|
Endman posted:Do you mean to imply that a game set in the first world war where you sit in the mud surrounded by your own poo poo, dead rats and mentally scarred husks of your comrades before standing up for two seconds and getting bonked in the head by a machinegun round wouldn't be FUN!? But realism is fun https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBvhUYI6T5U
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I dream of a game that can one day replicate the glory of the Irish Alchemists cloak in A Field In England. That thing is simply gloriuous. I'm unfamiliar with this. Care to elaborate?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:34
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I'm unfamiliar with this. Care to elaborate? The costumes are displayed in the Making Of Videos.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
truly a more enlightened age
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
I thought Mount and Blade was really fun from a gameplay perspective but I could never complete any of the quests because every character and location has a Polish name that is 1000 characters long with no vowels and I can't keep straight who I am supposed to kill/marry or where. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:I thought Mount and Blade was really fun from a gameplay perspective but I could never complete any of the quests because every character and location has a Polish name that is 1000 characters long with no vowels and I can't keep straight who I am supposed to kill/marry or where. I would just sort of ride around being a bandit until some noble insulted me and then crush him, burn his towns, and scatter his armies to the wind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:The second. That can be anything as casual as a pair of guys throwing down in a tavern because all insults demand either lawsuits or murder How would a mercenary react if he were insulted by a peasant, a woman, or royalty? Is a peasant too far beneath you to fight, and is a prince too far above you to challenge?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 07:22
|
|
|
Chamale posted:How would a mercenary react if he were insulted by a peasant...Is a peasant too far beneath you to fight... quote:a woman, quote:or royalty?...is a prince too far above you to challenge? But like, royal royalty? That he would probably have to take...although there's a Wallenstein anecdote about this (there are tons of Wallenstein Anecdotes and they're all gold): The army is travelling and they snag a dude for plundering more or less at random. Wallenstein orders him hanged at once. Some officers do this on the march--it sets an example and it makes everyone involved feel like they're solving the problem. Wallenstein especially is...touchy. "At least let me die guilty, then," says the guy, draws his sword, and runs at him. Wallenstein orders him released, since he admires his spirit. "I think we've frightened him enough," he says. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 10:59 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 07:44
|
|
|
Hunterhr posted:This game is a pro click. Just running around trying to save the countless wounded and drag them to safety in a maelstrom. Sometimes your guys charge sometimes the enemy does and it always results in a bloody never ending mess. It's made by Bay 12 Games (Dwarf Fortress and Liberal Crime Squad), if it was anything other than a horrible, blood-soaked (and possibly drunken) mess, I'd be terribly surprised.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 07:52
|
|
|
Japanese Explosive Ordnance: Army and Navy Ammunition Army Projectiles: Part 10 Type 100 8cm (88mm) High Explosive A.A. Long-Pointed Projectile  Weight of complete round: Not Available Weight of complete projectile (with fuze): Approx. 19.6 lbs Weight of empty projectile (with Aux Fuze): 7.4kg Weight of filling: 0.9kg Filling: TNT Diameter at bourrelet: 88mm Length of projectile (w/o fuze): 298mm Length of propellant case: 570mm Length of assembled round (w/o fuze): 804mm Diameter of base of case: 100mm Width of rotating band: Forward - 8mm Aft - 8mm Distance between rotating bands: 6mm Fuzing: Type 100 mechanical time fuze (combination time and impact) with an auxiliary detonating fuze. The auxiliary fuze is the same as that used in the 7cm (75mm) H.E.A.A. projectile Type 90. Used in: Type 99 8cm A.A. gun. This is a gun modeled after one of the Germans 88mm guns. Case: -Length: 567mm -Diameter at base: 137mm -Construction: The case is made of drawn brass and is machined for about 2 and 3/4 inches above the rim - It is a rimmed case with a slight taper and a bottleneck. Propellant: No.16 cylindrical, 2,330g 9cm (90mm) High Explosive Projectile  Weight of projectile, filled: 7.79kg Weight of filling: 0.59kg Filling: Crude TNT Diameter at bourrelet: 90mm Length overall (w/o fuze): 265.1mm Length of projectile body (w/o nose piece): 209.6mm Length protruding from case (w/o fuze): 246.1mm Width of rotating band: No Data Fuzing: -Type 88 instantaneous nose fuze (Howitzer - mortar type) -Type 88 short delay nose fuze (Howitzer - mortar type) Used in: This is an antiquated weapon classified as a mortar by the Japanese by virtue of length of tube, muzzle velocity, etc., but bearing only a remote resemblance to other Japanese mortars. It is breech-loading, using an interrupted thread breechblock, and employs projectiles embodying the conventional features of design of common breech-loading artillery pieces. Remarks: The body of this projectile is painted black overall. There is a shallow groove immediately below the bourrelet hich may be painted yellow or green. 9cm (90mm) High Explosive Semisteel Projectile  Weight of projectile, filled: 7.86kg Weight of filling: 0.65kg Filling: TNT Diameter at bourrelet: 90mm Length overall (w/o fuze): 263.5mm Length protruding from case (w/o fuze): 246.1mm Width of rotating band: 15.9mm Fuzing: -Type 88 instantaneous nose fuze (Howitzer - mortar type) -Type 88 short delay nose fuze (Howitzer - mortar type) Used in: This is an antiquated weapon classified as a mortar by the Japanese by virtue of length of tube, muzzle velocity, etc., but bearing only a remote resemblance to other Japanese mortars. It is breech-loading, using an interrupted thread breechblock, and employs projectiles embodying the conventional features of design of common breech-loading artillery pieces. Remarks: The projectile is painted black overall with a 1/2 inch green or yellow band before the rotating band. The fuze adapter is painted red. 10cm (105mm) Ammunition There are three 105mm howitzers and four 105mm guns in use by the Japanese Army. These guns are designated 10cm by the Japanese but have an actual bore diameter of 105mm. The projectiles are in most cases interchangeable for use in all these weapons and are assembled with different size cases for use in the different weapons. Only one weapon, the Type 14 year A.A. gun uses fixed ammunition, all the other weapons using semifixed ammunition. In this section the cases and projectiles will be treated seperately as was done with 75mm ammunition.       Type 91 10cm (105mm) High Explosive Projectile  Weight of projectile, filled (w/o fuze): 15.9kg Weight of filling: 2.3kg Filling: Cast TNT Diameter at bourrelet: 104mm Length overall (w/o fuze): 427mm Length protruding from case (w/o fuze): 389.7mm Width of rotating band: 22.2mm Fuzing: -Type 88 instantaneous nose fuze (Howitzer - mortar type) -Type 88 short delay nose fuze (Howitzer - mortar type) Used in: -Type 91 howitzer, case 9 and 1/2 inches -Type 88 field gun, case 11 and 1/8 inches -Type 92 field gun, case 29 inches -Type 14 year field gun, case 18 and 1/8 inches Type 91 10cm (105mm) High Explosive Long Pointed Projectile  Weight of projectile, filled (w/o fuze): 15.7kg Weight of filling (white composition): 2.3kg Filling: 1.Cast TNT 2. White composition of ammonium nitrate, cyclonite, and guanidine nitrate Diameter at copper bourrelet: 104.2mm Length overall (w/o fuze): 501.7mm Length protruding from case (w/o fuze): 423.9mm Width of rotating band: 22.2mm Width of copper bourrelet: 20.6mm Fuzing: -Type 88 instantaneous nose fuze (Howitzer - mortar type) -Type 88 short delay nose fuze (Howitzer - mortar type) Used in: -Type 91 howitzer, case 9 and 1/2 inches -Type 88 field gun, case 11 and 1/8 inches -Type 92 field gun, case 29 inches -Type 14 year field gun, case 18 and 1/8 inches -Type 14 year A.A. gun (fixed ammunition), case 22 and 1/4 inches Remarks: This projectile has been recovered with either a copper or a machined bourrelet 12cm (120mm) Shrapnel Projectile  Weight of projectile, filled (w/o fuze): 19.88kg Ejecting Charge: Black Powder contained in the base of the projectile and in a central brass tube. Shrapnel Filling: 539 lead balls (12.5g each) packed in a resin matrix. The balls are separated from the ejection charge by a steel disc which rests on a shoulder in the projectile cavity. Diameter at bourrelet: 119mm Length overall (w/o fuze): 314.3mm Length protruding from case (w/o fuze): 293.1mm Width of rotating band: 9.5mm Fuzing: -Type 88 35-second combination fuze Used in: -Type 38 Howitzer Case: -Length: 83mm -Diameter of base: 128mm -Weight (empty): 3 pounds, 4 and 5/8 ounces -Construction: The brass case is straight sided and of the rimmed type Propellant: The propellant is in two increments, each encased in a silk bag with a small ignition charge sewed to the bottom of each bag. The first increment is nitrocellulose in 5/16 inch square flakes and the second increment is nitrocellulose in 1/18 inch square flakes. Weight of propellant: -1st increment: 11 oz -2nd increment: 6 and 3/8 oz 12cm (120mm) Armor Piercing High Explosive Projectile  Weight of projectile, filled and fuzed: 20kg Weight of filling: 1.3kg Filling: Picric Acid Diameter at bourelet: 