Profile of braciszek

Jump back to quoted post5 Feb 2015, 16:41 PMREforever

It was said by an Italian correspondant named Indro Montanelli that the Polish charged German Panzers using Lancers and horses. German commanders who were present at the battle also confirmed cavalry charges by the Polish.

I did look at the numbers and my research tells me the British Army was 860 thousand to 900 thousand strong in 39 compared to the Polish who had 940 thousand approximately. Did Poland have numerical superiority? Sure(Not by much though) but the Invasion of Poland proved that their tactics, equipment and troops were of low quality. This is supported by the fact that casualties for the polish during the Battle of Poland was 900 thousand(Lol!), compared to the British who lost around 300 thousand in total(Including civilians). This is early on in the war mind you, once the British Empire was operating at full capability, the amount of troops, weapons, ships and etc were increased tenfold.

As for modern weapons, do I need to remind you of the Lee Enfield and the 17 Pounder? The Lee Enfield was modern because it was still the best infantry rifle in WW2; the Enfield was the weapon of choice for Colonial troops in the Boer Wars, conflicts in the Middle East and WW1 and WW2; it was tried and true.

The 17 Pounder was also the only AT gun that could take on Germany's heaviest tanks; what did Poland make that rivaled the 17 Pounder? Nothing.

-Of course Poland has no 17 pounder equivalent because it was 1939 - no allied nation had a mass produced equivalent. It didnt even exist at the time. The Lee Enfield "jungle carbine"? "Modern"? Its a PoS. Its only worthy to be on a wall as it has no accuracy. Maybe everyone i know that has it are just used to other nation's proved rifles of the time. Praise the Canadian designed Garand, but not that pile of trash that was a waste of a friend collector's money.

You can't win every battle. None the less, the British Army were constantly winning battles in 1941 and after, and often against enemies who had numerical superiority. Let's not forget though that the British Empire's bread and butter was the Royal Navy; it's the main weapon that established battlefield superiority, but the British Army weren't incompetent idiots and ill-equipped. Quite the contrary actually since they also had an extremely good Army on top of the World's greatest Naval force.

First sentence applies to everyone. Poland tried. Britain itself did not break down from hard times and pulled through in the end. And the people of Poland did not give up under their occupation. I had a relative (grandfather's brother) who was killed by the SS for his partisan activities. The spirit of Poland fought on.

Again, you can't win every battle. The British Empire was decisively winning from 1941 and onward.

Being an island helped a lot.

Poland had more troops than the British Empire during 1939, so where do you get "smaller Poland" from? Doesn't change the fact that the British Empire defeated Germany while Poland lost to them.

Britain defeated Germany with the help of its entire Commonwealth, the US, and most importantly, the Soviet Union. They all aided each other, a popular example being Lend Lease.

The British were fighting on all fronts from an economical and military perspective. They were busy fighting the Germans militarily in Eastern Europe, while financially supporting and militarily supporting the Mediterranean countries; let's not forget about Japanese aggression and movements in the Pacific and SEA, AND the Middle East on top of all that.

Being an island has had its advantages for centuries.

Sorry for weird quoting, but the point is:

I know you are patriotic for Canada and Britian and all...
But that doesn not mean you can talk shit that did not happen about nations and people that you think are inferior to you.

Jump back to quoted post5 Feb 2015, 14:06 PMl4hti

Sherman smoke isnt bug or anything. It is the thickest vehicle smoke in game, and it shoots three big smoke grenades far away. If it would do it on the move, it would be OP.

Jump back to quoted post4 Feb 2015, 23:45 PMdaspoulos

Just like side armor, which would be a critical balancing factor, engines cannot work in reverse in the game due to the game engine design. Even though limiting blitzkrieg to only go forward would be the perfect balance decision it cannot be done. Try to think of a different way without gimping the tank too hard. Even so I find blitzkrieg more imbalanced on tigers and King tigers, the ability can simply be removed for them in place of other abilities. For tiger replace blitz with S-,ine launcher, for King tiger make it a long 50-60 range shot. Or sort of a hull down mode where the driver helps load shells making it immobile for a time but increased fire rate and like +5 range. But has a cooldown timer so it becomes very vulnerable to flanks due to slow turret speed and lack of movement.