|
team overhead smash posted:The most significant lend-lease help that's usually talked about is in terms of logistics. As WW2 was getting started the Red Army was still relying on horse and cart for a lot of its stuff but the USA sent over hundreds of thousands of jeeps and trucks. This improved the logistics situation a lot and gave their armies much more maneuverability, which they used to very good effect. Don't forget locomotives. The USSR was able to dedicate the vast majority of its domestic industry to directly producing war fighting materiel, which was a significant advantage.
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 06:51 |
|
|
That's realism, baby!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
Bozart posted:Here's a shot in the dark and slightly OT - is there an equivalent for Victorian England? Amazon only yields crap about poetry, sexuality, and barely reviewed surveys of the period. How the heck did they manage a world spanning empire? Doesn't help that I'm not a Brit. Dreadnought by Robert Massie is pretty good and provides some context around the twilight of the empire. It is also about cool botes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
Veloxyll posted:For submarine bombing there is no such thing as overkill. Either it goes down forever or you needed a bigger bomb. Basically the theory behind the various Nuclear Depth Bombs.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
CeeJee posted:Did the Japanese put any effort into expanding their merchant navy before 1941 to actually be able to use all the resources and territory they planned on grabbing ? Or did the leadership consider those ugly floating boxes a waste of shipyards that should be building sleek weapons of war ? Short answer: No. http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2016 13:07
|
|
|
A White Guy posted:Overweight? Not really, the Bismarck was actually a bit smaller than the Iowa-class battleships that the US put in the water. Overweight is a function of design, not tonnage.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:It was mined to hell and there were two battleships trained at the possible route of German advance on the city. I don't think so. Dieppe really showed that one of the major points for amphibious assaults is "Do Not Attack Fortified Ports Head On"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
alex314 posted:Enterprise eats a sub-launched long lance salvo The Type 93 was only carried by surface ships.The sub-launched oxygen torpedo was the Type 95, which was considerably smaller with shorter legs.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
The game models anything that isn't boats or planes extremely poorly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
If you read about SMS Emden, it took them a hell of a long time to scuttle freighters even with charges and seacocks open, and that's without trying to risk dudes going aboard / staying aboard a completely hosed up ship.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
goatface posted:How the gently caress did they manage to lose that many men in an attack with 2-1 AV? Attacking an urban hex is like a 4x bonus or something.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Why do you insist on grouping extremely slow ships with fast ones in the worst possible TF combinations?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 10:46
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:I like giving the ai a chance.... I respect this answer.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
pthighs posted:Another advantage of transporting aircraft on a carrier is they are ready to fly at the destination. If you use a cargo ship they have to be reassembled over several days at their destination. On the other hand, crated airframes are pretty cube efficient.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Avisos aren't minesweepers. They're the size of a destroyer, roughly, and have similar-sized main armament. Late avisos carried an aircraft, and no torpedoes. They were over crewed and extremely slow with very long range. The Bougainville class made 17.5 knots. They were used as despatch boats and show-the-flag patrol boats in colonial areas. Two Bougainville class avisos fought a single ship action in a somewhat unique occurence. The Vichy aviso won. Edit: got it backwards the free French aviso won KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Nov 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:It came up in both. Colonial Avisos are just kind of neat so your shouldn't lump them in with stupid minesweepers!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
Chuu posted:My view of World War II is so colored by the way it's taught in the US and the fact we won that I can't really answer. There is a lot of America (gently caress yeah) in the way it's taught; but I can't help but think that some parts of America were just tired of War after the meat grinder that was the eastern campaign. Vietnam definitely shows there is an upper limit. Vietnam wasn't even close to an even arguably existential war where the US was directly attacked. What do you mean about the meat grinder that was the eastern campaign?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:For us ignorant, what message? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_world_wonders
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
For a guy with the nickname "Bull," Halsey was sure a sensitive motherfucker.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:The first part of the padding was removed before it got to him, but not the second. Halsey thought the message was a direct rebuke from Nimitz, a man not known for personal insults. Considering the massive emotional whiplash he'd just gone through (On the verge of triumph over the infamous Japanese carrier fleet to being responsible for what was quickly appearing to be the greatest disaster in US Naval History), I can understand being a bit upset. yeah but like, do your loving job instead of sulking like a child
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
dtkozl posted:Almost all the admirals and generals were like that. Clark, MacArthur, Bradley, Montgomery were all extremely vain and immediately shut anyone out that wasn't part of their circle that worshiped them. how do you post this list and not include Patton
