Author Topic: first  (Read 10768 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dodnet

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 595
  • Infamy: 149
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Wolpertinger
  • Game nicks: DoD, DoD_Wolper
Re: first
« Reply #30 on: April 26, 2012, 11:07:45 PM »
0
Ya, India is so much wealthier than the USA. Which is why we live in big houses and eat lots of mcdonalds and people in India live in the street and dont eat anything.

Superior american intelligence. Just LOL.
The logic of war seems to be that if a belligerent can fight he will fight.

(click to show/hide)

Offline Casimir

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1758
  • Infamy: 269
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • The Dashing Templar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Knights Templar
  • Game nicks: Templar_Casimir
  • IRC nick: Casimir
Re: first
« Reply #31 on: April 27, 2012, 02:19:56 AM »
0
where the fuck is out 104th recruitment thread?
Turtles

Offline Tomas

  • Beta Tester
  • **
  • Renown: 718
  • Infamy: 217
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
    • Fallen Brigade Website
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Tomas
Re: first
« Reply #32 on: April 27, 2012, 04:25:16 PM »
0
And America was the wealthiest and most valuable colony the british had.

Wealth does not make somewhere important.  India, Canada and Jamaica all had military/tactical significance either through their location or through the essential resources that they produced.  For instance, without the high quality saltpeter coming from India the British army/navy would not have been able to afford regular training with live ammunition and would not have been the fighting force that they were.

The American Colonies mostly produced luxury goods, such as Tobacco and Cotton, that were traded privately. This generated tax income for the British Crown/Government but not much more and once the Revolution was over, traders still brought these goods to British ports so the Bristish Crown/Government still got their money.

All in all, with the exception of a few wealthy land owning individuals, the British lost very little at the time due to the Revolution. 

Offline Oberyn

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1568
  • Infamy: 537
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Lone Frog
  • Game nicks: Oberyn
Re: first
« Reply #33 on: April 28, 2012, 09:44:29 AM »
0
Unfortunately a lot of hospitallers got sucked in. 

I never was a fan of mount and musket...I got warband specifically for the medieval combat system...not to stand in a row as meat shields and shoot primitive firearms at people.

The American's won the revolutionary war largely because they didn't play dat shit when it came to "gentlemanly" conduct.  Having a large group firing from one position is good for offense.  Having all of your people bunched up in a ball makes hitting targets very easy for the enemy however (just aim for the center).  Guerilla tactics FTW...history can teach you stuff.

Honor gets you killed.  "Once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision. In war there is no substitute for victory." - General Douglas MacArthur.

Lol stupid propaganda.

http://www.revolutionarywararchives.org/tactics.html

"The traditional enemy of the colonists was the Indian. The tactics used to fight the Indians were quite different from those of massed European armies. Our use of Indian tactics inflicted numerous casualties upon the British, but it did not win battles.

It wasn't until the Continental Army, and to a lesser degree, the militia, mastered the art of 18th century warfare - - - standing in ranks and trading volleys and finally capturing the battle field at bayonet point, did we start winning battles."

Europeans didn't fight that way because they thought it was gentlemanly or fair. Only a complete fucktard with zero understanding of the development of musket warfare would even suggest something like that. Most of the battles and skirmishes of the Rev war were set-piece battles no different than those fought all over the world in the same period. It's not like Euro armies had never run into fucking guerilla warfare before, especially the British. History can teach you stuff. Try looking into it instead of regurgitating what some two bit hollywood flic taught you.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2012, 09:54:53 AM by Oberyn »
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Lobster

  • Noble
  • **
  • Renown: 11
  • Infamy: 4
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Byzantium
  • Game nicks: Byzantium_Lobster
Re: first
« Reply #34 on: April 30, 2012, 04:02:48 PM »
0
Byzantium have a NW server up, Commander battle mode.  104th_Weeaboo Fukushima space Regiement, we play under 104th tag.

You can join our team speak and move down to the channel we on under same name,  we mainly play commander battle mode and some times play on NW eu_1 battle server.
To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.

