Profile of Bastables

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 20

General Information


Thread: Nice to see the new patch....16 Jul 2015, 02:07 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Jul 2015, 14:56 PMBlalord "Laws of war", come on, you really think they really care of that text ? they should place on "Agent Orange" barils "approved by laws of war" War is war, they dont give a fuck about a text. (i am talking of every country) "They" cared enough to lie about Russia not being a signatory and pretend therefore the protections to Prisoners of war did not extend during Germanys war on Russia.. In: Lobby
Thread: Nice to see the new patch....16 Jul 2015, 02:03 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Jul 2015, 12:37 PMCasTroy Allied War Crimes Soviet War Crimes War Crimes of the Wehrmacht Italian War Crimes Japanese War Crimes U.S. War Crimes . . . Now tell me where are the civilized countries? Please discuss over here: General World War 2 Thread On Topic: Good to see there is a patch in all. Let´s wait until the British show up. So if other countries commit warcrimes the Wehrmacht did not commit war crimes . . . nor was tied explicitly to the Nazi party/regime? That's certainly an "argument". In: Lobby
Thread: Nice to see the new patch....15 Jul 2015, 12:02 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Jul 2015, 05:59 AMJohnnyB An army would "go along" with the regyme and serve it most probably until the end. It's army's duty as long as the political regyme elected by the people is in place no matter if the choice was wrong. That's what armies do. If we are thinking like this, Soviet army on the other hand "went along" with Stalin's regyme and with the following commie regyms with no problem at all until '90s (or like some would say, until today ). The only thing armies can do is keep at least dignity and act like armies, by separating civilians from opposing forces. Armies have their idiots and fanatics among its personnel, but they are not the majority. So I would like to keep the difference between Wehrmacht and SS, between Soviet Army and NKVD even though in some situations the differences were hard to note I like in your facist devotion you ascribe to the idea that no order is ever illegal or wrong. You then contradict this by blithering about separating civilians and opposing forces. Note the Heer's active breaking of international law: The laws of war as accepted by all civilized countries in 1942 were unequivocal on this point: "... it is especially forbidden ... to declare that no quarter will be given". With the Promulgation of: The commissioner order The commando order The severity Order The tendency to conduct collective punishment Which all enjoined, allowed, and enlarged the German army's historical propensity (since the war of 1870) for mass reprisals/collective punishment aka gunning down/burning/bayoneting unarmed solders and civilians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrecklichkeit There is a list of orders, massacres, collective punishment, execution of prisoners that all point to a bit more than the bullshit "few bad apples" apologist argument. There were serious structural issues with the Heer that predisposed it to committing atrocities. The very fuckwittery that following orders led to by the Wehrmacht resulted in most western militaries after the war enacting various injunctions to follow only "lawful orders" or giving soldier/NCO officer the ability to reject illegal orders. Because merrily breaking laws and murdering unarmed persons while hiding behind duty/oaths/orders is considered in polite company, evil. In: Lobby
Thread: Nice to see the new patch....13 Jul 2015, 22:54 PM What theory? The Reichswehr was ordered by the Ministry of Defence to use the Nazi Eagle on it's uniform begining 1 May 1934. The same month the Reichswehr was retitled the Wehrmacht Heer as Hitler followed through on his promises to expand the Army. The Wehrmacht was a creation of the Nazi Party and wore it's symbols as part of it's ceremonial and field uniforms. Anything else is "lost cause" revisionist bullshit. 1935 1944 Also from wiki: Die Vereidigung der Wehrmacht auf Adolf Hitler, 2.8.1934 "Ich schwöre bei Gott diesen heiligen Eid, daß ich dem Führer des Deutschen Reiches und Volkes Adolf Hitler, dem Oberbefehlshaber der Wehrmacht, unbedingten Gehorsam leisten und als tapferer Soldat bereit sein will, jederzeit für diesen Eid mein Leben einzusetzen." The Wehrmacht Oath of Loyalty to Adolf Hitler, 2 August 1934 "I swear by God this sacred oath that to the Leader of the German empire and people, Adolf Hitler, supreme commander of the armed forces, I shall render unconditional obedience and that as a brave soldier I shall at all times be prepared to give my life for this oath." There is a list of public notables who refused to swear an oath to Hitler either in public office or conscription to Heer/SS and their various punishments including death penalty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_oath The Wehrmacht as a organisation went along with this shit, German army officer drafted these oaths from within the defence ministry(General Werner von Blomberg and General Walther von Reichenau). The Wehrmacht's very genesis after all owed everything to Hitler and the Nazi party In: Lobby
