Cyrano4747 posted:Exactly this. It's great as an inspiration to learn about the subject the problem is idiots who take a game as s 1:1 representation of reality. I want somebody to do a movie where a naive time traveler goes back into the past and discovers that people of the past were just slightly thinner, smaller, dirtier and hairier versions of people of the present.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 07:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 12:29 |
|
|
I think it's more than just the idiots who think tank combat in War thunder is representative of reality though- any sane person knows they're full of poo poo if they cite that. More insidious is stuff like the linear tech tree in Civ or a Paradox game getting a generation of people accustomed to the idea of historical progress as a straight thing from a to b and that without the wheel or copper working you can't have researched opera and so must be inferior as a culture. I guess that's not something that started with Civ but it's definitely been reinforced by it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
Way back when I was in high school, there was a guy on a forum I went to who was convinced that instead of reforming after the Boshin War and opening up, Japan should have closed the borders again and then just "teched up" for a few decades then conquer the rest of the world. I guess he meant Emperor Meiji should have set the research slider to max and stacked research bonuses or something. EDIT: In hindsight I'm definitely blaming way too much Civ on that line of thinking. Don Gato fucked around with this message at 08:25 on Nov 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:His exploitation force was 8,000 cavalry and 30,000 infantry. OK, going to ask another question here. Sorry about the 88 thing; that was a stupid joke and I feel sort of embarrassed for the honest discussion/answers that followed it. What's the deal with all this cavalry still seeing tactical use? Why was it even on the TOE at the time? Was it because the infrastructure was already extant? Did cavalry consume fewer strategic resources than mechanized units? Was it just kind of a holdover from the Russian Civil War/Soviet-Polish War/the entirety of history up to that point? How did the cavalry of 1940 fight? I'm kind of guessing that they served mostly as dragoons with maybe one or two charges pushed through in the course of the war, but I'd love to hear from someone who actually knows what they've talking about. I believe this is Ensign_Expendable's territory. e: the gently caress? Grand Prize Winner fucked around with this message at 08:52 on Nov 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
Cavalry isn't as resource intensive as vehicles/tanks, is the short short answer, I believe. Also, games for representation is great and my, for years now, go-to for WW2 squad-level stuff is ASL. Not only are all the scenarios unique and spread across the globe, but they feature plenty of different units, each of which have their own entries with a small historical summary, as well as a briefing and an aftermath text entry. I think it could use another review or two to make the info even more accurate than it is, but the game does a great job at making such a small scale of war fun. "Hey, why is the Panther D's movement points in red? Oh, that's cause it represents the thing catching on fire due to leaking/bad fuel lines.  "
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 08:46
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I want somebody to do a movie where a naive time traveler goes back into the past and discovers that people of the past were just slightly thinner, smaller, dirtier and hairier versions of people of the present.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 08:52
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I want more of this please holy gently caress Ok.   Edit: I also have the B-17 and A-10 books, if you want to see those. Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 09:25 on Nov 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 09:18
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
Fort:  I can't find the Hog book. Also I thought more of the bombers had formation-leader paint schemes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 09:40
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Cavalry isn't as resource intensive as vehicles/tanks, is the short short answer, I believe. Horses are incredibly resource intensive. They need 15000 calories per day (in hay  ) to not die, and the the same amount to do hard labor like pulling about guns and broken down tanks. You can't as easily transport fodder for horses as you can fuel, and you can't box up your horses in storage if you find you don't need them for a month or to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 09:57
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:and you can't box up your horses in storage if you find you don't need them for a month or to. You can't box but you can can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 10:14
|
|
|
By 1940, whenever you see "Cavalry" replace in your mind with "Dragoons" or "Semi-Motorized Dragoons."
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 10:29
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:By 1940, whenever you see "Cavalry" replace in your mind with "Dragoons" or "Semi-Motorized Dragoons." Though Patton and Rommel were writing their books at the time, the Blitzkrieg was pretty much based on cavalry tactics, and Patton designed the last sword adopted by the US Army before he got into tanks. And by 1970 it's helicopter dragoons, and in 1990 it's proper heavy cav again.There's a reason the Brits call their tankers "Lancers."
