Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers requiredPandora: Eclipse of Nashira gets release dateCommunity impressions of To End All WarsAgeod's To End All Wars is now availableTo End All Wars is now available!Deal of the Week: Field of GloryTo End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!Ageod's To End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!To End All Wars: Artillery
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/7/2006 8:24:57 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 18273
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Davidt
Need help on the BULGARIAN army writeups

Unfortunately it seems that the actual armies deployed by the bulgarians dont match with the pieces in MWIF. This goes for both the naming and the number of Corps. My guess is that the MWIF pieces for the Bulgarian I and II Corps are the Bulgarian 5th army and the 1. occupation corps. See link
http://www.vojska.net/eng/world-war-2/bulgaria/organization/1943/ for example. Also it seems that the Bulgarians actually did more fighting against the germans towards the end of the war than for the germans http://members.tripod.com/~marcin_w/index-bul.html. My concerne is this will be confusing to add in a game where the specific piece is an axis piece. (The same concern is valid for the Sofia Mil) 

I the absence of naming consistency i have decided to do a more generic description for the 2 Bulgarian infantry corps units instead of specifics for a given unit.

 
 
The Bulgarian Army (Infantry Corps I and II)
 
There were strong pro-German tendencies in Bulgarian foreign policy at the start of the second world war. The driving force was the desire to regain the lands lost by Bulgaria, after the First World War.
 
On march 1. 1941 Bulgaria acceded to the Axis Tri-Partite Treaty. At this time the mobilized Bulgarian armed landforces consisted of 16 infantry divisions, two cavalry divisions, one motorized brigade as well as special and service units.
 
In April of 1941 Bulgaria was awarded Aegean and Vardarian Thrace and the entire Jugoslav Macedonia, as well as  and extreme south-eastern section of Serbia. Bulgaria also co-participated in the occupation of the remainder of Serbia (until September of 1944).
 
The Bulgarian government refused, despite heavy axis pressure, to commit its troops against the Soviet Union.  Bulgaria even, as the only axis country, allowed a Soviet embassy to operate for the entire duration of the conflict,
 
Bulgaria declared war on the UK and the United states on December 13. 1941.


Let me hear what you think. Is this fine or can someone help me differentiate the units??

Regards
David


What you have both at the top and at the bottom would be ok by me. You could say:

The armies deployed by Bulgaria do not match precisely with the counters in WIF. In addition, Bulgaria switched sides towards the end of the war and therefore spent some of the war fighting with the Germans and some of it against the Germans.

You could then either include what you have already written and/or some operation details on the Bulgarian 5th Army and 1st Occupation Corps (using the combat units you mentioned - I know absolutely nothing about this).

I feel no compulsion to hide things from the players - WIF is a game and by necessity, it only approximates reality everywhere if you look closely enough. That's not to say that discrepancies should be emphasized in the unit writeups, but neither should they be hidden away as if we are embarrassed by them. WIF is as it is. We like it, and so will others - despite the odd blemishes.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Davidt)
Post #: 121
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/7/2006 8:53:13 PM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
PM sent to David but I agree with what Steve said here. Sometimes we need to approximate and as long as we are clear with what we are doing I see no harm.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 122
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/7/2006 9:05:45 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7898
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

I feel no compulsion to hide things from the players - WIF is a game and by necessity, it only approximates reality everywhere if you look closely enough. That's not to say that discrepancies should be emphasized in the unit writeups, but neither should they be hidden away as if we are embarrassed by them. WIF is as it is. We like it, and so will others - despite the odd blemishes.

I agree with that.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 123
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/8/2006 9:39:57 PM   
Jimm


Posts: 580
Joined: 7/27/2006
From: York, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

PM sent to David but I agree with what Steve said here. Sometimes we need to approximate and as long as we are clear with what we are doing I see no harm.


I think this will inevitibly be an issue we will have to sometimes have to be a bit vague on. I'm having some problems with Italians too, sometimes where what are marked as corps in the game appear to actually be divisions IRL; and furthermore were part of other corps which are also represented in the game.

In the end we've got to accept that the names and numbers on the units are there to add colour and interest to the game, and not get too hung up on it!

Jimm

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 124
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/8/2006 10:11:37 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 18273
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimm


quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

PM sent to David but I agree with what Steve said here. Sometimes we need to approximate and as long as we are clear with what we are doing I see no harm.


I think this will inevitibly be an issue we will have to sometimes have to be a bit vague on. I'm having some problems with Italians too, sometimes where what are marked as corps in the game appear to actually be divisions IRL; and furthermore were part of other corps which are also represented in the game.

In the end we've got to accept that the names and numbers on the units are there to add colour and interest to the game, and not get too hung up on it!