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Murgos posted:To be fair to Halsey here he was pursuing a massive Japanese carrier fleet and still couldn't be sure that the action off Samar wasn't a diversion. An hour isn't really that much time to deliberate. He instead managed to not make a decision, meaning that his forces didn't contribute to the outcome at all! Great!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Compared to the B-17, the B-24 was faster, could carry more, and could fly father, sure. But you can't forget that the B-17 was a hell of a lot more durable than the Liberator, and could survive ferocious punishment compared to other aircraft. There's a reason they kept making them alongside Liberators, and why they were retained in service in specialized roles for over a decade after the war. noooot really, it was more the fact that if you already have a line entirely tooled for B-17 production, it does not make sense to redo the line to produce a somewhat better bomber. gradenko_2000 posted:The qualifiers I would put on B-17s and the strategic bombing of Germany is that: There might be some benefit in terms of fighter squadrons but AA batteries were to a large degree manned by old dudes, kids, and guys invalided out or on convalescent leave.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Noumea's right there and he's going to ram the island and sink it into the Pacific Ocean! banzai, mother fuckers! RA Rx posted:You can make some pretty good fighters out of old dudes and kids with enough training and experience. I assume you're joking.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:Also unspoken in the previous question, how did this TF get within 24,000 yards? IJN_air_search_doctrine.txt
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:I wonder how mythical the American Will To Fight really is. I mean, at what point does the United States finally say "Well, really, Hawaii was just a colonial naval base...: Generally killing more dudes is not the way to weaken the Will to Fight throughout history
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
goatface posted:Depends how useful the game codes guns for island hopping. I could definitely see them being a big loss on the holding-on to poo poo front, what with all the shore defence sniper bullshit we saw early war. Guns aren't the same as CD guns, naturally.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
You've killed a lot of useful stuff like that APA as well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:That being said, I have no goddamn idea how you're supposed to fight Shermans with what Japan had for fighting Shermans, so you know. Explosives on stick is a surprisingly good way to kill a tank if you're willing to die.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
the IJN's CAs mostly rusted at Truk for a bunch in real life anyway.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Italy in North Africa could have been kind of reasonable given a few changes to the scope conditions. 1. Iachino and Campioni drown in bathtubs or die at an early age. RM leadership was atrocious. Campioni was too cautious and Iachino was an idiot. 2. Domenico Cavagnari trips on a high-technology rock and dies. Italian radar technology was potentially world leading in the mid 1930s, but Cavagnari halted development. This made the RM a fair-weather force only. I suppose some deficiencies could have been made up for by heavy emphasis on night fighting a la IJN, but the Gufo installed on capital ships with trained technicians in 1939 would make a big difference. 3. The Italians don't declare war with approximately 1/3 of their total merchant tonnage at pier in Allied ports. 4. The Italians take the war seriously and don't view it as a "take a few thousand casualties and show up at the negotiating table" - I think this, plus too much Mahan, led them to be very strategically cautious in the naval area. 5. Plan for amphibious assault operations and expand parachutist training earlier. The Italians actually had fairly decent capabilities in terms of parachute infantry, but not enough on hand early. Once the war is under way: 1. Plan for and immediately hit Malta with seaborne and airborne assault. 2. Push quickly for the Suez and commit more troops - once you get across, the situation in the Med becomes a lot easier. Once a lot of African, Indian, ANZ, etc troops start showing up things get pretty tough. 3. Ignore Greece and Yugoslavia for a while. 4. Get the Germans to come to the party from the beginning. edit: forgot a really good one: begin prospecting for oil in Libya early. Build a strategic petroleum reserve. KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at 13:48 on May 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 13:43
|
|
|
wukkar posted:Did the Italian navy sink goddamn anything that wasn't Italian? HMS Valiant, HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS York.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
It's definitely Romania, they joined the Axis and were immediately carved up by other Axis minors.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
RA Rx, you have a really poor understanding of the causes of the Spanish Civil war. The Beevor book on it is a decent enough overview and a good read. As has already been said, it's pretty well documented that the Nationalists killed far more civilians than the Republicans during the war. Franco was a brutal dictator; just because he wasn't Hitler or Stalin doesn't mean he was a Good And Positive Influence On Spain And Europe. The world would have been better off if he had eaten a bullet in the Rif wars. If ETA had not assassinated Luis Carerro Blanco, there's a good chance that Spain would not have liberalized as quickly. His replacement as PM immediately relaxed restrictions on free associations and promoted a politically liberal agenda, not just an economically liberal one.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2017 13:47
|
|
|
whitewhale posted:The Queen Elizabeth wasn't sank either. Heavily damaged but was repaired and back in action by 43. both those ships were sunk at anchor and raised, I'd count Littorio, Nevada, Caio Duilio exactly the same way
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
That APA will be a good get.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
APA and an AKA are great gets.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
goatface posted:Daytime at 10 miles, slow PBs, presumably radar fire control is fully online by this point. They might have needed a few ranging shots to adjust for wind. I'd be surprised if a fair number of those hits aren't from 5"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
Technically since its boats it's the responsibility of the IJNAS
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 06:51 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If I'm not mistaken those things go poof because they're land units that are included in the surrender part of the land combat mechanics. WitP.txt
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2017 17:22
|
|