Scummy Soviet units

That would also mean, that one Panther and a few Grens/Panzergrens could stop it

It would also mean the panther you called in doesn't arrive half the time due to "technical difficulties."

That would also mean, that one Panther and a few Grens/Panzergrens could stop it

That is, assuming it wouldn't randomly break down or run out of fuel forcing crew to abandon it before they even seen the battlefield.

Not to mention, the grens/pgrens would be pummeled into oblivion with massive creeping arty barrage.

Axis fanboys screaming for realism are as blind as Hitler was on how screwed the axis army was at the time where we have multiplayer.

@Katitof and Omega

You get the joke

Not sure where people had this idea of soviets having endless reserves of manpower and/or tanks. Tanks, sure, if they lost alot of tanks, they could make alot of new tanks. But men? Not really , soviet manpower reserves were pretty dry after the losses in 41-42.

Not sure where people had this idea of soviets having endless reserves of manpower and/or tanks. Tanks, sure, if they lost alot of tanks, they could make alot of new tanks. But men? Not really , soviet manpower reserves were pretty dry after the losses in 41-42.

It is not war before WW1, who has the better technology and explosive weapon, who win. But somehow the commie still think they can win by soldiers spamming, e.g. Korean War.

It is not war before WW1, who has the better technology and explosive weapon, who win. But somehow the commie still think they can win by soldiers spamming, e.g. Korean War.

Worked fine in Vietnam.

It is not war before WW1, who has the better technology and explosive weapon, who win. But somehow the commie still think they can win by soldiers spamming, e.g. Korean War.

Well you have to look at these "commies" and who they were...

Second Sino-Japanese War (CCP, KMT, Japanese). These forces did not a huge industrial base to churn out airplanes, tanks, and heavy artillery. Chinese forces especially lacked heavy artillery and mechanization.

Korean War: North Korea and China supply the soldiers and USSR supplies the tanks and planes.

Vietnam: I think everyone believes that the NVA just supplied an endless human wave to American bullet but they also fought conventionally with tanks and artillery. They were also very organized.

Really the whole point of this post is to show that these Commie countries lacked an industrial base to produce tanks, planes, etc, so they had to rely on infantry

Worked fine in Vietnam.

Wrong, those Murican are not trained fighting in jungles, so as their weapons.
They simply faced the similar disaster as the German faced in Stalingrad.

Wrong, those Murican are not trained fighting in jungles, so as their weapons.
They simply faced the similar disaster as the German faced in Stalingrad.

Wait, there were jungles around Stalingrad?

There were jungles around Stalingrad?

Good luck shooting with M1 / Kar98 in jungles / Stalingrad.

Armor/Panzer and USAF/Luftwaffe can't help shit there.

Good luck shooting with M1 / Kar98 in jungles and Stalingrad.

I got your point, I just tried to relax the atmosphere here with a joke.

But the fight around Stalingrad was lost due to the 6th army being cut off, the impotence of the Luftwaffe to supply them, a harsh winter and major Soviet resistance, rather than Rifles being not the first choice in close quarter combat.

I got your point, I just tried to relax the atmosphere here with a joke.

But the fight around Stalingrad was lost due to the 6th army being cut off, the impotence of the Luftwaffe to supply them, a harsh winter and major Soviet resistance, rather than Rifles being not the first choice in close quarter combat.

But Stalingrad wasn't only in war in winter, it is very hard to breaking resistance in a rumble like this. Similar difficulties like the US force vs "Insert Mid-east whatever", even in 21th century.

Wrong, those Murican are not trained fighting in jungles, so as their weapons.
They simply faced the similar disaster as the German faced in Stalingrad.

well not tryna turn this into a Vietnam war thread.. but I wouldn't agree that your reason is a significant factor in American's exit

but not tryna derail so let snot go anymore into vietnam

well not tryna turn this into a Vietnam war thread.. but I wouldn't agree that your reason is a significant factor in American's exit

but not tryna derail so let snot go anymore into vietnam

The US never lost an engagement in Vietnam and when the US forces left it was with the North having been beaten back. The South managed the ground war for several years after and lost in the mid 70's because the US congress stopped funding any sort of military material and advisors so South Vietnam soon crumbled.

As to realism... One of the reasons people love to play the German supertanks is that realism isn't modeled. You would rarely get to use a Tiger let alone a KT. Both might break down shortly after they leave the start point, and that is if they even have fuel. There would be no Ostwinds (only 40 were ever built), Pumas (200 20mm and 100 5omm were built) or that big rocket tank (forgot the name) of which only 10 were built.

You would be fighting with PIII's, Stugs, P4s and some Panthers. Your replacement troops would DECLINE in quality instead of increasing (15 year olds and old men), your artillery would be in short supply, short of ammunition, and what you had made of inferior grades of steel. Some of that ammunition would be duds as well since your industry uses your enemies as slave labor to make that ammunition and some of them would figure out how to make a dud that passed quality inspection. (Oh the irony that the only unit that in a way models duds was the COH1 m10 with its misfires.)

Your biggest advantage would be that you are on the defensive and that while retreating your enemies lines of supply keep getting longer.

The US never lost an engagement in Vietnam and when the US forces left it was with the North having been beaten back. The South managed the ground war for several years after and lost in the mid 70's because the US congress stopped funding any sort of military material and advisors so South Vietnam soon crumbled.

Never lost an engagement, got 60k soldiers killed.

Wat? The others are all Rambo? amis

Useless thread being derailed at max speed.
No fucks given anyway.

Never lost an engagement, got 60k soldiers killed.

Wat? The others are all Rambo? amis

Sources put the dead and missing of North Vietnamese and Viet Cong forces at 1,100,000.

The war last years, several million US servicemen served at one point or another, and it was the last major US war in which the technology of the infantryman did not look all that different than it did in WWII.

As an example, in the Tet Offensive the PAVN caught the US and South Vietnamese forces completely by surprise. Despite this it was a hard fought battle and a decisive loss for the PAVN who lost approximately 45,000 dead. In comparison: "The South Vietnamese suffered 2,788 killed, 8,299 wounded, and 587 missing in action. U.S. and other allied forces suffered 1,536 killed, 7,764 wounded, and 11 missing.[99]" (Source: Department of Defense, CACCF: Combat Area [Southeast Asia] Casualties Current File, as of Nov. 1993, Public Use Version. Washington, D.C.: National Archives, 1993.)

The modern narrative is that the US military lost the Vietnam War, but that couldn't be further from the truth.

Seems like lolcake's suggestions are being listened by Relic. MVGame