Battles you have trouble stomaching

Gufnork said:
Why wouldn't a catapult take out a badly damaged gunship? Those rocks are big and do you really think a badly damaged gunship is that maneuverable? It's likely that it just sits there taking the punishment due to previous damage.

Hauling out a fifth-century catapult to take on tanks and helicopters = suicide, which is probably why nobody on Earth has ever attempted it, ever.

It'd be nice if when ages advance, the outdated units get superficial changes - so your catapult becomes the modern equivalent, like one of the first posters suggested, a band of 'irregulars'. But the vital stats remain the same.

Here's a question, when you advance to the next age, do the cities of your opponents also advance in looks or do they remain the same? I guess I could figure this out on my own easily enough.
 
Reading this thread brought to mind an article I read about the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan. The Soviets were flying around in their helicopters, and the Afghans had no way to do anything about it(this was before the CIA started handing out stinger missiles like candy at Halloween). So one of the Afghans ditches his AK, and brings out a flintlock rifle, an antique from the mid 1700s or some such. Bear in mind that these things are about .50 cal. So he climbs up a mountain and waits for a helicopter to fly by. The mountain is high, the air is thin and thus the helicopters have to fly relatively low to the ground. The soviets chopper flies by, and this guy fires his flintlock. The musketball penetrates the choppers windshield/bubble, hitting the pilot. The Helicopter spins out of control and the Afghan cheers. The Helicopter then promptly crashes on top of him. The point is that with the element of surprise a technologically inferior unit can defeat a more advanced foe, but that he should expect heavy casualties in doing so. Also, in the Afghanistan McGuyver episode, McGuyver kills a guy with a door and a can of hairspray.
 
Surpised at the number of people who seem to think it's perfectly feasible to battle modern weaponry with.... catapults? Riiiiiiight.

And the fact that gunships suck is abysmal. They should be THE tank-killers, and quite effective against infantry as well.
 
Sid the Lucid said:
Surpised at the number of people who seem to think it's perfectly feasible to battle modern weaponry with.... catapults? Riiiiiiight.
Perfectly feasable? Hell no. Theoretically capable of sometimes working if the low-tech unit is really really really REALLY lucky and/or the high-tech unit is damaged to the point of being little more than a pile of scrap in the first place? Yes.
 
Gunships are pretty good now. They've got 24 strength vs a tank's 28, and with Blitz, 4 attacks per turn. I use them to clean up defenders in a city after my tanks have taken out the toughest ones.
 
I like the gunships myself. I'm all about combined arms, which is why I miss paratroopers so much :(
 
Toefur said:
20 power (I think that's what they are off the top of my head) doesn't seem like enough to effectivily take on later units
20 + 100% vs armored equals 40 which is equal to the strengh of modern armor ;)
 
I'll make my point again...

If a squadron of Blackhawk helicopters are all grounded for repairs, the crews are all beaten up from crash landing, and they're out of ammunition, a brigade of 5th-century catapults raining down fire and stone on them would most assuredly be lethal.
 
chimera99 said:
Ever see what happens to a modern aircraft when it flys through a flock of birds?

The best scene in the third Indiana Jones movie was the one on the beach where Sean Connery knocks down the Messerschmidt with his umbrella and a flock of seagulls.
 
Hellfire said:
The spearman could be using a sock bomb and got lucky (take some explosive, wrap it in a sock, dip it in tar or something equally sticky, pull the pin on the timing device you have for the explosive, and throw it against the side of a tank and wait for it to blow).

Is that even in the manual?
 
TCGTRF said:
No, Saving Private Ryan.

Tom

Oh, that movie is almost as historically accurate as C-IV.

I think it's pretty funny when Tom Hanks explains all that and about the sticky bomb and then he is like, "..it's all in the manual. Yeah, that's the ticket. I can't wait for this war to end so I can get back home to may wife, Morgan Fairchild."
 
budweiser said:
Oh, that movie is almost as historically accurate as C-IV.

I think it's pretty funny when Tom Hanks explains all that and about the sticky bomb and then he is like, "..it's all in the manual. Yeah, that's the ticket. I can't wait for this war to end so I can get back home to may wife, Morgan Fairchild."

I'd like to respectfully disagree with you. My father was in the first wave of Omaha as a combat engineer. He was the only survivor of his platoon. He said that the invasion scene was probably the best recreation of a World War 2 battle that he had ever seen. (Second place in his mind was the scene in Band of Brothers in the Huertgen Forest where the Germans were using tree burst with their mortars to hit the American troops in foxholes below.)

As a matter of fact, he placed the location where Private Ryan's brother was killed coming ashore as about 150 meters to the immediate east of where he landed himself after his landing craft had been holed by a German 88 from one of the bunkers. He said that the next line of incoming craft contained a bunch of DUKWs that went down pretty fast under fire from the 88.

He finished the day in an orchard along the road which ran along the top of the heights overlooking the beach with members of the 2nd Ranger Battalion.

The hedgerow fighting, the overloaded 101st Airborne Glider with the plates welded to the bottom, the fight for the bridge at Carentan, the second-line troops manning the bunkers along the beach....all true. [I got to see part of the glider as well as the overloaded packs used in the 101st's landings (which resulted in paratrooper drowning) at the 101st's museum at Fort Campbell.]

