rafiki said:Units with tanks in Vicky are slower than the same units with artillery...
Rafiki
Damn it Rafiki... you know everything.
spend too much time in these forums... -
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Damn it Rafiki... you know everything.
spend too much time in these forums... 
Well, Memnon is "the one who knows", DR is "the one who mods" and I fancy myself as "the one who has the statistics and lists"
Rafiki
Rafiki
I'm "Memnemonic"rafiki said:Well, Memnon is "the one who knows", DR is "the one who mods" and I fancy myself as "the one who has the statistics and lists"
rafiki said:Units with tanks in Vicky are slower than the same units with artillery...
rafiki said:Well, Memnon is "the one who knows", DR is "the one who mods" and I fancy myself as "the one who has the statistics and lists"
I think of you as the comedy relief sidekick
The great brit said:rafiki said:Units with tanks in Vicky are slower than the same units with artillery...
Why
But weren't they faster than artillery?
C'on!!! At least they had the same speed, don't tell me....
C'on!!! At least they had the same speed, don't tell me....
Well judging from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_World_War_I_tanks, they were rather slow even when they worked properly, which they rarely did
Rafiki
Rafiki
Bit off topic but creeping barrage should then be in invention that makes artillery better as 1 of the latest inventions to try and work agaist all that entranchment like historically - or is this allready in their?
creeping barrage should be implanted some why. It didnt work all the time but worked better than other ways. Maybe give infantry a decent boost to attack to show there improved attack potenial. Or something like that
rafiki said:Units with tanks in Vicky are slower than the same units with artillery...
Are you sure about that ? I always thought art units were the slowest in the game.
Actually, since i'm using combined army corps/armies (+- former soviet TOE), it's a bit hard to figure.
"attract them, fix them... kill them"
Gil8891 said:
I would think that tanks were slower than arty... arty pulled by teams of horses or light trucks... hmmm... are their rail guns in this game?
Tanks would have a lot of issues in moving between territories.
WWI tanks were almost useless, had an average ground speed of about 3 mph(Brisk walking pace) and had nothing resembeling a modern suspension, so they could only be used in certain smooth terrains, and then they would still break down due to its inability to absorb simple shocks while moving. Parts would just snap in half. And thats in the summer! Imagine the crappy metals they had at that time in the mid of winter, where metal was extremely fragile(see the Titanic!)
It was the birth for AFV's, it took a while to create an efficient amoured fighting vehicle. Then even longer to figure out how to use em!
It was the birth for AFV's, it took a while to create an efficient amoured fighting vehicle. Then even longer to figure out how to use em!
Last edited:
Yeah the tanks were slow ,and the experience on pulling artillery that was in use for decade's was high ,and often they used double or triple spans to get artillery fast out of an position.Most artillerist were pretty experienced i gues in limbering/unlimbering in a minimal time.
Actually the British miss used their early tanks.
At first they spread them out to thin.
The second time they used them in the coastal wet lands and got bogged down.
The third time they did use them in mass, (with the highly successful armored car), they tried an armored thrust with the last of the British Calvary units to exploit the gap produced by the tanks. The armored cars and tanks over ran the Germans but the cav. never followed up. It was one of the best break through of the war, but one of the worst wasted opportunities too. With out any support the tanks/cars pulled back before dark.
There was a great article in Military History magazine on the battle and some very interesting stories of individual crews.
____________________________________
“I will bring this country back to its time honored tradition of going to war because we have to, not because we want to.” John Kerry
Some one don't know his US history. (or play this game)
Wars the US had to fight: 2 (WWII, Civil War)
War the US wanted to fight: 10 (War 1812, Mexican & Spanish wars, WWI, ect...
At first they spread them out to thin.
The second time they used them in the coastal wet lands and got bogged down.
The third time they did use them in mass, (with the highly successful armored car), they tried an armored thrust with the last of the British Calvary units to exploit the gap produced by the tanks. The armored cars and tanks over ran the Germans but the cav. never followed up. It was one of the best break through of the war, but one of the worst wasted opportunities too. With out any support the tanks/cars pulled back before dark.
There was a great article in Military History magazine on the battle and some very interesting stories of individual crews.
____________________________________
“I will bring this country back to its time honored tradition of going to war because we have to, not because we want to.” John Kerry
Some one don't know his US history. (or play this game)
Wars the US had to fight: 2 (WWII, Civil War)
War the US wanted to fight: 10 (War 1812, Mexican & Spanish wars, WWI, ect...
Some other bad things with WWI tanks was that it got so hot inside them the crew would often pass out. And if they got shot bits of the inside of the armour would chip off and zoom about the inside of the tank like shrapnel. Tank crews were issued with light chainmail to protect them :rofl: