8206
Off-Topic / Re: New Names?
« on: 30-03-2009, 04:03:43 »
VonMudra= Von Mudra
And its not von Mundra, or von Murda, or van Mundarianplex, damnit.
And its not von Mundra, or von Murda, or van Mundarianplex, damnit.
Show Posts
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.
8207
Off-Topic / Re: What do you know about WW2 generals?
« on: 30-03-2009, 02:03:43 »
Patton? Simple. He never once in any of his victories faced an enemy that matched him in terms of supplies and numbers. Its easy to roll over an enemy that is crushed, in full retreat, and there is nothing in front of you. His victory in France was nothing. The 1st Army was the one that broke through in Cobra, and cleared the way for Patton to ride around through France all crazy like, because there wasn't a thing that could stop him until he hit Metz. At Metz, for 3 months, he could not break through a brigade sized kampfgruppe of officer trainees, replacements, pioniere, garrison troops, and a couple Panthers.
Let's look at his victories:
Tunisia: He did nothing but charge forward against a foe that knew it was vanquished, and was surrendering in droves
Scicly: The italians barely put up a fight, and the couple german divisions never tried to hold the island, only to hold off the brits and amis long enough to evacuate their own troops, something that they accomplished.
Normandy: As I said, Patton takes credit for Cobra when his army was not the army that did the fighting. The 1st Army broke through, the 3rd Army just drove on by.
Metz: Technically a victory, but it shows Patton's true colours. He had all the numbers advantage, more tanks, full air support, and complete arty support. But a few well led german troops with ample defenses to offset thier numerical and equipment inferiorities held him off for 3 months.
Battle of the Bulge: The true credit goes to the 101st Airbourne and the 291st Engineers, as well as some other units that were caught up in the initial german offensive, taht held, slowed down, and halted the german attacks. Patton attacked the flank of an enemy that was being swallowed up to the west. He once again, attacked with full superiority, against an enemy that couldn't fight back.
All in all, Patton's tactics are medieval. He believed in attack, attack, attack. If he had ever faced the germans as they were in 41, or the Russians as they were in 45 (something he wanted to do) he would have been let into their defenses, cut off, and butchered, much like the germans mastered in 41 against the russians, and the russians in turn mastered in their sweep across eastern europe from Bagration to Vienna.
Patton was a poor general, who was a great spokesman, and a bombastic personality, fitting for a propaganda coup.
Let's look at his victories:
Tunisia: He did nothing but charge forward against a foe that knew it was vanquished, and was surrendering in droves
Scicly: The italians barely put up a fight, and the couple german divisions never tried to hold the island, only to hold off the brits and amis long enough to evacuate their own troops, something that they accomplished.
Normandy: As I said, Patton takes credit for Cobra when his army was not the army that did the fighting. The 1st Army broke through, the 3rd Army just drove on by.
Metz: Technically a victory, but it shows Patton's true colours. He had all the numbers advantage, more tanks, full air support, and complete arty support. But a few well led german troops with ample defenses to offset thier numerical and equipment inferiorities held him off for 3 months.
Battle of the Bulge: The true credit goes to the 101st Airbourne and the 291st Engineers, as well as some other units that were caught up in the initial german offensive, taht held, slowed down, and halted the german attacks. Patton attacked the flank of an enemy that was being swallowed up to the west. He once again, attacked with full superiority, against an enemy that couldn't fight back.
All in all, Patton's tactics are medieval. He believed in attack, attack, attack. If he had ever faced the germans as they were in 41, or the Russians as they were in 45 (something he wanted to do) he would have been let into their defenses, cut off, and butchered, much like the germans mastered in 41 against the russians, and the russians in turn mastered in their sweep across eastern europe from Bagration to Vienna.
Patton was a poor general, who was a great spokesman, and a bombastic personality, fitting for a propaganda coup.
8208
Off-Topic / Re: What do you know about WW2 generals?
« on: 30-03-2009, 02:03:15 »
Yeah, he was fine in WW1 as a company commander. But his actions in Africa are inexcusable. He beat back just two weak british divisions, then got his ass kicked all the way back to his start lines because of his lack os understanding logistics. Then when he pushed back to Toburk, he only won at Gazala due to a lucky break at the 150th Box. Otherwise, he would have been forced to surrender the entire Afrika Korp, which had been surrounded and trapped, sans water supplies, for days...and remember, its 3 days before u start dying from lack of water. After that lucky break at 150th box, the brits HAD to retreat to the next positions, at Alam Halfa. Mersa Matruh was a failure, the british divisions in there escaping overnight, and of course, Alam Halfa was a total failure, with Rommel running headlong into the british defense.
Next, we have El Alamein, where ROmmel abandoned his Italian Allies and left them to die or be captured, getting his own divisions out and booking it while the Italians literally fought till death or until they were entirely out of ammunition. Next, we have Tunisia, where he stupidly squandered the revived Afrika Korp in his attack on the Americans, which achieved only temporary, short lived success, and then proceeded to lose the battle for Tunisia. Next, we have Normandy, where his idea of a thin crust defense was destroyed, partly by weak garrison units, but also because of the simple fact that there are almost no cases in history where an amphibious assualt has been stopped by a thin crust defense. As for the idea that it was Hitler's fault for not releasing the armour, that exact course of events happened at Salerno, where the armour broke through all the way to the beachhead, only to be butchered by the allied naval forces. The 16th Panzer Division at Salerno lost 70% of their armour, almost all due to naval gun fire.
