open historical conversation

[wyvern]

Reminder:

Things to Never Discuss on the Board:
-Hitler (Easily taken as an insult regardless of the matter or presentation)
-Religion (forum cannot handle this type of topic, tends to lead to flamewars and gets out of hand)
-Abortion (forum cannot handle this type of topic, tends to lead to flamewars and gets out of hand)
-Biased Politics (biased and just starts an unproductive conversation)
-"Best" governments/ideologies (biased and just starts an unproductive conversation)

You may read the board rules here.

Why not hitler

[ultifd]

Because in the past people couldn't handle a discussion about Hitler and etc...

[wyvern]

Because in the past people couldn't handle a discussion about Hitler and etc...

Oh, well the past axis versus allies tech argument seems to include that topic

[Omega]

Because in the past people couldn't handle a discussion about Hitler and etc...

Oh, well the past axis versus allies tech argument seems to include that topic

Nope, just Hitler. Most particularly, displaying support for him (your post WILL be removed).

[Gabbe]

Just be neutral, i think that obviously you can name his name, BUT that doesnt mean it has to be written "And then Hitler ,who all should hail as the allmighty, did stuff and more stuff" like.

[Omega]

Your posts were removed Warlord. You were warned multiple times. This is the last one.

Things to Never Discuss on the Board:
-Hitler (Easily taken as an insult regardless of the matter or presentation)
-Religion (forum cannot handle this type of topic, tends to lead to flamewars and gets out of hand)
-Abortion (forum cannot handle this type of topic, tends to lead to flamewars and gets out of hand)
-Biased Politics (biased and just starts an unproductive conversation)
-"Best" governments/ideologies (biased and just starts an unproductive conversation)

You may read the board rules here.

[the warlord of the reich]

i red it up a thousand time. still i dont get your point. be clearer!

whatever lets get back to the real conversation: wyvern dident replie at my answer to his post. if this subject is slow and bnoring and too short we can switch eras

[wyvern]

A7Vs had their MGs placed well. on evrey side. countering infantry is easy. it would exterminate any infantry coming. also all except one MK tanks were slower then A7V and all had a way WAY weaker armor not to mention most of them had their anti-infantry pointed only forward. MK tanks had quiet a poor sight. it was low. A7V had a tower where a trooper can watch from it. also its shape allows it to cross stretchy and small areas. while MK tanks are too wide.

well. i agree in the combat result... though when it comes to infantry. MK loses. it will be overrun and captured. you can stick a pistol through its small line of looking and shoot! wow. also sturmtruppen had no hard time disabling them. they had AT guns and grenades. sturmtruppen were speciliezed to annihlate entrenched enemies and also destroy armor. they were nicely equipped. aswell vetrans. and fearsom shock troops. best choice to elimnate enemy trenches while outnumbered

True it was faster though the speed doesn't really help when your range of action is between 20-50miles, its armor was decent but it was more a more expensive tank not to mention 2-5 tons heavier and the armament was not much better, 6mgs and a cannon to 6mgs or 4mgs and two cannons, it was also higher and believe it or not their weren't many tight spaces where its width would be good and it still had terrible trench crossing ability, as I said, both were bad but the A7V was nothing special. The vision was also extremely limited whether on the A7V or the MKIV, troops could easily sneak up on both. about weapon placement, the MKIV's had weapons all around like the A7V so they weren't much inferior.

Against infantry, the tanks were great in fear and morale effect but they could also combat infantry, taking a tank out by shooting through the portholes is possible on any WW1 tank, sturmtruppen had grenades, which are only good if you can throw through the portholes or blow off tracks and the AT guns were more like special AT rifle ammo. The sturmtruppen were well trained but their abilities pale when compared to the men of the BEF that marched to france in 1914, also, the allies also had elite troops but don't recieve as much attention. Another disadvantage of german troops in clearing trenches was that they lacked proper close combat weapons, the british had the lewis, the italians the smg and the french had lmgs like the chauchat for close combat, the germans had rifles and used captured enemy weapons.

[the warlord of the reich]

germans had great technology in WW1 heres one:

During the second half of the 19th century, most Western countries were using fettered round balloons for observation above the front lines. (The first really successful use of these flying craft for military purposes was during the American Civil War.) The big problem with them was their tendency to go spinning in the wind, making it a rather unstable platform, and the observers airsick. The accuracy of the observers work (reading and marking maps, etc) would be very much diminished by this bouncing about in the basket.

