Search found 125 matches

by Rasputitsa
Sun Apr 01, 2012 7:47 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Bef ME 109 - Interesting Fact
Replies: 16
Views: 1994

Re: Bef ME 109 - Interesting Fact

I think another problem was the F104's stubby wings making it hard for pilots to control. Thats anecdotal though; I have no numbers. A check on the web indicated that Luftwaffe pilots liked to take their aircraft very low on practice missions (one incident was when a flight of 4 F104s flew into the...
by Rasputitsa
Sun Apr 01, 2012 4:12 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Bef ME 109 - Interesting Fact
Replies: 16
Views: 1994

Re: Bef ME 109 - Interesting Fact

I believe the F 104 Starfighter actually earned the nickname 'Widow Maker' because of its lethality to the pilots. The impression given in most comments is that the pilots where mostly the problem, flying too low, with many instances of flying into terrain, but it is an example that the operation o...
by Rasputitsa
Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:43 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Bef ME 109 - Interesting Fact
Replies: 16
Views: 1994

Re: Bef ME 109 - Interesting Fact

It's no surprise that there was a significant loss to accidents, as flying high performance military aircraft is potentially dangerous, even in peacetime, the post-war Luftwaffe lost 30% (292 aircraft) of its F104 Starfighters through accident, the Canadians lost 50% of theirs, in peacetime . Landin...
by Rasputitsa
Sun Mar 25, 2012 9:24 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: GS 2.1?
Replies: 70
Views: 11363

Re: GS 2.1?

Wow !!!! :D
by Rasputitsa
Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:16 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Finnish armistice
Replies: 9
Views: 547

Re: Finnish armistice

Ironically, Churchill was the primary force behind the British intervention in Norway. He was also pushing for the Brits to intervene in Finland against the Russians. The planned British invasion of Norway was his plan. Ironically, his poorly thought out and executed plan (i.e., the British & Frenc...
by Rasputitsa
Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:57 am
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Finnish armistice
Replies: 9
Views: 547

Re: Finnish armistice

Ironically, Churchill was the primary force behind the British intervention in Norway. He was also pushing for the Brits to intervene in Finland against the Russians. The planned British invasion of Norway was his plan. Ironically, his poorly thought out and executed plan (i.e., the British & Frenc...
by Rasputitsa
Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:38 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Finnish armistice
Replies: 9
Views: 547

Re: Finnish armistice

I wonder, why Finnish units don´t change sides the same as Hungarians and Romanians? Is there any in game reason? Though I'm digressing. Churchill actually wanted to send British troops to support Finland against Russia via an invasion of Norway. Germany saved the UK the title of aggressor by beati...
by Rasputitsa
Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:55 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: GS 2.1?
Replies: 70
Views: 11363

Re: GS 2.1?

Thanks for the update.
by Rasputitsa
Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:43 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: GS 2.1?
Replies: 70
Views: 11363

Re: GS 2.1?

Stauffenberg wrote:We will send the files for the installer Slitherine will make on March 20th. So barring any serious bugs or game balance issue we will have completed our work then.

When it will be released is up to Slitherine and their schedule.
That's good to know, thanks. :D
by Rasputitsa
Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:06 pm
Forum: Time of Fury
Topic: Ending the war with USSR
Replies: 29
Views: 14558

Re: Ending the war with USSR

Yes, Poland did not surrender, but it was completely occupied. And if it had surrendered and been more cooperative with the Germans, in the way that France did, it would have recieved better treatment. I'm not making a political point here, but the refusal to surrender will ultimately lead to a gen...
by Rasputitsa
Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:36 am
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Need help with language translations for Rail Depot
Replies: 17
Views: 983

Re: Need help with language translations for Rail Depot

I think 'Depot' is a reasonable word for this situation, short, with a rail head naturally being a place were supplies and troops will accumulate, after reaching the end of the usable railway. :D
by Rasputitsa
Sat Feb 04, 2012 3:21 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Taking Malta in GS
Replies: 15
Views: 1327

you need to make 2 attacks per turn on the FTR - attack the GAR or port first with a TAC and the FTR will intercept (attack 1) and next attack the FTR with your FTR (attack 2) - then hit the GAR with another TAC. If the Brit has a carrier in port you'll need more FTR to neutralize them. With good G...
by Rasputitsa
Sat Feb 04, 2012 11:55 am
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Taking Malta in GS
Replies: 15
Views: 1327

I totally agree that this is not historical at all. If the Germans had wanted to take Malta in 1941, they could have done it, assuming that they had devoted a reasonable airborne force, along with good fighter cover, and maybe some token naval forces and some seaborne assault troops, just to throw ...
by Rasputitsa
Sat Feb 04, 2012 6:32 am
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Taking Malta in GS
Replies: 15
Views: 1327

I totally agree that this is not historical at all. If the Germans had wanted to take Malta in 1941, they could have done it, assuming that they had devoted a reasonable airborne force, along with good fighter cover, and maybe some token naval forces and some seaborne assault troops, just to throw ...
by Rasputitsa
Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:16 am
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Taking Malta in GS
Replies: 15
Views: 1327

so to take Malta is very easy, just a little planning 2 German TAC's for the GAR 2 German FTR's for the FTR plus German commander Italian BB's and DD's in support for bombardment usually 3 or 4 turns and done (can be done in two with good combat results) with lucj it can be done with just the Itali...
by Rasputitsa
Wed Jan 18, 2012 8:22 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Tanks in CEAW
Replies: 19
Views: 1103

Ah yes, my first sentence was a reply to PionUrpo, I should have been quoting him I suppose, sorry about that. Anyway, conclusion, everyone is happy with ARM costing 80 PP, while not performing very well and being a weak target that needs protection? :) Yes I'm ranting a bit. :) Armour does perform...
by Rasputitsa
Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:32 am
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Tanks in CEAW
Replies: 19
Views: 1103

Well yes, that's all fine and dandy. The russians did not have anything resembling the german Sdkfz 251 for their mechanized corps however, but they did have a lot of tanks. The german Tiger tank played a role in the war, they created the fear of panzers that you mention above. Allied troops saw Ti...
by Rasputitsa
Tue Jan 17, 2012 10:21 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: V-1 & V-2?
Replies: 8
Views: 589

According to Wikipedia, the Allies dropped about 1.5 million tons of bombs on Germany in WWII. The V-1's produced carried 15,000 total tons of explosive and only about 25% hit their targets. The V-2s produced carried about 6000 tons of explosives. I couldn't quickly find out how many V-2s actually ...
by Rasputitsa
Tue Jan 17, 2012 10:18 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: V-1 & V-2?
Replies: 8
Views: 589

According to Wikipedia, the Allies dropped about 1.5 million tons of bombs on Germany in WWII. The V-1's produced carried 15,000 total tons of explosive and only about 25% hit their targets. The V-2s produced carried about 6000 tons of explosives. I couldn't quickly find out how many V-2s actually ...
by Rasputitsa
Tue Jan 17, 2012 10:02 pm
Forum: MILITARY HISTORY™ Commander - Europe at War : General Discussion
Topic: Tanks in CEAW
Replies: 19
Views: 1103

Yes, the Tiger tank had between a 5:1 to 10:1 kill ratio. In CEAW german tanks will never get that ratio because there simply aren't that many allied tanks built! What we see is instead the russians building hordes of almost as efficient, but cheaper, mechs. Mechs also seem to have better air defen...

Go to advanced search