Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: MORAY37 on January 04, 2010, 12:35:31 PM
-
I would propose that HT might look into the possibility of curtailing side switching when any country gets within Four bases of a reset. This would serve a couple of different purposes:
1) It would increase the likelihood of actual "fights" for bases, rather than 75 man hordes on a single vehicle base.
2) ENY. When one side gets close to a reset, there is an inevitable mass exodus of players from the other two. I don't know if people can't get perks any other way, but the fights degenerate rather quickly close to a reset, for all countries.
Case in point... was having a great time yesterday (Sunday 3 JAN), with a small map and good fights. I fly high ENY birds ~75-80% (Ki84 and 190F8) of the time anyway, so that doesn't make a difference. Rook ENY was ~8 or so, and the fights were spectacular. I mean great times. Rooks took a couple of bases.....and got within 1 or 2 of reset. Suddenly, 80 players from Knit and Bish switched sides, I guess to get the free perks. ENY went from 8 to 29 in about 3 minutes. Fights all over the map degenerated into hordes of Rooks on single bases, which were then countered by both of the other countries upping 262's en masse. The actual fighting dropped to nothing...and turned into a slaughter. I left the arena and went to the other.
It's really frustrating going from a great time having great fights to flying P40's against 262's and Tempests.
Inevitably, someone will say, just switch sides. I like flying with my squadron. If I was freelance, I would switch in a heartbeat. I'm just saying that the fights would be better if we limited the "mass exodus" of switchers close to a reset.
-
Any measure to prevent anyone from switching sides is a bad thing.
ack-ack
-
Any measure to prevent anyone from switching sides is a bad thing.
Indeed.
-
Moray... I hear ya. It irritates me to no end to see people doing that and watching your ENY shoot through the roof. We have one guy in MW that makes it known to the whole arena that he is switching sides to get perks, and will stay logged in and go to sleep waiting for the map to get rolled over night so he can do it without any effort on his part. We have tried telling him that it's lame, and that it hoses our ENY, but he doesn't care. :mad:
But, Ack-Ack is right... preventing side switching is even worse... for a lot of reasons.
-
Moray... I hear ya. It irritates me to no end to see people doing that and watching your ENY shoot through the roof.
ENY doesn't go through the roof because everyone is changing countries. Most of them just leave the arena, either to go to another where their country is hording/winning/whatever, or they log off in disgust.
-
ENY doesn't go through the roof because everyone is changing countries. Most of them just leave the arena, either to go to another where their country is hording/winning/whatever, or they log off in disgust.
+1
What I was about to say. You have 2 sides that outnumber the third already. When getting vultched or picked is no longer fun, people don't switch, they leave.
People gravitate to the dar bars, the friendly dar bars. If you can't take off, there's really no point in playing, is there?
wrongway
-
ENY doesn't go through the roof because everyone is changing countries. Most of them just leave the arena, either to go to another where their country is hording/winning/whatever, or they log off in disgust.
Actually... it is becoming a common occurrence in MW. Starts out even, but as the map starts to edge over to one color, you see the guys you were shooting at not 5 minutes ago wearing little green icons and flying alongside you. But no... it isnt all due to side swapping... it just doesnt help it at all.
-
Pointless. Because it simply delays the inevitable and the players who would
rather not be online and on the receiving end of a beat-down would just logoff
or go elsewhere.
-
Pointless. Because it simply delays the inevitable and the players who would
rather not be online and on the receiving end of a beat-down would just logoff
or go elsewhere.
I agree completely... another reason it is so darn irritating.
-
Any measure to prevent anyone from switching sides is a bad thing.
ack-ack
QFT!
-
If the low number country all switched to get perks (it doesn't work that way anymore), you can always switch to the low number country. You'll earn a lot more perks that way than you would 'winning the war' anyhow.
Last night was real pathetic, here are some of the statements used in regards to ENY (all from one squad too).
"Hitler would of loved ENY."
"I bet the same people that like ENY are on welfare."
"They need to level the playing field, same reason dodgeball was removed from schools."
"I bet you think every kid deserves to get a trophy."
-
I thought if you switched to the wining side hours before a reset the system didn't give you the 25 perk points on the win.
So the OP is saying that the players on the side being gang slaughtered should stay and take it so that the OP can have some "nice" fights? "Nice" for who? If it's ENY that you find annoying, you can always switch to the side being slaughtered and have no ENY problem and all the "nice" fights you want.
