random item

Troperville

Tools

Find recent edits by troper:

back to: Main / DeployableCover

edit article | go to discussion page

12th Jun '13 12:29:36 PM Earnest

Send Earnest a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Added line(s) 0 (click to see context) :

11th Jun '13 11:53:58 PM EarlOfSandvich

Send EarlOfSandvich a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 50 (click to see context) from:

to:

28th Apr '13 12:52:41 PM MAI742

Send MAI742 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 65 (click to see context) from:

** More commonly, such as in the latter part of World War 1, armies would employ a "creeping barrage" tactic, where the artillery would continually lay down fire just ahead of the advancing troops, using the shell blasts themselves as a form of cover. Creeping barrages soon became obsolete when the Germans realised (as a result of trying to conserve their increasingly scarce ammunition) that short, concentrated, and intense barrages on short sections of the enemy lines followed by lightening-fast assaults and break-throughs[[hottip:*: the rest of the force following through these bridgeheads to encircle and force the surrender of/exterminate the forward sections of the enemy line]] were much more effective than either creeping barrages or the massive (week-)long barrages (followed up methodically but painfully slowly across a broad front) that had proceeded them both. 'Creeping Barrages' and 'Massive Barrages' were just too slow to result in anything more than tactical advances, as the enemy would always have enough time to bring up reserves to strengthen their lines, something that brief barrages followed by rapid assaults and breakthroughs managed to avoid (In theory, anyway. In practice, Germany's logistics capabilities were always too weak to properly sustain strategic offensives).

to:

** In [[WorldWarOne 1915-1917]], (Allied) armies experimented with the use of a "creeping barrage" tactic, where the artillery would continually lay down fire just ahead of the advancing troops, using the shell blasts themselves as a form of cover. Creeping barrages soon became obsolete when the Germans realised (as a result of trying to conserve their increasingly scarce ammunition) that short, concentrated, and intense barrages on short sections of the enemy lines followed by lightening-fast assaults and break-throughs[[hottip:*: the rest of the force following through these bridgeheads to encircle and force the surrender of/exterminate the forward sections of the enemy line]] were much more effective than either creeping barrages or the massive (week-)long barrages (followed up methodically but painfully slowly across a broad front) that had proceeded them both. 'Creeping Barrages' and 'Massive Barrages' were just too slow to result in anything more than tactical advances, as the enemy would always have enough time to bring up reserves to strengthen their lines, something that brief barrages followed by rapid assaults and breakthroughs managed to avoid (In theory, anyway. In practice, Germany's logistics capabilities were always too weak to properly sustain strategic offensives).

28th Apr '13 12:51:51 PM MAI742

Send MAI742 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 65,66 (click to see context) from:

** More commonly, such as in the latter part of World War 1, armies would employ a "creeping barrage" tactic, where the artillery would continually lay down fire just ahead of the advancing troops, using the shell blasts themselves as a form of cover. Creeping barrages soon became obsolete when the Germans realised (as a result of trying to conserve their increasingly scarce ammunition) that short, concentrated, and intense barrages on short sections of the enemy lines followed by lightening-fast assaults and break-throughs[[hottip:*: the rest of the force following through these bridgeheads to encircle and force the surrender of/exterminate the forward sections of the enemy line]] were much more effective than either creeping barrages or the massive (week-)long barrages (followed up methodically but painfully slowly across a broad front) that had proceeded them both. 
*** It's worth noting that 10% casualties were expected in an advance covered by a properly-executed creeping barrage; most of those casualties were not due to enemy action[[hottip:*: as one's own troops would be in excellent positions to force the enemy's to surrender by the score or be massacred in their dugouts]] but rather due to defective shells and mis-aimed artillery pieces resulting in some of the barrage hitting one's own troops.

to:

28th Apr '13 12:47:27 PM MAI742

Send MAI742 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 65 (click to see context) from:

to:

28th Apr '13 12:45:23 PM MAI742

Send MAI742 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 65 (click to see context) from:

to:

** More commonly, such as in the latter part of World War 1, armies would employ a "creeping barrage" tactic, where the artillery would continually lay down fire just ahead of the advancing troops, using the shell blasts themselves as a form of cover. Creeping barrages soon became obsolete when the Germans realised (as a result of trying to conserve their increasingly scarce ammunition) that short, concentrated, and intense barrages on short sections of the enemy lines followed by lightening-fast breakthroughs[[hottip:*: the rest of the force following through these bridgeheads to encircle and force the surrender of/exterminate the forward sections of the enemy line]] were much more effective than massive (week-)long barrages followed up methodically but painfully slowly across a broad front. 
*** It's worth noting that 10% casualties were expected in an advance covered by a  properly-executed creeping barrage; most of those casualties were not due to enemy action[[hottip:*: as one's own troops would be in excellent positions to force the enemy's to surrender by the score or be massacred in their dugouts]] but rather due to defective shells and mis-aimed artillery pieces resulting in some of the barrage hitting one's own troops.

24th Apr '13 7:52:52 PM ironcommando

Send ironcommando a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Added line(s) 50 (click to see context) :

18th Jan '13 2:38:08 PM ManchuCandidate

Send ManchuCandidate a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 45 (click to see context) from:

to:

19th Dec '12 1:51:01 PM Redfredhunter

Send Redfredhunter a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 69 (click to see context) from:

to:

25th Nov '12 12:16:35 PM Alucard