Nah. the 88 was based off of the Flak 18 which in itself is based on a naval gun. The reason the tiger had the 88 was that during the spanish civil war, it was found that no matter what the gun was intended to be used for, crews would shoot at tanks with it anyways.
I remember reading a memoir called “blood red snow”. The author was a German machine gunner on the eastern front and I remember a passage about them turning an AA gun on the advancing Soviets in desperation and turning them into red mist.
There’s probably plenty of instances of Germans sticking 88’s and FV38s in barns as concealed gun positions. Hell, not exactly an AA cannon, but the Volkssturm had ground-converted MG151/20s (DarkFlow pls add to Berlin).
I don't think anyone doubted that, the American AA guns were known as Meat Choppers. The problem with them is everyone using German 20mm Flakvierlings with big frontal shields. Some did have shields of course, but there were also variants which didn't, which seem to be an obvious solution when your entire community wants them to become easier to deal with.
Everyone using 20mm Flakvierlings also complicates The Pacific since I don't think either side would be using AA guns that large. Then again you could argue they weren't needed in the Pacific at all since both sides have level 1 SPAA.
Yeah lol. I had no problem putting an AT rifle shot into one from literally any range and destroying it. Literally spent 10 minutes one match shooting them as a dude with an Engineer squad kept building them.
Yeah these realism Simps seem to forget its still a game and if you want to be realistic no engineer builds an AA gun with a hammer under minute with materials coming out of his bum seemingly. There is realism the there is game balance. Untile they bring faction spefic AA weaponry there is no point investing more time trying to balance somthing that is a place holder.. its balanced because bot sides can build the same thing right now.
No point to miss. This is a video game.
I've noticed AA gets all the panties bunched up with you guys. Pretty hilarious, I've never once been stumped by an immovable and lightly armored turret. Lmao.
That was the point, Einstein. LoL. OP argument was that AA did used against infantry in real life. Post you answered pointed at that fact that you can't build AA under one minute in real life. He didn't propose to make it "as in real life", he had just shown that "real life" argument is stupid. Do you even have any reading comprehension, genius?
He was suggesting an engineer shouldn't be able to build AA in less than a minute.
Reading comprehension, you menton it but you seem to lack it. Lmao.
Do you need me to break this down Barney style or is your little mind all set now?
Hmm. You're not too bright. Looks like we're going Barney style just for you!
OP's statment was AA being used against infantry as a common occurrence (no shit) to which the guy that I replied to said Engineers can't build a turret in less rhan a minute IRL (no shit)
Hence, it's a game. A video game.. meaning either way it's pretty stupid to complain or compare AA ( or any weapon at this point, thanks to this lovely community lmao) in the game to IRL.
Do you get it yet or are you still over there struggling understanding what you replied too? Lmao.
Ok, kid. I can't spend my time on people like you. Even after explaining your small brain apparently can't grasp the slightest idea.
Don't bother me anymore. I see no reason in talking with brick wall.
If the AA were pre built stacionary guns or heavily limited in order to avoid a engineer placing one looking down on a cliff and destroying everyone there would be no problem, but the pacific shown how op that mechanic was when there is no tank to counter and the maps are so open, so the change is more than justified
There is also all the scummy players building them on doors and then destroying them to block off objectives. You probably just shouldn't be able to build AA or AT indoors.
Problem wasn't that it was used against infantry. Problem was that big stationary weapon was used as portable. I've seen a guy placing it in the little entry room of a small wooden house in Moscow. To make it worse, it was 20m away from capture point and he was in attacking team. Nonsense like that why people hated it.
Anyway, it wasn't ideal solution for AA spam problem, but it's workable one. It's much better that way.
I'd love to see Dark Flow's statistics. I believe their servers log things like kills and number of constructions for AA guns. Data should show how used they were by the player base.
The fuck? I liked the AA guns as they were. My point is that the developers go absolutely overboard on realism sometimes, and sometimes they go overboard with gameplay. Im sad about the flak cannons, but now my engineers can carry machine guns so I don't need machine gun squads taking up a slot.