-
how about 24 hours seat lock! Fli
-
If the low number country all switched to get perks (it doesn't work that way anymore), you can always switch to the low number country. You'll earn a lot more perks that way than you would 'winning the war' anyhow.
Last night was real pathetic, here are some of the statements used in regards to ENY (all from one squad too).
"Hitler would of loved ENY."
"I bet the same people that like ENY are on welfare."
"They need to level the playing field, same reason dodgeball was removed from schools."
"I bet you think every kid deserves to get a trophy."
:rofl
You might be a redneck...
(http://www.topofmind.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/1_61_foxworthy_jeff.jpg)
-
I thought if you switched to the wining side hours before a reset the system didn't give you the 25 perk points on the win.
So the OP is saying that the players on the side being gang slaughtered should stay and take it so that the OP can have some "nice" fights? "Nice" for who? If it's ENY that you find annoying, you can always switch to the side being slaughtered and have no ENY problem and all the "nice" fights you want.
No, I'm saying things were nice and equal until many of them switched sides to go to ROOK when it seemed rooks were about to reset. Then it became a horde versus perked rides for a quarter. Not much fun for either side. I mean, obviously a few souls have a great time picking away in perked rides from 20K plus. The rook ENY went from around 8 to 29 in three minutes. There wasn't a decent fight to be had on the map after that.
I could honestly care about ENY, I fly high ENY rides most of the time anyway.
Please re-read the original post slower, and comprehend what I said. That isn't a cut on you, but you completely misinterpreted my meaning.
would propose that HT might look into the possibility of curtailing side switching when any country gets within Four bases of a reset. This would serve a couple of different purposes:
1) It would increase the likelihood of actual "fights" for bases, rather than 75 man hordes on a single vehicle base.
2) ENY. When one side gets close to a reset, there is an inevitable mass exodus of players from the other two. I don't know if people can't get perks any other way, but the fights degenerate rather quickly close to a reset, for all countries.
Case in point... was having a great time yesterday (Sunday 3 JAN), with a small map and good fights. I fly high ENY birds ~75-80% (Ki84 and 190F8) of the time anyway, so that doesn't make a difference. Rook ENY was ~8 or so, and the fights were spectacular. I mean great times. Rooks took a couple of bases.....and got within 1 or 2 of reset. Suddenly, 80 players from Knit and Bish switched sides, I guess to get the free perks. ENY went from 8 to 29 in about 3 minutes. Fights all over the map degenerated into hordes of Rooks on single bases, which were then countered by both of the other countries upping 262's en masse. The actual fighting dropped to nothing...and turned into a slaughter. I left the arena and went to the other.
It's really frustrating going from a great time having great fights to flying P40's against 262's and Tempests.
Inevitably, someone will say, just switch sides. I like flying with my squadron. If I was freelance, I would switch in a heartbeat. I'm just saying that the fights would be better if we limited the "mass exodus" of switchers close to a reset.
-
If the low number country all switched to get perks (it doesn't work that way anymore), you can always switch to the low number country. You'll earn a lot more perks that way than you would 'winning the war' anyhow.
Last night was real pathetic, here are some of the statements used in regards to ENY (all from one squad too).
"Hitler would of loved ENY."
That one always cracked me up, considering the Luftwaffe and the Wermacht were much more technically advanced than any of the Allies' fighting forces for the entire war. The Allies had numerical superiority from 1941 on. I'm sure this will start a side thread from the flag wavers, but the fact is the Germans fielded the most advanced military in the world through 1945. The war would have been over much sooner if that had not been the case, with obvious help from Hitler's blatant strategic ineptitude.
-
That one always cracked me up, considering the Luftwaffe and the Wermacht were much more technically advanced than any of the Allies' fighting forces for the entire war. The Allies had numerical superiority from 1941 on. I'm sure this will start a side thread from the flag wavers, but the fact is the Germans fielded the most advanced military in the world through 1945. The war would have been over much sooner if that had not been the case, with obvious help from Hitler's blatant strategic ineptitude.
Actually, the Allies had numerical superiority at the beginning. During the Phony War phase and the Battle of France, the Allied armies out numbered the German army by a large margin. In fact, the French army alone out numbered the German army.