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_rknwnr78.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_aasqfnnl.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_8ae5bnjl.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_6fjkv0hm.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_0s57whan.jpg[/img][/URL] However, in 1896 two German Officers, Parseval and Siegsfeld, designed a new type of balloon: it was not spherical in shape but ellipsoidal, about 20 meters long, a gas volume of some 1200 m3, and with a ballonet curled at one end. This ballonet had a hole at either end to allow wind to go through it, which helped steadying the balloon. These new balloons were called Drachen, after the German word for kite - or dragon. (Due to the fact that they were cylindrical and rounded at both ends British and French troops nick-named them Sausages (Saucisse).This type of balloon was filled a very important tactical role, especially as spotters for artillery, with specially trained observers suspended in the basket under the Drachen.When the war started in 1914 in the West, the deployment of eight German Balloon Companies gave the Germans a distinct tactical advantage over the French. The French put up a solitary balloon on 25th August 1914 that was soon followed by several more in September and October 1914. When the British Expeditionary Force arrived in France in mid-August, it had no observation balloons at all. It was not until April 1915 that they got their first balloon company, and that was on loan from the French.

 

sturm truppen. were deadly anti trench and bunker and fortifecation. the allies feared trenches. the sturmtruppen had evrey type of equipment to destroy trenches. flamethrowers. grenades. even barbed wires were becoming useless to them. they had trench periscoped. much modern equipment such as mobile telephone. redio. mobile bakery you said they dident had anti-bullet shields. here is a live proof of their existance:

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_cllasmw8.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_tymdc436.jpg[/img][/URL]sturm truppen raiding a trench. you can see the soldier in the middle is about to throw a grenade. you know that sturm truppen litterly means storm trooper? perhaps disguised star wars troopers. though with a much better aim

the germans were armed with the masterpiece mauser Gewehr magazine-rifle in 1897. It was Germany's answer to the French Lebel M1888. It has been claimed that the Mauser Gewehr was the most successful bolt-action rifle ever designed. replacing the older gewehr 1888


well. germans mastered the artillery part. unlike their poor friends the japanese who sadly had only one piece of artillery in their entire army  however. its true that germans had the very best artillery. example: the paris gun. with no doubt. is one of the most extrodinary and amazing artillery ever made. it can shell Paris from 120 kilometres (75 mi) away it was the biggest piece of artillery in WW1 invelunarble to airstrikes. there was very little worth of aircraft strafing the ground back then. due to the lack of aircraft carrying air to surface rockets or light bombs that are fast enough to reach the target. fire and run without getting destroyed. heres pictures:

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_k40ogbrx.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_6hoyi84k.jpg[/img][/URL]
[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_5hb4rdvt.jpg[/img][/URL]
paris' people thaught its shells were zeppelin bombs. poor fellows

hmmmmn you saw an A7V? it has a tower up. it can get a good sight from up there. though there was'nt too much space... true. you know. the 18 crewman in the A7V can be reduced by 6. due to that evrey MG rquires 2 operators. one shoots one feeds the gun with belts and bullets. it can be operated by one you know. fires. reloads. fires. not quiet hard

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_8jktnyb7.jpg[/img][/URL] you can see the A7V has a small tower up its body. the tank itself is long enough to be able to get a good look at whats going on. as i said. its MGs are well emplaced as you can see

though the germans rarelly faced off with armored cars and tanks. they had the world's first AT rifle. it was very effective VS armor. heres a picture:

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_3olpx0dc.jpg[/img][/URL]

[wyvern]

I said they didn't have armor, anti bullet shields is something british snipers had and the original reason for germanies AT rifles, the kar 98 was nice but the lee enfield was better especially when paired with a BEF rifleman capable of firing up to 20 rounds a minute. Uh, the tower still has tiny view holes and in the smoke of battle you won't see much.

about technology, mobile telephone and radios is something allies also had though not in significant numbers or development, trench periscopes were used by both sides and flamethrowers, though potentially dangerous, could be more dangerous to the operator due to how primitive they were at the time.

Artillery was better at the time due to the lack of good air support but the allies had great stuff too, not to mention the rockets had been developed for use against zeppelins and balloons, though they were extremely inaccurate, and light bombs could be somewhat efficient, the worlds first purpose built ground attack aircraft came just too late for WW1, it was the sopwith salamander, link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sopwith_Salamander

[will]

the worlds first purpose built ground attack aircraft came just too late for WW1, it was the sopwith salamander, link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sopwith_Salamander

I hate to fuel this pointless game of top-trumps, but the link for the Salamander does explicitly say that the Germans had ground attack aircraft first and lists the Halberstadt CL.II and Junkers J.I.