Jimm

Yes

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Jimm)
Post #: 125
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/9/2006 12:29:49 PM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
A pleasant surprise arrived in my mailbox today! A man called Adam has volounteered for the finnish units and sent me one finished write-up straight away. Thank you Adam for stepping up! Here is the screenshot of what he did (the missing word in the second paragraph is my fault and corrected in the original document now)






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 126
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/9/2006 9:39:45 PM   
grab

 

Posts: 140
Joined: 6/18/2005
Status: offline
I'm currently producing the writeups for the artillery, a/tk and AA guns. I have hit a wall trying to source information on the US 128mm AA gun. Can anyone point me in the right direction please.

cheers

Gary

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 127
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/9/2006 10:15:14 PM   
mlees


Posts: 2261
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: grab

I'm currently producing the writeups for the artillery, a/tk and AA guns. I have hit a wall trying to source information on the US 128mm AA gun. Can anyone point me in the right direction please.

cheers

Gary



Shipboard: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_5-38_mk12.htm

Unfortunately, my google-fu is not up to the task.

I dunno if there were any of these mounts used ashore (although I suspect there may have been) ...still looking.

< Message edited by mlees -- 11/9/2006 10:26:55 PM >

(in reply to grab)
Post #: 128
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 4:30:04 AM   
mldtchdog

 

Posts: 48
Joined: 7/23/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Davidt

quote:

Need help on the BULGARIAN army writeups


Try here for the 1941 order of battle.

http://niehorster.orbat.com/032_bulgaria/_bu.htm

I find it to be a good starting place.

-Adam


< Message edited by mldtchdog -- 11/12/2006 4:37:01 AM >

(in reply to Davidt)
Post #: 129
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 6:34:07 AM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
Adam has finished the Finns and screenies will come later tonight! Good work Adam! Yesterday Helsinki, tomorrow Berne!

We will probably need to put some flesh into the "fictive" finnish ski-divisions, so if anyone have any good stories, details or what nots please speak your mind.

(in reply to mldtchdog)
Post #: 130
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 8:44:18 PM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
As promised I will post some of the screenshots






Attachment (1)

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 131
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 8:46:55 PM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
I forgot to have the cursor over the unit when taking this screenshot so the stats are not shown but this is still a very nice read!






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by capitan -- 11/12/2006 8:58:30 PM >

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 132
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 8:47:34 PM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
Some US ART to follow




Attachment (1)

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 133
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 8:48:17 PM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
All very nice reads!




Attachment (1)

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 134
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 8:50:05 PM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
The last one for this this round. I would post another communist chinese unit but I do not have a good way to catch that large amount of text that is involved in Wosungs thorough and interesting reads. Maybe something for Steve to help me with?






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by capitan -- 11/12/2006 8:59:00 PM >

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 135
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 8:52:53 PM   
capitan


Posts: 694
Joined: 7/29/2006
Status: offline
Ah what the h*ck, I will post this ski division to see what you think and how we can expand on the "fictional" ski-divisions.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 136
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 9:27:49 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 18273
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: capitan

The last one for this this round. I would post another communist chinese unit but I do not have a good way to catch that large amount of text that is involved in Wosungs thorough and interesting reads. Maybe something for Steve to help me with?


I use HyperSnap 6 which has worked wonderfully for me. I take 2 (or 3) screen shots to capture all the text and then cut the bottom text portion(s) out and paste it(them) on top of the first screen shot. The first screen shot needs to have enough room at the bottom to hold all the text.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to capitan)
Post #: 137
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/12/2006 10:34:08 PM   
trees

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
going way back to the question about the '128mm' US Heavy AA piece, don't discount the possibility that Harry simply put that spec on a counter included in WiF for a unit type the US never actually built....but could have.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 138
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/13/2006 8:54:34 AM   
wosung

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
apropos built,

I would love to see some production numbers in the write-ups for "equipment-counters" (arty, planes).

(in reply to trees)
Post #: 139
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/13/2006 5:58:48 PM   
CBoehm

 

Posts: 113
Joined: 10/31/2005
From: Aarhus, Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: trees

going way back to the question about the '128mm' US Heavy AA piece, don't discount the possibility that Harry simply put that spec on a counter included in WiF for a unit type the US never actually built....but could have.


hmm at my guess he made a mistake ...and really meant the 120 AA gun spoken of here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_mm_M1_gun

(in reply to trees)
Post #: 140
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/13/2006 7:22:11 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 18273
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CBoehm


quote:

ORIGINAL: trees

going way back to the question about the '128mm' US Heavy AA piece, don't discount the possibility that Harry simply put that spec on a counter included in WiF for a unit type the US never actually built....but could have.


hmm at my guess he made a mistake ...and really meant the 120 AA gun spoken of here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_mm_M1_gun

Perhaps Patrice can ask Harry. It is easy enough to rename the unit (in fact, the players could do that themselves).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to CBoehm)
Post #: 141
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/14/2006 12:27:17 PM   
amwild

 

Posts: 105
Joined: 2/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CBoehm


quote:

ORIGINAL: trees

going way back to the question about the '128mm' US Heavy AA piece, don't discount the possibility that Harry simply put that spec on a counter included in WiF for a unit type the US never actually built....but could have.


hmm at my guess he made a mistake ...and really meant the 120 AA gun spoken of here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_mm_M1_gun


This seems like a likely explanation. The Germans had a 128mm AA gun (The 12.8 cm Flak 40), but my reference material doesn't mention any US AA guns anywhere near this size - probably because they were never used.

