- Welcome to GrogHeads Forum.
Keep Calm and Grog On!
Recent posts
#11
Enigmas of the Mystical / Re: More Pix For A Laugh
Last post by GDS_Starfury - Yesterday at 05:28:20 PM #12
Current Events / Re: RUSI article on Attritiona...
Last post by bobarossa - Yesterday at 04:24:09 PMHow long until we run out of the expensive missiles, etc that we are using to kill those drones? I would say it would be long before we could spin up replacement quantities given that the Ukraine was has gone on over 2 years and what have we got for artillery shell replacement?
#13
Enigmas of the Mystical / Re: A feel good thread
Last post by Windigo - Yesterday at 04:05:09 PMThe taller one....
#14
Music, TV, Movies / Re: Fallout
Last post by ArizonaTank - Yesterday at 02:16:54 PMBethesda released the character "stats" for the TV series characters...
Not sure I agree with them all...but its fun...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/gaming/bethesda-has-revealed-fallout-tv-characters-stats/ar-BB1lFzg2?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=6ef037b9cd7340709cb9b74335583008&ei=9
Not sure I agree with them all...but its fun...
https://www.msn.com/en-us/entertainment/gaming/bethesda-has-revealed-fallout-tv-characters-stats/ar-BB1lFzg2?ocid=msedgntp&pc=NMTS&cvid=6ef037b9cd7340709cb9b74335583008&ei=9
#15
Current Events / Re: The Great American Solar E...
Last post by Tripoli - Yesterday at 01:48:11 PMI was doing a little processing of my eclipse images this weekend. Here's a detail of one of the photos I took at 13:51:36 CST. You can see some of the fine detail in the solar prominence.
#16
Current Events / Re: RUSI article on Attritiona...
Last post by GDS_Starfury - Yesterday at 12:36:11 PMQuote from: FarAway Sooner on Yesterday at 12:19:15 PMIt's unclear if NATO has the ability to sweep the skies of cheap and plentiful Russian drones which seem to have been revealed as among the primary enemies of maneuver warfare.
this ability was pretty much proven last night over Syria and Iraq.
#17
Computer Gaming / Re: Headquarters: World War II
Last post by al_infierno - Yesterday at 12:33:24 PMQuote from: Grimnirsson on Yesterday at 11:37:31 AMI watched a German review video and the guy said the tanks don't have armor value, penetration factors etc. but are wholly dependent on the life points of their crew, so if they got hit inside the tank gets weaker...is that correct? I mean it sounds silly...
Sort of. As Pete pointed out, armor values are indeed a thing. But yes, a tank's health is tracked by its living crewmates. A critical penetrating shot kills everyone outright and destroys the tank, whereas a glancing blow might kill the commander, gunner, etc. and weaken the tank's ability to fight back. You can "repair" the tank by using a cooldown ability to revive the crewmates.
It's an odd system for sure, but I think it works as an abstraction.
#18
Current Events / Re: Russia's War Against Ukrai...
Last post by FarAway Sooner - Yesterday at 12:31:20 PMI think this was a one-time attack that we had success in repulsing. In Ukraine, my sense is that Western weapons systems (and anti-air systems in particular) have worked quite well, so long as they haven't run out of ammo.
Of course, the West is dragging its toes to re-arm them with surface-to-air missiles, in part because our own inventories are so limited. Of course, that could have something to do with the fact that a Patriot missile costs somewhere between 60 and 400 times as much as a Shaheed drone.
The nature of modern sustained warfare seems to require a different high/low mix than our current procurement systems seem interested to provide. We seem to be taking the German approach to WW2 rather than the approach that actually won the war for the Allies.
Folks point to WW2 as a war of maneuver on the ground, but it really wasn't (in Europe at least). It took 2 1/2 years of considerable bleeding through largely attritional warfare (much of it aerial) to weaken Germany sufficiently that the Allies were able to land on the French coast.
Of course, the West is dragging its toes to re-arm them with surface-to-air missiles, in part because our own inventories are so limited. Of course, that could have something to do with the fact that a Patriot missile costs somewhere between 60 and 400 times as much as a Shaheed drone.
The nature of modern sustained warfare seems to require a different high/low mix than our current procurement systems seem interested to provide. We seem to be taking the German approach to WW2 rather than the approach that actually won the war for the Allies.
Folks point to WW2 as a war of maneuver on the ground, but it really wasn't (in Europe at least). It took 2 1/2 years of considerable bleeding through largely attritional warfare (much of it aerial) to weaken Germany sufficiently that the Allies were able to land on the French coast.
#19
Computer Gaming / Re: Headquarters: World War II
Last post by Pete Dero - Yesterday at 12:29:50 PMQuote from: Grimnirsson on Yesterday at 11:37:31 AMI watched a German review video and the guy said the tanks don't have armor value, penetration factors etc. but are wholly dependent on the life points of their crew, so if they got hit inside the tank gets weaker...is that correct? I mean it sounds silly...
Not according to the manual (p. 79-80):
ARMOR FACING - FRONT, SIDE, BACK, AND TOP ARMOR
Most armored vehicles have 4 armor values:
� Front armor (usually the strongest)
� Side armor (usually not so good)
� Back armor (usually rather weak)
� Top armor (usually the weakest)
Each value indicates how much armor the unit has if attacked exactly from that direction - front, side, or back. However, in most situations, the attack would come at a certain angle, so it would be something inbetween the front and side or side and back armor, and the exact value 80 will depend on the precise angle. The resulting value is an Adjusted armor value.
ADJUSTED ARMOR
The Adjusted armor value indicates how much armor the unit has when an enemy attack hits two or more armor values, taking into account the Attack and Elevation angles.
Example:
The unit has 100 Front armor, 60 Side armor, 40 Back armor, and 10 Top armor.
If it is attacked at an Attack angle of 45 degrees, it will use 50% of its
Front armor and 50% of its side armor, so in the end it will have 80 armor.
Example 2:
The situation is the same as above, but the attacker is situated on a hill and has an Elevation angle of 30 degrees - meaning it is firing from above.
This means that the 80 armor from the example above (a combination of Front and Side) is further adjusted by Top armor as well. So, the result will be between 10 (Top armor) and 80 (Front/Side armor) and will depend on the Elevation angle.
#20
Current Events / Re: RUSI article on Attritiona...
Last post by FarAway Sooner - Yesterday at 12:23:10 PMOn a separate note, the Chinese would be foolish to mount a military invasion of Taiwan. It plays to the democracies' strengths (high-tech weapons and the professionalism of the crews who man those weapons) and ignores China's own strengths (patience, cost tolerance, and the sheer volume of more disposable items that can be produced).
China instead should (and probably will) impose a total blockade of Taiwan, daring Taiwan's allies to start a shooting war that they couldn't possibly have the stomach for in the absence of a clear-cut provocation. I wonder how much time and money we've spent helping to arm Taiwan, while probably not doing jack to improve self-sufficiency of food and fuel?
China instead should (and probably will) impose a total blockade of Taiwan, daring Taiwan's allies to start a shooting war that they couldn't possibly have the stomach for in the absence of a clear-cut provocation. I wonder how much time and money we've spent helping to arm Taiwan, while probably not doing jack to improve self-sufficiency of food and fuel?