|
Arquinsiel posted:There are rules for it. It's a complex situation. Like if the dude is a would-be Baron then there's a strong chance it'd be the same as being English on the scale of "great craic" to "kicked to death outside Copper's". I've found the best practice is mocking the prejudice, not the people. There's plenty of material too.
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 13:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 13:52 |
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:There's a certain value in going for broke and surviving via shock value. Or surviving because you deserted before the war started as the case may be  .(The San Patricios were rad)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Additional safety question - In videos of guys loading and firing old guns and artillery, you see a lot of safety precautions like cleaning out the residue, swabbing down the barrel in case of left over embers, placing a wooden block to shield against stuff coming out of the fuse hole etc. In a real battle, do any sufficiently brave people cut corners on parts of these procedures to improve rate of fire? There's something wrong with our bloody guns today!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
What do you do when you're tired and mess the order up? 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Someone correct me but weren't there issues with German weapons melting on deployment to ISAF. The G36. Better yet, the melty plastic was among other things the connection between scope and barrel.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:For quite a while, navies avoided superfiring turrets because they were worried about blast damage (especially to sighting hoods for local control). Not the US, because they already knew it'd work because of the worst drat idea ever, the double decker turret.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:The double decker was amazing, it was like what a child would draw, or what xzibit would make. I love the justification for it. The 8 inch turret would gain considerably in protection because it'd share the 12 inch turret's barbette! A ship is a pretty small target, so it doesn't really matter that they're stuck firing at the same target, and in close the turret can turn for the 8 inch salvoes between 12 inch shots. Heck, we can even turn the turret 180 between 12 inch shots! ("a heavy fire could be maintained against a weak enemy to port while the [heavy] guns were being prepared for delivering their blows against a stronger enemy to starboard") It'll reduce blast interference within the heavy gun battery (apparently a major problem abroad)! Actually that interference is worth noting. "For example, in the French Brennus 'a system of bugle calls has been adopted by which one or more guns' crews must desert their guns and seek cover from the blast of some heavy gun that is about to be fired'".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:The worst bit of all of this is that is only a glimpse of the madness and human suffering that was the Eastern Front of the 2nd World War. I was going to go for them not making a similar attempt on Dirlewanger, but that works too.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Plan Z posted:The most disgusting thing to me is how they're slowly achieving some kind of exalted status as an "elite fighting force." To say nothing of the fact that they were largely poor-to-acceptable fighters, I'm more bothered that they're treated as anything but jackbooted monsters. I think if anything that's changing in a positive direction. Pershing posted:Not to criticise you, Cythereal, but I think an argument could be made to link instead and mark with a Yeah, I'd agree.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2016 18:10
|
|
tag.
|
HEY GAL posted:uh, "the global supremacy of the Spanish Empire," obviously I think you mean the primacy of Austria in German politics (this is a bad idea don't do this).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:What do you call it then? Not fighting them over it?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2016 13:27
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:(Quick, throw out something that has nothing to do with WWII so people will stop beating the Unthinkable horse!) So as a newcomer to the thread, would someone please explain to me what exactly the deal with windows is that seems to come up now and again when talking about early modern stuff? Something about shooting into windows? What's remarkable about this? Out of. And a breathtaking lack of concern with firearms is a primary characteristic of the period (although we've got examples of a guy on the eastern front and a plastered as gently caress torpedo bomber squadron commander emptying a pistol out the window and door respectively).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
This is the period that brought you two defenestrations of Prague, both notable for starting a major holy war. Edit: Even better with the changed context.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:My Latin teacher always got a kick out of the word defenestrate so now I always get a kick out of seeing it used. What are the first and second defenestrations of Prague?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I wonder how a Russian underground resistance would have gone, had there been a proper occupation a la France. Well for starters actually literally underground in Moscow given the subway system.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
altright.jpg up thereDisinterested posted:Would it actually have been worse than what we got, though. A weaker Russia could have made things much worse, for values of worse including generalplan ost and the Ruhrplex being one giant nuclear target. I think the Cold War is worth missing out on that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:That's to change one variable but leave the others intact. Which is totally viable for looking for a worst case scenario? Versailles isn't dependent on the outcome of the Russian Civil War.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:What? No, I'm saying that a long and drawn out WW1 is directly connected to the violent excesses that follow it in the next several decades, so that, regardless of the politics, it's conceivable that a swift and decisive outcome to WW1 by any party would have been better. This is fair enough, and not what I was getting from what you said. Disinterested posted:But you still admit the possibility of things that, with a rapid and decisive German victory, almost certainly would have not happened: generalplan ost. I really don't think that anybody would be able to pull off a rapid and decisive victory against Russia in the 40s barring Russia being pacifist or something similarly unlikely.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:But...we're talking about WW1? Man did these posts ever get tangled. Yeah, thought you were treating WW2 as part of the worst case consequences, and horrifyingly enough that could have been worse.