I didn't realize a PhD historian like you has such an interest in games. Surprised and have to admit that this video is really cool stuff :)

Everyone has a plan until he gets punched in the face. ~Mike Tyson

Nato tactics don’t work in Ukraine because Ukraine isn’t a NATO army

You mean 67 to ca 97.

"Feldjustieranlage, Feldjustieranlage on the wall, who shoots straightest of them all?"

M548 was a spacious ammo vehicle for self propelled Artillery in the USA 70's 80's USA National Guard units . Fun to drive !

Wasn’t the 10th Mountain Div. under Clark?

My stepfather drove a tank in the Fort Gary Horse Canadian armored regiment in France and Belgium. He called it "Royal Tiger," but never saw a working version

It wasn’t limited to WW2. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M9_half-track#:~:text=It%20was%20used%20during%20World,and%20the%20Yom%20Kippur%20War.

Worst tank

The ATGM and Shorad variants are perfect uses for this vic

It is good to see RTS genre making a comeback.

20 years ago you looked into the Maus? So you are in your 40s? I thought you were 30 years old or something around that age.

This is an example of why I love learning about WWII. The tech existed, but nothing was refined. It was a war of innovation, countries invested and developed tools and vehicles that needed to serve a purpose, but where the concept of how best to serve that purpose hadn’t yet been figured out. So they just made things work. That’s why there’s so many wildly different vehicles that came out of the war, there were so many needs to be filled and the number of ways they tried to fill them were just as varied. The benefit of the halftrack being able to off road and on road travel also meant it was versatile. Hence why they got used for everything. From troop transport, anti-tank, support weapon towing, infantry support MGs, mobile mortar platforms, mobile anti-air platforms, even ambulances. They could do just about anything, anywhere and had a mounting system for it all. It’s what made the Sherman so great too. If you needed something done, there was a Sherman for that. Versatility helps logistics greatly and logistics is a huge reason the allies won that war. If we needed something somewhere, you’d have twice that much on hand sooner than you expected.

Thats right, the ammunition is the problem.

Ytmp3 doesn't allow videos longer than an hour, but background UKposts on PC will lead to low attention...

The french recruited many from pow camps after ww2 For service in indochina 1948 and 49 saw the formation of two foreign Legion airborne battalions!

just visited the site for requirements. The recommended PC to run this game starts @ $1000 with many being near/over $2K. You cannot be serious. To each their own but that's a ton of coin. To be fair: I wouldn't spend $1K on a deer rifle either !

stupid clickbait. nobody ever asked this question. Educated people know that the wegde armor is hollow and not ment to deflect anything bigger than small arms fire. anything bigger is ment to penetrate and expend its energy in the process before it hits the real armor behind.

Would love to see you do a similar thing with Gates of Hell and it's DLC. I think you will be really impressed!

One of the main reasons that NATO tactics don't work is they are not sharing their modern strategies with Ukrainians and are giving them cold war era strategies. The problem with this is the fact that NATO in Cold War expected a Soviet attack into West Germany and fighting around East Germany-Western Poland and also Fulda Gap. Their equipment is made to fight in an area like that, not the vast open fields of Ukraine. Russian equipment and tactics on the other hand revolved around (yes Fulda Gap again) mostly Ukraine as they also expected NATO to strike first into Poland and practically overwhelming the troops there and advancing into Ukraine where they'd have the advantage. So they have the home advantage when it comes to strategy. Also most of Ukraine's older top brass grew up with Soviet doctrines, that and NATO equipment don't match too well.

WoopWoop Worms and <Mannheim <3 Grüße aus Monnem :D

This is my favourite game. I have been playing Men of War for last 12 years. Especially the older version Faces of War from 2006.

It really was a cool idea for this stream to have happened the way it did, with one person playing and the other commentating rather than one person trying to juggle both. 👍

Another issue with lightly armored vehicles. The clue is in the word "explosive"... That means that even when they do stop shaped charge, the explosion of ERA block is likely to destroy the vehicle by smashing its thin armor. It is after all, explosive on its thin armor. The UKposts creator with the channel Red Effect did a great video with using photos from USSR tests with light vehicles and you can see entire side of BMP shattered only by ERA block exploding. They did develop ERA for lightly armored vehicles (called Kontakt-3 or 4) but it never caught on most likely due to added weight and price.

Why would we be angry at Russia? They would sell us all the oil and gas we like, its our politicians that decided to join the sanction wagon and thereby reducing purchases from russia that made prices soar on that sector...

Another thing... People have the wrong idea how the ricochet works. Most of people think of it as if it was a laser beam bouncing off of a mirror; exit angle is equal to entering angle. Most likely due to video games. Not quite the case... The round will in reality hit a metal plate it can't penetrate, dump almost all of its energy there and then it will kind of slide along the plate with very little energy (and shape cos it will deform) giving it little to no penetration ability left. It's not as I said a laser off a mirror or a tennis ball...

Warum nicht auf Deutsch. Muss alles immer in Englisch / Denglisch sein.

Drones have made tanks obsolete for anything but civil oppression. On the battlefield they're essentially a mobile coffin. This discussion is moot.

It is indeed a strange crossover, but a welcome one

Nice Video

Summary: overcomplicated plans and tactics made up by people without real experience seldom work or are practically impossible to apply.

If era was easy to detonate, you would potentially suffer from a chain reaction as the first era brick initiated a sympathetic detonation of the surrounding bricks and so on.

My tv says that the Leopards are wonder weapons and the Russians fight with shovels and old washing machines. I believe my tv.

You generals do understand that Russia is using 10% of its military force!

Tactical commentar

Tactical commentar

2024 😂

Yes, air superiority and all the components of American air power are the key missing pieces that the Ukrainians don't have. So, how would this air power help Ukraine break through the Surovikan line of triple deep minefields and fortifications? Simple, after an intensive few days or weeks of SEADS air attacks to wipe out the ground based air defenses, the heavy bombers would then be sent in. They would be in a package of additional SEADs and probably drone surveillance to draw away any remaining MANPADS air defenses. Each heavy bomber can carry 30 tons of bombs. I don't know if anybody has ever seen footage of what the aftermath of a B-52 strike looks like after it has emptied its entire load of bombs into a small strip of land. That entire target area blows up, everything inside is blown up, and what's left is a Moon-like surface of barren craters. No more minefields, booby traps, trenches, pillboxes, bunkers, artillery. Just barren craters. The B-52s, B-1s, B-2s can all carry some 30 tons of conventional bombs and within a matter of days, with the entire fleet of American heavy bombers brought to bear, the Surovikan line is transformed into the surface of the Moon. You don't even need tanks to go through that area after you are done. Just send in the Bradleys and other IFVs and APCs through. They can just drive through to the next line of Russian defenses. Send a few Predator drones and AC-130s orbiting over the line of attack with infrared sensors to wipe out anything that gives off heat and moves in their line of attack. What people don't realize is why the F-35 is the latest key part of American doctrine to maintain air superiority. The F-35 brings the latest technological superiority over Russian air defenses that will start that process of gaining air superiority, by wiping out the Russian air force from the skies, and also wiping out all the sophisticated Russian air defenses, the S-400s, the S-300s, the S-200s, the Buks, etc., etc., Anything smaller and shorter range, like the MANPADS and mobile AAA gets taken care of by Predator drones and AC-130s, and F-15s/F-16s. So, yeah, the reason Ukraine can't fight according to NATO doctrine is that they don't have the full set of air power weapons that the U.S. has. Once you have air superiority, and the ability to suppress any local anti-air defenses, the power of heavy bombers makes all traditional warfare, with trenches, sieges, minefields, artillery duels, etc., completely useless. In 1954, in Vietnam, French forces were trapped at Dien Bien Phu by the Viet Minh, and, bombarded constantly by Vietnamese artillery, they were forced to surrender. Years later, in 1968, a garrison of the US Marines were surrounded at Khe Sanh, and things also looked desperate. The US sent in flight after flight of B-52s to bomb the surrounding hillsides where the North Vietnamese Army was besieging the Khe Sanh garrison. The hillsides, once lush with trees that hid the North Vietnamese army and their artillery firing into Khe Sanh, were leveled and turned into the barren surface of the Moon. After a week or so of this bombing, the remnants of the North Vietnamese Army packed up and went home.

It seems NATO tactics are designed only for US use, or at least only by major NATO countries. It would be interesting to see how Turkey implemented these (if at all) in Syria, or if Azerbaijan was more successful in it's application of NATO tactics, if they used it.

I wonder why tank-fired anti-air missiles aren't common. I'd think that something like a 10 km range missile that could track a helicopter (or possibly a larger drone) would be extremely useful, even if it only has a rudimentary guidance system.

So really what if someone does shoot it with an old shell? I mean its still a shot trap flaw, be pretty bad for a leo2 getting knocked out by a lucky ruski in a t54 or something someone desperate might toss at you.

Love tanks, just bought both books, i wish i had seen this sooner because i wanted the limited bilingual edition :(

Let’s revisit this one. Textbook NATO tactics are textbook ONLY to NATO. We have the necessary knowledge, experience and equipment to do so. Both sides in this war have pretty much none of that. Not the knowledge, not the equipment and not the experience.

Russia had tactical superiority and air superiority and are struggling to capture small villages i don’t think things are going to go well when Europe gets more serious about their commitment to the conflict

You talk too much 👎👎👎🤮🤮🤮

It’s all about the engineering. 1 transmission or 2-3

Thanks for answering my questions! I’m a long time listener and a first time caller lol

U.S. Army still had and used half track trucks up until 1957 or later. I remember seeing them being driven in field maneuvers miles outside of Fort Polk Louisiana in Hornbeck. Army soldiers drove them up and down the streets as they participated in mock battle.

Nice. Unexpected, but nice! Two quality content creators I didn't anticipate!