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:Though Patton and Rommel were writing their books at the time, the Blitzkrieg was pretty much based on cavalry tactics, and Patton designed the last sword adopted by the US Army before he got into tanks. And by 1970 it's helicopter dragoons, and in 1990 it's proper heavy cav again.There's a reason the Brits call their tankers "Lancers."
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
One positive thing about horses is that they are far more tolerant of bad roads than a truck is. Any trail will suffice and even deep snow is manageable. Logistically a cavalry unit is much more demanding than a motorized unit, you need at least one horse per cavalryman and then more horses to haul fodder for them all. Eg. Finnish cavalry company (eskadroona) TO&E included five fodder wagons and three vets (one trained veterinarian and two farriers) and each platoon included three guys whose job was just to look after the horses when the platoon dismounted.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 11:02
|
|
|
Horses won't throw their drat XO through a window either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 11:04
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:One positive thing about horses is that they are far more tolerant of bad roads than a truck is. Any trail will suffice and even deep snow is manageable. Logistically a cavalry unit is much more demanding than a motorized unit, you need at least one horse per cavalryman and then more horses to haul fodder for them all. Eg. Finnish cavalry company (eskadroona) TO&E included five fodder wagons and three vets (one trained veterinarian and two farriers) and each platoon included three guys whose job was just to look after the horses when the platoon dismounted. until they break feet/muscles and you have to shoot them
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 11:22
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:until they break feet/muscles and you have to shoot them BBQ? Hell yes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 11:24
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:until they break feet/muscles and you have to shoot them such is the life of a cavalryman ...oh you meant the horses!
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 11:37
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:such is the life of a cavalryman
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 11:46
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:i will never be happy until they bring cuirassiers back  
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 11:51
|
|
|
The british may put a man on a horse, but they will never have proper cavalry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 11:54
|
|
|
Kemper Boyd posted:The british may put a man on a horse, but they will never have proper cavalry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 12:08
|
|
|
Koramei posted:This stuff infests these kinds of WW2 discussions pretty much everywhere on the internet, doesn't it? Whereas I literally only ever read about that in this thread... I guess I should get some perspective. Yeah basically. I spend the entire rest of my time listening to people go "Um sweaty there were no elite soviet units???  also the king tiger was impenetrable and shermans need a special rule to show they blow up more!"EDIT: Don Gato posted:Way back when I was in high school, there was a guy on a forum I went to who was convinced that instead of reforming after the Boshin War and opening up, Japan should have closed the borders again and then just "teched up" for a few decades then conquer the rest of the world. I guess he meant Emperor Meiji should have set the research slider to max and stacked research bonuses or something. The really funny thing is if he played a proper wargame, he would know that Hearts of Iron shows that limiting your exports damages your research bonus. spectralent fucked around with this message at 14:06 on Nov 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
How much is 15k calories worth of hay in kgs?