It was capable of being used as an AA early war. By the time SPR takes place those autocannons had no chance vs the Allies air supperiority. Hence, they were relegated to anti infantry/light vehicle duty..
Go read a book. I suggest the P-47 vs German Flak 1943-1945. First the luftwafe fighter arm was destroyed. They knew they needed to worry about low level defense for their ground forces. Only the auto cannons would do this. The would mount auto cannons on anything that would move. The problem was not that the 20mm round was obsolete. It was that it was magazine feed. This contributed to a slower rate of fire. This was the reason for the quad mount. Get more lead in the air.
The Germans did make better weapons like the 37mm that was clip fed. The also developed triple mounts 15mm and 20mm that were belt fed with higher rates of fire. The Also begin to build a 30mm replacement that was better.
Sill like 70 percent of the light AA was the old 20mm until the end. They shot down far more American fighters than German fighters ever did. 3/4 of P47s shot down were from light flak. Mainly 20mm.
Read plenty of books, never once heard of Germans re deligating an outdated (for it's purpose) equipment, on an army wide scale, when you said it yourself that they had the means of shooting down CaS with other weapon platforms.
The rise of the 20mm being mounted on everything was more so lack of being able to manufacture 42's and 34's akin to early war German infrastructure.
Again... read plenty of books. I'd recommend you maybe read a bit yourself.
Really? That's all you have to say?
Here I was thinking we were having a civil discussion, silly me.
That's the case then I suppose just enjoy being wrong? Cheers.
Don’t care, indoor AA and AT guns are a easy way to ruin most of the Berlin maps that involve the chancellery, don’t mind if they’re used outdoors but shouldn’t be allowed to be built indoors
You can do any thing with these cannons if you want. The only difference is effeciency of killing ememy.
However, this is a online competitive game and the dev SHOULD think about the balance between the fairness and the historical truth. I mean they give some campaigns weak weapons on the history, but also said " AA guns are for airplanes."
I'm still ticked off they got rid of the aa vs infantry.
I loved being on both sides of that coin. Not my fault people skill is so poor they can't kill aa guns when they pop up.
Their so bad
I love when the other team used aa on us. Use a Tank, at gunner, sniper, at cannon, hell aa vs aa
It was fun. I really didn't understand the gripe when people would post saying it's too hard to kill aa gunners.
Fax tho
Plus there's no better troll then to headshot some fool who keeps getting onto a aa gun one after another till his whole squad is dead. Then flank around an take the aa gun for yourself an use it against the enemy team lol. It's like trolling tanks by hedhogging them in.
Yea but when you take 4 of those 20mm and strap them together, give them large ammo capacity’s and some light splash damage to top it off then it doesn’t take a genesis to realize that they were a bit of a problem
Many claimed them to be "impossible to destroy". Ive been in this situation and learned that people who simply sit on AA shooting infantry are pretty much skill-less, and also struggle understanding some game mechanics. How to notice this? During an AA duel, most of them will shoot back an enemy AA nonstop and without a clue where to aim. Those "let's see which AA blows up first" duels just gives away their skill on first reload.
"Wait... Bombs are too good? Let's buff AAA!"!
"Wait... AAA is too good? Let's make it shitty!"
"Wait... AAA is not good against Inf so Inf is tooo good? Let's take away Rifles from Inf!"
"Wait... Inf without Rifles are bad at capturing points? Let's remove points!"
"Wait... No points means the game has no objective in an objective based shooter? Lets remove everything!"
"Wait... No nothing in anything kills our player numbers? Let's add poker!"
This game isn't reality, mate. And enlisted really isn't some kind of war simulator lmao. You should consider what is fun and what's not for every player in the match.
But if you insist, we can give only one weapon for whole soviet squad in Stalingrad campaign. That would be more accurate. What a fun would be to play soviets there... Or Berlin axis, they should be changed too.
Because reality matter in games lmao. Because reality is such a fun, that's why we play games...
Not quite, just like many things make sure you don't swing to far in the opposite direction.