Offline Lobster

  • Noble
  • **
  • Renown: 11
  • Infamy: 4
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Byzantium
  • Game nicks: Byzantium_Lobster
Re: first
« Reply #35 on: April 30, 2012, 04:14:56 PM »
0
Ya, India is so much wealthier than the USA. Which is why we live in big houses and eat lots of mcdonalds and people in India live in the street and dont eat anything.


 Has to be a troll, not one can be this retarded ?
To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.

Offline Havoco

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 538
  • Infamy: 102
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Knights Hospookfans
  • Game nicks: Hospitaller_Havoc
  • IRC nick: Havoco
Re: first
« Reply #36 on: May 01, 2012, 04:51:25 AM »
0

 Has to be a troll, not one can be this retarded ?
We have a winner!Lol ur probably the first to spot this.Much props. Here have a cookie. :D


Back to topic: 1st Maltese has a NW command battle server up. I Love the game modes they added to NW and I think it was worth the 10 dollars.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 05:08:25 AM by Havoco »
Pock gobblers

Offline CrazyCracka420

  • Minute Valuable Contributor
  • Strategus Councillor
  • **
  • Renown: 1948
  • Infamy: 794
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Welp
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Vaegirs
  • Game nicks: Huseby
  • IRC nick: Steam name: crazycracka420
Re: first
« Reply #37 on: May 02, 2012, 06:59:05 PM »
0
Lol stupid propaganda.

http://www.revolutionarywararchives.org/tactics.html

"The traditional enemy of the colonists was the Indian. The tactics used to fight the Indians were quite different from those of massed European armies. Our use of Indian tactics inflicted numerous casualties upon the British, but it did not win battles.

It wasn't until the Continental Army, and to a lesser degree, the militia, mastered the art of 18th century warfare - - - standing in ranks and trading volleys and finally capturing the battle field at bayonet point, did we start winning battles."

Europeans didn't fight that way because they thought it was gentlemanly or fair. Only a complete fucktard with zero understanding of the development of musket warfare would even suggest something like that. Most of the battles and skirmishes of the Rev war were set-piece battles no different than those fought all over the world in the same period. It's not like Euro armies had never run into fucking guerilla warfare before, especially the British. History can teach you stuff. Try looking into it instead of regurgitating what some two bit hollywood flic taught you.

I read the whole article and nowhere does it explain why forming lines of men 3 deep to fire is good for tactics.  It explains how it's good for firing large volleys into the enemy, but how does that offset the fact that your army is one big target?  I question the validity of this tactic on a common sense standing, not on the little historic knowledge I have of the era.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
 - Stolen from Macropussy

Offline Gunfreak

  • Beggar
  • Renown: 0
  • Infamy: 0
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: first
« Reply #38 on: May 03, 2012, 12:22:58 AM »
0
Well if you want to play the game with a cRPG-attitude, DONT BUY IT. It's not about one person running to the front and killing all with a bayonet. Its much slower, as reloading guns takes ages, reloading cannons takes its time. But its much fun if you like the mood. It feels kinda real, esp. commander battle is so much fun. I usually take artillery there as you have your own cannon and don't need to distribute it with others  8-)

And battles with nearly 500 ppl (ok, 90% are commanded bots) and lines of fire are really intense. I love it.

Theres more in this thread: http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,29013.0.html

I actualy played a game with 1200 players and bots.

It was an epic game, but my biggest complait is that when playing commader battles, ALMOST ALL servers use those horrible "random maps" They are sooo boring, and most of them are so unrealstic, huge hills just right into the air, no real tatical options.

I don't understand why they want to play on those maps, when you have good realistic looking maps, with lots of tactical optinos, you have fields, hedges, rivers, bridges, houses, walls ect. NO they want to play on these random barren maps, they looks ugly and looks like they are from sci fi game.

But when you get a good map, and good server and good players it's fantastic.

I was playing Prussian line infantry, and got charged by british heavy dragoons, I held my fire, then 30 yards from me, I opend up a volley with 40 troops, only 3 dragoons surived and they were easy to take out with the bayonet.

