Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by homeyg, Apr 10, 2005.
Pasi, since just WHEN does "their paint-schemes were cool" equate to "I idolize their regime"??
If it is Rust, then why is it only on the Deck? Why not on the sides, and all over the ship? Or do they only paint the non-Deck areas white, and leave the Deck unpainted?
Very mysterious, either way . . . you think a Rust-coloured Deck would be easier to see by airplane then a painted deck . . .
Rust wouldn't cover 100% of the deck and 0% of everything else like this. That's just...completely ludicrous.
Also, it would be more in splotches et al - not a uniform, all-the-same-color-everywhere look.
The Nazis had the coolest equipment, uniforms, tanks, aeroplanes and colour schemes. Sorry, but it's historical fact. Indeed, the whole "looking cool" thing was what made the Nuremburg rallies so powerful.
well, history teaches us how looks dosent really matters, the important part is how it works
and indeed 55,000 not-so-pretty T-34s stomped every piece of precison engineered state of the art nazi equipment into the ground, nice paint and nice uniforms and all
so i agree german stuff were prettier, but thats not really the point of war equipment...
nazis learned that the hard way
Bah, the Nazis had the best equipment too. Just not very much of it.
well if they had not spend so much time with every single piece of equipment, they would have been able to make more
ps.some stuff they had were better, they had no tank beter than the t-34
maybe panther, but the tiger ws not "better", only heavier (better, heavier gun, more armour, better optics)
but t-34 overall design, from terrain negotating ability, suspension, shape of armour etc were all better
the germans copied much of its design for their panthers
I for one will vouch for the effectiveness of Soviet equipment on par with seemingly superior US or Eu equipment. Its all a matter of how well the "users" are trained and how well the equipment is used. India-Pakistan wars have been a god example of such.
If their decks were entirely rusty, you'd see characteristic rust streaks originating from scuppers, hawsepipes, and other high-rust areas as well. The decks aren't rusty (or at any rate, not rusty enough to see it from aerial photos taken hundreds of yards away). Red is simply the color of their deck paint scheme, for whatever reason.
And yes, their maintenance sucks, but tends more towards the "apply paint to everything including rust" rather than the "let rust run wild" complete abandonment, at least for their deployed surface navy up through 2000.
It isn 't called the "Red Fleet" for nothing, you know.
Aerial recognition sounds realistic. Most German WWII ships had the Swastika flag layed out at the fore and aft for aircraft to not bomb them.
The Russian Ships are read cause its Red paint.
Actually the Germans would have won the war if the battle decisions were in the hands of their generals. Civilian leadership and subsequent poor decisions are what led to their eventual doom.
If the Germans had left Russia alone for a year and concentrated on Great Britain, they would have been able to concentrate their entire force on taking out the reds without a threat of a western invasion. These were the plans and recommendations of the German military leadership, which, of course, were not followed.
There is no idolization taking place when mentioning the supremecy of German equipment and military might.
well thats your opinion, i personally think it was mostly strategy, motivation and surprise that carried them to victory over france, material wise, they were defenitly outnumbered and outclassed...
hitler did mess up warplans, but staling was doing his best to mess things up in russia too!
i think there are 2 reasons they had no chance of winning in soviet at all:
1. its a big country, the winter, logistics etc
2. they made it absolutely clear to the russians, that they were fighting for their lives!
to me, its a wonder they made it that far, with slightly more competent soviet leadership, they wouldnt have gotten half as far
anyway, thats not really discussing the equipment, thats discussing the war itself
and trust me, much of the german equipment was inferior to their russian counterpart
you give me an example and ill tell you about it, ive already mentioned the famous t-34
ps. ive already said i agree the germans had the sharpest looking uniforms!
Submarines, bombers, interceptors, and just pure cunning.
Their decks are red so that player 1 can distinguish their units from the other players units when it becomes player 1's turn.
not as pretty as the matrix-style long black leathercoat of the SS panzer (i own one of those myself), but alot warmer
submarines, russia had a few, but understandably, they had to concentrate on their land forces, germans made great ones though, and used them right, sure
bombers, soviets made really great tactical bombers, called i think IL-7, as far as i remember, theyre better than stukas
i dont think they had any (or not many) heavy bombers, but germans didnt have too many of those either
interceptors, russians made really great migs, the problem was althought the planes were very agile anmd good dog fighters, they didnt have enough firepower for the green russians pilots to hit something, but they had good low altitude perfomance, all in id say german one were better, specially the focke wolf
cunning, well thats were the germans lucked out, they had some good generals, and occasionaly they could do their work (despite of hitler )
stalin on the other hand, being the utter paranoid that he was had killed something like 20 outta 22 red army generals, and huge numbers of educated officers, but again, thats not about equipment
Separate names with a comma.