Thread: Nice to see the new patch....13 Jul 2015, 01:18 AM Jump back to quoted post12 Jul 2015, 23:48 PMCardboard Tank Okay, I get it. You are the special kid. Barrel length is one of the most important factors. That´s why the 88 on the KT had more penetration than the 88 on the Tiger I. I didn´t state that it was the only factor. Someone was implying the caliber was the only factor and that is wrong. It's not though is it? Otherwise the higher velocity pzgr of the 5cm 60cal (835m/s) would have out penetrated the pzgr 39 of the Kwk 7,5cm 750m/s . . 750m/s is pretty close to the 745m/s of the 37mm kwk which was terrible even before one takes into account it's tendancy to shatter on overmatching armour. The war saw increasing calibre's not just ever longer 37/45/2pdr barrels. Issues penetrating sloped armour wapruf did not go make 5cm guns longer they went make larger calibre (7,5cm) that over match 4,5cm of armour and cut down the cartridge charge (and velocity) as it was having ejection issues. PaK 40 with a l46 barrel fired a larger cartridge at 790m/s than the KwK 48 with a l48 barrel but a smaller cartridge (longer) only achieved 750m/s. You can guess that the shorter barraled Pak had better penetration than the longer PIV/StuG gun. It's a lot more complicated than picking and choosing "history/weapons development" so: mighty nazi for my game. In: Lobby
Thread: Nice to see the new patch....13 Jul 2015, 01:03 AM Jump back to quoted post10 Jul 2015, 13:36 PMJohnnyB Wehrmacht ~~equals~~ SS (Nazi). You do know the Wehrmacht was created by an "executive" order of Hitler. It also has the Nazi eagle with a little Nazi swastika on all their uniforms. So symbolically and literally tied to the Nazi party. In: Lobby
Thread: Nice to see the new patch....12 Jul 2015, 23:18 PM Jump back to quoted post12 Jul 2015, 22:59 PMCardboard Tank Stop trolling. You know exactly what I meant. You disingenuously stated that length of barrel was the only determinate of armour penetration. I know exactly what you were doing. In: Lobby
Thread: Nice to see the new patch....12 Jul 2015, 22:53 PM Jump back to quoted post10 Jul 2015, 13:01 PMCardboard Tank Are you fucking retarded? I never said that the caliber equals penetration. The 88mm is bigger - it´s fucking 6,25 meters long. Barrel length is what gives increased penetration. But you are Katitof, the forum jerk. Which is why every one is using .50 calibre cartridges just in 10metre long barrels . . . . It's also why the Yamato is famous with it's 20 metre long 5cm guns.... In: Lobby
Thread: ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つGIVE USF HEAVY ARMOR༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ20 Jan 2015, 12:17 PM Jump back to quoted post20 Jan 2015, 05:49 AMbraciszek Except the US didnt produce a lot of HVAP ammunition, whereas Britain had a decent amount of 17 pounder ammunition for their various 17 pounder tanks (late war) and AT guns. 17 pounder and 76mm were somewhat similar... Depends on what they were mounted on and the variation of the gun. 17 pounder shells were a bit heavier, a bit larger, and had a bit higher muzzle velocity... But that didnt mean it was necessarily better given RoF and accuracy for a 76mm... Given tanks with those cannons used APCBC ammunition. Hastily looked at forums. I'd leave British weapons to the Commonwealth - when they come around. 17pdr APDS or early sabot rounds had horrendous dispersion/accuracy issues as the subcaliber bullet would usually yaw due to imperfect separation of the sabot. Which is why Sabot rounds don't become standard for every army until finned dart penetrators are used in the 60s. Every one else took the lesser penetration at range but the ability to hit by selecting subcaliber rounds still encased in the the jacket aka HVAP, and Russian/Soviet APCR rounds. To actually hit something with a 17pdr or a 77 you need to fire the APCBC shot. Tests by the US army at Isingy france in 1944 with UK gunners netted a 57% 17pdr APDS hit rate at ranges from 600 yds to 300yds . . . 17pdr APDS was a white elephant. Again there is a reason that every other combatant relied on APCR/HVAP; the need to actually hit the target. British Army’s own test results, obtained by two 17pr-armed Sherman Firefly tanks in September of 1944, were no better. These results and comments were published in Warrant Office Reports WO 291/1263 and WO 165/135 dated 22 September: 400 yds APC hit 90.5% APDS hit 56.6% 600 yds APC hit 73.0% APDS hit 34.2% 800 yds APC hit 57.3% APDS hit 21.9% 1000 yds APC hit 45.3% APDS hit 14.9% 1500 yds APC hit 25.4% APDS hit 7.1% In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panzer IV Ausf J Info27 Jun 2014, 09:32 AM Jump back to quoted post27 Jun 2014, 08:18 AMMr. Someguy It makes sense in that Germany was on the decline and the metals they used to make late-war tanks were much lower quality than the metals used to make their early and mid-war tanks. That's a bit of a simplification. On the one hand you have changes in type of armour as face hardened armour would exhibit brittleness with the increasing employment of overmatching rounds, so rolled homogeneous armour was increasingly employed. RHA armour was less prone to manufacturing flaws than FH but compromised by lower and lower access to elements such as molybdenum. Armour "quality" is further muddied by improvements as time went on in how to "fit" it to the tank: The Ausf G frontal hull armour was a 50mm FH (face Hardaned)with a 30mm FH initially bolted and in later production welded. It provided less protection than a single 8cm plate. The Ausf H has a single 8cm FH plate welded that generated poor results in popping along the weld seams with non penetrating hits compromising hull protection. late H and J had 8cm RHA (rolled homogeneous armour) that was welded and interlocked mitigating the popping. J also had thicker top turret and hull armour. As a further confusing factor the army would accept thicker 85mm plates for the Panther's glacis. Thicker and thinner plates would be fabricated by Krupp and as the war went on army inspectorate seem to have gravitated to rejecting plates below 85mm. Perhaps to make up to the poorer quality of armour? (Panther design spec called for 8cm glacis as in the D1's at Kursk yet in captured examples in Normandy the glacis was 85mm). You'll see this impulse exhibited in the Tiger's side armour actually being 8,2cm and not 8cm. So armour quality weakened(decrease in molybdenum)as the war went on but welding and thickness improved/increased to passively compensate. In: COH2 Gameplay