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:imo subutai+genghis khan is pretty much the dream team right there What the gently caress are these guys without horses? What do we even do with them? They'd likely figure it out, the organization is what would really give them a nosebleed.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:wait, were you saying every general from the war is available or every general from ever? Inversely I really want to give Pappenheim a tank.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Depressingly it's still a shades of grey situation since the real pieces of poo poo were perfectly happy to worm their tentacles into a lot of people who were innocent or just wanted to keep their heads down, either coercively or via outright force. The poor sod from the Dirlewanger situation is SS because he got conscripted, for instance. If you had to summarize too hard, I'd say all three stages aren't really wrong. Cartoonish villains built a society where all the shades of grey in people were used to drag people into being cartoonish villains. Sorry I can't help but make the joke 50 shades of feldgrau.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Napoleon was fairly capable in terms of logistics. For real logistics fuckups you need someone like Erwin "My supply line runs through hundreds of kilometers of desert and across a sea that is heavily interdicted by the enemy, let's attack anyway because lol so random" Rommel. I think you mean Erwin "hosed up my supply lines so badly even Hitler knew what a bad idea it was" Rommel. Also Halsey in charge of meteorology. Yorktown's staff and air wing leadership pretty much all go on the dream team. It's kind of funny how much better they were at it than the rest of the early war carriers. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 12:19 on Aug 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 12:17
|
|
|
Considering that the Nazis were basically WWI vets for logistics collapse "truth", it makes a lot of sense that they didn't believe in logistics. After all, if there isn't anyone to do it can a dolchstoß happen?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
For the farms I'd bet that the preservation of small farms is what prevented agricultural growth, since the individual farmers likely wouldn't have hit the break even point on mechanization.Nenonen posted:Is that any worse than Dwight "let's march to Berlin when the nearest operational ports are in Normandy, Rhine should be no obstacle roflol" Eisenhower, really? Generals aren't clairvoyeurs, especially when the enemy has no decency to stop fighting after their initial defeat. It is. Eisenhower at least got closer to the end goal. Rommel was fighting a delaying action and decided the best way to do that was to stretch the lines so much that it made the Italian transports doing supply incredibly vulnerable and made his corps use about an army's worth of trucks while the Eastern Front was on. It's really hard to state just how total a failure Rommel managed from an operational and strategic perspective, but there wasn't a single upside to his campaign at any level higher than tactical. The only thing that might have redeemed it is if he'd captured Suez, and that wasn't in the cards.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Halsey might be the man for the destroyers, though I keep thinking the WW2 IJN had to have a good destroyer guy given how proficient and dangerous Japanese destroyers and their crews were. I'm not very familiar with the IJN's leadership outside Yamamoto, though, so I don't know if there is such a candidate. Nagumo, maybe? Shattered Sword says he a pretty good destroyerman, just hopelessly out of his depth with carriers. Yamamoto himself... I could see him as the navy all-star carrier dude, but only if his bosses could keep him on a tight leash. Raizo Tanaka's probably your best bet for IJN destroyerman. Fo3 posted:Yeah, what I took from it was someone saying imports should have driven prices down so much that small farms went broke and got bought out in a firesale by a large corp that had the benefit of scale of economy and a huge bankroll. Worked pretty well for Germany getting their hands on a Ford subsidiary for WWII.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
What did Yamamoto do in his capacity as a carrier commander that was so remarkable? Pearl was a huge win but he won it wearing the overall commander's hat. I'd just as soon have Fletcher, they both made some mistakes, but Fletcher's fit better for the role of carrier commander, I'd think. Letting the Japanese make their getaway from Savo Island is no worse than Yamamoto's various piecemeal deployments.Cyrano4747 posted:Really this thread skews way to hard on the Axis powers being stupid. They weren't the unstoppable evil geniuses of post war myth and wheraboo fantasy but they also weren't the loving keystone cops. Last I checked his job was to prop up the Italians so Mussolini didn't suffer an embarrassing loss, and do so with a small allocation of forces and support. Everybody who decided on that job had their poo poo together and their priorities straight in that regard. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Aug 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
The early condottieri class ships were hellishly vulnerable, too. That didn't help the Italians. Also if I had to go to WWII era war blind, I'd probably pick Frederick Sherman to command the carriers. His idea with SBDs as an inner screen against torpedo bombers when presented with a doctrinal lack of fighters was an interesting idea that shows a good grasp of what a carrier fight entails. Sucked for the dive bomber pilots but it did help the carriers out. Also Thach gets the highest position he can have while still in a cockpit. It's not an accident that Yorktown's strikes were so well put together. I have a feeling that there'd be a good number of Japanese guys in the group, considering how well put together their strikes were. I'd much sooner go with one of a few Americans (who also did a plenty good job of developing carriers as a weapon of war, look at the Fleet Problems for all the work they did. The only real thing they missed on was getting enough together to work out tactics for a proper carrier group) who didn't make mistakes like Yamamoto's and then pick Tanaka and/or Togo. I really need to get more reading done and start effortposting about carriers. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Aug 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:The man you want from the IJN is Genda Minoru, one of the primary minds behind the establishment of the Kido Butai as an organized striking force. Yep. Also trying to phone post is doing interesting things to the chronology of my posts.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
So as I was saying about Wallenstein...
