Comments on: 19.4.2014 – Part 1

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Sun, 20 Apr 2014 09:08:01 +0000

At the very end of the march columns, IIRC what I’ve read. And not because they particularly wanted the things along.

By: EdwardTeach

EdwardTeach — Sun, 20 Apr 2014 01:48:34 +0000

Yet they used KT in droves :)

By: Medjed

Medjed — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:58:37 +0000

From what you can read in various sources some of them indeed fought there, while some of them were being repaired. But most important is that they were there, whether they saw combat or not, while SerB(WG) specifically are trying to convince there weren’t Tigers at all.

By: jontheblack

jontheblack — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 20:53:19 +0000

- SerB: “There were no Tigers in Ardennes”

There was one, I don’t believe it saw combat.

By: Legiondude

Legiondude — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 18:11:48 +0000

It’s not an E8 without HVSS

By: junglekayser

junglekayser — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 15:52:23 +0000

”Storm does not think that the number 15 makes it too hard to maneuver, because everywhere you turn there is an enemy”

this proves once again that the game is made for them, not for us.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 15:49:06 +0000

Given that the buggers apparently saw no fighting, same difference.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 15:45:22 +0000

A 105mm “assault gun” section was part of the standard armoured company TO&E you know, at least by the late war years. And at least some frontline commanders wanted those in a version with the gyrostabiliser fitted too.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 15:41:24 +0000

Though note that breaking up the silhouette is a major part of concealing the target from observation in general, optimally to the point where the enemy cannot pick it out from the environment. Failing that hampering his ability to locate and identify it at a distance is good enough.
Bonus points if the camo makes it difficult for the enemy to judge distances, vectors and whatnot properly and hence hamper his ability to properly track and target a moving object, which is the logic behind the eye-watering naval “dazzle” camouflage schemes (and IIRC zebras’ stripes), but dunno if that really works for land vehicles.

By: Kellomies

Kellomies — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 15:32:40 +0000

Sounds suspiciously like the commanders left the big boxes in the reserve so as not to have to worry about narrow roads getting blocked by immobilised examples thereof…