(Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns

Message

Alby -> (3/10/2001 7:09:00 AM)
quote: Originally posted by Mogami: Hi, I don't want to change to the civil war here but where does poor US Grant get this rep for attrition? If you look at his war record he was one of the most mobile generals of either side. The Virgina campaign was him always trying to find the flank. The army of the Potomac was the smallest it had ever been while Grant was with it. He made no more silly failed frontal assaults during the war then Lee did. He made excellent choices when picking sub-ordinates. I think he would have made an excellent mobile/armour war commander in WWII he was prehaps the best stratagist of the Civil War (I admit he was weak in battle field tactics but he made up for this by picking Generals who were not) ..... Cold Harbor ring a Bell,

AmmoSgt -> (3/10/2001 8:38:00 AM)
The Allies didn't use attrition ( at least in the WW1 sense we killed and took Germans prisioner about 5 to one and it took us about as long to get from Normandy to Berlin (11 months)as it did the Germans to get from Poland to Calais (9 months) of course alot of that was air and arty but i think the Germans were tougher opponents that the Dutch.... I don't like the giving one side more points than the other idea that much .. I think allied stuff should be a little cheaper .. but not enough to complain about it .. I find no problem winning overwhelmingly in either the 43 league or the last league 44 as Americans on even point meeting engagements .. my main concern is strictly subtracting units from the game or withholding unit's in the Game from PBEM players ..the "understandings" posted. that i am using specfics to illustrate the genneral is correct .. the fact that there seems to be a trend to trim the allies does give me anxious moments because the complaining about German not being invincible does not stop .. it has been going on since i found this site and i see things change to further and further restrict the allies ...

frank1970 -> (3/14/2001 6:41:00 PM)
Ammosgt, the Germans did not attack France until 10.5.1940! The time in between Poland and France, they built up some divisions and trained their forces. The whole France campagne lasted for about 6 weeks!

chanman -> (3/15/2001 4:24:00 AM)
Hi AmmoSgt, I don't have a real beef with what you are saying, but I would like to add some thoughts. The (western) allies did use attrition, but in indirect ways. Waiting until 1944 to invade France, after the Soviet Union had wasted so much of the German Army in '43, for example. The use of Tac Air for interdiction as opposed to the close in support style of the stuka. Another example is Eisenhower's refusal of Patton's proposal to attack up the German departure line after the Bulge (cutting off the units in the Bulge) instead preferring to push on the sides and tip of the salient. Let's not even talk about the Italian campaign. Just my $.02

Billy Yank -> (3/16/2001 4:45:00 AM)
Please forgive the total digression. quote: Originally posted by chanman: "As * is my witness, I thought that turkeys could fly"** "They're hitting the pavement like sacks of wet cement!!!" :D

sven -> (5/20/2001 12:42:00 PM)
quote: Originally posted by Alby: Cold Harbor ring a Bell, Gettysburg bring back any memories???? Grant was a good general and by far one of the best the Union had.

Alby -> (5/21/2001 12:18:00 AM)
Geez this is back??? Um yes gettysburg rings a bell, but grant wasnt there. If I recall correctly, but proably have forgotten or gotten my facts screwed up, I think grant Stupidly lost far too many men at Cold Harbor, by ridiculous frontal assaults on very good confederate defenses. My opinion on grant was that he always had more men, lost more men, and thusly finally just wore down Lee, by sheer numbers, not caring about his own losses due to the fact, that he knew he had more men, and could always get more. Anyway no big deal.... ;)

sven -> (5/21/2001 12:26:00 AM)
quote: Originally posted by Alby: Geez this is back??? Um yes gettysburg rings a bell, but grant wasnt there. If I recall correctly, but proably have forgotten or gotten my facts screwed up, I think grant Stupidly lost far too many men at Cold Harbor, by ridiculous frontal assaults on very good confederate defenses. My opinion on grant was that he always had more men, lost more men, and thusly finally just wore down Lee, by sheer numbers, not caring about his own losses due to the fact, that he knew he had more men, and could always get more. Anyway no big deal.... ;) I was stating that 'Superman'(aka Lee)was perfectly capable of attritional stupidity in his own right. Grant was guilty about Cold Harbor for the rest of his life. Thing is he won.

Alby -> (5/21/2001 12:33:00 AM)
Yup Lees own ego got him at Gettysburg, He had come to think the army of Northern Virginia was invincible and he paid for it big time!! I still think Jackson was the brains behind Lee, when he was killed, things went downhill from there. ;)

Spike -> (5/21/2001 12:45:00 PM)
Wow.. this was one of those threads I wasn't going to bother reading a few months ago.. I left for a month and it's still on page 1! :) (oops I guess it's on top again!) Sorry, nothing to contribute, just amazed.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 4 [5]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.75