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
Normally I follow the rule of "the sillier the uniform, the bigger the badass" but I'm willing to bet these guys suck extremely Kemper Boyd posted:The british may put a man on a horse, but they will never have proper cavalry. Those are not men, they are English
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
hot take: no protestant great power had good cav
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:OK, going to ask another question here. Sorry about the 88 thing; that was a stupid joke and I feel sort of embarrassed for the honest discussion/answers that followed it. Do you have the stuff to make a unit of it? If yes than you make a unit of it, this is late 1941 in the USSR. Barring one charge by Italian cavalry I can think of, dragoon stuff is going to be the vast majority of it. My best guess is they were trying to keep up with the tank brigade, I don't have details of what they did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:hot take: no protestant great power had good cav https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcFuInmnYNQ
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I have to admit, occasionally I get annoyed by the total derision that this thread generally has for the Werhmracht (among others), it feels kind of one sided. But then reading poo poo like that guy's comments, or Raenir Salazar's argument with that dude- now I understand. This stuff infests these kinds of WW2 discussions pretty much everywhere on the internet, doesn't it? Whereas I literally only ever read about that in this thread... I guess I should get some perspective. It's worth noting that Wehraboos don't really worship the Wehrmacht per se. They worship the ideal of the superhuman force of arms the Wehrmacht is supposed to represent, and for the antagonist they pose the ideal of the hordes of the Great Enemy. This ideal force cannot, by definition, be flawed, just like the ideal enemy cannot, by definition, be virtuous in any way, and can only prevail through numbers and "cheating" (definition of "cheating" depends on the culture the Wehraboo is from). It has surprisingly little to do with the actual German army at the time, or their enemies, or, well, reality. Under slightly different circumstances, the same train of thought that glorifies virtuous German arms would deride Germans as a degenerate race that's wasn't worthy of the role they were given, and say that the torch was rightly seized from them by their vanquishers (hello US and USSR/Russia) just like "Germany" "seized" "the glory" of the "ancient world" from the "degenerate" descendants of Greeks/Romans/whoever. Hell, good old Adolph rejected the German people in his final moments. Fascist take, and take, and take, even from those they call their own, until there is nothing left to take and they are cast aside into the mud. I don't think this thread ever claimed that the army that fought most of the rest of the world for half a decade was completely incompent. But fascist organization of just about anything was a clusterfuck that would have been hilarious if it weren't for the bodycount it caused, and the sheer contrast between the ideal you see the Wehraboos rant about and the reality they refuse to acknowledge is such an easy target to mock, doubly so when you look at the ideological insanity that drove it all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Normally I follow the rule of "the sillier the uniform, the bigger the badass" but I'm willing to bet these guys suck extremely A quarter of the globe subjugated without men 
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
So how did the Brits handle the logistics of putting horse cavalry on to the continent during the Napoleonic wars? If horses are that resource intensive shipping them had to be the biggest pain in the rear end.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 15:43
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Normally I follow the rule of "the sillier the uniform, the bigger the badass" but I'm willing to bet these guys suck extremely Nope, these positions are pretty much given to serving professional soldiers still and the elite in the modern British Army are equally hard well trained bastards. Only different from the average soldier is they got the swankier post. Some still are the elite and well connected but these guys are trained for modern war and know how to tank it up with the rest. I expect with the recent conflicts they have men who have seen action. KildarX posted:So how did the Brits handle the logistics of putting horse cavalry on to the continent during the Napoleonic wars? If horses are that resource intensive shipping them had to be the biggest pain in the rear end. They bought what they could and hired/seized the rest of the horses from the continent, you'll always lose horses taking them overseas. The quality wasn't great but the men riding sometimes had the same fragility. SeanBeansShako fucked around with this message at 16:08 on Nov 20, 2016 |
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:hot take: no protestant great power had good cav Germany and the USA. Armored cav. And air cav.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
I found an interesting article detailing the history of a certain armoured train during the end of the 1st World War to the Japanese occupation of China!
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Germany and the USA. Armored cav. And air cav. Noted officially protestant country, USA
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
the best cav the us produced wasn't even christian, and that's a fact
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
OfficialGBSCaliph posted:Noted officially protestant country, USA Let me tell you about the Mexican-American war period. When your enemy is able to make one of their best units out of deserters from you to them because you're such a needless dick to Catholics, you're pretty Protestant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the best cav the us produced wasn't even christian, and that's a fact The Zoroastrian dragoons kicked rear end in 1812.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comancheria https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Sioux_Nation
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 12:29 |
|
|
the JJ posted:I remember getting really shirty with some people in here who were convinced that Civilization was a great way to learn about history. To be fair, in my last Civ IV game I conquered the world with Assyria. Which was an accurate retelling of world history. Now excuse me, I have to bring some animals to our local Ashur-temple for some emergency sacrifice. Apparently there's some trouble in Ninive and our priests think more sacrifice will help keep the gods on our side.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2016 18:01
|
|
