|
https://mobile.twitter.com/mcmoynihan/status/1552309024732991488
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 08:53 |
|
|
Weka posted:Also from an ethical one, as it would be much easier to kill Americans. The real heroes of the vietnam war: the soldiers who fragged their officers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 21:50
|
|
|
No wonder he got cucked by the beer summit
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 22:00
|
|
|
this might be really broad but does anyone have any favorite military history books? just started one about The Somme
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 23:11
|
|
|
Shattered Sword by Parshall and Tully is about Midway and features a neat example of scholarship in one language not matching that if another, and Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors by James D. Hornfischer about the colossal fuckup that was the Battle off Samar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 01:15
|
|
|
Shattered Sword is my favorite, absolutely. Strong recommend. Most fun: Eye-Deep in Hell by John Ellis. My favorite war history, perhaps it's not military history exactly but it is about a war and it does feature lots of people who were in the military, is The Good War by Studs Terkel. I don't trust anyone's opinion about American involvement in WW2 unless I know they've read The Good War
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 05:20
|
|
|
i'm not much of a military history guy but i grabbed Civil War Infantry Tactics: Training, Combat, and Small-Unit Effectiveness from the library one day and found it fascinating
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 07:24
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:The real heroes of the vietnam war: the soldiers who fragged their officers. I’m sure a few of those was because the officer tried to stop the troops from committing war crimes on the regular though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 08:09
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:this might be really broad but does anyone have any favorite military history books? just started one about The Somme I'm gonna throw out as a very memorable title "Enduring the Whirlwind" by Gregory Liedtke. It's essentially one gigantic debunking of the myth that the German Army in the Eastern Front after 1941 was severely understrength, as a deflection used by certain persons to distract from later German defeats (i.e., the Ostheer was unable to take Stalingrad because it just didn't have enough troops). The author goes through a long statistical analysis of orders-of-battle, replacement/reinforcement rolls, inventories of equipment, and so on and so forth, and manages to credibly establish that Germany was in fact able to rebuild its army in the East to at-or-near parity with its Barbarossa status. Ergo, the Axis lost because they were plain outfought.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 09:00
|
|
|
With all the recent scholarship showing how the Eastern Front was actually completely different than the popularly known Nazi account of events (what a surprise) I am half expecting it to be revealed soon that the Romanian army actually punched above its weight and outperformed the Germans on at least some metrics. As opposed to the popular conception of a trash fire that failed at defending the flanks causing Paulus' encirclement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 09:20
|
|
|
the gigantic Soviet offensives in and around Smolensk in September 1941 that depleted Army Group Center was, as far as I can tell, largely invisible to Western eyes until the Soviet archives were opened
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 09:24
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:With all the recent scholarship showing how the Eastern Front was actually completely different than the popularly known Nazi account of events (what a surprise) I am half expecting it to be revealed soon that the Romanian army actually punched above its weight and outperformed the Germans on at least some metrics. As opposed to the popular conception of a trash fire that failed at defending the flanks causing Paulus' encirclement. That came up with this lecture/presentation. I watched it a while ago so I can't remember many details, but what I remember is that Romanians were active and motivated participants that the Germans often made use of, and were also a convenient scapegoat for the Germans' failures. When you read Beevor's book on Stalingrad he makes them out to be medieval peasants given rifles. Then the Germans inexplicably trust them to guard an incredibly important flank at Stalingrad. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-IA2K8ADkY
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 09:34
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:*monkey's paw curls as you die falling into a vat of molten steel* Stalin origin story?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 10:56
|
|
|
I replayed Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa recently and in light of recent scholarship about the Eastern Front it... doesn't hold up well. Shame since it's such an innovative war game. Wonder if we'll ever see an Eastern Front game where the Soviets are counterattacking like mad from 1941 onwards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 11:07
|
|
|
Everybody has been giving you a billion military history recommendations about WW2 so I'll come out of left field and say that you should read Russia Against Napoleon by Dominic Lieven to learn about a much earlier Eastern Front where somebody who had already conquered Europe tried to invade Russia and got hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2022 11:52
|
|
|
If it wasn't for Russia we'd all be speaking Swedish right now
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 00:05
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:If it wasn't for Russia we'd all be speaking Swedish right now This but for whatever Swedish cavalryman accidentally shot Gustavus Adolphus in the back of the head
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 00:56
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:I replayed Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa recently and in light of recent scholarship about the Eastern Front it... doesn't hold up well. ...how so? I dont recall anything particularly egregious about it
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 01:03
|
|
|
Has anyone invaded Russia from the east and won?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 01:26
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:I’m sure a few of those was because the officer tried to stop the troops from committing war crimes on the regular though. Not sure, the officer corps was full of psychos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 01:28
|
|
|
Dameius posted:Has anyone invaded Russia from the east and won? The Mongols, pretty famously. The Russo-Japanese War also should probably count, though that was mostly over colonial influence and concluded with negotiations where Japan took the Russian sphere after their clear defeat rather than action on or transfer of any of their own territory.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 01:44
|
|
|
Mandoric posted:The Mongols, pretty famously. But didn't the Mongols come from the west? And not quite the same, but also for the Russo-Japanese War it wasn't an eastern invasion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
Mongols came from the East Christianity came from the South The winds blew down from the North All other invaders came from the West
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 05:17
|
|
|
I always admired the mongols for their achievements....can you imagine being a regular mongol guy and there's this guy who used to be the son of a pretty big leader but then his dad died and nobodies heard much about him for a while and then he's back and aligned all your clans and establish a legal system and starting to conquer all comers. but they also invaded russia in the winter, and it was to their advantage! cause they could use the rivers as roads for their cavalry. to bring it back to the modern history, anyone who hasn't read a bit about the establishment of soviet mongolia should read a bit, pretty interesting things happening.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 06:17
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:...how so? I dont recall anything particularly egregious about it Seconding this
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 06:19
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:Mongols came from the East I meant moving into Russia by going east which would have been attacking Russia on their west. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 06:24
|
|
|
R. Mute posted:personally, i wouldn't want to die in any war. like, y'all talk about how hard Verdun was, but I'm pretty sure (based on meticulous research) the average height of a man back then was like 4'3", so I'm pretty sure I'd be okay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 07:05
|
|
|
Punkin Spunkin posted:i'd be down to die in a cool war, and I'm pretty sure any war is about as cool as you make it Reading this in Carlton's voice is just exquisite
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 07:06
|
|
|
Punkin Spunkin posted:i'd be down to die in a cool war, and I'm pretty sure any war is about as cool as you make it
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 08:43
|
|
|
Ardent Communist posted:I always admired the mongols for their achievements....can you imagine being a regular mongol guy and there's this guy who used to be the son of a pretty big leader but then his dad died and nobodies heard much about him for a while and then he's back and aligned all your clans and establish a legal system and starting to conquer all comers. it's p funny because nobody seems to realize that the mongols conquered half the world in a generation not because they were some barbarian horde that was just so good at fighting battles but rather because they were literally about 700 years ahead of their time when it came to operational art and logistics
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 09:57
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:it's p funny because nobody seems to realize that the mongols conquered half the world in a generation not because they were some barbarian horde that was just so good at fighting battles but rather because they were literally about 700 years ahead of their time when it came to operational art and logistics "what if we shoot the wall that ISN'T impenetrable" was a millenia ahead of any european combattant, sure but I def feel that it would have been difficult to anticipate, or counter, movement of resources and manpower that were completely impossible without an also completely impossible amount of horses, which god had simply given to mongolia as a prank
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 10:22