Nor would I consider the Germans having the most 'advanced military' in the world through 1945, what made them advanced? Technology wise, the Allies were just as technical in some areas or even surpassed the Germans in some areas and maintained parity in other areas. Sure, there were some areas that the Germans were more advanced in like oven construction, gas chambers and the like but to call them the 'most advanced' army through 1945 is just silly.
ack-ack
-
That one always cracked me up, considering the Luftwaffe and the Wermacht were much more technically advanced than any of the Allies' fighting forces for the entire war.
A very broad and very wrong statement.
-
I'm pretty sure you have to have been on the winning side for at least 12 hours before the reset to get the extra perkies. Somebody in EW was on our side when we took the last base for the reset. I got my perks, he says he got nothing. I'm also pretty sure you don't even have to be online at the time to get your perkies.
-
I'm pretty sure you have to have been on the winning side for at least 12 hours before the reset to get the extra perkies. Somebody in EW was on our side when we took the last base for the reset. I got my perks, he says he got nothing. I'm also pretty sure you don't even have to be online at the time to get your perkies.
Correct on both counts. Switching to the winning side just prior to reset is futile, and hibernating in tower to be present if war is won is not necessary.
-
I have seen people in the MA's get perks after being over a couplehours.
-
No, I'm saying things were nice and equal until many of them switched sides to go to ROOK when it seemed rooks were about to reset.
Sorry if I misinterpreted your post, but I still don't understand. As several people have pointed out, you don't get the 25 perks if you switch to the winning side just before a reset. So why did they switch?
Even if the sides were even, being on the side about to lose can be quite unpleasant: usually outnumbered because both other sides are attacking, limited fields to fly from, radar down, strat porked, big "for the win" missions launched against you etc. Maybe that's why they changed sides (or just logged off thereby creating an imbalance)?
-
Seems to me, perhaps hitech does not really care for map resets, and the ENY system (and generous side switching allowance) is a way to prevent rampant resets -- especially in the small hours of the night, when it always seems to happen as far as I can tell...
One more thing, If there are 4 bases left to capture for a reset, and you're worried about switchers, you probably aren't looking for a fight.. You are looking to reset.
-
One more thing, If there are 4 bases left to capture for a reset, and you're worried about switchers, you probably aren't looking for a fight.. You are looking to reset.
Sorry, if that was directed at me, you're completely wrong. I was quite content on flying and fighting in my Ki84 with the same 4 people against the same 5 people for hours. As it was, the massive switch and subsequent poor gameplay made me change arenas.
I have 6K in perks. Another 25 isn't gonna change my flying.
-
As it was, the massive switch and subsequent poor gameplay made me change arenas.
To emphasize again: There is no such thing as a "massive" switch to the winning side. Actually most players are relatively loyal to their side. They will log off or go to another arena (and that's were the problem starts). Those who are very easy at hopping the fence are a very small minority (and many, if not most, of those do switch to the outnumbered side, not the hording one).
At least in LW, short-term side switching is not responsible for any ENY limitations at all.
-
To emphasize again: There is no such thing as a "massive" switch to the winning side. Actually most players are relatively loyal to their side. They will log off or go to another arena (and that's were the problem starts). Those who are very easy at hopping the fence are a very small minority (and many, if not most, of those do switch to the outnumbered side, not the hording one).
At least in LW, short-term side switching is not responsible for any ENY limitations at all.
Again, respectfully, it sure was yesterday. ENY went from 8 to 29 and I watched the numbers of the countries change, when Rooks got close to reset.
-
Again, respectfully, it sure was yesterday. ENY went from 8 to 29 and I watched the numbers of the countries change, when Rooks got close to reset.
Yes, the numbers changed. They always do. People leave & enter the arena. Players do not "hop over" en masse. They just go away
-
Nor would I consider the Germans having the most 'advanced military' in the world through 1945, what made them advanced? Technology wise, the Allies were just as technical in some areas or even surpassed the Germans in some areas and maintained parity in other areas. Sure, there were some areas that the Germans were more advanced in like oven construction, gas chambers and the like but to call them the 'most advanced' army through 1945 is just silly.
ack-ack
You're kidding right? So an army (the Wehrmacht) that is outnumbered from the beginning, steamrolls a continent and they're not more advanced? Wrong, they were more advanced both technically and operationally (tactically). A third of the French tanks couldn't fire anything bigger than a machine gun. The lengths people will go to to customize their truth. The US Army still had Cavalry at the beginning of the war.
I mean c'mon.
Germany manufactured pretty much the most advanced weaponry of the war, in most, if not all categories. It was the Allies superiority in numbers and in operational control that won the war. Logistics and Industrial capacity as well, won the allied effort.