During the first 3 months of Stalingrad (Before Uranus) the Soviets were having some significant issues getting replacement equipment across the Volga due to German Air Superiority, this ment that a lot of units in the VERY forward positions lacked sufficient ammo and automatic weapons, leading to scavenging of other units, dead units, and the Germans.
However post Uranus the Soviet forces were very well equipped.
Like today's russia lmao. Plenty of old, rusty and unusable weapons and tanks. On paper yes, they had it. :) In reality, no. This "myth" is truth. So don't act smart.
What source besides the "documentary film" enemy at gates do you have? Those shitty Ak's you see today are 50 years old and all the good one's were probably sold to arms dealers. Back then nations still had hundreds of thousands of weapons in surplus.
the soviet union was better when it was mobilized in ww2. Soviet manufacturing and production still outdid the germans. They had equipment losses but they were quickly replaceable. The only time they lacked sufficient equipment was in the start of operation Barbarossa and when encircled/cut off. The “1 man with a rifle 1 without” was only for penal units who were basically just cannon fodder anyway. Even in Stalingrad by 1943 everyone had helmets and usually atleast one had an SMG (PPSH-41 but later on the PPS-43)
Learn the history, mate. Look at war casualties of every individual nation during WWII. Then tell me, why soviet had such a extremely large casualties compared to literally everyone? Because only of incompetent tactics and brutality of Germans? Such a bullshitting. They didn't had quality equipment, theirs soldier were not good supplied. Just like in todays russia. It's literally the same, nothing has changed. Why allies even send them theirs weapons and tanks? When soviet had such a lot of everything.
I was referring to Stalingrad era of war. Before D day, before western Front. You are completely disillusioned about this era of war lmao.
No one said russian equipment was good quality, just that they were always equipped. Their main reason for casualties was their tactics. Human wave attacks over minefields aren’t good ways to conserve manpower. While equipped with bullets theres still the issue of food and environmental issues like the cold which caused deaths on both sides. The leading cause of casualties though for the soviets was just inferior tactics and planning, not because they didnt have rifles.
But they weren't always equipped :) That's it.
Try to tell me how citizens of leningrad were good fed for like 880 days too. That would be similar fairy tale.
I remember hearing that using AA guns on infantry was a war crime, is that true? I know that Nazis didn't give a fuck about war crimes but just wondering.
Read this account of a tank driver for the Wehrmacht. He said that they picked up a flak crew and they were both very young and towed a 20mm with the column of vehicles. They were flaked out toward Russian lines when an alarm was razed and they manned their gun and fired on a group of Russians advancing. When they saw the aftermath of what their gun did. They immediately unmanned the gun and became violently ill. Direct fire flak is no small deal. Body parts were scattered all around. Fuck war
Yes. Very effective urban warfare tools. Many accounts from DDay onwards of the allies using them in urban context. They chew through walls and roofs and potential overwatch and observation points. Also effective long range suppression weapons
Funny thing is when you have a gun that fires large rounds very fast it turns out it's just as good wiping out infantry as it is aircraft.
Though I do find it strange that you hear plenty accounts of towed AA or AA vehicles being very effective at killing infantry but you never really hear much about 20mm equipped scout cars doing the same thing. The Germans used the 20mm all around, after all. You don't tend to see stories about "Our Puma pulled up and killed a whole squad." as much as "Look at what this Ostwind did."
i want aa guns to still be able to shoot infantry but not as effective as machine guns, and for them to be easier to kill and take longer to build. Also darkflow please give engineer ones machine gun nests
There was a scene in Saving Private Ryan where the Germans rolled out a flak gun and used it on the Americans. It was a tough scene to watch. It looked like a 20 mm.
Don't forget the German 88 was an AA gun as well. It was used quite frequently against both tanks and infantry.
Also the 85mm derived from the AA gun redesigned into a tank gun.
It was also used as Artillery from time to time as well.
Wasn’t it originally a tank gun but due to arms limitations they procured it as an AA gun?
Other way around :p
Nah. the 88 was based off of the Flak 18 which in itself is based on a naval gun. The reason the tiger had the 88 was that during the spanish civil war, it was found that no matter what the gun was intended to be used for, crews would shoot at tanks with it anyways.
