A couple hours ago, I saw an Ash for President poster as http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2079&p=3.
Disclaimer: somethingawful has a lot of things that will likely offend somebody, and this is my warning. If you find something you don’t like, I told you so.
Either one works for me, but I tend to actually be able to win at turn-based games.
It still amazes me how a Italian force of over 500,000 men could not manage to capture the British held Africa against a force a fraction of their own.
The Italian army was not as highly mechanized as the British, probably also not as well trained.
I’m italian! I find that comment very insulting! Mussolini didn’t mess hitler up that much!!! Hitler was the one that initiated the treaty with him! Also, he wasn’t really “bloated” He wore a form of suit that made him appear bigger! :x
Well let’s see…we already know that two of the things on your list were caused by Italy, so if Hitler hadn’t made the treaty, then that would have been a plus for Hitler, wouldn’t it? He would then not have had to commit necessary divisions to Africa and the Balkans-well he probably would have attacked the Balkans anyway, as they were there, but Germany would have been able to choose their battles instead of bailing out their Italian “allies.”
Oh, and what did Italy ever do for Germany? It isn’t a very good alliance when you have to do all the work now, is it?
Surely one could move German trains into Poland until you got to the Bug River where they met trains of the USSR, which were a different gauge so, you must transfer from one train to the next.
Yes, except that would only get you so far until you ran into the scorched earth.
All right, time for a little logic:
Battle of El Alamein, Balkans: Due to alliance with Italy.
Krisstalnacht, Barbarossa: Due to Hitler.
Battle of Britain: Failed due to Goring.
Warsaw Ghetto: Can’t recall exact details.
So we can logically conclude from the list given that most devastating to Germany in WWII were either Hitler or the Rome-Berlin Axis, which of course was encouraged by Hitler, so therefore the true worst thing to happen to Germany was Hitler.
I know it’s not very good logic. :wink:
People. I will repeat again. QUOTE EXACTLY OR DONT QUOTE AT ALL! I will NOT have this blasphemy against the movie.
Yes, unfortunately you can’t do anything about it. Now, how to respond in quote form:
Let’s just go with: “GET ON WITH IT!”
Just ignore him!
Warning: Do not ignore the mods, they’ll edit you into next week, and then you’ll have a temporal anomaly on your hands.
Seriously, though, it’s widely known that the Holy Grail is beloved by all, and those who don’t like it aren’t worth wasting time on. :roll: So this is more or less a pointless forum. Probably not the dumbest ever, but I’m not going to bother arguing that point.
Very true F_alk! I’m glad someone revived this post, cause i love talking about it!
Patriotism is something the Russians had in the ton Stalins country was just so willing to die for the motherland cough cough :lol:
I also think Germany would have had trouble waging blitzkrieg in the siberian region! :-?
I don’t know, once you get the tanks outfitted for cold, it wouldn’t be too hard, of course I’m going without maps here, but IIRC Siberia is pretty flat, and good for blitzkriegs.
When i agree with what someones saying am i supposed to say a paragraph on how i agree with them, or should i say just “i agree”, The answer is easy, I agree is much easier to say!!!
Or, you could just not respond at all, it’s not always necessary to say that you agree, unless you have points to add to their argument. (unless you’re blatantly trying to add to your post count)
Oh sorry. If you roll a three or less with the bazooka man the tank dies, yes.
Hmm…I could see there being specialized assaults with that sort of thing, moving in, hitting the tanks, and pulling out so as to prevent an assault the next turn. Even so, it should prob. be reduced in price by one or two. The machine gunner and sniper I think are kind of pointless, but I suppose there could be some use for them. The officer I might use, but does he have attack or not?
All right. How about just like two-hit battleships, we could have two-hit tanks with attacking bazooka men. What do you think? Thanks for your response!
That’s kind of missing my point, what I want to know is if you roll the number, does the tank automatically die?
I like them, but I have a question. If you have a bazooka inf, and roll 3, that means the tank is automatically dead? I could see that working on def. but I don’t know how it would play on attack.
You were crucified because it was obvious that was your goal, and the vast majority of your posts prove it. I think had you earned your post count legitimately, very few would take issue.
Thats Bull… :evil: Only about 10 of my 450 something posts were intended to do that! :x
Hmm…as the most recent member of the super mega club, I feel a certain responsibility? to make a comment here. Generally, posting to increase your post count about your post count is annoying, although on special occasions (such as 1000) or something like that, it’s no big deal. For K-Ration to do it at 100 suggests that maybe he really didn’t expect to even get that far, and so is no big deal, whereas MuthaRussia, posting at 250 when several people were criticizing many of his posts as spam is an entirely different matter. MuthaRussia, I would suggest that you not get so mad, as all the charges leveled against you are entirely true, even though you have made some attempts to change your ways. However, if you make a post about reaching 1000, I doubt anyone would really mind that.
And consider this my obligatory 1000 post, I just thought I’d bury it somewhere where few are likely to hunt for it. :wink:
Technically, Diplomacy isn’t an A&A variant, this should be in other games.
I think thats a republican thing! :lol: :D
Yes, we always inject cold-blooded logic into our entertainment decisions.
I don’t go to movies to get some sort of religious affirmation, I go to be entertained. I don’t know that this movie would be the sort of thing I’m likely to go see.
@Prizefighter:
I like the general idea. A few things could definately use work, but i’ll just do one. If you’re gonna go generals, really go with generals, Churchill was really just a cheerleader, took care of all the fancy talkin’. Monty as a general could be really cool, like do a Paratroopers sort of thing where bombers could drop two inf/armor anywhere in its range. He really loved that sort of stuff.
Yeah, and then he came up with Operation Market Garden.
I think it would make things too easy for the allies. Question, though: Britain calls an allied attack on Finland, they and the Russians move in, would those Russians get to non-combat back to Karelia on t2?
But stalin had planned an attack on Germany…So there would have been war regardless… :-?
Yes, but the Germans were much better trained then the Russians, and even though we all know what the Russian military concept is/was like, the Germans might have caused enough casualties for the Russians to give up, or failing that, made life for the Russians so difficult that it would have been impossible for them to finish the job.