Offline dodnet

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 595
  • Infamy: 149
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Wolpertinger
  • Game nicks: DoD, DoD_Wolper
Re: first
« Reply #39 on: May 04, 2012, 09:49:35 PM »
0
I read the whole article and nowhere does it explain why forming lines of men 3 deep to fire is good for tactics.  It explains how it's good for firing large volleys into the enemy, but how does that offset the fact that your army is one big target?  I question the validity of this tactic on a common sense standing, not on the little historic knowledge I have of the era.

Maybe you should read it again. It's not about firing much, it's about firing often. If there's constant bullets raining at you, you think twice about charging. Ofc firing in ranks sounds stupid from our point of view, but the muskets back then where so inaccurate, that it's more a psychological factor then a tactic. Also standing in groups makes it much easier to receive commandsand it raises moral. I think the chance to be hit while in a line was still quite low.
The logic of war seems to be that if a belligerent can fight he will fight.

(click to show/hide)

Offline Oberyn

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1568
  • Infamy: 537
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Lone Frog
  • Game nicks: Oberyn
Re: first
« Reply #40 on: May 04, 2012, 10:09:37 PM »
+1
So I guess you're not going to withdraw your retarded "this is why Americans won the Revolutionary War" statement, or even aknowledge that it was retardedly wrong in the first place.
Seriously though, the English had been facing guerilla warfare the world over, pretending that Americans were the first to attempt such tactics is beyond moronic. "Omg, they're not standing in lines and shooting at us, whatever shall we do?!". It's not like they had dealt with 75 fucking years of it just from the French and Indian wars, not even counting the sporadic resistence in other parts of their empire.
Just fucking ask George Washington I guess, who had been trying to craft an actual army ever since his experiences in those Wars. He was a fan of the Continental ARMY, and thought the militia were practically worthless. I guess that's not as easy to craft a superiority myth out of, though, so it got conveniently left out of all those Hollywood movies.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2012, 10:12:24 PM by Oberyn »
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Gunfreak

  • Beggar
  • Renown: 0
  • Infamy: 0
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: first
« Reply #41 on: May 05, 2012, 12:45:43 AM »
0
The british and americans during the revolution formed 2 deep lines, not 3, they also were spaced out in longer more open lines, so the british didn't stand around in 3 deep close formations and get shot at.

Offline Arathian

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 649
  • Infamy: 175
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Pick it up you white ass cracka
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Frisians
  • Game nicks: Arathian, schizophrenic_axe_murderer
Re: first
« Reply #42 on: May 08, 2012, 08:56:34 PM »
0
We used these kind of tactic until WW1 (and with shinning uniform, so it was a shinning large mass  :mrgreen:) and the invention of the machine gun, so most of the general (even the American one, during the Civil War) must have think that gunpowder weren't That effective, and made an expensive use of the bayonet, cavalry (with saber, and lance...)

indeed. The only country that changed that tactic in ww1 was, ironically, not any of the great powers but instead Greece that removed all the flashy stuff from officers so they couldn't be identified and shot at.

At first it was to save cash, then it worked better and we kept it and later adopted by Britain and the rest.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Harafat

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 80
  • Infamy: 21
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Holy Roman Empire
  • Game nicks: Harafat_HRE
Re: first
« Reply #43 on: May 09, 2012, 12:21:27 AM »
0
just bought it tonight, kinda like it, nice change if you think c-rpg has no longer any secrets for you.

However, it feels very arcade like, so its good for a short period, not for countless days like crpg

Offline Arathian

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 649
  • Infamy: 175
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Pick it up you white ass cracka
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Frisians
  • Game nicks: Arathian, schizophrenic_axe_murderer
Re: first
« Reply #44 on: May 09, 2012, 01:23:43 AM »
0
just bought it tonight, kinda like it, nice change if you think c-rpg has no longer any secrets for you.

However, it feels very arcade like, so its good for a short period, not for countless days like crpg

Project asinus is crpg for NW.

Infa 100%
visitors can't see pics , please register or login