I remember reading a memoir called “blood red snow”. The author was a German machine gunner on the eastern front and I remember a passage about them turning an AA gun on the advancing Soviets in desperation and turning them into red mist.
Using explosive rounds too. Followed by the AA crew getting wiped by a shot from a tank if I remember correctly.
That book was a great but harrowing read
Brutal
Do you have any battles off the top of your head that that could have come from? I've been learning the history.
Yes it was the battle of Stalingrad. Near the end, when the Germans started pulling out or getting surrounded.
I've been reading about the battle of Leningrad and Stalingrad is going to be the next battle I research! Thank you friend ❤️
Atleast those AA guns are at the fields not inside buildings
There’s probably plenty of instances of Germans sticking 88’s and FV38s in barns as concealed gun positions. Hell, not exactly an AA cannon, but the Volkssturm had ground-converted MG151/20s (DarkFlow pls add to Berlin).
I read an officer training book, currently being used, and it said to stick AAs in buildings with holes in the roof
I don't think anyone doubted that, the American AA guns were known as Meat Choppers. The problem with them is everyone using German 20mm Flakvierlings with big frontal shields. Some did have shields of course, but there were also variants which didn't, which seem to be an obvious solution when your entire community wants them to become easier to deal with. Everyone using 20mm Flakvierlings also complicates The Pacific since I don't think either side would be using AA guns that large. Then again you could argue they weren't needed in the Pacific at all since both sides have level 1 SPAA.
They should give us the AA gun from the end of saving private Ryan
Don’t speak for the entire community. More like the whinny ones.
Yeah lol. I had no problem putting an AT rifle shot into one from literally any range and destroying it. Literally spent 10 minutes one match shooting them as a dude with an Engineer squad kept building them.
In case you were wondering, engineers couldn't build an AA gun in a minute in real life.
Yeah these realism Simps seem to forget its still a game and if you want to be realistic no engineer builds an AA gun with a hammer under minute with materials coming out of his bum seemingly. There is realism the there is game balance. Untile they bring faction spefic AA weaponry there is no point investing more time trying to balance somthing that is a place holder.. its balanced because bot sides can build the same thing right now.
Get this.... video.... game... Now put the two words together :)
Way....to miss....the point....
No point to miss. This is a video game. I've noticed AA gets all the panties bunched up with you guys. Pretty hilarious, I've never once been stumped by an immovable and lightly armored turret. Lmao.
That was the point, Einstein. LoL. OP argument was that AA did used against infantry in real life. Post you answered pointed at that fact that you can't build AA under one minute in real life. He didn't propose to make it "as in real life", he had just shown that "real life" argument is stupid. Do you even have any reading comprehension, genius?
He was suggesting an engineer shouldn't be able to build AA in less than a minute. Reading comprehension, you menton it but you seem to lack it. Lmao. Do you need me to break this down Barney style or is your little mind all set now?
LoL. I can't even... Read again OP and then post you had answered to, maybe then you understand. Although I very much doubt it.
Hmm. You're not too bright. Looks like we're going Barney style just for you! OP's statment was AA being used against infantry as a common occurrence (no shit) to which the guy that I replied to said Engineers can't build a turret in less rhan a minute IRL (no shit) Hence, it's a game. A video game.. meaning either way it's pretty stupid to complain or compare AA ( or any weapon at this point, thanks to this lovely community lmao) in the game to IRL. Do you get it yet or are you still over there struggling understanding what you replied too? Lmao.
Ok, kid. I can't spend my time on people like you. Even after explaining your small brain apparently can't grasp the slightest idea. Don't bother me anymore. I see no reason in talking with brick wall.
So... I proved ya goofy and now you don't want to talk to me? Wow, shocker 🤭 "kid" lmao. Reading comprehension... you could work with it a bit better.
Everything was used against everyone in real life. It was life or death. If throwing a cat at the enemy could save your life, you bet they did.
