I called IT ONCE AGAIN ABOUT COH3

Tigers in 1941 North African campaign? hell yea...

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 09:42 AMDonnieChan

i think relic definitely knows that.


problem are the guys whose only knowledge about ww2 consists of "german had tigers hadnt they"

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 08:26 AMBasedSecretary

And what happens on stream? You see this pile of shit

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 11:30 AMaerafield

Dude, on that screenshot you can see them playing as brits and you also cut out the VP counter which revealed that it was obviously a custom match, not campaign.



The campaign starts in 1941, yes, but whole DaK faction is about 1941-43.
You know, CoH2 Wehrmacht also isn't just 1941.

At least think or research for 1 minute before you make posts like these pls. Doofus

• Nowhere does it list the place DAK takes place in COH3. But for the sake of argument, let's take your example that it encompasses the whole of 1941-43.
  
• There's no way I paid attention to that silly little fact that it's a "custom map". I am not obliged to know about it, and you pointing out as argument verifies the fact that you do it only to poke holes at me personally in a pathetic attempt of ad hominem.
  
• Let's talk about research you wanna talk about research? I will teach you ww2 history dumbo.
  
• The main DAK/Wehrmacht armaments in North African Theater were almost exclusively Pz III, IVs for purely combat missions and Pz I and II (Luchs variant) for reconnaisance and scouting. After all, it was never in the early years' Wehrmacht doctrine to put heavy tanks (Tiger tanks were never completely accepted by High Command even after Soviet campaing, since they were deemed overengineered by a lot of High Officials).
  
• You can read all about the above in Memoirs like Guderian, Panzer Leader and on more historically explicit books on the Land Doctrine of OKW.
  
• Wehrmacht also used plenty of Italian made tanks like the Carro Armato M13/40.
  
• Very late during the NA campaign, Hitler himself changed the order of battle and operational integrity of the campaign and personally asked for a shipment of Tiger Tanks be sent to Afrika along with a lot of support equipment in order to not lose their position completely near the oil rich fields of Northwestern Africa.
  
• Their use was very very succesful but futile in helping the general disintegration of the front (don't forget that no more than 1,500 Tiger I tanks were made during the whole of ww2). Their first deployment was made little before christmas of 1942 and the general military situation was that of a strategic stalemate.
  
• At any rate, the total number of Tiger I tanks in DAK reserves was no more than 15 at any time of the war. Source for that can be found in the unit's cuckpedia page here and also in Schneider, Tigers in Combat I.
  
• It's worth noting however that 501 Schwere Panzer Battalion was one of the most effective of the war. Upon the general surrender of DAK the 501 had a Tank K/D ratio of 18.8. Meaning that for every Tiger I tank they lost, they shot and succesfully terminated 18.8 enemy ones.
  
  

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 12:04 PMBasedSecretary

• Let's talk about research you wanna talk about research? I will teach you ww2 history dumbo.
  
  

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 11:57 AMCrecer13

Dude. You are even more upset now (I already) I saw the Black Prince in that stream. In Africa between 1941-1943. Unused prototypes from 1945. "We listen to our community and want maximum historicity" - ©Relic.

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 12:30 PMOKSpitfire

That's all you wanted to do anyway. You've made several posts like this that are mostly just presumption, wild speculations and an excuse for you to act like a know it all contrarian.

Why don't you whine about the graphics, historical authenticity (lol), and features when it actually comes out and your complaints might have some actual substance.

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 12:39 PMBasedSecretary

The poster that blatantly ad hominem'd me and my history knowledge made a host of assumptions that I proved above that even if they turn out to be true, they are completely dumb and misrepresentative of the historical field the game wants to emulate.

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 13:23 PMaerafield

You claimed that Relic is putting Tigers into a 1941 mission and you got called out for missing the obvious and being completely wrong after making a cringe "I know it all" type of post, that was all. Now you try to make it seem like you were complaining about historical accuracy in terms of units being over-represented

What the chicken fried fck is the point of coming up with this topic now again when it's happening since 16 years already in CoH. Where was your outrage about the Pershing in CoH1 & 2? Or about Ostwinds, Sturmtiger and JTs in CoH2?

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 14:03 PMProtos Angelus

How I love armchair generals discussing history in a game. Oh look, an awesome looking black prince tank was not used in WW2, but was designed to be used. Such profanity! Makes this game unplayable!

95% of the playerbase: Who cares?

5% of dweebs: "But! But! Historically!"

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 14:09 PMCrecer13

And while there are people like you, the Enemy at the Gates or the CoH2 campaign will get into the mainstream and people will eat such shit and then believe that everything was like that, the game told me so!!!

Games and movies are tools of popular culture, so they should also be questioned for authenticity when you choose a particular time event.

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 14:22 PMOKSpitfire

Those people are idiots then. If they were really interested they would go away and take some time to learn about the real facts and history. This is a game, it can get people interested in the subject sure, but as long as it stays away from dumb moral grandstanding it doesn't have to teach anyone anything. It just has to be fun.

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 14:28 PMCrecer13

People are not interested. Two illustrative examples:
- anyone will tell you that the Red Army fought with one rifle for three, because he saw it in the movies. He will not go to read a book or go to sites where archives are digitized. Because people go to check the facts if they are passionate about something. If he is not interested in this topic, he will not check the facts.
- but just as anyone will tell you that Oskar Schindler was a hero who saved people. After all, he saw it in the movies. After all, he will not go looking for real information and will not see that he was a bastard who settled well in the Nazi system and saved people for jewelry and was caught with diamonds of those people whom he "saved". Who cares? The film said that he was a hero turned Nazi into a good man. And no one will go to see the facts, especially if the film was a masterpiece.

Jump back to quoted post13 Jul 2022, 14:36 PMOKSpitfire

So? If they don't want to learn the facts, that's up to them. Stories and games aren't obligated to educate those people.