|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I'm not fully sold on the Matilda just because of how slow it was. Sure, it was competitively armed and well armored, but tactical mobility was poor due to the top speed and weight. It got a good rep due to the armor, and in a WoT featureless plain that might be fairly useful, but in an actual by-God tank battle I'm not convinced. It was KV-tier impregnable; the degree of armouring outstripped anything the Germans had in common service at the outset of the war. Strategically, not going to make a difference at all; even a vehicle that's totally impregnable can be bypassed, or just surrounded and wait to run out of fuel, and you're right being slow as poo poo wouldn't help. But probably a huge pain in the rear end regardless.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:36 |
|
|
spectralent posted:Yeah pretty much those. A tank that in no way resembles a cruiser tank becomes one if you label it so? Can't buy this for a second. Arquinsiel posted:Crusader, Cromwell and Comet, to varying degrees at varying times. The Crusader is debatable but for the early desert war where it fought nothing but the earlier marks of Panzers II through IV it was at least competitive. Infantry tanks were closer to conventional tanks of other countries, it's a big stretch to say they were only possible because useless cruisers were also around. The crusader was equivalent to the Panzer III, except where the III could go anywhere, the crusader would keep breaking down. Probably because its chassis and engine couldn't support its only advantage. A bad tank. Also a tank designed 3 years after the Panzer III. How exactly do you define a cruiser tank? I can only see them as the specific products of cruiser doctrine, otherwise any fast tank suddenly becomes a cruiser even if the designers had zero intention to follow interwar British design principles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
What the gently caress is this? It looks like some sort of dual flintlock shotgun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
The Soviets didn't like it that much, which is basically good enough for me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Flintlocks: the tool of capitalist running-dog lickspittles!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
spectralent posted:It was KV-tier impregnable; the degree of armouring outstripped anything the Germans had in common service at the outset of the war. Strategically, not going to make a difference at all; even a vehicle that's totally impregnable can be bypassed, or just surrounded and wait to run out of fuel, and you're right being slow as poo poo wouldn't help. But probably a huge pain in the rear end regardless. Sure, the tank was a pain in the rear end, but just look at the Battle of France '40 edition. Tactical superiority doesn't matter if you can't do the other things right, and building a great, expensive, heavy, slow tank probably inhibits you from doing the other things right.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:How exactly do you define a cruiser tank? I can only see them as the specific products of cruiser doctrine, otherwise any fast tank suddenly becomes a cruiser even if the designers had zero intention to follow interwar British design principles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:What the gently caress is this? It looks like some sort of dual flintlock shotgun. I think that's what it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Mazz posted:It's always fun to try and explain to people who grew up watching the Hitler Channel how the Soviets post-1943 (give or take) were actually extremely loving good at modern combined arms warfare. The Soviets had a greater degree of mechanization in their armed forces than the Reich or its allies, but tell that to a certain kind of person who wants to talk to you about "human wave" attacks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:I prefer to think of it this way: August Storm is the time trial mode of armored warfare. That operation -- August Storm is a misnomer-- was like the war equivalent of an efficient, well-planned Stalinist show trial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
The only thing remotely similar to August Storm is Gulf War 1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
 The black night always triumphs!  Can someone tell me what the gently caress is this? Because it looks like a two-handed sword that you can also use as a pole-axe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:So I'm envisioning a unit mounted on frigging John Deeres, 18 wheelers and yellow schoolbuses going into action. Is, uh, that really what they do? It seems a bit...rustic. Our very own Valmet tractors, the same state company that created the Finnish assault rifle RK-62. This was a experiment on having 4x4 drive, dubbed 'Homotin' by conscripts. You might catch the meaning.  It evolved over time...  This one has been converted to a halftrack, pulling some munitions. Under other circumstances it might be towing an anti-tank platoon with their recoilless rifles or a rifle platoon. Notice the riders still have Suomi SMGs, old Mosin Nagants and SMGs were the mainstay of Finnish infantry, especially reservists, for a long time. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:The Soviets had a greater degree of mechanization in their armed forces than the Reich or its allies, but tell that to a certain kind of person who wants to talk to you about "human wave" attacks. I don't see how anyone gets into that mindset, when if you look at Bagration or August Storm, they just such brilliantly planned and executed operations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:32
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:What the gently caress is this? It looks like some sort of dual flintlock shotgun. It's two muskets taped together son.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:I don't see how anyone gets into that mindset, when if you look at Bagration or August Storm, they just such brilliantly planned and executed operations. That's because that kind of person has never heard of either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:I don't see how anyone gets into that mindset, when if you look at Bagration or August Storm, they just such brilliantly planned and executed operations. racism / anti-communism with a big ole side of ignorance, mostly
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:
I think that when you see a bizarre, badly unbalanced weapon with unnecessary edges and a weird decorative shape, it's almost always a ceremonial/parade/display piece.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:I don't see how anyone gets into that mindset, when if you look at Bagration or August Storm, they just such brilliantly planned and executed operations. People are horribly bad at understanding military history and equipment in general, the other day I had somebody online tell me that the Pak 44 was equivalent to the M256. For those of you who aren't modern military equipment spergs, this is what an M256 is stuck on; 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