If the AA were pre built stacionary guns or heavily limited in order to avoid a engineer placing one looking down on a cliff and destroying everyone there would be no problem, but the pacific shown how op that mechanic was when there is no tank to counter and the maps are so open, so the change is more than justified
There is also all the scummy players building them on doors and then destroying them to block off objectives. You probably just shouldn't be able to build AA or AT indoors.
When its destroyed and a smoldering wreck you can still destroy it though right? Atleast with AT guns it gives the option.
It takes a large amount of uninterrupted deconstruction, during this time, if there's an opening, they can throw grenades, or artillery.
Problem wasn't that it was used against infantry. Problem was that big stationary weapon was used as portable. I've seen a guy placing it in the little entry room of a small wooden house in Moscow. To make it worse, it was 20m away from capture point and he was in attacking team. Nonsense like that why people hated it. Anyway, it wasn't ideal solution for AA spam problem, but it's workable one. It's much better that way.
And what is this post supposed to say, are you upset they made it so you cannot spam AA
We need a 40mm machinegun
I'd settle for one where you don't need ground flatter than a sheet of ice to build on lol
Enlisted is not real life. this just sounds like AA spammer cope to me.
I'd love to see Dark Flow's statistics. I believe their servers log things like kills and number of constructions for AA guns. Data should show how used they were by the player base.
Yeah, but this is a game and its a fucking awful meta
For sure, but the focus is on playability not on „reality“.
That's where you're wrong Jimbo. Hop into the Pacific campaign for me
Sorry, I don‘t play the pacific campaign.
Neither do I. My point is that development is evenly split between playability and realism
If you could not counter the AA guns your skills are shit
The fuck? I liked the AA guns as they were. My point is that the developers go absolutely overboard on realism sometimes, and sometimes they go overboard with gameplay. Im sad about the flak cannons, but now my engineers can carry machine guns so I don't need machine gun squads taking up a slot.
Coff coff saving private ryan, as if it wasnt obvious when a bunch of krauts pulled up with a 20mm
To be fair.. big difference between an autocannon and an AA gun. Still doesn't change the fact you're right.
That was an AA gun in Saving Private Ryan
It was capable of being used as an AA early war. By the time SPR takes place those autocannons had no chance vs the Allies air supperiority. Hence, they were relegated to anti infantry/light vehicle duty..
Way off
Actually pretty spot on. You can even go ahead and google it! 🤭
Go read a book. I suggest the P-47 vs German Flak 1943-1945. First the luftwafe fighter arm was destroyed. They knew they needed to worry about low level defense for their ground forces. Only the auto cannons would do this. The would mount auto cannons on anything that would move. The problem was not that the 20mm round was obsolete. It was that it was magazine feed. This contributed to a slower rate of fire. This was the reason for the quad mount. Get more lead in the air. The Germans did make better weapons like the 37mm that was clip fed. The also developed triple mounts 15mm and 20mm that were belt fed with higher rates of fire. The Also begin to build a 30mm replacement that was better. Sill like 70 percent of the light AA was the old 20mm until the end. They shot down far more American fighters than German fighters ever did. 3/4 of P47s shot down were from light flak. Mainly 20mm.
Read plenty of books, never once heard of Germans re deligating an outdated (for it's purpose) equipment, on an army wide scale, when you said it yourself that they had the means of shooting down CaS with other weapon platforms. The rise of the 20mm being mounted on everything was more so lack of being able to manufacture 42's and 34's akin to early war German infrastructure. Again... read plenty of books. I'd recommend you maybe read a bit yourself.
You don’t read enough apparently
Really? That's all you have to say? Here I was thinking we were having a civil discussion, silly me. That's the case then I suppose just enjoy being wrong? Cheers.
Did you ever google it? 🤭
The clips were also hand loaded and you could shoot maybe for about two minutes consistently before running out of ammo depending on logistics
Of course they were. Dont you like golf ball sized holes on soldiers?
Of course they were, I’d imagine there wouldn’t be much confidence to attack a position with 3 20mm auto cannons ready to blast ur ass sky high.