Name a class of weaponry the Reich didn't actually have an edge in.... There were entire classes of weaponry only possessed by the Germans, such as guided missiles, rocket powered flight and of course jet (until very late in the war), helicopters, cruise missiles, anti shipping missiles......
-
Yes, the numbers changed. They always do. People leave & enter the arena. Players do not "hop over" en masse. They just go away
In this case... they went from one of two countries, to a third.
Of course, I must allow for the possibility that coincidentally all of those bish and knight logged off within the exact same time that many more rooks showed up.
Lusche, respectfully, I watched the numbers change. In this case, it happened exactly like that.
-
You're kidding right? So an army (the Wehrmacht) that is outnumbered from the beginning, steamrolls a continent and they're not more advanced? Wrong, they were more advanced both technically and operationally (tactically). A third of the French tanks couldn't fire anything bigger than a machine gun. The lengths people will go to to customize their truth. The US Army still had Cavalry at the beginning of the war.
And the majority of Wehrmacht transportation was horsedrawn. And not only at the beginning, but right up to the end.
And regarding tanks in the French campaign: Out of 2500 German tanks, 523 were Pz I, which was not much more than an armored car on threads, armed with a machine gun only. About 1000 tanks were Panzer II's, armored only slightly better, and armed with a 20mm gun that had serious trouble in penetrating heavy French & British tanks. The advantage was much more one of doctrine than of material.
-
usche, respectfully, I watched the numbers change. In this case, it happened exactly like that.
Exactly. You watched numbers. Not players. That's the problem. And the only conclusion you can imagine is people switching sides, completely ignoring actual behaviour and team loyalties.
Numbers are changing all the time. During daytime you will see them rocket up and down. One moment Bish have ENY 15, 30 minutes later Rooks get the ENY limit. And that's just because players are entering and leaving the arena. And when a country is getting thrashed, people will leave for the other arena, thus increasing the "winners" ENY limit.
-
Exactly. You watched numbers. Not players. That's the problem. And the only conclusion you can imagine is people switching sides, completely ignoring actual behaviour and team loyalties.
Snailman, I really like your posts. You are 'spot on' most of the time but none of them will ever admit it.
Numbers are changing all the time.
If you don't believe Snailman, the next time your ENY is very high and another country is low, go to the other arena. Most of the time the situation is reversed in the other arena because the country with its back against the wall usually just logs into the other arena.
-
A very broad and very wrong statement.
Amen
-
You're kidding right? So an army (the Wehrmacht) that is outnumbered from the beginning, steamrolls a continent and they're not more advanced? Wrong, they were more advanced both technically and operationally (tactically). A third of the French tanks couldn't fire anything bigger than a machine gun. The lengths people will go to to customize their truth. The US Army still had Cavalry at the beginning of the war.
I mean c'mon.
Germany manufactured pretty much the most advanced weaponry of the war, in most, if not all categories. It was the Allies superiority in numbers and in operational control that won the war. Logistics and Industrial capacity as well, won the allied effort.
Name a class of weaponry the Reich didn't actually have an edge in.... There were entire classes of weaponry only possessed by the Germans, such as guided missiles, rocket powered flight and of course jet (until very late in the war), helicopters, cruise missiles, anti shipping missiles......
Please oh please go do some research first before making statements like that
-
That one always cracked me up, considering the Luftwaffe and the Wermacht were much more technically advanced than any of the Allies' fighting forces for the entire war. The Allies had numerical superiority from 1941 on. I'm sure this will start a side thread from the flag wavers, but the fact is the Germans fielded the most advanced military in the world through 1945. The war would have been over much sooner if that had not been the case, with obvious help from Hitler's blatant strategic ineptitude.
In some respects yes they did in others not so much . 90% of the German Army still relied on horse drawn transport . Putting their infantry on the same level as Napoleans army as far as mobility goes . The standard German infantry weapon the Mauser kar98 was a WW1 piece of technology . Once again except for the Panzer units German artillery control still relied on the field phone in the overwhelming majority of their formations . They made up for this with much better operational concepts such as making the rifle the support weapon and the MG the squads primary weapon . More importantly thru far superior leadership . Company grade officers were head and shoulders above everyone they fought .One thing the Germans really stunk in was logistics . From top to bottom if not the worst then just 1 notch away . Procurement to individual issue the were riddled with problems .
