Charles2222
Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline
|
PLease note, I wrote these comments as I read the quoted portions, so what may look as though I'm not understanding, may soon clear up further into the post
Mogami: quote:
Stug production went east tanks went west.
That's the same thing you said in the first place, and it's just as muddy now. If you mean what I now think you mean, what you're saying is that stug production, or new stugs went east, while new tanks went west. Still don't agree. BTW, when you say stug, I think you're still not clear. Perhaps you should resort to the more general term "tank-destroyer", because the "true stugs" were the "SG" lineup, whereas the tank-destroyers would more commonly also fit the JPZ's in as well. In any event, assuming I've hit on one of the possibilities of your meaning, i don't believe any of them (except for the Bulge of course). I don't know why you'd think the 'stugs' were going east, or more peculiarly the tanks going west, when it's normal to send tanks where the tank divisions were, and that post-Bulge was east. Nevertheless, you're more than welcome to prove it again.
quote:
If you can count is not snide. You state you don't trust me I say go count them your self.
Maybe where you come from it isn't, but to say "if you can count" is to tell me I'm stupid; snide indeed. In any part of the USA I know of, it is an insult. If you instead had said "go count" or "you can count" those aren't insults. Your English doesn't seem too precise, so naturally you may not understand the HUGE difference in whether you threw one word in there or not.
quote:
If you can count is not snide. You state you don't trust me I say go count them your self. If you examine Panzer Regt you will observe one or more Bn being replaced by Stug. If you check all Panzer and Panzer Grn Div you will find a number that on June 6 1944 have Panzer Regt with 0 tanks (stugs instead)
That's not tanks moving west, and I'm pretty sure you'll find the divisions of the west, at about the same time, with a stug regiment as well. Perhaps you already know this, but when the divisions became low enough on tanks, instead of keeping a weak third regiment, or balancing all the tanks between the three regiments, they took the 3rd regiment and consolidated all the tanks into the 1st two regiments, thus, when say 10 stugs arrived and 10 tanks, the tanks went into the 1st and 2nd regiment while the 10 stugs started the 3rd regiment.
quote:
The Germans were not adding stugs they were using them in place of tanks.
Yes and no. When they had 3 regiments of tanks, naturally they didn't have any stugs. When the stugs arrive new, they in a sense replace the tanks, since there is no longer a 3rd regiment of them, but any that arrive go into the 1st two regiments, while any new stugs go to the 3rd. I don't think this was regulated to just new stugs either. I think a number of infantry divisions had those stugs stripped from them to help the panzer divisions too.
quote:
Even some west front formations had this change. Okay, well we're agreed on that then.
quote:
Although total numbers of tanks is on the rise, the total on the east front remains fairly stable. The number of stugs however continues to rise. I conclude the stug was gaining in importance on the eastern front while the tank was being held in the west.
That may be so, but I sure haven't seen any documentation that showed to what front new AFV's were going.
AmmoSgt: quote:
Just look at Mine Clearing .. Germans were incredibly weak in Mine Clearing, Yet they Have Mine Clearing Vehicles they never produced.
As far as I know the minenrams or whatever they were called, were removed from the game. Other than not having mobile mine-removers, I wonder how you come to the conclusion that GE was "incredibly weak" in that department? They apparently didn't have too much problems with Eban Emal (sp) . the Maginot Line, or Tobruk. Slower than some perhaps, but they seemed to manage. Incredibly weak to me is 30% or worse, the efficiency of what it's compared to. The USSR has used penal battalions/cows at times, and though it may had been primitive I'm sure it was reasonably quick. That's the secret weapon the USSR needs, cows to blow up mines!
quote:
Allies developed several Mine Clearing techniques , yet are only allowed the ones that the Germans have as well... "must be that fair and balanced" thing the the Tiger Kiddies are afraid to play the game without.. Not every nation had to clear mines by hand ,, Allies had line charges and Bangalores , But everybody clears at the same rate . I don't know how a German Player can take any pride at all in claiming a win. geeze louise , and the whineing .. put a box of tissues in the German OOB fer Gawds sake .
Because maybe everyone that with any regularity plays GE, isn't on some kind of quest to look for every little nat's worth of advantage that they had that the Allies didn't (Goliaths anyone?).
quote:
M6A1 was made in Quanity ( about 50, heck of a lot more than some German Stuff) and deployed in Bn Strenght Stateside. Just Like many German vehicles it Didn't see any Action outside of it's home Country.
Irrelevant point. The war wasn't fought in the States, AT ALL, and it WAS in GE. Yes, we might be with glee if we nit-picked and left every vehicle that never crossed the borders of GE and make it useable only there, and how you know that I'd like to know, but that's impossible depth to the game. Does that also mean that if you're defending in Sevastopol, that I get to use my not-in-the-game Dora? mu-ha-ha-ha-ha.:eek:
quote:
I keep getting told by both staffers and german players US Tactics are not "fun" and Unbalance the game, How can anybody tell anybody else what tactics are fun for them , especially when they are a heck of a lot more Historically correct than the current game options for the Allies ..
Please don't misunderstand that I'm siding with you on this one, but one possible explanation is that the game is being designed for this awful balance thing. Everything is pretty much revolved around the idea of human playing human, therefore, no human will play, or at least very long when the odds are stacked so heavily against them. In CL, this 'could' change, if the operational layer is any good. Imagine for example how fun it would be, even if you're the side getting stomped all the time, to bide your battles and save up for a select few where you throw in practically everything and have the opponent going :eek:. Of course, having said that, two of the problems of SP is that the opponent is NEVER beyond a certain size for the given battle, and also that you have the unnatural boundaries of the screen edges. I just moan in a pathetic wimper when I think of all that scenario design when the designer may think they're clever by having some flank attack from some fairly unlikely place. The main thing wrong with that, is that the flanking force is unnatural, because until it enters that one crummy hex, I can't attack it in the slightest. It rather damages the adage that plans don't survive enemy contact when we always know the relative size of what we cannot even see yet (3X our force maybe) and that we can never escape the boundaries. Sure there are boundaries sooner or later, but not in every battle. A battle against a force holding a town could easily turn into a change of direction and attacking another force attacking the front's flank. Boy, I don't know what I'd give to play a campaign battle where I'd be able to attack from both the front and the rear of the enemy in a given battle, and his subsequent possible sliding right out of my grasp. We need battle attention more than weapon attention.
quote:
When you get past all the BS reasons it comes down to a simple lack of will to buck the Tiger Kiddies that act like they are scared to death of even a unrestricted game with the existing stuff in the game at even odds , God forbid the US get any more stuff that they can'rt cope with, Heck they can't cope with half the stuff that is already in the game, so why would anything change if more stuff they can't deal with is added .
You need to be more consistent. You're the one afterall who's always crying that all the Axis players want to always have a field full of Tigers. If you got your precious WP, or whatever else, would you be willing to run into an SS Heavy Tank Regiment with support? It don't sound like it.
|
Printable Version
- 
One on-topic observation and one vote - 
- 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread