|
Disillusionist posted:How did 20th century armies process captured weapons and equipment? Depends on situations. If the soldier needs the firepower and can use it, they likely would. If the soldier doesn't need the firepower and there are few weapons, they might keep it or bring it to their unit. If the weapons in question is a large cache, you either blow it up so the enemy can't recapture it or call it in so that the stores can be removed, catalogued, and used (potentially). The bigger consideration for any old soldier to use a captured weapon immediately is that, for certain weapon systems, the lack of training makes it pointless to use or unlikely to have any effect. Ammunition also becomes a concern if you can't find any excesses or caches nearby.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 07:41 |
|
|
Cessna posted:Were laborers subject to military discipline, including being shot if they left work without permission? No, granted. And as I said before, I don't have the receipts hand, so to speak - I'm going from my memory of a careful argument. It's more about the other direction, where the prominent written accounts are from people who are accustomed to never having to respect anyone else's authority. Slim Jim Pickens posted:A fine theory, except that poets like Sassoon didn't actually write poems complaining about having to work labour behind the frontlines. They wrote about the rotting bodies in the trenches and the traumatized men around them, both unusual things if you were a coal miner back home. The absolute worst industrial disasters in British history were dwarfed by just the deaths at the relatively small battle of 1st Ypres. They can write about whatever they want. My uncle produced a book of great war poetry and what stands out to me in his his perception of the seeming endlessness of everything - it's not acute horror, but the scene of the present that extends to all horizons of past and future in his memory. Sassoon's poetry is fine and good in and of itself, but he was only one witness and his accounts are biased by the privilege he brought in with him. It's that readers look at those vivid experiences and go "ok this is every day in ww1" that's the problem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 17:09
|
|
|
Jehde posted:I see Manitoba and Nunavut as neither west nor east. Not central either, more so a sort of "neuter" Manitoba is the area that Saskatchewan relinquished but Ontario didn't want.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 17:12
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:But still—what would the likely outcome be if a B-17 got raked with the only/most-major damage being several bottles punctured or ruptured in the main store in the pilot's compartment? Salvageable airframe or bailout situation? Does the dorsal gunner, who stands between two banks of bottles, make it out? The pilot/copilot? They all bail by traversing between the bottles and dropping through the bomb bay; would oxygen bottle hits prevent that? If the only major damage are that the bottles are punctured you descend to an altitude where you don't need the oxygen system.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 17:33
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Depends on situations. US armored infantry and infantry with integral transport during the war in general were able to assemble huge collections of captured enemy(and friendly) non-TOE arms because they didn't have to lug everything around. This was less common in the leg infantry, but Germany had a lot of logistical effort devoted to collecting and making use of the all sorts of captured arms. A lot of the static divisions were repositories of captured Polish and Soviet gear, for example and this was issued.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:No, granted. And as I said before, I don't have the receipts hand, so to speak - I'm going from my memory of a careful argument. It's more about the other direction, where the prominent written accounts are from people who are accustomed to never having to respect anyone else's authority. You’re right that being the sort of literate person who reacts to trauma by putting pen to paper is the sort of thing that skews towards the middle and upper classes. That said, it’s a bit disingenuous to say that it was dominated by them. There are plenty of working class voices in WW1 lit, especially if you get out of English language authors. Louis Barthas to single out a thread favorite, for example, is pretty far from being a coddled prep school boy with no idea of hardship. Across the wire, Remarque also came from a working class background. Second, your larger argument about how coal miners saw poo poo nearly as bad as the average trench fighter holds up a pretty extraordinary working class experience as typical. poo poo was rough for coal miners but even at the time that was recognized as a brutal and unforgiving profession. There were a lot of them but they’re still very outnumbered by factory workers, small farmers, day laborers, dock workers, and all the other working class jobs you can find in the UK ca 1914. For your typical guy from London who has been making his way shifting crates at the docks death isn’t going to be unusual or unheard of, but he’s also not going to react to the trenches as just another day at the proverbial office.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 17:50
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:US armored infantry and infantry with integral transport during the war in general were able to assemble huge collections of captured enemy(and friendly) non-TOE arms because they didn't have to lug everything around. This was less common in the leg infantry, but Germany had a lot of logistical effort devoted to collecting and making use of the all sorts of captured arms. A lot of the static divisions were repositories of captured Polish and Soviet gear, for example and this was issued. You also had a lot of German soldiers grabbing Russian weapons on the eastern front. Hell, the appreciation of the infantry for the SVT-40 is a big part of what led to the development of first the G41 and later the G/K43. Something like a Mosin is a lot more likely to be sent back than used (a though a LOT of sniper m91/30s were pressed into service by front line German soldiers) but the semi and full autos got repurposed a lot. You can find a lot of pics like this one. Dude on the left has a PPSh and the one in the middle an SVT-40 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 17:55
|
|
|
I read this a long time ago and can't remember the exact details of it, but I believe the Germans even manufactured ammunition and box magazines for the PPSh. Or that it was possible to convert them to using German 9mm in 30-round magazines? Something like that. Also that alot of "88s" that the Allies encountered in Italy and North Africa were actually Soviet 76.2mm guns*. *Based on playing Company of Heroes 2, the 76.2 mm Zis-3 is the best loving gun. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Jun 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
It really can't be overstated just how much of the German war effort was with equipment that was confiscated from the places they conquered. They even used WW1 equipment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:I read this a long time ago and can't remember the exact details of it, but I believe the Germans even manufactured ammunition and box magazines for the PPSh. Or that it was possible to convert them to using German 9mm in 30-round magazines? Something like that. 7.62 tok and 7.63 mauser are interchangeable (the tok is a hotter load), so a lot of captured PPSh and PPS were just taken directly in to service. there was also a conversion program to tool PPSh for 9x19.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 18:18
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:I read this a long time ago and can't remember the exact details of it, but I believe the Germans even manufactured ammunition and box magazines for the PPSh. Or that it was possible to convert them to using German 9mm in 30-round magazines? Something like that. 7.63x25mm Mauser (the cartridge for the C96 pistol) is close enough to work albeit a little under loaded compared to 7.62 Tokarev. That’s what they manufactured for their captured Russian weapons. Note that the reverse is not a good combo. People have damaged C96s putting surplus Soviet SMG ammo through them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 18:18
|
|
|
Fly Molo posted:What matters more than the strategic balance of forces is the local balance of forces at any one location. The fundamental problem both sides kept running into was reinforcements - the defender can use rail lines to move up reinforcements, while the attackers have to walk men across no-man's land to reinforce a successful attack, which makes it very difficult to hold onto any ground you win. The theater-wide balance of forces doesn't really matter, if every time they successfully attack they're limited to moving up, say, 1,000 men/hour (once a runner gets back to their lines to report the success) while the Germans can immediately start bringing up 5,000 men/hour to counterattack and plug the gap. Did the Germans build new railroads behind but parallel to the front for this, or use the existing rail network? Time wise, was this reinforcements from a different sector show up 5 hours after a major attack begins or a day or 3 days or what? Were offensive rail networks ever built to bring reinforcements for the attackers up as close to the front as possible? Was using numerical advantage to concentrate in time, if not in space unfeasible? I.e. attack along the whole front at the same time to pin down reinforcements from being transferred to another sector. Of course I suppose then you are less likely to have the needed 3:1 advantage in men and...okay now I see why it never worked.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 18:27
|
|
|
The Finnish army salvaged and deployed a ton of stuff before and during WW2, a partial list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_equipment_of_the_Finnish_Army Various Soviet (and pre-Soviet Imperial Russian) artillery pieces numbering in hundreds and MG's and various rifles by the thousands. Tanks and even airplanes that crashed on the Finnish side of the front.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 19:07
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:Is this footage real? The audio all sounds fake as hell. It's much too clean (plus there's the Hitler speech bit at the end), and I suspect it was all added from stock recordings after the fact. The film component looks real though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 19:08
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Playing a Maquis vs FAGr5 in guntrucks table top game would be pretty fun, i think. *drops his 25lb ASL rulebook and begins jotting down notes*
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
Simultaneous attacks or concurrent attacks to pin potential reinforcements in place or to force the enemy to keep reserves in reserve rather than committing them were de rigeur at an operational level and at a strategic level. Many Western Front offensives were executed to take pressure off of other fronts, or support Russian or Italian offensives. In terms of logistics, everyone used the existing French railroads (no break of gauge in Western Europe so that simplified things quite a bit for les boches) and supplemented with Military Railroads that were narrow gauge (600mm) and roads with motorized and horse-drawn transport for last mile. The French had developed a thing called the Decauville railway, which was preset sections with rails and ties that could be rapidly hammered together. The Germans had something very similar. Both sides laid thousands of miles of 600mm track. Speeds were limited to say, 10-15 miles an hour, so the lines radiated from standard-gauge railway lines behind the front. Every mile of the front line probably had another two to three miles of trench railways behind it in various configurations. edit: more train stuff - main lines were standard gauge across borders, but there was an absolute ton of meter-gauge narrow gauge railways around France as well. Rail density in Northern France was extremely high as it was one of the most industrialized areas of the world. In organizing a defense there were of course tiers of reinforcement based on location and speed of potential response. The Germans were on the defensive more and thought about the defensive challenges in greater depth. Doctrine in '17 divided divisions between line-holding divisions and counter-attack divisions. Line holding divisions were responsible for organizing their own defense in depth, with forward posts, a MLR, a battle area behind the MLR, and a secondary line of resistance behind that. Behind that, you have the local regiment's reserve battalion. In a minor or probing attack, the line holding division solves its own problems using regimental and divisional reserves. Communication posts and artillery parks were defended more strongly. Counter-attack divisions were held in reserve behind local reserve battalions, and deployed either locally in immediate counterattack, or held in reserve awaiting relief divisions (taken from other area's counter-attack divisions or corps level reserves) to be assembled for a coordinated counter attack. An immediate single division counter-attack should take place as soon as possible; this meant realistically within a few hours of the attack at most. The coordinated counter-attack was to take place 24-48 hours later. These were not mutually exclusive - you could and should throw your local counter-attack division in to the fray immediately, and then also respond with a more coordinated response using relief divisions (usually line or attacking divisions that had been rotated to the rear to rest and refit) within 24-48 hours. Assuming no gently caress-ups, Divisional Reserve in roughly battalion strength is available in minutes. Counter-Attacking divisions are available within an hour or two. Corps or Army level relief divisions are available within 24-48 hours. After that, you're getting other Army's relief divisions and it depends on how far away they are, but since strategic mobility is very high compared to tactical mobility, you will be receiving reinforcements fairly constantly every day. KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Jun 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 19:19
|
|
|
Ok, semi-serious question here: If the world, post-WW1, moved to try to "sanitize" conflicts by holding them in specific regions on the planet. What places would be likely candidates in a 1920-30s world, or where might conflicts erupt due to the discovery of large resource deposits?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
Kaiser Schnitzel posted:Thanks for all these explanations-it has helped me understand better. These two questions go together. New main line construction was rare and onward transport from your closest main line standard-gauge railhead would have been by lorry or foot. (There are some persistently amusing stories about Tommies bumping into the fleet of requisitioned London buses somewhere in France, and how it seriously hosed with a lot of their heads to have something that was so obviously a symbol of Back Home showing up Over Here.) What everyone did build absolute shitloads of, and which were used far more for hauling poo poo to supply dumps than men to the lines, were light narrow-gauge railways on the system invented by Paul Decauville (the Germans had their own Netto Marken-Discount own-brand system). Decauville railways were abs-so-loving-lutely everywhere; they were cheap enough and simple enough to be assembled and repaired by any gang of idiots, and the logistical achievements of mostly-Indian engineers in the African campaign who ran working Decauville systems over thousands of miles of some of the most hostile terrain in the world deserves to be celebrated far more widely than it is. quote:Time wise, was this reinforcements from a different sector show up 5 hours after a major attack begins or a day or 3 days or what? Depends how you're defining "sector", really; are we talking brigade-level reserves or army-level reserves? Assuming the latter; as long as your logistics-wallahs can cope with emergency timetable changes (and by and large, they could), on the Western Front by 1916 an army commander can deploy his army-level reserves to any given spot he likes within about 36-72 hours of giving the order, local conditions permitting. Until fast tanks and stormtrooper tactics come into their own in 1918, this is generally fast enough to be able to react less slowly than your opponent and prevent a local defeat from turning into a front-dislocating disaster, and this then buys enough time to give the Chief enough time to react and start a major redeployment. Consider also that the defender has the advantages of falling back onto familiar ground, with your own prepared defences, and shortening your own supply lines in doing so; and the attacker has the opposite disadvantages. quote:Was using numerical advantage to concentrate in time, if not in space unfeasible? I.e. attack along the whole front at the same time to pin down reinforcements from being transferred to another sector. Of course I suppose then you are less likely to have the needed 3:1 advantage in men and...okay now I see why it never worked. You compensate for this by using deception. If you're at all familiar with WWII, you probably know the story of how Operation Bodyguard led Hitler to delay a full redeployment of his forces from the Pas-de-Calais to Normandy by an astounding seven weeks after D-Day, just in case it were somehow a massive stunt to get him to redeploy and then get pantsed by the real landings. There may not have been anything nearly so successful in WWI, but deception and concealing the location of things as far as possible was constantly on everyone's mind. When the next Big Push is being planned by GHQ, the lower-level comands are constantly ordering little local attacks or stunts to take some minor-but-annoying-for-the-enemy-to-have terrain feature. You're also launching what is politely known as a demonstration (or impolitely as a Chinese attack), where you send over a prepatory bombardment and fire off machine-guns and rifles and get the men to shout and scream as though they're coming over, and then never leave the trenches. When an attack is imminent, you step these diversionary efforts up, and in the early days of the main push you launch as many feints and local attacks in other areas as you can. It's probably going to be impossible to take the enemy totally by surprise, but what you can do is keep the exact location of your main effort unclear for as long as possible to freeze enemy reserves who will need to be railed in, and keep the enemy from reacting as long as you possibly can. These efforts were extensive and usually successful. The Battle of Verdun was preceded by a major phase of demonstrations and prepatory attacks indicating attacks against the French at Vimy and the BEF in the Ypres salient, with ten separate major feints in the month before zero hour. This programme caused delays at every stage and every level of the French response; it took four days to put the Verdun region under Petain and begin a wholescale redeployment to support the area, and a further two days to persuade Haig to begin making arrangements to extend the BEF's zone of responsibility south from Vimy to Arras (which would then free up the French 10th Army to go to Verdun); this process was not finished until the 14th of March, three weeks after the start of the battle. Likewise, for the Somme, the deception effort spread from Ypres to Peronne over multiple months with all involved army commanders instructed to prepare ostentatiously for an attack in their areas; it was so successful that all three German army commanders (von Below, Rupprecht of Bavaria, and Albrecht of Wurttemburg) believed that the main attack would fall on them; commander-in-chief Erich von Falkenhayn failed to react in any meaningful way to the start of the Somme for nearly four days, for fear it was a massive deception to support the real attack at Ypres that never came. Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Jun 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 19:41
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:From what little I understand, 20th century Japanese politics in general were absolutely mental. I started re-reading Shattered Sword, and I'm about to make an observation about "a problem in Japanese culture" as a white North American, so just get ready to cancel me. Oh, and I'm going to do some speculation about social dynamics, too! And furthermore, I'm inspired by a Brene Brown book I read in January! shame is this overwhelming force in the IJN and it really messes things up It hit me as I read Admiral Nagumo being quoted pre-Midway as saying "I don't care if I'm killed in this operation, as long as nobody impinges my honor." Because of course Nagumo had poo poo kicked on his honor by Adm. Yamamoto post Pearl Harbor for not being aggressive enough. Now Yamamoto was doing that because both men were in opposite factors of fleet arms control in the navy, and despite it not mattering even nominally anymore those factions were enemies for life, but also because as we all know the fleet carriers were not there. So Nagumo was letting an avowed enemy damage his self esteem? Honor as we know has several facets. As self identity, as a caste system, as a means of social control. But I can't help but see the culture of the IJN as turning the shame up to 11, and then just ignoring all the rolling problems that causes. As far as I can see, people never accept shame beyond their ability to process, and why not? Shame is an extreme social judgement; it marks who is worthy of love and who isn't, so it's not really suprising people break out psychological defenses beyond a certain threshold. This is pretty much why any value system that turns up the intensity of the shame fails; the psychological punishments are so harsh, people naturally avoid them. (Or like Adm. Nagumo, sometimes get drunk and attempt to stab fellow IJN admirals. This behavior was so common in the IJN officer corps that everybody just ignored it.) Anyway, I don't have much insight into the politics of 20th century Japan, except maybe for this: in a society where everyone's first thought is to avoid shame, for themselves and their families, I can get why this often ended in murder or letting junior officers in essence blackmail the honor of their superiors into a war with China. Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 00:05 on Jun 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 19:51
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Ok, semi-serious question here: You mean, like, the Brits suggesting that let's do this like gentlemen and resolve conflicts in a naval battle? Nah, that wouldn't be acceptable for most. Maybe arrange a pitched fight in the Antarctic? Assuming that a system like this was decided on, what would the international community do when Hitler annexes Czechoslovakia anyway? Send a strongly worded letter? e: actually for that matter, perhaps more realistically at a national level we could handle coups and revolutions by some constitutional amendment, like a capture the flag contest or something. Nenonen fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Jun 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 19:55