[the warlord of the reich]

yes true that will. dont forget the AEG J.I the germans HAD ground attack aircraft.

[wyvern]

true, but neither were specifically built to be in support of infantry, not to mention that the J1 while closer to the salamanders concept, lacked much firepower

[the warlord of the reich]

well. germany had better control of the sky. it is confirmed.

fun fact: salamanders never particepated in WW1 and only 37 were made. you should've knew that.....

the Junkers J.I was a monster which its armour long has been thaught impentretable. it was a powerfull and effective all metal ground attack. its heavy armor heavily reduced the enemy's power of guns and made it very invelunerble. the Luftstreitkräfte mass produced them. it was well liked by its crews. it was versatile. for low-level ground attack, observation and Army cooperation. it was noteble to be the first al metal aircraft to enter mass production. None were apparently lost in combat, a tribute to its tough armoured design, it was an extremlley advanced design of an aircraft of the time. that is true. it served in the western front. and the spring offensive. where the allies outnumbering germany lost 851,374 whil the germans losing 688,341. a proof of both germany's power in millitery and heroic soldiers.

Code: [Select]

[URL=http://www.almlf.com][IMG]http://www.almlf.com/get-2-2011-almlf_com_kc4324xn.jpg[/img][/URL] a picture of a junkers J.I


the salamander was expensive. unlike the Halberstadt CL.II which was easily produced. a fighter and an escort and a ground attacker. which makes it versatile. the Luftstreitkräfte had about 900 of them.

[Mr War]

well. germany had better control of the sky.  

Not the case, they had air superiority at times especially earlier on but not always

You come across as biased, are you biased towards Germany in ww1and ww2?

[will]

Code: [Select]

[img]http://visualnews.columnfivemedia.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/germanufo.jpg[/img]

[the warlord of the reich]

its true. germany had control of the sky both WW1 and WW2 in WW1 they had better definetly better fighters, in WW2 they had techenology. you know. haunebu conducted operations over LA and was spotted. flyed half through the skies of LA without bieng spotted by radar. they dident shoot it down. i like germany. but this is truth. though i made a crapstorm in my very first comments in the 1st and to the 2nd page. the 3rd page had truth. dozens of Army anti-aircraft batteries firing nearly 2,000 rounds of 12 pound, high explosive shellss. this topic made me study and learn alot of my beloved reich. i feel silly for saying stuff earlier. stupid stuff... like "it would require 6 hours of heavy assault by 20 typhoons to destroy a single tiger" i feel so silly of saying that.....

i dont think they shot it down. but meybe. US has some saucer flying ships today. britian treacherously stolen one. they have the "avrocar" under tests now. russia has one. they all sneakly sucked the idea from germany.

[Mr War]

this topic made me study and learn alot of my beloved reich.

You're referring to the German third Reich? You love that?????

[the warlord of the reich]

power of the reich: -- a rare WW2 film. i expect you to enjoy it.

_{Edit by Omega: Removed racist side comments.}

[Mr War]

Do you actually believe that Germany operated flying saucers in ww2 as a matter of historical fact?

yes. but uh. i got warnings so change the subject. to answer your questions: i am deeply obssessed with hitler's reich. but keep going on the current talk. avoid this completley so i dont go in a serious trouble. 

power of the reich: -- a rare WW2 film. i expect you to enjoy it.

if you cant stop talking about me likes reich TO ALL PM ME IF YOU WANT TO TALK DONT TALK PUBLIC OK?

[the warlord of the reich]

it is true. germany was hardly to belive. long and lengthy empty spaces afar from its foriegn counterparts in techenology. german had about 3 haunebu I's. one crashed. 2 i dont know about them. their point was: recon, evacuate, transport through hard to reach terrien. it was a true thing. if you check my last posts careflly. this topic is getting derpy and dead while talking about WW1. increase the talk. and conversation would be more of fun to read and replie to. thats why sometimes i hugely double my posts.

[will]

I don't get it.  Everybody knows that the yanks were first and furthest with the walking robots in WW2:

Code: [Select]

[img]http://surbrook.devermore.net/superpics/machines/BGPM1.jpg[/img]
They made at least 8, but several were sank by uboats on their way across for D-Day and at least one ended up dismantled in Kent, where I remember seeing it once as a child.

[the warlord of the reich]

the robots are a joke. the saucers are true. get a taste of fun

[will]

I remember seeing it once as a child.

No joke!

[the warlord of the reich]

its a joke made by a site about "what if world had robots?" picturing history as if it had robotic and walking machines.