Re: [Epic] Epic 40K Facts

From: <duckrvr_at_...>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 09:42:29 -0600

At 11:26 AM 3/29/97 -0600, you wrote:

>In several words, you are incorrect.
>
>Artillery, after say, 1800, has been THE major factor in warfare.

That may be, but because it is the major factor does NOT mean it kills
troops directly.

> The US Army thinks that CC is combat at under
>200 meters range. Given the VERY short ranges of GW's game weapons
>this would be "long range" in a game.

Moo? Then why is the Army rifle course exclusively under 200m? Why is it
that the majority of decisive engagements since WWII have been at 50m or less?
"Close Ambush" range is grenade range (35m or so). How can "close combat"
be at 200m? Army training (for infantry) barely reaches this range under
ideal circumstances (rifle range). They certainly can't be very good at it
under combat conditions.

>Closeing to melee range and going
>at it with sharp pointy things is NOT something that was done after 1914
>or so.

Yeah, but armor and artillery duels aren't very "gothic".

>Also Artillery is by no matter of means as inaccurate as you seem to
>think. After the "modern" foward observer came in to play (say 1930 or
>so for the US, a bit latter for the rest of the world) a group of
>infantry in the open the was spotted by the FO was going to be dead.

Probably. But the crap they spew about being accurate within 1 meter at a
12 klick range is imbecilic. I love the artillery guys, but they shouldn't
believe their own press. Hitting a 10m target at that range is doing well.

Temp
Received on Mon Mar 31 1997 - 15:42:29 UTC