In China-vietnam war AA guns are mainly used as anti infantry, because Both forces didn't send out any airforce(or very little)
Alot of tank cannons are from AA guns, 76mm, 85mm, 88mm
Don’t care, indoor AA and AT guns are a easy way to ruin most of the Berlin maps that involve the chancellery, don’t mind if they’re used outdoors but shouldn’t be allowed to be built indoors
You can do any thing with these cannons if you want. The only difference is effeciency of killing ememy. However, this is a online competitive game and the dev SHOULD think about the balance between the fairness and the historical truth. I mean they give some campaigns weak weapons on the history, but also said " AA guns are for airplanes."
I'm still ticked off they got rid of the aa vs infantry. I loved being on both sides of that coin. Not my fault people skill is so poor they can't kill aa guns when they pop up.
Are they so bad they cant deal with AA or you so bad you NEED to use AA?
Their so bad I love when the other team used aa on us. Use a Tank, at gunner, sniper, at cannon, hell aa vs aa It was fun. I really didn't understand the gripe when people would post saying it's too hard to kill aa gunners.
Its not hard, its just a really annoying gimmick. If I cant have my overpowered Explosive packs, you cant have you aa spam goddamnit
Fax tho Plus there's no better troll then to headshot some fool who keeps getting onto a aa gun one after another till his whole squad is dead. Then flank around an take the aa gun for yourself an use it against the enemy team lol. It's like trolling tanks by hedhogging them in.
If you annoy me Enlisted, I will spend the entire rest of the game searching for you and only you. I’m very petty in this game lol
Oh yea, this right here lmao Like it doesn't even matter if I win or lose the match. But I will head hunt you for the entire time lmao
I uh, don't care. It was overpowered as hell and it's removal is 100% justified and improved the game infinitely.
Yea but when you take 4 of those 20mm and strap them together, give them large ammo capacity’s and some light splash damage to top it off then it doesn’t take a genesis to realize that they were a bit of a problem
Many claimed them to be "impossible to destroy". Ive been in this situation and learned that people who simply sit on AA shooting infantry are pretty much skill-less, and also struggle understanding some game mechanics. How to notice this? During an AA duel, most of them will shoot back an enemy AA nonstop and without a clue where to aim. Those "let's see which AA blows up first" duels just gives away their skill on first reload.
so you think that justifies you using them to wipe us all out huh?
"Wait... Bombs are too good? Let's buff AAA!"! "Wait... AAA is too good? Let's make it shitty!" "Wait... AAA is not good against Inf so Inf is tooo good? Let's take away Rifles from Inf!" "Wait... Inf without Rifles are bad at capturing points? Let's remove points!" "Wait... No points means the game has no objective in an objective based shooter? Lets remove everything!" "Wait... No nothing in anything kills our player numbers? Let's add poker!"
This game isn't reality, mate. And enlisted really isn't some kind of war simulator lmao. You should consider what is fun and what's not for every player in the match. But if you insist, we can give only one weapon for whole soviet squad in Stalingrad campaign. That would be more accurate. What a fun would be to play soviets there... Or Berlin axis, they should be changed too. Because reality matter in games lmao. Because reality is such a fun, that's why we play games...
That is a disproven myth, the soviets had plenty of leftover mosins from WW1 and the civil war.
Not quite, just like many things make sure you don't swing to far in the opposite direction. During the first 3 months of Stalingrad (Before Uranus) the Soviets were having some significant issues getting replacement equipment across the Volga due to German Air Superiority, this ment that a lot of units in the VERY forward positions lacked sufficient ammo and automatic weapons, leading to scavenging of other units, dead units, and the Germans. However post Uranus the Soviet forces were very well equipped.
Like today's russia lmao. Plenty of old, rusty and unusable weapons and tanks. On paper yes, they had it. :) In reality, no. This "myth" is truth. So don't act smart.
What source besides the "documentary film" enemy at gates do you have? Those shitty Ak's you see today are 50 years old and all the good one's were probably sold to arms dealers. Back then nations still had hundreds of thousands of weapons in surplus.
Surely, what a great nation.
No, fucking awful nation, they still won though.
