# War!

Discussion in 'History' started by Omega133, Oct 2, 2009.

1. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
Oh, and I think Japan is trying to develop mobile suits. Plus, they have a special armor for its infantry codenamed "Gundam"

3. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
It will to cool to see mechs in combat in the future

I would LOVE to pilot one ( if I don't die that is )

5. ### Omega133Aus der DunkelheitValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,281
In Enemy at the Gates men are drafted out of their homes thrown a rifle or magazine of ammo and thrown right into battle. The movie is about a Russian soldier during the battle of Stalingrad, who becomes the best sniper of WW2 and becomes a Soviet hero. True story.

7. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
Heard about a hero sniper on National Geographic too, he was a farmer. In some cases, resources are so scarce that there is 1 rifle for TWO men....Personally, I think Numbers doesn't = Strength, skill does. I rather have a smaller group of elite ,well trained, and intelligent soldiers ( just like the Specials in Gundam Wing correction: More like the Gundam pilots, and Gundam Meisters ), then a huge group of grunts and cannon fodder.

8. ### Omega133Aus der DunkelheitValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,281
Exactly, to quote the movie "The first man in line gets a rifle. The second man in line gets ammo. The man with the rifle aims and shoots. If he is killed the man with the ammo picks up the rifle and shoots".

I beleive he was a farmer.

You ever played Defend Your Castle? That game uses overwhelming numbers.

9. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
In WWI it was more or less standard (according to the stories at least) for Russian infantry to go into battle with one rifle per three men. The thinking was that if one of the guys without a rifle got hit it didn't matter, if the guy with the rifle got it then one of the others would pick it up and carry on.

Um, Stalin: "the more you use, the less you lose" and "quantity has a quality all of its own".
Small groups of elite troops cost money, lots of it. Especially to maintain their edge. And a given group can only be in one place at once.
There's a difference between full-on war and special operations.

Edit: sorry, "the more you use, the less you lose" was Slim.
Oops!

10. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
Yeah, for tower defense games, when I need to upgrade stuff, I take out the weak turrets for space. I always spend on a few expensive stuff instead of masses of cheap crap.

11. ### Omega133Aus der DunkelheitValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,281
The Russians wasted men. Then again so did the Japanese with the Bonzai attacks and suicide charges. No offense Shogun.

12. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
The Russians had men to waste. (And they weren't the only ones).
They were "cheaper" than technology.

Messages:
6,281
True.

14. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
Russia simply didn't have the military resources and technology before. Soviet Generals don't care at all how many men they lose. I heard one commander at Stalingrad kill every 10 person until he runs out of ammo if somebody desert. Every person down, they at least have another to take their place. Soviet troops are very poorly trained, but its ironic how good the Spetnaz ( it might be spelled wrong ) and Russian pilots are.

Small groups of elite troops cost a lot to train and maintain, but it boost morale and weakens the enemy's will to fight. It gives a reputation of being "invincible". You may also gain some defectors to your "invincible" army. Also some of the dumber enemy commanders will underestimate your strength, causing them to make foolish and rash decisions.

I agree that it can show up at as many places. Still I don't like a whole bunch of cannon fodders and grunts. It only take a few fools to endanger an entire army.

15. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
I am not Japanese remember?

I just respect them and learn their culture and language. I have to say there is a very clear difference. The Russian troops are mostly conscripts, the Japanese are mostly those seek glory and honor on the battlefield. They volunteered to go kamikaze in their Banzai attacks ( Its Banzai, Banzai means long live, and they shout Nippon Banzai! when crashing, Nippon means Japan ), to have a "glorious" and "honorable" death in the battlefield defending their nation and Emperor. The reason they go Kamikaze, is because of the Bushido, its engraved in their culture. I don't agree with wasting troops in ANY way, in ANY condition. I believe a good commander never wastes his troops, but rather use them to their full potential.

16. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
Yeah, I don't like it though.

17. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
Spetsnaz are trained better than most Russian/ Soviet troops mainly because they sign on for longer service. They're more ruthless than well-trained (in the Western sense).
And as for Russian pilots... low hours (in some cases they were down to 10 hours flying training per year, and still largely trying to move away from a heavily GCI-led (Ground-Controlled Intercept) doctrine, where the pilot did little but follow instructions from a ground-based radar controller.

18. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
Spetsnaz are awesome

. They are a lot tougher then your average commando.

Dude, have you seen what kind of aerial maneuver they can do!?!?!? They are crazy!! ( in a good way )

Russia is going bankrupt I agree, but Soviet pilots are awesome! You have to agree, it takes a whole lot of skill to pilot the MIG-25 and MIG-31

, the two fastest fighters. I saw on discovery channel about how they get low fight hours and follow radio instructions. Its also \$ that matters......

19. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
Just some side information: Luftwaffe have got the best aces in the world. Erich "Bubi" Hartmann the top ace of all time got 352 during WWII, 352!! Wow........

20. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
So are most special forces.

Yes, live.
But that's a function of the aircraft and a highly-trained test pilot (not a service pilot).
Any aircraft with thrust vectoring can do a kulbit, most Western aircraft are capable of the tail slide, and a good number capable of doing Pugachev's Cobra.

Foxbat and Foxhound are straight-line follow the instructions interceptors (not fighters). Little skill involved.
The pilot is there mostly to manage throttle setting.

Last edited: Dec 24, 2009
21. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
I meant that Spetnaz is tougher then most special forces, my bad, I didn't make it clear.

Good point, but the Russians do it with not as advanced aircraft. Then again, its their job to look good. I am not saying that the Russian pilots are the best or anything, I was just saying that the Russian pilots have training that can't even compare to their average soldier's.

Another good point with interceptors and fighters, I always get the two confused

. It takes quite a bit of skill to fly at Mach 2.83+ and not die, crash .etc, plus the G forces involved will make the average person black out. I am not saying there weren't any accidents or anything.

22. ### DywyddyrPenguinaciously duckalicious.Valued Senior Member

Messages:
18,742
No, that's just a reputation they like to maintain (although if Draqon sees this he'll take the opposite view to me). They are certainly more ruthless, but I doubt you'd find any SAS guy who'd accept they're tougher.

Um, no. The Su-37 (the one used to do the Kulbit) was at the time one of the most advanced aircraft the Russians had, and an experimental prototype.

All much of a muchness. Different training certainly (firing a rifle compared to piloting a jet), but all round still pretty naff compared to the West.

Um, point the thing where you want to go and open the throttle - at M=2.8+ you're not going anywhere except in a reasonably straight line.

Speed doesn't cause any G forces, manoeuvring does (and there's little manoeuvre done at those speeds. F-16 for example can pull (and hold for a while), 9G.
The aircraft itself is cleared for lower G limits than a standard fighter (MiG-25 is structurally limited to 4.5G, for example).

23. ### ShogunBleed White and Blue!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
7,635
The show deadliest warriors proved them to be awesome. Anyways, they are more mentally tough ( you have to be to survive the training ), and are more prepared to be ruthless. Of course a SAS guy won't say it, every special forces like to think they are the best.

Not even in the same generation as the F/A-22 and other American aircraft.

Totally agree

Dogfighting........

I know, but you have to maneuver to dogfight right?? Foxhound is structurally tougher then the Foxbat.