My words don't do his stories justice, I'm afraid. I asked him once what the most important thing that he brought away from D-Day was. He said, "always make sure you go to the bathroom before you get to the beach."

In any case, the manufacture of sticky bombs *was* in the Army training manual in use at the time. The technique had first been used by the Soviets two years earlier during the Battle of Stalingrad to knock the treads off German tanks in street fighting that they did not have sufficient anti-tank firepower to take out any other way.

As an aside, in my father's opinion, the most realistic computer/video game on the subject was Brothers-in-Arms with the Red suppression circles turned off and full realism turned on.

Tom
 
I have to back up TCGTRF on this one. We had a survivor of the DDay invasion come to our university(GO PALADINS!) to talk about his experiences during the war before a screening of Saving Private Ryan. He felt the movie was as accurate as a movie could be, the only thing he saw as absent was the smell of war, which apparently is horrible beyond description. I remember when the movie came out, that veterans were pleased(if that is the right word), that finally a war movie was "accurate". If you compare Saving Private Ryan, to The Longest Day and Patton, the 2 movies that were the gold standard for WWII films, there really is no debate as to which film is both superior and more accurate.
 
No offense to anyone who fought in D-Day. Yes, the opening scene was a very accurate tribute to D-Day. What did that have to do with the plot of the movie?

Did Rangers actually land with the infantry at Omaha beach? I thought they assaulted the cliffs at Point-Du-Hoc. Let me ask you this, how many Ranger Captains do you think wore their rank on their collar during the D-Day assualt? The enemy soldiers facing the GIs were older men, young boys and a mix of european POWs. Look at the actors playing them, Speilberg used the Irish (I think it was Irish) army, young men in their twenties. The list goes on. I sort of like the movie, I even own a copy. But in my eyes, the fictional story complete with stereo typical american squaddies lessens the movie a great deal.
 
Am I the only one that uses Gunships as medics? Very mobile in enemy territory and can move between injured stacks with ease.
 
budweiser said:
No offense to anyone who fought in D-Day. Yes, the opening scene was a very accurate tribute to D-Day. What did that have to do with the plot of the movie?

Did Rangers actually land with the infantry at Omaha beach? I thought they assaulted the cliffs at Point-Du-Hoc. Let me ask you this, how many Ranger Captains do you think wore their rank on their collar during the D-Day assualt? The enemy soldiers facing the GIs were older men, young boys and a mix of european POWs. Look at the actors playing them, Speilberg used the Irish (I think it was Irish) army, young men in their twenties. The list goes on. I sort of like the movie, I even own a copy. But in my eyes, the fictional story complete with stereo typical american squaddies lessens the movie a great deal.

Two of three platoons of Company C of the 2nd Ranger Battalion landed on the beach shown accompanying Company A of the 116th Infantry Regiment. This is the unit that Tom Hanks's character was supposed to be with. (This is also the unit with which my father spent the night atop the ridgeline.) The Pont-du-Hoc rangers were the members of the 1st Platoon of Company C that had lost contact with the rest of the invasion troops, had taken 50% casualties and went up the cliffs anyway, to find that the guns up there were not really a danger. 2nd and 3rd Platoons helped at the Vierville exit but did not clear it (as they were shown to do in the movie) and then proceeded along the top of the ridge to PdH to meet the survivors (not many) of the 1st Platoon.

So, they did land at the right place, but the entire battle (which took about an hour from first landing to clearing the exit and reaching the top) was compressed into about a twenty minute period--my guess is for dramatic effect.

You're right about Hanks wearing his insignia on his shoulder during the landing. Very, very stupid move if he did so. The only outfit that regularly displayed regalia (and ties) in combat was Patton's 3rd Army, and believe me, they didn't like it.

As far as the composition of the troops in the Bunkers along the Beach, if I remember correctly, the two guys that came out shouting that they were Czech were about 30-35. I understand the need for dramatic tension, but most of the troops in those Bunkers were killed by dropping captured German potato-masher grenades down the stovepipes, amazingly enough (the American grenades were too large in diameter to fit down the pipe). The enemy exiting the back of the bunker is something I found to be less believable than other parts.

The units in the Cotenin Peninsula were second-line units, but were not Static troops like the beach defenses. The troops faced at Carentan were the 3rd Battalion of the 6th German Parachute Regiment, which was probably made up of troops about the same age as the troops they were facing (average age about 26.) Reinforcing them were some fairly good Mechanized Infantry troops.

The Tiger Is shown in the movie being blown up by the "sticky bomb" is actually a repro made on a Russian T-34 Chassis. This can be noted because the tracks are wrong.

In any case, it's nice to talk to someone who has some interest in the history of the Normandy Campagaign. I would highly recommend a visit to the 101st's museum if you live anywhere close to Fort Campbell.

Oh, one final note: the manual Hanks referred to was the "Ranger Handbook of Field Expedient Devices." Most of the rangers involved would have been very familiar with it. I'll see if I can find a repro page showing how the sticky bomb worked.

Tom
 
The action that the final battle in the movie portays is based on an attack by local german troops, not panzergrenadiers. They actually used french tanks for support. I dont think you would have seen americans facing tiger tanks that close to the beachs so early after the invasion. Another thing is the fighter plane at the end, a P-51. Most likely a P-47 or a british Typhoon would have been used in that role.
 
Back
Top Bottom