119mm Length overall: 379.4mm Length protruding from case: 339.7mm Width of rotating band: 11.1mm Fuzing: -Type 88 small base fuze (Howitzer - Mortar type) Case: -Length: 83mm -Diameter of base: 128mm -Weight (empty): 3 pounds, 4 and 5/8 ounces -Construction: The brass case is straight sided and of the rimmed type Propellant: The propellant is in two increments, each encased in a silk bag with a small ignition charge sewed to the bottom of each bag. The first increment is nitrocellulose in 5/16 inch square flakes and the second increment is nitrocellulose in 1/18 inch square flakes. Weight of propellant: -1st increment: 11 oz -2nd increment: 6 and 3/8 oz Used in: -Type 38 Howitzer Next Time: 15cm Ammunition Edit: Fun Fact, the IJA had an Anti-Air mortar round that is quite interesting. Jobbo_Fett fucked around with this message at 11:51 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 09:41
|
|
|
100 Years Ago It's a day of hanging threads. At some point I'm going to go back and drop in references to the formation of the Special Organisation (a band of Ottoman Turkish quasi-paramilitaries, a strange mixture of professional specialists and literal violent criminals and murderers who were paroled in order to join the force, which is itself a Matter of Some Debate concerning exactly what it was and what it was for) and the Tunnelling Companies. That notwithstanding, there's something very interesting going off in Van, and the Tunnelling Companies are nearly ready to try to blow up a hill in the Ypres salient.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 12:15
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:Did you ever watch The Last Valley? I think I recommended it to you 1-3 years ago. Amazing movie starring Michael Caine, and I'd really like to hear just how much that low-budget production gets wrong. One of my favorite historical fiction movies. Michael Caine's attempt at a German accent is wonderful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:The second. That can be anything as casual as a pair of guys throwing down in a tavern because all insults demand either lawsuits or murder, or as formal (almost medieval) as this thing: Brb, gonna go watch The Duellists again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 14:36
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:I thought Mount and Blade was really fun from a gameplay perspective but I could never complete any of the quests because every character and location has a Polish name that is 1000 characters long with no vowels and I can't keep straight who I am supposed to kill/marry or where. It doesn't make it clear, but you can easily track who people are using the quest book and clicking the blue names. Just a matter of hoping the AI is still there and not loving around on the other side of map or in gaol. Phanatic posted:Brb, gonna go watch The Duellists again. The best bit of that movie is showing just a brief window of utterly loving misery of the retreat from Moscow, complete with eager harassing Cossacks. Odd choice of leads though. Also, War movie/TV nerds, no accents or bad accents? Personally, I don't mind bad accents because at the end of the day it is mostly entertainment that takes a lot of liberties with the history and settings. Some guy trying to sound German or French isn't that off putting. A clipped English accented Russian however throws me right off. Then again, everything about that loving movie throws me right off. HEY GAL posted:Kill him or severely injure him. He's beneath you, since being a soldier is "an honorable class" by definition, but nobody is so far beneath you that you can't throw down with them. Seriously HBO, why aren't you going to use this. Even if the original set burns down you can work around it.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:It has quests? Sounds like you'd fit into the 30 Years War just fine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:ahahahahaha you know nothing rabadh And your regiment hasn't extorted enough villages to be able to pay him back? A shameful regiment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
So, US Grant was actually really, really competent as a general? I grew up in the US south and I remember lots of stuff in American History about how amazing Lee was (and he was) but what I recall of Grant from those classes was just that he had lots of troops and equipment and basically bludgeoned down his opposition at any cost. However, now that I've worked through Shelby Foote's The Civil War A Narrative I don't see how that analysis can possibly stand up to scrutiny over his body of work. He had what? One major set back during the first day of Shiloh and after that was pretty much dominant in everything he did. Sure, at the end in Virginia he threw men and material at Lee but when you are faced with the devil then you take the sure certain path to victory and screw finesse because look what happened to all those fools who came before you. You have to be really good to know when you are probably out-classed (and everyone was telling him he was out-classed from the moment he got there) and so martial your advantages such that you can still pretty much guarantee victory. That series of maneuvers to get around Lee's right and south into Virginia during the overland campaign seems like something very few could have pulled off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:40