I mean... it's roughly the same bore? Yeah, totally the same gun 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
that sure is a tank
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:I mean... it's roughly the same bore? Yeah, totally the same gun
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:I don't see how anyone gets into that mindset, when if you look at Bagration or August Storm, they just such brilliantly planned and executed operations. Their knowledge is things happened in the east, Enemy at the Gates, and things based on bitching by German commanders that they always seemed to get attacked by superior numbers of Soviets (a much bigger disparity than they had over the front, which should set alarm bells ringing but apparently 11 time zones means literally limitless people). Translation, the Soviets got a reputation for having ludicrous dudes because they so badly fooled the Germans they were still fooled by the time they wrote their memoirs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:People are horribly bad at understanding military history and equipment in general, the other day I had somebody online tell me that the Pak 44 was equivalent to the M256. Hoooly poo poo, that's dumb. Hey guys, the Spitfire had eight guns while the F-15 has just one 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
Have some quotes;quote:Yup. It is basically a rifled version of the latest modern Rheinmetal 120mm smoothbore: quote:Clearly the metallurgy and materials used have changed, which increases barrel life and reduces weight, but the performance isn't that dissimilar other than one being smoothbore; they nearly the same caliber and length. Of course the recoil mechanism is quite different because of the advancements in technology too. quote:If you look at the link he used about the projectiles for the modern 120mm gun the sabot is combustible, so there is no loss from it's discarding. Edit: link so you can see morons got internet
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Their knowledge is things happened in the east, Enemy at the Gates, and things based on bitching by German commanders that they always seemed to get attacked by superior numbers of Soviets (a much bigger disparity than they had over the front, which should set alarm bells ringing but apparently 11 time zones means literally limitless people). Plus the Russian Steamroller had been a staple of European thinking for almost a century by that point. If nothing else, it was a convenient explanation for the German generals as to how they could have possibly lost the war (seeing how they had excellent soldiers, outstanding tanks and the objectively best generals in the world).
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Plus the Russian Steamroller had been a staple of European thinking for almost a century by that point. If nothing else, it was a convenient explanation for the German generals as to how they could have possibly lost the war (seeing how they had excellent soldiers, outstanding tanks and the objectively best generals in the world). Technically yes, but Rommel never fought the Russians.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:What the gently caress is this? It looks like some sort of dual flintlock shotgun. If you ever get the chance, visit the Royal Armouries at Leeds in the UK. They have so many stupid loving guns. I'm not sure if the weird flintlocks are best or whether I like the punt guns the most.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
What about the Puckle Gun? I want to learn more about the Puckle Gun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
Endman posted:What about the Puckle Gun? I want to learn more about the Puckle Gun. It's a crank operated six-nine chamber anti-popery device. Seems pretty obvious to me? E: To clarify, a device to oppose popes, not a device to facilitate antipopery. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Aug 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
Square bullets for the non christians.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Plus the Russian Steamroller had been a staple of European thinking for almost a century by that point. If nothing else, it was a convenient explanation for the German generals as to how they could have possibly lost the war (seeing how they had excellent soldiers, outstanding tanks and the objectively best generals in the world). Also, Russian hordes pouring through the Fulda gap makes a good argument for why the military's budget needs to be raised, again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Square bullets for the non christians. What kind of Christians were Christian enough to be shot at with regular bullets? Was it only the proper kinds, or did they admit that even the Eastern Orthodox heretics deserve a proper round bullet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:What kind of Christians were Christian enough to be shot at with regular bullets? Was it only the proper kinds, or did they admit that even the Eastern Orthodox heretics deserve a proper round bullet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 09:43
|
|
|
Does anyone know how well the square bullets would have worked? I assume 'not very'?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 10:05
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Does anyone know how well the square bullets would have worked? I assume 'not very'? I dunno, I imagine it'd be something like discout bin hollow-point ammo if it hits.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 10:15
|
|
|
laconian if
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 10:17
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Edit: link so you can see morons got internet alternatehistory.com Well there's your problem right there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:How old is it? And ofc, post pics! Not a lot of old stuff other than undated dry stone walls sadly. The walls are rad though but nothing milhist related. Might have a wander and take some pics of the rad landscape though but doesn't seem relevant to the thread. Edit: well, we might have found some stone tools when we were working in the garden and there is viking age and medieval archaology around but mostly in museums now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 11:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:36 |
|
|
Did you take pics of the tools? Palaeolithic archaeology was my previous life before the CO stuff
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 11:49
|
|