Then, finally, Rommel joins in on the assassination attempt, not because he doesn't like Hitler so much as he views it as a chance to grow in power. Rommel was nothing more then a propaganda tool used by the nazis. He was loyal to Adolf, something that had been nutured since he had become the commander of Hitler's bodyguard in the 30s. He was a poor commander who had some lucky breaks against inferior foes, and had no grasp of logistics.
Next, we have El Alamein, where ROmmel abandoned his Italian Allies and left them to die or be captured, getting his own divisions out and booking it while the Italians literally fought till death or until they were entirely out of ammunition. Next, we have Tunisia, where he stupidly squandered the revived Afrika Korp in his attack on the Americans, which achieved only temporary, short lived success, and then proceeded to lose the battle for Tunisia. Next, we have Normandy, where his idea of a thin crust defense was destroyed, partly by weak garrison units, but also because of the simple fact that there are almost no cases in history where an amphibious assualt has been stopped by a thin crust defense. As for the idea that it was Hitler's fault for not releasing the armour, that exact course of events happened at Salerno, where the armour broke through all the way to the beachhead, only to be butchered by the allied naval forces. The 16th Panzer Division at Salerno lost 70% of their armour, almost all due to naval gun fire.
Then, finally, Rommel joins in on the assassination attempt, not because he doesn't like Hitler so much as he views it as a chance to grow in power. Rommel was nothing more then a propaganda tool used by the nazis. He was loyal to Adolf, something that had been nutured since he had become the commander of Hitler's bodyguard in the 30s. He was a poor commander who had some lucky breaks against inferior foes, and had no grasp of logistics.
8209
General Discussion / Re: FH2 Avatars
« on: 30-03-2009, 01:03:23 »LOL Lightning I just noticed that you're official occupation is "Dreamcrusher"... nice touch.That was Toddel's idea...
Can we get some usergroups for the pubs, like debaters, or historians, etc....?
8210
General Discussion / Re: Can't wait for 2.2
« on: 30-03-2009, 01:03:28 »Just a hypothetical situation for the betatesters:
(Using the current internal version) You have just deployed an mg42 lafette, but it didn't appear. You hear an explosion in a nearby building, and enter it looking for a better weapon than your pistol. On the ground are 3 kits: one with an M1 garand, one with a carbine, and one with a g43. All have an equal number of bullets left. Which do you pick up and why?
Why would I enter a building that I just heard an explosion in, with only a pistol.
8211
Off-Topic / Re: What do you know about WW2 generals?
« on: 30-03-2009, 01:03:30 »ahh Guderian...the pioneer of blitzkrieg
Rant on how blitzkrieg the theory is incredibly different from blitzkrieg the reality, and how the idea that it was some new tactic was nothing more then german propaganda that the allies latched on to to explain their defeat in france, rabble rabble rabble.
Now, if you guys start talking on the idea that Rommel and Patton were great, visionary generals, I'll have to slap you
8212
Off-Topic / Re: Unite And Conquer!
« on: 30-03-2009, 01:03:26 »
Honestly, I don't think it should be closed or such. Its good to have a single spam thread, as long as it is all CONTAINED withen this thread, and this thread ALONE.
8213
Announcements / Re: Back in Business
« on: 30-03-2009, 01:03:11 »Where's our house warming gift? We better not get some silly April Fools present instead lol.
Actually, I really hope there IS an April Fools joke. We all know it would be, but it would add some levity to the situation.
8214
General Discussion / Re: New Forgotten Hope Forum!
« on: 30-03-2009, 01:03:44 »Oh, and don't forget Happy Fun Ball, and Fuzzybunny!Fuzzy Bunny has been missing for ages... even on the old forums so I wouldn't hold you're breath.
No, he popped in rarely from time to time, every 3-4 months or so.
8215
Sidi Rezegh / Re: Sidi Rezegh 64
« on: 30-03-2009, 01:03:54 »
Yep, for the germans. Its an airfield, it should have more than 2 88mms 
8216
General Discussion / Re: FH2 Avatars
« on: 30-03-2009, 01:03:17 »
Oh oh, make one of a lafette, and I'll for sure use it:)
8217
Sidi Rezegh / Re: Sidi Rezegh 64
« on: 30-03-2009, 00:03:54 »
One thing that would be nicer is to have a couple 20mm AA guns placed on the airfield in where they can only fire forward. Would be a lot more realistic, and any spamming can be fixed by locking them out to the brits, and/or making it so that there's a sandbag wall over any areas to the back and sides, so it can only fire front.
8219
General Discussion / Re: Signatures!
« on: 30-03-2009, 00:03:56 »Thanks
Big coincidence, if there is anything like that.
edit: I noticed your sig, and thought: let's spread some happiness. Keep up the faith.
I'm not one to believe in coincidences much
Keep up the faith, and Blessed Be