|
|
Murgos posted:So, US Grant was actually really, really competent as a general? To quote a recent book review: quote:Southern writers eager to preserve Robert E. Lee's reputation promulgated the notion that the North won the Civil War by mindless application of greater manpower and industrial strength, not by superior generalship, and that Grant's only distinction is that he understood how to bludgeon. This stereotype does not fit the facts; nor is it any longer the mainstream view of military historians. Mr. Bonekemper rightly attacks it. See also: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...istory_and.html
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
If you look at that campaign, Grant does keep trying to maneuver around Lee, but Lee is just too good a general to allow that. Another important factor was that Virginia has lots of rivers and they all run east-west, making it slow to move north-south. Until 1864 every offensive in the east failed, even Lee's.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
Grant also had to ensure Lee could not reinforce Hood against Sherman while Sherman caved the West's head in.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
Grant's Vicksburg campaign was a thing of beauty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
Also Grant stands out among other commanders of the Army of the Potomac because he broke the cycle of 'launch a campaign, lose one battle, go home'. His willingness to keep on trading blows beyond anyone else is precisely the thing that the Union needed to correct what it had been lacking. Complaints about 'bludgeoning' are just loser's code for being out-fought.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
The US Navy didn't beat the Imperial Japanese Navy because they were better, they just had more of everything, and would have totally lost if all of their units had lined up against their opposite numbers in a duel to the death. See also Nazi Germany and their complaints about the Red Army.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:"Realistic" is often the antithesis of "fun" in computer games. Literally any match against the Khergits. I can only recall winning once.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
BurningStone posted:If you look at that campaign, Grant does keep trying to maneuver around Lee, but Lee is just too good a general to allow that. It's true that Grant didn't collapse Lee's right and march into Richmond but a more realistic goal, and the one achieved, was to force Lee to commit his forces to entrenchments. Once Lee lost the ability to take the initiative that army was pretty much doomed. The south simply did not have the means by then to maintain it. Probably mostly due to lack of will, Sherman's march shows quite clearly that the south still had abundant resources. They people just weren't passing it on to the army.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Also Grant stands out among other commanders of the Army of the Potomac because he broke the cycle of 'launch a campaign, lose one battle, go home'. His willingness to keep on trading blows beyond anyone else is precisely the thing that the Union needed to correct what it had been lacking. Complaints about 'bludgeoning' are just loser's code for being out-fought. And it's funny that it took so long, because Lincoln had been screaming for a general who would do that for years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 18:25
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Tomn posted:The US Navy didn't beat the Imperial Japanese Navy because they were better, they just had more of everything, and would have totally lost if all of their units had lined up against their opposite numbers in a duel to the death. Well you say that, but Taffy 3......
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Tomn posted:The US Navy didn't beat the Imperial Japanese Navy because they were better, they just had more of everything, and would have totally lost if all of their units had lined up against their opposite numbers in a duel to the death. I guess if they all just lined up it would negate the repeated failures in Japanese intelligence and strategic planning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:Grant's Vicksburg campaign was a thing of beauty. This a million times. And if you have the chance, read Grant's account of the thing (in his memoirs).
