|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 5, 2021 7:22:05 GMT
1. I don't have a Southern front. 2. Since you diverted your forces, your eastern front was weakened and I repelled successfully with negligible causalities. So how did you encircle my troops. What do you mean? I already mentioned that I split my troops into two army groups - One towards your west and one in the east |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2021 7:24:33 GMT
So how did you encircle my troops. What do you mean? I already mentioned that I split my troops into two army groups - One towards your west and one in the east Encirclement means you surround a unit from all sides. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 5, 2021 7:25:54 GMT
What do you mean? I already mentioned that I split my troops into two army groups - One towards your west and one in the east Encirclement means you surround a unit from all sides. Yes. Once you charged my western front, the one towards your left, I came rushing from east. I surrounded you on 3 sides. The forth side is the edge of the map |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2021 7:26:44 GMT
Encirclement means you surround a unit from all sides. Yes. Once you charged my western front, the one towards your left, I came rushing from east. I surrounded you on 3 sides. The forth side is the edge of the map But I was at centre of the map. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2021 7:27:52 GMT
Yes. Once you charged my western front, the one towards your left, I came rushing from east. I surrounded you on 3 sides. The forth side is the edge of the map But I was at centre of the map. Also which 3 sides. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 5, 2021 7:31:30 GMT
But I was at centre of the map. Also which 3 sides. You WERE at the center. You charged my western front, which was at the edge of the map. 3 sides - North, South, West |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2021 7:32:36 GMT
You WERE at the center. You charged my western front, which was at the edge of the map. 3 sides - North, South, West Ok you would have won but your infantry got mowed down by my Artillery. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 5, 2021 7:34:40 GMT
YAHHOO!! THIS CERTIFIES THE CREDIBILITY OF NAPOLEON AS A COMMANDER ON THE BATTLEFIELD!! FOR YOU zink, who calls me Nappy, for you STILETT0, WHO PREFER CHUIKOV OVER ME!! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2021 7:36:01 GMT
YAHHOO!! THIS CERTIFIES THE CREDIBILITY OF NAPOLEON AS A COMMANDER ON THE BATTLEFIELD!! FOR YOU zink, who calls me Nappy, for you STILETT0, WHO PREFER CHUIKOV OVER ME!! How? |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 5, 2021 7:40:03 GMT
YAHHOO!! THIS CERTIFIES THE CREDIBILITY OF NAPOLEON AS A COMMANDER ON THE BATTLEFIELD!! FOR YOU zink , who calls me Nappy, for you STILETT0 , WHO PREFER CHUIKOV OVER ME!! How? Napoleon fought most of Europe. His allies were not as strong as the 4 biggies. Whatever, it definitely is not Chuikov |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2021 8:00:38 GMT
Napoleon fought most of Europe. His allies were not as strong as the 4 biggies. Whatever, it definitely is not Chuikov No, France has better trained and more motivated soldiers. Napoleon got his first taste of true tactical opponent during War of fifth coilation when Archduke Karl defeated Napoleon during his 4 day campaign and at battle of Wagram Napoleon was only able to win because of Numerical Superiority of 8:5 over Karl. When a minister mocked Austrians, Napoleon said, " No doubt you were not present at Wagram". |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2021 8:02:34 GMT
Napoleon fought most of Europe. His allies were not as strong as the 4 biggies. Whatever, it definitely is not Chuikov I wanted to say that You had not won the RP still |
|
|
|
Post by STILETT0 on Apr 5, 2021 13:06:37 GMT
YAHHOO!! THIS CERTIFIES THE CREDIBILITY OF NAPOLEON AS A COMMANDER ON THE BATTLEFIELD!! FOR YOU zink , who calls me Nappy, for you STILETT0 , WHO PREFER CHUIKOV OVER ME!! lmao. Napoleonic Wars and Second World War are two different eras. Chuikov was the best artillery general defense-wise. You are uncontested for napoleonic eras, hence the name of that era. |
|
|
|
Post by Pietro Badoglio on Apr 5, 2021 13:43:13 GMT
YAHHOO!! THIS CERTIFIES THE CREDIBILITY OF NAPOLEON AS A COMMANDER ON THE BATTLEFIELD!! FOR YOU zink , who calls me Nappy, for you STILETT0 , WHO PREFER CHUIKOV OVER ME!! lmao. Napoleonic Wars and Second World War are two different eras. Chuikov was the best artillery general defense-wise. You are uncontested for napoleonic eras, hence the name of that era. Even better than Wellesley? |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Apr 5, 2021 13:45:11 GMT
lmao. Napoleonic Wars and Second World War are two different eras. Chuikov was the best artillery general defense-wise. You are uncontested for napoleonic eras, hence the name of that era. Even better than Wellesley? Buff! My bitter enemy. He just gained fame for defeating me in 1 battle, that too having numerical superiority 1:2 |
|