(in reply to CBoehm)
Post #: 142
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/14/2006 5:58:20 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: amwild


quote:

ORIGINAL: CBoehm


quote:

ORIGINAL: trees

going way back to the question about the '128mm' US Heavy AA piece, don't discount the possibility that Harry simply put that spec on a counter included in WiF for a unit type the US never actually built....but could have.


hmm at my guess he made a mistake ...and really meant the 120 AA gun spoken of here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_mm_M1_gun


This seems like a likely explanation. The Germans had a 128mm AA gun (The 12.8 cm Flak 40), but my reference material doesn't mention any US AA guns anywhere near this size - probably because they were never used.



True but 128mm converts to 5 inch which the US did use.

But then again it may have been a typeo and ment to be 120mm.

(in reply to amwild)
Post #: 143
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/19/2006 2:51:44 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
Short question:

Are MWIF Chinese non divisional normal INF units Corps (XXX) or Army sized (XXXX)???

According to Schodts' WIFFE counter webside, they are Army sized. Besides there are corps sized CAV, MTN, MOT, Mech, Para.

http://users.ats.dk/jsp/wif.htm

According to the unit picture in post 42 of the MWIF thread (unit descriptions) they are Corps sized.

For doing unit write ups I should know this, for linking MWIF counters to unit histories.






< Message edited by wosung -- 11/19/2006 2:58:03 PM >

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 144
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/19/2006 3:34:23 PM   
Froonp


Posts: 7898
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung
Short question:
Are MWIF Chinese non divisional normal INF units Corps (XXX) or Army sized (XXXX)???
According to Schodts' WIFFE counter webside, they are Army sized. Besides there are corps sized CAV, MTN, MOT, Mech, Para.
http://users.ats.dk/jsp/wif.htm
According to the unit picture in post 42 of the MWIF thread (unit descriptions) they are Corps sized.
For doing unit write ups I should know this, for linking MWIF counters to unit histories.

What is displayed at http://users.ats.dk/jsp/wif.htm are scans of the real counters, so this is the truth.

So, the units in MWiF are wrong, and should be corrected if possible (I volunteer to do that if necessary). Some are Armies, and some are Corps.

Steve, is it possible to make non DIV MWiF units Army sized ? (with 4 "X").

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 145
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/19/2006 3:40:16 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
BTW: Checked WIFFE National Chinese OOB as a whole:

2 HQ, 24 Armies/Corps (including Warlords, Mil), 7 Div, 4 Arty Div
According to rule commentaries each Chinese Army (Corps??) equals 10 divisions. So that would probably ammount to 251 divisions + 2 HQs.

In the index of "Hsu Long-hsuen et. al., The histoy of the Sino-Japanese War (1937-45)", the following Chinese Divs are listed:

198 infantry divisions (No. 1-55, 57-96, 98-149, 151-200, 207)
2 honor. divisions (No 1-2)
2 temporary divisions (No. 1-2)
52 prov. divisions (No.1-6, 10-17, 19-26, 28-29, 31, 33, 35-55, 58-59, 61-62, 64)
11 reserve divisons (No. 1-11)
37 new divisions (No. 1-4, 6-16, 19-23, 25-26, 28, 30-32, 34-39, 42-46)
12 cavalry divisons (No. 1-12)
2 prov. cavalry divisions (No. 1-2)
8 new cavalry divisions (No. 1-8)
1 temporary cavalry division (No.?)
1 training division (No.?)

= 326 divsions

(Note that for example there existed infantry divisions and new divisions with the same divisional number at the same time, although I don't know if this was always the case)

Finally the Communist forces mentioned in the book should be substracted:

2 divisions (New 4th Army)
3-6 divisions (8th Route Army: the total of six is mentioned, but also a total of 3 divisions: the 115th ,120th and 129th divsions).

= lets say 10 divisions

That would ammount to up to 316 National Chinese Divsions altogether.

So if playtesting shows the need of more National Chinese units, according to the WIF ten-division-formula for Chinese corps/armies probably up to six more counters historically could be warranted.


