|
It all makes sense now... He found Tokyo Bay Fortress!
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 06:58 |
|
|
Gort posted:Is a six-foot soldier even desirable? I'd have thought having less to shoot at, being able to cram into smaller foxholes, being easier to drag off the field, eating less and so forth would have been more useful characteristics as a soldier than "Can lift heavier weights more easily". i forgot where exactly i read it, probably in beevor's stalingrad but in it they said the first men to die were all the soldiers over 6 feet on the march to siberia from malnutrition and exposure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
And the Soviets had such a wealth of manpower that generally all their tank crews were 5'3" or less, which allowed them to make the tanks slightly smaller/lower/lighter than they would have been otherwise. Which is probably why as noted a few posts ago it was probably harder and harder to find quality recruits for the armored divisions more recently as nutrition improved.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
   The day starts poorly for one of our subs.   They bring fighter support on their suicide run today. It doesn't help.  Our Carrier friend continues to wander, I may be able to organise some response in a few days.   The Chinese troops retreat along the rail line while I want to advance north. I'll detach a small unit to stop them cutting my supply lines.   It's always nice to kill more planes than you lose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
   Oh yeah, I was going to put these guys back on the day shift.  Yeah, it looks like these guys are planning on sweeping up through Singapore.  YOU LEAVE MY TANKERS ALONE!  Huh? Did someone hear something just then? Must have been a bump in the road.  One step closer to points in China!  An old ship kill to make me feel better. It doesn't start with the letters CV, so it doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
dtkozl posted:i forgot where exactly i read it, probably in beevor's stalingrad but in it they said the first men to die were all the soldiers over 6 feet on the march to siberia from malnutrition and exposure. Also George Orwell was 6'2 and got shot through the neck in the Spanish Civil War, probably related. E: and if memory serves, the average British soldier in ww2 was 5'9, for comparison simplefish fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Dec 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Also George Orwell was 6'2 and got shot through the neck in the Spanish Civil War, probably related. Sounds like it would have been way worse if he was 5'8.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
Comrade Koba posted:Sure didn’t help him avoid a bullet to the face, though. Ah, but think about how many bullets probably missed him before that one
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 09:33
|
|
|
20 December 1943 What was I saying about American torpedoes? The Japanese destroyer Fuyo is sunk by USS Puffer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:20 December 1943 It's really easy to do this in the original Silent Hunter from 1996. When the destroyer gives chase from your initial torp spread against the convoy, all you have to do is submerge to periscope depth to prevent them from shooting you with their main gun. They'll continue to give chase, and with you being submerged they're going to be a good 20+ knots faster. Turn away from them and set up the course until you're at a nose-to-tail chase. Wait for them to close to 700 yards or so, then shoot a torp from your rear tubes (with zero-deflection). It'll be just far enough for the torp to arm, but too close for the destroyer to turn away. You'll score a hit every single time. This isn't nearly as reliable with the newer Silent Hunters, since the DDs will shoot at you continuously.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
It was still possible in SH3, you probably could do it with periscope down too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
.
Gort fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Dec 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Gort posted:If you needed someone strong to help carry out a repair you could always get one of the infantry who should always be accompanying the tank to do it. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
Wouldn't be a WW2 thread without the biotruths On that note, was the eastern front the largest number of women to ever serve on the frontline in a conflict ever? Kinda feel like it was, but nobody ever talks about that which is kind of insane in our military-worshipping culture. Wonder if it got swept under the rug as part of the red scare? E: before someone says it, yes I know they only served in sniper/pilot/extremely limited units. Even still though? S w a y z e fucked around with this message at 00:40 on Dec 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Gort posted:I always thought the obvious solution there would be to have the female soldiers crew the tanks. If you needed someone strong to help carry out a repair you could always get one of the infantry who should always be accompanying the tank to do it. Dude, I'm a tiny Asian person and I was able to help change tracks just fine. I'd rather not have an untrained retard touching my vehicle. e: to be clear, any repair that actually requires outside assistance is going to be too severe for some random grunt to help with in the first place. 3 DONG HORSE fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Dec 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
With modern tools, there isn't much maintenance that you need big gigantor dudes for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
The correct answer here is that if you're capable of using the T-34's gearbox, you're probably strong enough to do any low-level maintenance work on it as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:The correct answer here is that if you're capable of using the T-34's gearbox, you're probably strong enough to do any low-level maintenance work on it as well. This is the correct answer to any tank related discussion
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Well now I want to know more about the T-34's gearbox.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
Deep Dish Fuckfest posted:Well now I want to know more about the T-34's gearbox. it wasn’t very good
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
David Corbett posted:it wasn’t very good look just because you needed a hammer to change gears doesn't mean it didn't WORK you try building a gearbox when the germans have forced you to relocate to siberia
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Well, truth is truth minus steroids or other chemicals. 60/100 upper body strength for athletic persons, 40/100 for non-athletic. But the size differential is more important anyway, not like a guy could change gears without a hammer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 04:06
|
|
|