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Also look at his dates of birth / death... Dude's life was an achievement whoring run in the grand game of Soviet military membership. Even managed to grab the one for being Polish.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:It sure worked for the West Virginians in famous historical document 1632~ It's kind of unfair to pick on the QH-50 too much because it was designed to be very small, very cheap, and consequently had the accident rate you'd expect from a drone helicopter from 1960 that didn't have much in the way of redundant systems. Much as the joke goes that interceptors are the first stage of a two stage SAM, those were expendable like the first stage of a two stage long range depth charge, and it's a bit hard to judge the ROI on a system that provides a capability that otherwise wouldn't be there. They did do some interesting stuff with them with television cameras to spot artillery and do recon for their ships, as well.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Work expands to fill screen space available. If you have three monitors you'll still have at least one open book in your lap and another face down next to the keyboard. I have two 27" 2560x1440s flanking a 34" 3440x1440, and I use my surface in my lap a decent amount. My screen real estate is wider than I am tall. Also as a general thing ultrawide monitors are awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
He pushed to militarize them more prewar, but wasn't in charge to make it happen.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Speaking of inherited calibers and long-term usage of standard shell diameters, what was the reason (if anything cohesive as far as mil-reasoning goes) for the US sticking with ~3in (incl. 75 and 76mm) shells for so long? I can't imagine they were just using the same tooling (or drat near anything for that matter) for 75 years but did they do something like an ergonomic study and realize that 3" was about as big as you could make a shell before it started getting too big for the average crewman's hand? Actually that's how you got metric 75mm shells being used in the US at the same time as 3 inch shells labeled in metric (76.2mm). The US built their early 75mm tank guns to use howitzer shells designed for the French 1897 75. The various inch marks seem to have been pretty convenient brackets for guns so they got used out of convenience. You see 75mm and 50 mm guns showing up elsewhere although only the USSR seemed to have consistently done 100mm over 105 (except for the new hotness naval dual purpose guns in Japan)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:The USSR used the 107 mm caliber in infantry (4.2 inches) since they inherited it from the Tsarists. Until the D-10, 100 mm was a navy caliber. Yeah, and as far as I know that's comparatively widespread use of 100mm. The Japanese 10cm gun was a naval AA piece that started production in 1940 (good gun incidentally), the French and Italians started using 100mm guns around 1930 it seems and were probably one of the main users as well, but I don't know of any major land use of 100mm caliber guns rather than 105s.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Is HOI 4 any good? It looks bad. It's good in some regards, same as the rest. It's got a fantastic system for materiel production and management, the logistics system is okayish but thankfully the non-fiddly kind of okayish, and the map is the vastly better hoi 3 level of granularity. Naval combat is closer to decent but it's still kind of hands off. The air stuff really could go for exposing more information. I've put way too many hours into it and enjoyed it. It's pretty much tidied up 3. No more battle visio managing your entire personnel flowchart.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Fair Vic 2 causes physical pain, but can be worth it for things like recruiting all the soldiers in the south and putting them in a mountain area to starve so the civil war is easier. (I've played multiple games and still don't really know how it works). EUIV can be cool but I never got into it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
Also if you decide to get into it, anywhere that gives victory points gives a bit of supply so rather than landing in the giant port and slugging it out with a corps in a fort, you can land nearby, take a point to let you get supply so your guys don't just run out of organization and then surround the port so their guys can't retreat and whittle them down.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 13:52 |
|
|
And here I am cosplaying a security guard, watching four feeds of running programs while loving about online.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2016 21:33
|
|