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Ok, semi-serious question here: United States, hands down. Tons of empty space, a wide variety of terrain, and tons of domestic arms manufacturing, bullets, tanks, oil- just think how much you’d save on shipping!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:You mean, like, the Brits suggesting that let's do this like gentlemen and resolve conflicts in a naval battle? Nah, that wouldn't be acceptable for most. Maybe arrange a pitched fight in the Antarctic? I'm thinking more that Hitler and co never comes into play. Kinda more like "The British empire has determined it has viable grievances against X country" and they then fight in a ruined, depopulated Yugoslavia. Winner gains prestige, resources, maybe territories. Loser is the opposite, maybe forfeits some GDP to the winner if they can't give the other. Other nations can join on either side, and mercenaries/counter-ops become more prevalent. Reason I ask is because I'm trying to think of viable locations for an alt-history setting using our planet (Because I have no current understanding on how to mod in a giant, new map for IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 and I have a dumb plan to play this out as a war diary over many years and across all the various different technologies involved in flight combat.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
Kind of sounds like Robot Jox.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:11
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Ok, semi-serious question here: How about Africa? It's largely controlled by colonial powers, there's lots of space, it's likely that the resource deposits will be found there, so it's appropriate, and there's a lot of climates and conditions to choose from. As an added bonus, the people who live there are irrelevant, because that's the times we live in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:16
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:I'm thinking more that Hitler and co never comes into play. I find it really difficult to imagine a situation where proud nation states would agree to something like this. Maybe an Ayn Randian libertarian dystopia where corporations rule the world? Then you can have different conglomerates fighting over the same piece of territory with any mix of equipment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:17
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Kind of sounds like Robot Jox. I was thinking Area 88, to be honest, but instead of being about Jets it would start with something akin to mid/late 1920s biplanes and go through 3 or so decades of aircraft tech until I'm forced to change games and then do another decade or two with various jet aircraft generations. Dance Officer posted:How about Africa? It's largely controlled by colonial powers, there's lots of space, it's likely that the resource deposits will be found there, so it's appropriate, and there's a lot of climates and conditions to choose from. As an added bonus, the people who live there are irrelevant, because that's the times we live in. The only issue with Africa is a general lack of scenery. Has there been any major resource discoveries in the Congo? I think that might be the only map I have thats viable in Africa proper. Everything else is North Africa, the Sinai peninsula and Madagascar
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:20
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Sure, it's just that there's a vividness that seems a tiny bit out of place given the other qualities of the film, like they restored the color but couldn't do much about the physical condition of the film. It's legit. It's part of the batch of film George Stevens shot. Most of what he shot was professional 35 mm B&W but he also took a 16 mm camera and a bunch of Kodachrome stock. That's from one of his 16 mm films. And that's just what 16 mm Kodachrome looks like. It was pretty advanced for it's time but there are really compelling reasons you don't see it used widely in the film industry. Also I doubt they did much actual restoration to the color. One of Kodachrome's traits is that unless you leave a slide in a projector or stop the projector on a single shot, the stuff doesn't fade. It's possible he took this reel home with him but most of his filming during the war is in DoD archives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:24
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I started re-reading Shattered Sword, and I'm about to make an observation about "a problem in Japanese culture" as a white North American, so just get ready to cancel me. Oh, and I'm going to do some speculation about social dynamics, too! And furthermore, I'm inspired by a Brene Brown book I read in January! It was absolutely a huge deal in Imperial Japan, but it is probably important to remember that this sort of thing was hardly limited to Japanese/Asian cultures. I think it is reasonable to say that Imperial Japan was a bit more enthusiastic about the shame/suicide/etc culture than average, although if I remember correctly, Yamamoto was extremely over all of that and was actively working to get his captains to NOT off themselves if it was avoidable. I feel like this has been presented historically as kind of an Orientalist thing, but my gut (notice: not even any cursory research attempted) thinks that it is something more endemic to autocratic or military governments, or more feudal/stratified systems.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:The only issue with Africa is a general lack of scenery. Has there been any major resource discoveries in the Congo? I mean I might be missing something here but uhhhhhhh 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:If the world, post-WW1, moved to try to "sanitize" conflicts by holding them in specific regions on the planet. What places would be likely candidates in a 1920-30s world, or where might conflicts erupt due to the discovery of large resource deposits? This question is so divorced from how early twentieth century states behaved that "Mars" is as valid an answer as any other.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Not really, since the Tigers achieved so little during the first deployment that the Red Army didn't notice that the Germans were using a new tank. After that yeah, two were captured in January of 1943 and some conclusions were drawn, although I can't think of any new countermeasures developed as a result that were already available by Kursk. What was the cause for the Soviets to try and put the ZiS-2 back into service after initially stopping it for the much cheaper and more general purpose ZiS-3? The timing makes sense more for the Tiger than the Panther, I think. Ensign Expendable posted:That's pretty much how Tigers were used in Italy, and they couldn't pull off a breakthrough there either. To add to this southern/central Italy is just Not Good Tank Country in general, especially for something as broad and as heavy as the Tiger. Lots of up and down, very narrow paths, and generally pretty short ranges that heavily favor the defender. What Tigers that did see action would be close enough that the 75 would have a decent chance of damaging it if not knocking it out and the 3" on the M10s doubly so.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:35
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:What was the cause for the Soviets to try and put the ZiS-2 back into service after initially stopping it for the much cheaper and more general purpose ZiS-3? The timing makes sense more for the Tiger than the Panther, I think. Yeah, the ZIS-2 was put back into production but I don't know how many guns were built by Kursk. The reason why it was taken out of production in the first place was difficulty in barrel manufacturing, that's not the sort of thing that just goes away after your industry was ruined by two years of war.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:37
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:The only issue with Africa is a general lack of scenery. Has there been any major resource discoveries in the Congo? I think that might be the only map I have thats viable in Africa proper. Everything else is North Africa, the Sinai peninsula and Madagascar The Congo is one of the world's richest regions in terms of mineral wealth. It sits on some of the largest deposits of cobalt, tantalum, and diamonds in the world. There's also large quantities of copper, tin and gold in the region, and there's significant hydrocarbon deposits off the shore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I mean I might be missing something here but uhhhhhhh I know nothing about Africa outside of "They seem interesting, let's fire up a game of EU4 and see if I can establish world domination". Not something my history classes ever truly covered in school and its a blind spot for me when it comes to natural resources, etc. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
aren't you from the UK?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:55
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:I know nothing about Africa outside of "They seem interesting, let's fire up a game of EU4 and see if I can establish world domination". Not something my history classes ever truly covered in school and its a blind spot for me when it comes to natural resources, etc. The reason the colonial powers were interested in Africa was that there were resources to get.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Definitely love to spend a bunch of mental effort to concoct an alternate history scenario where european colonial powers gently caress up africa even more.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
Phobeste posted:Definitely love to spend a bunch of mental effort to concoct an alternate history scenario where european colonial powers gently caress up africa even more. Doesn't have to be European powers, imagine a Russo-Japanese War that got VERY out of hand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 21:10
|
|
|
bewbies posted:It was absolutely a huge deal in Imperial Japan, but it is probably important to remember that this sort of thing was hardly limited to Japanese/Asian cultures. I think it is reasonable to say that Imperial Japan was a bit more enthusiastic about the shame/suicide/etc culture than average, although if I remember correctly, Yamamoto was extremely over all of that and was actively working to get his captains to NOT off themselves if it was avoidable. The concept of "face" is a very useful one for democratic governments as well. You see a lot of politicians pushing and pushing on policies that proved unpopular purely because they don't want to face the shame of "flip-flopping".
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 07:41 |
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:I'm thinking more that Hitler and co never comes into play. It's weird but it sounds fun so why not do whatever? Invent some fake countries like its Ace Combat. A de-imperialized Germany isn't going to fight outside of Europe in any explainable way so I think you're shot for answers if you want to have German planes. Otherwise, some colonial conflict anywhere would make sense. Dance Officer posted:The reason the colonial powers were interested in Africa was that there were resources to get. It was a bit more haphazard than that. The Scramble for Africa happened mostly because the Berlin Conference established a bunch of guidelines for claiming territory in perpetuity via cartography rather than physical presence of government. There were resources in Africa but most of it was unsurveyed and would remain unsurveyed for decades after. The Europeans just wanted to get ahead of the other Europeans and claimed territory as much as possible before actually getting any resources figured out. That's why it happened so quickly, the just madly sent out surveyors and signed treaties to indigenous powers and then scribbled the borders in on the map later.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2020 21:12
|
|