I've never seen a really technical or scholarly work on the Soviet transmissions (i've never even seen something as simple as model numbers), but yes they had serious problems. About halfway through the war the T-34 was updated with a 5-speed transmission instead of the original 4-speed and this was supposedly much more reliable. I think a persistent problem from an engineering standpoint is that the same overworked transmission was used from early prototypes through the final production designs which carried heavier armor and armament. I have seen anecdotes about using hammers, or that the driver would have the tank commander reach down and him help shift. Again, someone more knowledgeable or with access to better sources can correct me, but I think I read once that the Soviets particularly liked the transmission on some of the Caterpillar-brand heavy equipment (bulldozers?) that the US supplied them decades earlier, and simply scaled up this design for their larger tanks. And if you thought they had problems with the gearboxes on the T-34, the KV-1 and KV-2 were even worse off, and often the crew could not get the heavier model to shift higher than second gear. Also famously the traverse motor on the KV-2 was so underpowered, that the vehicle had to be nearly level or the turret wouldnt move.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
  My tanker is not so lucky today.  I have the feeling this is going to become a normal report in the coming years.  The fight back at Jaluit begins, and with the enemy low on supplies, the destruction of a Marine Division I on the cards!  I feel good knowing I'm about to wipe out a large, well trained force.  A battleship? Why do you torment me so?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
Yeah, I guess I phrased that badly. Gort fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Dec 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
Started up the big campaign. This turn’ll be a lot of clicking. Witp logistics simulator engage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
It's worse bothering to make a deal out of it anyway. So, will Grey be able to take out the marines at Jaluit before they get reinforced? Woodchip posted:Started up the big campaign. This turn’ll be a lot of clicking. Let us know how it went! Which side are you? RA Rx fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Dec 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Don't worry that was mild as far as biotruths go. Recently started a campaign myself as Japan. RaRx's World in Flames allied navy cheerleading has me thirsting for blood. That said I'm awful at this game and I estimate it's taken me ~16 hours to set up the first turn following the setup spreadsheet. And I haven't even done industry or pilot adjustments yet. Honestly I can see doing this once and keeping the save file, but I can't imagine the level of insanity that would go into doing the first turn over and over for something like a PBEM game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
It really isn't that bad once you have done it for each nation once and know what you are doing. Getting over that hump is the hard part.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
This rime it’s allies. So many subs and cargo to update
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
  This is a different target for them. Quite far south!  The carrier is still hanging around I see.  These guys are bloody lost!  A slower day today, but their AV is dropping like a stone.  I wonder if I should sally some cruisers to get those troop transports outside of Rabaul. Eh. Why not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
dylguy90 posted:Recently started a campaign myself as Japan. RaRx's World in Flames allied navy cheerleading has me thirsting for blood. That said I'm awful at this game and I estimate it's taken me ~16 hours to set up the first turn following the setup spreadsheet. And I haven't even done industry or pilot adjustments yet. Ahh, so that's what you meant! Good luck killing the Enterprise! The Royal Navy and US nukes and subs are just too beautiful for me to root for Japan, except in China, but I can't help but love the Yamashiro and Hiei. In retrospect though, it would've been fun if the IJN had lasted longer, like here in Grey's game. An early Operation Downfall might be worth it though. You can do it, Grey! Kill a few Essexes, hold the islands and keep the perimeter up until 1945. Edit: Would the allied AI nuke the west coast if you did a suicide capture of LA/SF right after they spawn? RA Rx fucked around with this message at 07:00 on Dec 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
I'm gonna invade Los Angeles and San Francisco and post the dumb screenshots in this thread just to spite you watch me
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 06:54
|
|
|
So, a potential full division of Marines to take out. That might not be that bad a trade particularly given I think at this point the US only had like three or four fully commissioned Marine divions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 07:04
|
|
|
They lost a lot of guns in today's attack and the one before it, that would explain the loss in AV once you factor in the lack of supply. It seems impossible, but a US marine division is going to lose an invasion and be completely wiped out by the Japanese going into 1944.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 07:49
|
|
|
this whole war does not put a good light on the marines. they probably won't continue to exist as an independent branch after the war. they tried that in real life but the corps had good pr people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
Where is the land based air to kill carriers that just wander into the Java Sea? The World Wonders.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 08:11
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Mycroft Holmes posted:this whole war does not put a good light on the marines. they probably won't continue to exist as an independent branch after the war. they tried that in real life but the corps had good pr people. To be fair, a lot of heads are also going to be rolling in the Navy too for getting a lot of marines killed by proxy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 08:37
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes posted:this whole war does not put a good light on the marines. they probably won't continue to exist as an independent branch after the war. they tried that in real life but the corps had good pr people. On that note, would the navy also be folded into the army as some kind of combined US Military? The amount of ships that went down in the South Pacific in this timeline is astronomically high to the point that the equivalent of several army divisions have gone down with their transports.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 08:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 06:58 |
|
|
What do the battle odds actually represent? Grey's attackers had like 30 to 1 odds and only managed to come out about even in the fighting with the numbers steadily swinging towards the Americans during subsequent fights, until this last one where he had less than 2 to 1 and managed to out perform the marines. If barely. What the actual gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 09:01
|
|