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:...how so? I dont recall anything particularly egregious about it It does the thing where SS units get their own special black counters. It depicts Soviet high command in a very negative light. Specifically: - the only way to get competent commanders is to send Kruschev around to fire, force suicide or execute poor commanders. And you'll probably end up doing some of all of that since the political point cost increases for each action every time you take it. Or you can guarantee getting a competent marshall by releasing them from prison. - the chance for armies to even activate (ie. be actually able to do something) is quite low and can only be increased by reorganizing the command structure of the army through a card play which is quite expensive in political points. - similarly putting armies in defensive posture, giving them bonuses when defending and the only way to get a real fighting chance against the Germans, costs a prohibitive amount of political points to begin with (15 PP, vs 2 for Offensive or Neutral posture) unless you (sorta playing Stalin) "Admit crisis", which says "You are willing to concede that, yes, we are being invaded, and that, yes, it is serious.". This does make Stalin more paranoid though. - Stalin being paranoid as a game mechanic where whenever you play useful cards or lose important cities his paranoia shoots up, which inevitably leads to him randomly purging officers, with the more competent ones being more likely I think, which also paralyzes that army for the turn. Note that officers being killed this way is *bad*, but sending Kruschev to get rid of incompetent officers, or competent officers who are perceived as so politically threatening to Stalin that they raise his paranoia is good? - Soviets can increase political point gain only by holding onto specific cities beyond a specific turn limit, and by playing the "Demand Power" card, which says "Demand that the Politburo cede you ever more supreme executive powers!" (+5 PP per turn, increased paranoia). This is kind of a mandatory card play if I understand the Soviet side correctly. - Soviet armies are only able to do basic rear end poo poo like blowing up bridges if Zhukov is personally supervising them. So only 1 army in the entire Soviet Union can blow up a single bridge every turn. And then through the stacking of all the maluses effecting the Soviet army you also spend a very large chunk of the game just being utterly combat ineffective against the Germans, having to use your units as speedbumps on which the Germans hopefully exhaust themselves through too many successive attacks. Even when your front units start in Offensive stance (giving a bonus to attacks) and you manage to mass enough of them together that you think you might be able to counterattack somewhere, you probably can't because: - German troops generally just have better stats than Soviet infantry - Soviet armies are unlikely to activate so they have way fewer action points and are unlikely to be able to actually concentrate forces to mount an attack, let alone maneuver to exploit a breakthrough if you can even get one This means it is difficult to even achieve a bloody nose. Orange Devil has issued a correction as of 11:04 on Jul 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 10:57
|
|
|
Dameius posted:I meant moving into Russia by going east which would have been attacking Russia on their west. The Poles took Moscow in 1610 and installed their own tsar on the throne, but it only lasted a couple of years before the boyars stopped fighting each other, elected Mikhail Romanov, and chased them back to the west. Probably the big real answer is that Germany invaded Russia from the west and won in WWI, but they then immediately lost the other war they were fighting and Russia's successor state got back some of the territory they had given up to Germany in the process (and then reclaimed most of the rest of it over the following 25 years one way or another). If you enter some alt-history hypothetical where Germany's western front doesn't collapse in 1918 then you're left with a Germany that defeated Russia on the battlefield, created the conditions that led to its government being overthrown twice, and forced a humiliating peace treaty on the third Russian government.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 11:05
|
|
|
AGEOD's Revolution Under Siege has a scenario where a victorious Germany invades Russia in 1921 at the height of the Russian Civil War in order to prevent the Bolsheviks from crushing the Whites and other separatists
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 11:12
|
|
|
Dameius posted:Has anyone invaded Russia from the east and won? America, using it's primary weapon, money, when it took Alaska. More seriously, I guess the Qing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Russian_border_conflicts
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 11:17
|
|
|
Dameius posted:I meant moving into Russia by going east which would have been attacking Russia on their west. Oops. Poland in the 20s. Didn't last long of course. Also the Crimean war. Weka has issued a correction as of 11:26 on Jul 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 11:23
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:"what if we shoot the wall that ISN'T impenetrable" was a millenia ahead of any european combattant, sure im thinking more like coordinating army movements between forces that were literally hundreds of kilometers apart and the enemy suddenly realizing that they've got a couple more mongol armies appearing as if out of thin air from every possible and impossible angle and you know, invading russia in the winter and not only winning but winning real easy Cerebral Bore has issued a correction as of 12:04 on Jul 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 11:54
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/Kevinliptakcnn/status/1553096606513258496
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 10:20
|
|
|
I'd like to ask for recommendations on a book covering Napoleonic era naval warfare. Like if I wanted to learn about the Glorious First of June and Trafalgar and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 13:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 08:53 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I'd like to ask for recommendations on a book covering Napoleonic era naval warfare. Like if I wanted to learn about the Glorious First of June and Trafalgar and whatnot. how do you manage to read so many books
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 14:40
|
|