(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 146
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/19/2006 3:49:42 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung
Short question:
Are MWIF Chinese non divisional normal INF units Corps (XXX) or Army sized (XXXX)???
According to Schodts' WIFFE counter webside, they are Army sized. Besides there are corps sized CAV, MTN, MOT, Mech, Para.
http://users.ats.dk/jsp/wif.htm
According to the unit picture in post 42 of the MWIF thread (unit descriptions) they are Corps sized.
For doing unit write ups I should know this, for linking MWIF counters to unit histories.

What is displayed at http://users.ats.dk/jsp/wif.htm are scans of the real counters, so this is the truth.

So, the units in MWiF are wrong, and should be corrected if possible (I volunteer to do that if necessary). Some are Armies, and some are Corps.

Steve, is it possible to make non DIV MWiF units Army sized ? (with 4 "X").


As I read the MWIF Land unit list (10/16/2006), it differenciates only between Divs (1) and non-Divs (0), with 0 and 1 being the last number in each row. But some 0-units, like Liberian army are depicted as army (XXXX), some like Chinese normal INF as corps (XXX)?!

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 147
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/19/2006 4:47:42 PM   
trees

 

Posts: 175
Joined: 5/28/2006
Status: offline
Some of the cardboard WiF corps/army distinctions are deliberate. The Russians grouped infantry divisions into 'armies', while cavalry units were designated 'corps'. From my limited readings on China I can't recall them using 'corps' (at all?), groups of infantry divisions were part of 'armies'. How China organized their specialist forces would be the question. But then they may never have deployed massed cavalry beyond a divisional size???

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 148
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/19/2006 6:34:39 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
According to the index in Hsü, (National) Chinese units consisted of:

100 corps (No.1-100),
4 prov. corps (No. 1-3, 9),
2 route corps (No. 2, 19),
8 new corps (No. 1-8, there within New 4th Corps = Communist New 4th Army  in National Chinese nomenclature),
6 cavalry corps (No. 1-6).

According to some, obviously wrong, sources  National Chinese Army didn't use corps at all.

Apart from the independend used ones, these 120 corps were organized  in:

18 armies (No. 1-3, 8, 13-17,  19-21, 27, 29, 32, 37 + 19th and 26th Route Army) and
39 army groups, or group armies (No. 1-39, 40, with the 18th army group equals the Communist 8th Route Army in National Chinese parlance).

AFIK Russian Red Army used cavalry corps, sometimes with other units in cavalry-mechanized groups. Rifle divisions sometimes also were grouped in corps but mostly in armies. Beginning in 1942 tanks were also formed in tank corps (with brigades, not regiments), equal a German or Wally panzer/armoured division. There were even a number of artillery corps. In red army  many OOB reforms and experiments around command and administrative issues took place during the war to maximize combat effectiveness.

Regards





(in reply to trees)
Post #: 149
RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land - 11/19/2006 7:13:08 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 18273
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung
Short question:
Are MWIF Chinese non divisional normal INF units Corps (XXX) or Army sized (XXXX)???
According to Schodts' WIFFE counter webside, they are Army sized. Besides there are corps sized CAV, MTN, MOT, Mech, Para.
http://users.ats.dk/jsp/wif.htm
According to the unit picture in post 42 of the MWIF thread (unit descriptions) they are Corps sized.
For doing unit write ups I should know this, for linking MWIF counters to unit histories.

What is displayed at http://users.ats.dk/jsp/wif.htm are scans of the real counters, so this is the truth.

So, the units in MWiF are wrong, and should be corrected if possible (I volunteer to do that if necessary). Some are Armies, and some are Corps.

Steve, is it possible to make non DIV MWiF units Army sized ? (with 4 "X").


Currently the designation of army versus corp for units is:

- all HQ are Army groups XXXXX
- all divisions are divisions XX (duh)
- corps XXX versus army XXXX is taken from the country data (SU, MI, MA). File structure shown below; not part of GA.

I believe all special unit infantry units (para, mountain, etc.) are corps, but I would have to look that up in the code. You could simply look at the review of units form to confirm that.

So presently, I think this is in the 'map' data, since it concerns countries. [Not my data format design.]

==========
Governed areas:
- ID, name, parent ID, starting controlling country ID, center hex (row, column), Europe, Africa, Asia, Pacific, America (all boolean), # of cities and ports, conqueror ID, current controlling county ID, whether it has hexes, last city/port captured ID.

Sub-countries:
- Same as governed areas, plus:
3 letter name abbreviation, Partisan controller ID, force pool ID, unit color, icon color, land NATO outline color, land NATO interior color, strength text color, unit size color, letter/division color, outline elite flag, infantry armies/not corps, armor armies/not corps, partisans, partisans chance, partisans active, convoy points, contested, garrison, partisans count

Minor countries:
- Same as sub countries, plus:
Capital (Column, Row), Neutral this year

Major countries:
- Same as minor countries.
===========================

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.112