-
You're kidding right? So an army (the Wehrmacht) that is outnumbered from the beginning, steamrolls a continent and they're not more advanced? Wrong, they were more advanced both technically and operationally (tactically). A third of the French tanks couldn't fire anything bigger than a machine gun. The lengths people will go to to customize their truth. The US Army still had Cavalry at the beginning of the war.
I mean c'mon.
Germany manufactured pretty much the most advanced weaponry of the war, in most, if not all categories. It was the Allies superiority in numbers and in operational control that won the war. Logistics and Industrial capacity as well, won the allied effort.
Name a class of weaponry the Reich didn't actually have an edge in.... There were entire classes of weaponry only possessed by the Germans, such as guided missiles, rocket powered flight and of course jet (until very late in the war), helicopters, cruise missiles, anti shipping missiles......
First off operations and tactics very different . Operations falls in between tactical and strategic . Operational level is very hard to define , it is a concept the Germans developed . Let me try by citing example . Tactics would be using bounding overwatch reconnaissance by fire etc . Operations would be what formations are going to move where and how . Strategy would be deciding what to hit to make the nme quit . The Panzer I and II were pretty much no better armed then the French . The big problem with french tanks was overloading the Track Commander , I believe he was the loader gunner TC radio op . The Germans did it with organizational and operational superiority . The french had only one DLM <light armored division> in 1940 . Brigade sized units were generally parceled out even . This led to the French slapping , while the Germans concentrated their armor and punched instead . Lusche I should have read entire thread before posting . Sorry for repeating .
-
You're kidding right? So an army (the Wehrmacht) that is outnumbered from the beginning, steamrolls a continent and they're not more advanced? Wrong, they were more advanced both technically and operationally (tactically). A third of the French tanks couldn't fire anything bigger than a machine gun. The lengths people will go to to customize their truth. The US Army still had Cavalry at the beginning of the war.
I mean c'mon.
At the start of hostilities, which includes the invasion of Poland and up to and the end of the Battle of France, the French had more advanced and better tanks than the German army. Those Char B tanks people like to make fun of? At the time, they could easily take on and destroy any German tank the Wehrmacht had in their inventory. You scoff at the US Army still having actual horse cavalry units when the majority the Wehrmacht was dependent on horses for transportion throughout the entire war and it wasn't because the Allies had made any other form of transportation risky.
You should also read your World War II history a little bit better, especially the time of the Phony War and the Battle of France. It wasn't equipment that lost the war for the French and the British on the mainland, it was tactics. The French didn't use their tanks properly, instead they had the doctrine that tanks were to support infantry and their tactics weren't suited for maneuver warfare the Germans were using.
Name a class of weaponry the Reich didn't actually have an edge in.... There were entire classes of weaponry only possessed by the Germans, such as guided missiles, rocket powered flight and of course jet (until very late in the war), helicopters, cruise missiles, anti shipping missiles......
But you want me to name a class of weaponry? That's a real easy one...atomic weapons.
ack-ack
-
"There were entire classes of weaponry only possessed by the Germans, such as guided missiles, rocket powered flight and of course jet (until very late in the war), helicopters, cruise missiles, anti shipping missiles.."
Bzzzzt. Wrongo! You really should go bone up on who had what more. The US had all of that too (USN mainly) and so did the Brits. As Ack Ack noted
the German was success from tactics, not technology. Also, as was noted, the Allies had the trump card - das nOOk. Something old Adolph never
had (nor came close to) . Nor did the Germans have a decent navy with aircraft carriers. Something the US had an abundance of. Hell even the British
had those! You're vision is just warped from those leather undie colored glasses. <heel click, arm thrust> "Seik Hellp!" ;)
p.s. the Germans had NO chance in winning the war because they did not have the technologically advanced industrial might of the United States. That
is the reason the Axis lost in a nutshell. The US could out research, out develop, out produce and out "reach out & touch somebody" a magnitude more
than the Germans could - even adding in the rest of the Axis. The US could project an enormous power across both the Atlantic AND the Pacific oceans
AND maintain and supply them to boot The Germans could not. (example: their Afrika forces just south of them).
-
I would propose that HT might look into the possibility of curtailing side switching when any country gets within Four bases of a reset. This would serve a couple of different purposes:
1) It would increase the likelihood of actual "fights" for bases, rather than 75 man hordes on a single vehicle base.
