This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - loatty
1
« on: July 22, 2011, 11:02:00 AM »
@Otto 213: wow, I'm impressed, i merely created a very basic example and you immediately link this to actual history...
your approach of this situation impresses me and i agree with your tactics.
BTW: I'm planning on reading Achtung - Panzer!, which i think is the best book on motorized warfare.
2
« on: July 15, 2011, 01:04:51 PM »
@Tico_1990: and the enemy is just going so sit there, waiting to get slaughtered? really?  BTW: this topic is about what you would do in real life, not COH or any game.
3
« on: July 14, 2011, 11:54:30 PM »
and when i ask everyone here to come up with plans for breaking a stalemate or crush enemy defences? to start with something: you have 10 divisions (7 infantry, 2 armoured and 1 elite armoured for a grand total of 180.000 men and 900 tanks, 350 of which are slightly aged) facing you are 22 enemy divisions (a total of 350.000 men and 2000 tanks). intelligence suggest they consist of 15 infantry, 5 armoured and 2 mechanized infantry divisions, of which 1 armoured and both mechanized infantry divisions are kept in reserve behind the lines. lets say the front line is quite like a straight line, with one minor bulge (about 50 km deep), both under your control, on either end. the enemy does not have superiority in the air, but has a powerfull AA defence readied and waiting. you are given the command over a airfleet of 500 planes, of which 150 bombers, 300 fighters and 50 divebombers. suprise me with some good tactics, guys, I'm wondering what you could make of this! 
4
« on: July 12, 2011, 07:15:59 PM »
i try to build up my forces while holding on to a predetermined area of control which i then use to launch strong attacks, designed to wear down the enemy's forces.
Note: sadly, i never really complete the part of preparing my forces, because i usually seem to wait around to often, building defenses in case my offense fails.
5
« on: July 12, 2011, 04:05:35 PM »
Well guys, i guess everybody here enjoys some warfare from time to time... but i was wondering: what kind of strategy & tactics do you favor? what would your ideal operation, be it defensive or offensive, look like? for example: although i favor a swift campaign in which the enemy's forces are encircled using Blitzkrieg tactics, but on the other hand I'd like a good fight as well. share some opinions with me guys, and your views on strategy & tactics, please  .
6
« on: February 23, 2011, 05:56:19 PM »
Concerning the vehicle mounting, I was talking about the MG42 being used for tanks, which wasn't possible, because of it's design.....the MG3 is a newer and better design, remember.
7
« on: February 11, 2011, 04:20:45 PM »
I agree with Pariah, politics are part of this discussion, but we should leave our own opinions out, guys.
8
« on: February 10, 2011, 05:02:26 PM »
may i remind everyone that this is a discussion about why Germany lost on the eastern front? And the 'they lost because they were fu...ng idiots' story might be partly right, it isn't going to explain everything, so please try to talk about something a little more serious.
Now, can we all please get back to the topic?
9
« on: February 08, 2011, 04:06:38 PM »
it didn't had a drum mag, but the drum was replaced with a special container which held an 50-round belt.
and I'm not saying the 42 was an LMG, it just had more of an LMG's handling and was sadly not capable of vehicle mounting, due to it's rapid overheating.
what I'm trying to say here, although the 34 and the 42 are of the same breed, their very different from each other, and the 42 simply proofed to be superior in most roles.
10
« on: February 07, 2011, 04:47:19 PM »
sorry, i didn't intend to say it's an LMG, the weapon is surely an GPMG, but has much more characteristics of an LMG when it's handled. 
11
« on: February 06, 2011, 05:13:24 PM »
I agree, but the MG-34 was overall not at all as good as the MG-42, which was indeed more of an LMG, but don't think it was weak  .
12
« on: January 31, 2011, 01:50:08 PM »
They may have scared a lot of scientist away, but Germany was still superior with certain technologies until the very end of the war, take rockets, for example...... damn I'm not in the mood to talk a lot right now 
13
« on: January 30, 2011, 08:28:57 PM »
Well, if i stick to basic options, Germany could've won the war if: 1: the German nuclear project finished before the US. 2: if Hitler actually listened to his officers! 
14
« on: January 26, 2011, 04:10:36 PM »
That covers it, i suppose
15
« on: January 24, 2011, 05:40:35 PM »
The defeat of the USSR would've been more likely with Japan joining in, but Japan already attacked the USSR before, and lost all the time (fun fact: it was the fighting against Japan which helped so to speak 'shape' General Zhukov  ) Germany was the country which had to deliver the biggest en then decisive blow, not any other nation.
|
Show Posts