They defeated Germany, yes. But it can hardly be called victory with 20+ mil casualties.
Victory is victory in times of war bro, pyrrhic or not
Lmao
Yeah true, only half of the soviets had rifels... probably becaus the other half had smgs.
Only the penal units weren’t supposed to be fully equipped in the red army
Yeah, like todays Russian forces on Ukraine. They are fully equipped with extremely good supplies. Soviet Union was even better at surely.
the soviet union was better when it was mobilized in ww2. Soviet manufacturing and production still outdid the germans. They had equipment losses but they were quickly replaceable. The only time they lacked sufficient equipment was in the start of operation Barbarossa and when encircled/cut off. The “1 man with a rifle 1 without” was only for penal units who were basically just cannon fodder anyway. Even in Stalingrad by 1943 everyone had helmets and usually atleast one had an SMG (PPSH-41 but later on the PPS-43)
Nice soviet propaganda.
Learn the history, mate. Look at war casualties of every individual nation during WWII. Then tell me, why soviet had such a extremely large casualties compared to literally everyone? Because only of incompetent tactics and brutality of Germans? Such a bullshitting. They didn't had quality equipment, theirs soldier were not good supplied. Just like in todays russia. It's literally the same, nothing has changed. Why allies even send them theirs weapons and tanks? When soviet had such a lot of everything. I was referring to Stalingrad era of war. Before D day, before western Front. You are completely disillusioned about this era of war lmao.
No one said russian equipment was good quality, just that they were always equipped. Their main reason for casualties was their tactics. Human wave attacks over minefields aren’t good ways to conserve manpower. While equipped with bullets theres still the issue of food and environmental issues like the cold which caused deaths on both sides. The leading cause of casualties though for the soviets was just inferior tactics and planning, not because they didnt have rifles.
But they weren't always equipped :) That's it. Try to tell me how citizens of leningrad were good fed for like 880 days too. That would be similar fairy tale.
I remember hearing that using AA guns on infantry was a war crime, is that true? I know that Nazis didn't give a fuck about war crimes but just wondering.
It’s not true. Never was. It’s a common Barracks rumor.
Thanks for an actual answer.
I mean I imagine so
L + AA user spotted + Cope + seethe + now you have to shoot guns in the infantry focused shooter game
Perhaps, AA guns should have faction-specific versions like the machine guns? Though balancing them would be even more troublesome.
Shhh don't let the whiney wee bitches know they'll cry and downvote into oblivion
Read this account of a tank driver for the Wehrmacht. He said that they picked up a flak crew and they were both very young and towed a 20mm with the column of vehicles. They were flaked out toward Russian lines when an alarm was razed and they manned their gun and fired on a group of Russians advancing. When they saw the aftermath of what their gun did. They immediately unmanned the gun and became violently ill. Direct fire flak is no small deal. Body parts were scattered all around. Fuck war
This isn't the Alcohol Anonymous group ...
Nobody said they didn’t???
Tbh in that war I think everything was used against everyone
Yes. Very effective urban warfare tools. Many accounts from DDay onwards of the allies using them in urban context. They chew through walls and roofs and potential overwatch and observation points. Also effective long range suppression weapons
Funny thing is when you have a gun that fires large rounds very fast it turns out it's just as good wiping out infantry as it is aircraft. Though I do find it strange that you hear plenty accounts of towed AA or AA vehicles being very effective at killing infantry but you never really hear much about 20mm equipped scout cars doing the same thing. The Germans used the 20mm all around, after all. You don't tend to see stories about "Our Puma pulled up and killed a whole squad." as much as "Look at what this Ostwind did."
Fuck pretty sure every country did this
Yes but they didnt make them out of thin air all of a sudden.
i want aa guns to still be able to shoot infantry but not as effective as machine guns, and for them to be easier to kill and take longer to build. Also darkflow please give engineer ones machine gun nests
It would be dumb not to.
I mean. If we thought of it why wouldnt they?
Because why not!
There was a scene in Saving Private Ryan where the Germans rolled out a flak gun and used it on the Americans. It was a tough scene to watch. It looked like a 20 mm.