2) ENY. When one side gets close to a reset, there is an inevitable mass exodus of players from the other two. I don't know if people can't get perks any other way, but the fights degenerate rather quickly close to a reset, for all countries.
Case in point... was having a great time yesterday (Sunday 3 JAN), with a small map and good fights. I fly high ENY birds ~75-80% (Ki84 and 190F8) of the time anyway, so that doesn't make a difference. Rook ENY was ~8 or so, and the fights were spectacular. I mean great times. Rooks took a couple of bases.....and got within 1 or 2 of reset. Suddenly, 80 players from Knit and Bish switched sides, I guess to get the free perks. ENY went from 8 to 29 in about 3 minutes. Fights all over the map degenerated into hordes of Rooks on single bases, which were then countered by both of the other countries upping 262's en masse. The actual fighting dropped to nothing...and turned into a slaughter. I left the arena and went to the other.
It's really frustrating going from a great time having great fights to flying P40's against 262's and Tempests.
Inevitably, someone will say, just switch sides. I like flying with my squadron. If I was freelance, I would switch in a heartbeat. I'm just saying that the fights would be better if we limited the "mass exodus" of switchers close to a reset.
Just make the map a 2 sided war with 2 teams, that would stop alot of problems that lead to side switching
-
Just make the map a 2 sided war with 2 teams, that would stop alot of problems that lead to side switching
How so?
One side with 60 vs. one side with 20?
Sound better?
:rofl
wrongway
-
At the start of hostilities, which includes the invasion of Poland and up to and the end of the Battle of France, the French had more advanced and better tanks than the German army. Those Char B tanks people like to make fun of? At the time, they could easily take on and destroy any German tank the Wehrmacht had in their inventory. You scoff at the US Army still having actual horse cavalry units when the majority the Wehrmacht was dependent on horses for transportion throughout the entire war and it wasn't because the Allies had made any other form of transportation risky.
ack-ack
Exactly. AS TRANSPORTATION, not as viable military units. The U.S. still looked at cavalry charge as a viable military tactic in the late 30's and early 40's.
You can all disagree all you wish, it is generally accepted that my point is valid, from a military history standpoint. From squad weapons on up, Germany was ahead of the allies. I'm not saying that every soldier was fielding the best possible weapon available. Numerical superiority and Industrial might won the war for us, along with some technical innovation as well (Radar, codebreaking). Inevitably, some will disagree, and say that the MG42 wasn't the best fielded MG of the war... the StG44 wasn't the top infantry weapon, that Panthers and Tigers were not the standard for post war armor development, and the Me-262 was a dog. Ad Infinitum. You're entitled to your opinion of course....facts say different.
Military historians say otherwise.
As far as the atomic bomb, There are quite a few historians that think Hitler actually won that race. There was a patent draft for a plutonium bomb in Germany in 1941, as well as tested soil on the island of Rugen that is still radioactive from a purported test of a weapon during the war.
Most think this weapon was closer to a "dirty bomb" and the program was hampered by lack of pure grade uranium. (Which is a reason, some historians have postulated, that we invaded Africa when we did. Africa and North America were pretty much the only places that had uranium, as was known then)
We should be thankful Hitler was a complete buffoon in any case. Maybe we can agree on that? :)
-
The only reason why the Char was so hard to kill was because of its thick armor, the cannon itself was not that much better than that of the Pzkpfw II, but when you can take rounds all day and the enemy can't, you will eventually win.
-
Me thinks you get your info from Luft'46 type websites. Lots of conjecture, wishful
thinking and pure made up hogwash.
"squad weapons on up"
Right. The US didn't have the BAR, Thompson, M1, carbine and M3 grease gun. US soldiers
routinely threw away those weapons to pick up the <cough> superior German squad weapons.
lol. um, yeah.
Yes the MG42 was the fastest firing mg of the war and the St44 was a precurser STYLE wise
to the assault rifle but it was not the first automatic or even semi-auto weapon to be deployed.
The US M1 was the best infantry weapon of the war - hands down and was being used LONG
before the 44 was.
As with tanks the Germans had the advantage in not having to ship across the Atlantic ocean
those Tigers and Panthers to the North American continent. (like they ever stood a chance of
doing that either) The US had to weigh quantity vs quality so they sent the M4 and smaller tanks.
Now if the US had factories to make tanks in the European theater, like Russia with it's T-34, the
M-26 would have been there a lot sooner and been pawning those German tanks as it did when
it arrived in '44.
But as for you and "some" historians thinking Hitler won the nuke war with a supposed dirty
bomb? Pure baloney. Refer to my opinion on what you really base your opinion on - Luft'46 type
of crap and not actual historical fact.
Seems that with the advent of the internet anyone who can build a website and post fabrications
and imaginative stories we now have a new legion of self dubbed "historians"
-
You're kidding right? So an army (the Wehrmacht) that is outnumbered from the beginning, steamrolls a continent and they're not more advanced? Wrong, they were more advanced both technically and operationally (tactically). A third of the French tanks couldn't fire anything bigger than a machine gun. The lengths people will go to to customize their truth. The US Army still had Cavalry at the beginning of the war.
I mean c'mon.
Germany manufactured pretty much the most advanced weaponry of the war, in most, if not all categories. It was the Allies superiority in numbers and in operational control that won the war. Logistics and Industrial capacity as well, won the allied effort.
Name a class of weaponry the Reich didn't actually have an edge in.... There were entire classes of weaponry only possessed by the Germans, such as guided missiles, rocket powered flight and of course jet (until very late in the war), helicopters, cruise missiles, anti shipping missiles......
You are wrong on so many levels Moray, it isn't even funny.
-
Moray let me help you out here bud, its true that Germany did produce *some* of the most advanced weaponary of the war...however there is a HUGE difference between experimental and advancement.
Germany did a lot of experimental weapons in order to gain a foothold on the war...when countries start to loose a war they try things they normally would not try. Just how the first submarine was actually made and tested by the Confederates during the civil war called the Hunley. This machinary was more advanced than anything the Union had, but however when it does not have an effect on the war you can only place it in the experimental category.
-
As far as the atomic bomb, There are quite a few historians that think Hitler actually won that race. There was a patent draft for a plutonium bomb in Germany in 1941, as well as tested soil on the island of Rugen that is still radioactive from a purported test of a weapon during the war.
I see your German atomic bomb and raise you a Reichsflugscheibe
(http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/2813/44zv5mz1.jpg)
Some historians say they saw action in WWII and are now operating from a secret base in Antarctica....
-
I just thought I would note that dodge ball hasn't been removed from school, we still have tournaments and it is good fun to go against the faculty.
-
Tactics would be using bounding overwatch reconnaissance by fire etc .
You make me want to go lay in the prone for hours in the snow :devil :salute
-
Exactly. AS TRANSPORTATION, not as viable military units. The U.S. still looked at cavalry charge as a viable military tactic in the late 30's and early 40's.
Where do I begin? The German army used cavalry units from the beginning of the war until their surrender in 1945. Below is a list of the German cavalry units.
1st Cavalry Division (later 24th Panzer Division)
3rd Cavalry Division
4th Cavalry Division
Cossack Cavalry Division (unit was transferred to the Waffen-SS, where it was split to form the 1st & 2nd Cossack Cavalry Divisions as part of the XV SS Cossack Cavalry Corps)
Most remember stories of the famous cavalry charges by the Polish army during the Invasion of Poland, but what is not as well known are the two cavalry charges by the German army.
Królewskie Forests near town Krzynowłoga Mała - 01.09 - Polish - German cavalry horse fierce skirmish - German cavalry horse charge with sabres:
Small Polish patrol from 11th Leggionary Ulan Regiment (Mazowiecka Cavalry Brigade) under command of lieutenant Wladislaw Kossakowski during the reconessaince mission, met small German cavalry patrol from 1st Cavalry Brigade. Kossakowski decided to start a battle - close combat with sabres and probably lances on Polish side (this was one of a few incidents during the campaign, when Polish cavalry used lances), and with sabres on German side.
