as to there effect I took a bunch of bazzokas vs PzIVG and PzIVH
The results for side turrest and hull penetrations were:
23 or 35 hits destroyed the PZIVG and 8 caused damage. 4 failed detonate properly (hit a piece of something on impact or otherwise landed cock-eyed so the jet did not form) 1 of which still stunned the crew
With skirts:
12 of 37 hits destroyed the skirt protected PzIVH 4 caused damage and 21 had no effect 4 of which stunned the crew.
31 of 35 damaged or killed without skirts
16 of 37 damaged or killed with skirts
That only considered Side Hull or Turret hits. I would say teh skirts ofer a air bit of protection. Is it "realistic"...who knows!
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
...PLEASE no wagering...
On skirts the encyclopedia indicates if a vehicel has skirts right under the line about smoke dischargers - its a statment not a value. as to there effect I took a bunch of bazzokas vs PzIVG and PzIVH
The results for side turrest and hull penetrations were:
23 or 35 hits destroyed the PZIVG and 8 caused damage. 4 failed detonate properly (hit a piece of something on impact or otherwise landed cock-eyed so the jet did not form) 1 of which still stunned the crew
With skirts:
12 of 37 hits destroyed the skirt protected PzIVH 4 caused damage and 21 had no effect 4 of which stunned the crew.
31 of 35 damaged or killed without skirts
16 of 37 damaged or killed with skirts
That only considered Side Hull or Turret hits. I would say teh skirts ofer a air bit of protection. Is it "realistic"...who knows!
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
-
Greg McCarty
- Posts: 231
- Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: woodbury,mn,usa
.....
More things to come.
And now some anecdotes about the dreaded (american) heroism, which is so often described in this message board.
1. Battle of Tebourba 01.12-03.12.1942
3 Tiger E of the 1./501 and less than 20 Pzkfw III of the 10.PD destroyed 134 tanks of the Crusader- and General Lee-types.
2. I know about an event when 4 Tiger E encountered 16 Sherman M4. The Tigers shot down the first 4 Sherman tanks. After that the other 12 tanks stopped and were abandoned in panic by their crews. You can find a better description of that event in the book "Tiger - Die Geschichte einer legendären Waffe 1942-45" which is the THE standard book about the Tiger weapon. I will look the exakt date and location up later und post it then. However such behaviour shows how brave american troops truly were in their fight for freedom, peace and pin up girls when they didnt have a better friend to enemy ratio than 10:1.
I too know some really good anecdotes about american troops in NATO-exercises. Care to know how 4 german fast-boats were able to defeat a complete american cruiser task group consisting of 2 cruisers and 4 destroyers? Or how one german M113 with a group of 12 soldiers was able to defeat 4 american heavy tanks and 60 soldiers?
Oh, and if the american army is really so great, somebody may explain to me, why they in Vietnam used Agent Orange in areas where their own troops were stationed without (!) telling them of the consequences. (Cancer etc.) And its interesting how history repeats itselve. During desert storm american tanks used uranium-ammunition and nobody told the men, that the uranium dust, which is set free when such a grenade hits, will, after they inhaled it, stay in their bones. Some members of that tank crews now have cancer, some have fathered very sick children...
Well they fought with the M1A1, which is really crap compared to the Leopard 2 Mk5, but still, the idea to poison ones own troops to give them a (very slight) advantage in a fight strikes me as ridicilous.
And a nice bonus question: Which american admiral commanded during WW2 his ships in a dress?
And wasnt it Gregory "Pappy" Boington who said: "Show me an american hero and I´ll prove he´s a bum." That quote is better known without the word "american" in of the "hero". I wonder why.
Greetings
JR[/QB][/QUOTE]
You know JR, many of us here have spent a good deal of time reading about military history. People that spend a lot of time in this forum will hardly find these items you point out, well, a new revelation.
Yup! we know about the cowardice... and we
know about the ineptitude. Interrupted by an occasional heroic incident. We didnt have an exclusive lease on any of it though. Oh, and uh, we know about the uranium. Been well documented on television. Saw it myself!
The U.S. army; well, you know, we have our good days and our bad. One moment ya got
Audie Murphy, the next moment; Sad Sack.
How the hell did we manage at all? Search me. You're right. We probably had no business even bothering in any of those conflicts.
Sorry if you're finding some things about
SPwaw less than satisfactory. But by God,
we'll keep tryin to have fun anyhow.
One last thing.... Prozac! Available by
prescription from one of a dozen preditory
American drug companies. Done wonders for my
friends! Give it a shot!
More things to come.
And now some anecdotes about the dreaded (american) heroism, which is so often described in this message board.
1. Battle of Tebourba 01.12-03.12.1942
3 Tiger E of the 1./501 and less than 20 Pzkfw III of the 10.PD destroyed 134 tanks of the Crusader- and General Lee-types.
2. I know about an event when 4 Tiger E encountered 16 Sherman M4. The Tigers shot down the first 4 Sherman tanks. After that the other 12 tanks stopped and were abandoned in panic by their crews. You can find a better description of that event in the book "Tiger - Die Geschichte einer legendären Waffe 1942-45" which is the THE standard book about the Tiger weapon. I will look the exakt date and location up later und post it then. However such behaviour shows how brave american troops truly were in their fight for freedom, peace and pin up girls when they didnt have a better friend to enemy ratio than 10:1.
I too know some really good anecdotes about american troops in NATO-exercises. Care to know how 4 german fast-boats were able to defeat a complete american cruiser task group consisting of 2 cruisers and 4 destroyers? Or how one german M113 with a group of 12 soldiers was able to defeat 4 american heavy tanks and 60 soldiers?
Oh, and if the american army is really so great, somebody may explain to me, why they in Vietnam used Agent Orange in areas where their own troops were stationed without (!) telling them of the consequences. (Cancer etc.) And its interesting how history repeats itselve. During desert storm american tanks used uranium-ammunition and nobody told the men, that the uranium dust, which is set free when such a grenade hits, will, after they inhaled it, stay in their bones. Some members of that tank crews now have cancer, some have fathered very sick children...
Well they fought with the M1A1, which is really crap compared to the Leopard 2 Mk5, but still, the idea to poison ones own troops to give them a (very slight) advantage in a fight strikes me as ridicilous.
And a nice bonus question: Which american admiral commanded during WW2 his ships in a dress?
And wasnt it Gregory "Pappy" Boington who said: "Show me an american hero and I´ll prove he´s a bum." That quote is better known without the word "american" in of the "hero". I wonder why.
Greetings
JR[/QB][/QUOTE]
You know JR, many of us here have spent a good deal of time reading about military history. People that spend a lot of time in this forum will hardly find these items you point out, well, a new revelation.
Yup! we know about the cowardice... and we
know about the ineptitude. Interrupted by an occasional heroic incident. We didnt have an exclusive lease on any of it though. Oh, and uh, we know about the uranium. Been well documented on television. Saw it myself!
The U.S. army; well, you know, we have our good days and our bad. One moment ya got
Audie Murphy, the next moment; Sad Sack.
How the hell did we manage at all? Search me. You're right. We probably had no business even bothering in any of those conflicts.
Sorry if you're finding some things about
SPwaw less than satisfactory. But by God,
we'll keep tryin to have fun anyhow.
One last thing.... Prozac! Available by
prescription from one of a dozen preditory
American drug companies. Done wonders for my
friends! Give it a shot!
Greg.
It is better to die on your feet
than to live on your knees.
--Zapata
It is better to die on your feet
than to live on your knees.
--Zapata