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Tomn posted:The US Navy didn't beat the Imperial Japanese Navy because they were better, they just had more of everything, and would have totally lost if all of their units had lined up against their opposite numbers in a duel to the death. In a different war, Yamato would have been a terrifying thing, which is why I give it a bit more credit than Bismarck. Both were expensive as hell, but Bismarck was laid down with the mindset of "I should get a boat". I don't think there is a Japanese equivalent of Wehraboos. It's a very Western cultural trend to bring up what is essentially a K:D ratio when talking about actual wars. A fanboy of the IJN would probably look at senseless battles like Surigao Strait and view it as a brave and courageous sacrifice. JaucheCharly posted:Literally any match against the Khergits. I can only recall winning once. Khergits are frightening at first, but they really struggle in castles and with high-level troops. The AI for horse archers is pretty underwhelming.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
Tomn posted:See also Nazi Germany and their complaints about the Red Army. Anyway, I think you also miss something significant here. If you look at the raw numbers, in 1942-1944, the Soviets only outnumbered the Germans by 40%, 70% and 90% respectively. But if you look at every major battle, however, the ratios of force are very different. Picking some random battles: Third Battle of Kharkov: 5:1 Kursk: 2.5:1 Dnieper-Carpathian: 3.4:1 Relief of Leningrad 1.6:1 (However, a 5:1 advantage in tanks and aircraft) Bagration: 3.4:1 (50:1 (!) advantage in tanks) Vyborg-Petrozavodsk Offensive: 6:1 It's not about overall numbers. 70% superiority in force will not create a genuine breakthrough. It's actually about effective Soviet strategy that enabled them to concentrate decisive numbers of forces against weak German areas. Back in 1941, when the Germans were winning, they often also had local superiority in numbers. But people talk in praise about blitzkrieg and *its* concentration of strong forces against weak points, while disparaging the Soviets for doing exactly the same thing. War's not about seeking out fair fights. Back in WWI, the Germans were able to win against the Russian Empire despite facing a much greater numerical disadvantage. Fangz fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Tomn posted:The US Navy didn't beat the Imperial Japanese Navy because they were better, they just had more of everything, and would have totally lost if all of their units had lined up against their opposite numbers in a duel to the death. Eeeeh the US had a considerable qualitative advantage in a number of respects, particular AA guns and so on as the war dragged on.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Kill him or severely injure him. He's beneath you, since being a soldier is "an honorable class" by definition, but nobody is so far beneath you that you can't throw down with them. What are your recommendation(s) for readable histories of the 30 years war? Actually - I would love it if everyone posted their reading recommendations for their conflict of choice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
I mentioned Shelby Foote's "The Civil War: A Narrative" earlier. Everything you didn't think you wanted to know about the American Civil War. It's a daunting undertaking but oh so good. If you want to read about Taffy 3 which has been mentioned repeatedly over the last few pages then, "The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors" is the one for you. "Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway" is also really good and gets repeated a lot around here. Right now I am working on "Castles of Steel" by Robert Massie about the Naval battles of WWI and so far I really like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
I'm reading "Neptune's Inferno," which is a very good book on the naval campaign at Guadalcanal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Murgos posted:I mentioned Shelby Foote's "The Civil War: A Narrative" earlier. Everything you didn't think you wanted to know about the American Civil War. It's a daunting undertaking but oh so good. You should also watch Ken Burns Civil War documentary if you have netflix, if only to experience Shelby Foote's amazing southern accent.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Also, War movie/TV nerds, no accents or bad accents? Personally, I don't mind bad accents because at the end of the day it is mostly entertainment that takes a lot of liberties with the history and settings. Some guy trying to sound German or French isn't that off putting. The ideal, imo, would be to have characters speak in the English-language equivalents to their own regional accents in their native tongue, but that'd be a bit tricky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
Masters of the Air by Donald Miller is a great look at the Anglo-American strategic bomber offensive against Germany.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 21:00
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:If a presumed Russian or French speaker is speaking English through the wonders of Make People Speak English So Audiences Can Understand Things rather than They Are Foreigners Speaking English Of Their Own Volition, then why should they have accents? It's not a war film (well, mostly), but The Grand Budapest Hotel is set in a fictional ex-Habsburg Interwar-era republic, and everybody just speaks with English or American accents rather than forced German or Hungarian or Slavic accents, and it works well for the movie. I'm happy to read subtitles if that was the case rather than force the cast to speak english. Also, in case it was not clear with my previous post. gently caress Enemy At The Gates.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 16:06 |
|
|
Phanatic posted:Brb, gonna go watch The Duellists again. TheChimney posted:What are your recommendation(s) for readable histories of the 30 years war? HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Apr 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 21:54
|
|