Kossakowski wrote:
"At the end of our march, in the edge of small forest clearing, we saw small German cavalry unit. They didn't see us, but their positions were crossing the road and blocking our march direction. I asked other officers - are we charging? As the answer, I heard noice of sabres being pulled out from sheaths. We made a pre-charge formation and charged towards them from the forest, screaming - Hurray! The shock tactic was succesfull, but - what surprised us - this time German cavalry didn't panic or withdraw, but re-charged us using sabres - also screaming Hurray! and occasionally - Heil Hitler! - two brave charging cavalry units, screaming, brandishing with sabres and bending down in saddles, were going to head-on collision! After few seconds, we reached them and they reached us. Two cavalry formations crushed in one battle - but our impetus was greater. In fact, both formations just passed each other - but there were casualties on both sides. I remember, that corporal Juckiewicz stuffed a German cavalryman with his lance - German soldier just moaned and died. After this short but fierce and bloody combat, we galloped in our way and those of Germans who survived - galloped in their way. We were all unconcsious from emotions and excitement, but kept riding - after few minutes we reached our infantry with MGs and mortars positions - great relief. Finally, our patrol joined our regiment in the late evening"
Charge by Krasnobród - 23.09.1939:
2nd Polish cavalry squadron (from 25th Cavalry Regiment) is attacking (in foot formation) German infantry - hand granades, rifles and MGs, together with artillery support (9th Horse Artillery Command) force German infantry to withdraw in great mess. German chaotic and fast withdrawal makes an opportunity to make a cavalry charge:
Other Polish cavalry unit (1st squadron under command of lieutenant Tadeusz Gerlecki) is charging and chasing panicked German Infantry which is now running away, crushed and completely disorganized - one squadron of German heavy "Eastern Prussian" cavalry with strong, heavy horses, charge with sabres towards Polish cavalry, trying to rescue rests of defeated German Infantry:
"It was amazing view - against Polish ulans charged German cavalry units - Polish squadron - charging in a single line formation - with lances directed towards Germans, was closing to the charging enemy. Enemy cavalry was charging with sabres in chaotic, messy formation. Finally, units striked each other. Polish cavalry - well disciplined, better trained for horse fighting and supported by Polish 9th Horse Artillery Command - crushed Germans. Polish sabres together with Polish artillery fire, crushed Prussians - German cavalry suffered heavy losses."
Prussian cavalry was also charging against 2nd squadron positions, which was defending in foot formation with MGs and rifles - German charge was rejected (mainly because of Polish artillery support and MGs fire) with quite heavy losses for them. But there is no doubt, that German cavalry charge gave the minute of peace to the Infantry, and help in its withdrawal, giving an opportunity to rest for a few minutes without being attacked, decrease panic, and - partially - regroup.
Polish cavalry attack supported infantry, and inficted on re-taking the city of Krasnobród from German hands, and capturing the headquarters & staff of German 8. Infanterie-Division together with many divisional commanders and staff officers.
There was also a Waffen-SS cavalry division, the 8th SS Cavalry Division Florian Geyer.
Insignia of the 8th SS Cavalry Division
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/8th_SS_Division_Logo.svg/125px-8th_SS_Division_Logo.svg.png)
German soldier of the 3rd Cavalry Division adjusting the bridle on his horse.
(http://www.odkrywca.pl/forum_pics/picsforum13/k2_copy.jpg)
Soldiers of the 8th SS Cavalry on the Eastern Front.
(http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/germanhorse/fig4_german_waffenss_cavalry_4th_ss.jpg)
Members of the 8th SS Cavalry crossing a stream in Russia.
(http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/germanhorse/fig5_german_waffenss_cavalry_river_crossing.jpg)
2nd Cossack Cavalry troop forming up prior to a charge.
(http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/germanhorse/fig6_cossack_cavalry_in_german_service_wwii.jpg)
In contrast, by the beginning of the war the US Army was already disbanding their horse cavalry units and reorganizing them as mechanized units and the last US cavalry charge took place in 1942 in the Philippines.
So, you were saying?
ack-ack
-
As far as the atomic bomb, There are quite a few historians that think Hitler actually won that race. There was a patent draft for a plutonium bomb in Germany in 1941, as well as tested soil on the island of Rugen that is still radioactive from a purported test of a weapon during the war.
Most think this weapon was closer to a "dirty bomb" and the program was hampered by lack of pure grade uranium. (Which is a reason, some historians have postulated, that we invaded Africa when we did. Africa and North America were pretty much the only places that had uranium, as was known then)
We should be thankful Hitler was a complete buffoon in any case. Maybe we can agree on that? :)
In 2006, scientists from Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt in Germany tested the soil for any evidence of a nuclear blast and their reported revealed no abnormal background levels of radiation, other than those elevated as a result of the Russian Chernobyl reactor accident in 1986. Other than the theories published by Rainer Karlsch in his book "Hitler's Bombe" there is no evidence that the Germans were close to building an atomic bomb, let alone test one.
The majority of historians all agree that Nazi Germany was not even close to building an atomic bomb but instead were years (some estimate up to a decade) behind the United States in developing an atomic bomb.
ack-ack