• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Psychomorph

  • Rank
    Master Blaster

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Profile Fields

  • Platform
    PC gamer

Recent Profile Visitors

13,182 profile views
  1. Operation Barbarossa

    Pretty much that. You're right of course. The 3rd Reich existed only slight more than 10 years, some of it war time. The autarchy was in the process and the war for the north African colonies was all about the resources, and that was also an important part of the war in the East. If those areas were successfully taken, than Germany would've been fully autarch and probably un-defeatable. That is why I mentioned that Russia is one of the few countries that can go that way. It didn't fully and didn't abandon globalism, of course, but the economy was heavily nationalized. So it's a step forward. Others have tried and fell. And that is what I use as an argument. Germans were well aware of the resources that the Soviet Union possessed (it was after those afterall) and had an idea about the geography (just weren't prepared enough, because counted on a swift victory before winter), but the ideology took a part in this. Hitler believed that "The Soviet man" would be weak willed and only held together by the iron hand of their dictator and counted on them to scatter in the face of a great force. Even if the Soviet leadership was very harsh and sacrificed bodies without remorse, without the will and courage of the soldiers the Soviet force would've fell apart. This was a miscalculation, because the soldiers didn't fight for communism, they fought for a greater cause than some foreign ideology (which communism was), their home land.
  2. Operation Barbarossa

    I know about "Lebensraum" and there is no contradiction. He had to take the Soviet Union out one way or another, despite the agreements with Stalin, which were all temporary. Of course there were vast plans for the post east war time, mainly to recoup the expenses and take advantage of the geography that also gave Russia its strength. A Germany like this would become un-defeatable and it had to be, because as I said, he feared the western forces the most. Without the concentration camp slave workers war industry production would've been slower also. The expanses overstretched the available resources and possibilities by a lot, because the plan was to recoup it with a victory in the East. So there was definitely an economic side (guess what, there always is...), but the concept of a preemptive strike still holds validity. Germany needed much more time to become strong enough for the war, time it didn't have. Hitler counted on German technology, superior tactics, smart leadership and courageous soldiers, which he believed Germany had (let's admit, it did), but with this also came arrogance, boastfulness and underestimation of the foe. It's the classical example of genius and madness in one. It was a gamble, one that was lost. It's when you know you're good, but don't have a clear mind. In other word, I didn't mean to dispute your argument, just add another piece of the puzzle. Operation Barbarossa had strategic failures, because of all that. Massive pressure and fear combined with arrogance and irrational believes. As for Poles, or Slavs in general. He viewed their "impurity", by the amount of "impure" people that inhabited these countries (Russia/Ukraine and Poland had the largest European Jewish communities, but also Roma, etc), but also their history. I don't believe in the idea he wanted to wipe all Poles out, he wanted to "cleanse" them. That probably meant to keep only those worthy. As said, he had his set of believes. I have little doubt that he would've incorporated a caste system to East Germania. It's also important to remember that, as we all know, Victors write history and not everything regarding the events prior and during WWII that we teach our children (and have been taught ourselves) is the "sincere and honest objective truth".
  3. Operation Barbarossa

    I'm not too sure about that version. Stalin had the Soviet Union undergo a rapid industrialization, which normally leads to military power. Hitler saw Communism as a threat for Europe, thus I think the war in the East was not economic, but a preemptive strike. Kill the Soviet Union before it is strong enough to become an irreversible danger. They say Stalin was surprised about Hitlers move and that the Soviet Union was vastly unprepared, but I believe production and build-up was already in process. Whether for an attack on Germany or not, Hitler might have known that and anticipated an attack sooner or later. Why attack Germany? Hitler removed globalism in Germany, made the country 100% self sufficient (removing extreme poverty, etc). A country that is economically fully independent (independent from the international bank), but also as industrious as Germany, is seen as a great danger in some circles. A country in such condition usually has an "expiration date". Putin did something somewhat similar and you can see his popularity status in the West, but Russia is one of the very few countries that can afford going that route and persist. I believe that Hitlers main problem was his faith in the concept of race as it was popular in that time. That could have affected certain decisions, such as seeing the Britisch (as Nordic people) stronger than they probably were, and the Russians inferior by blood thus weaker than they turned out to be. That superstition probably cost him everything. Hitler saw the Soviet Union as a greater threat, but a lesser opponent. He probably knew Germany wasn't ready for it, but believed that the Wehrmacht could be powerful and fast enough to conquer the Russian mainland, so that he could then focus on dealing with a potential threat that he truly feared, the Atlantic coalition. Sad story really.
  4. Game Video Thread

  5. The YouTube Thread

  6. The YouTube Thread

  7. Tomb Raider (2018)

    Not the best choice for Lara.
  8. Escape From Tarkov

    I was sure you already had the game. That's the artificial nature of level em up RPG's, which is why I don't like those, unless they're low key and single player (like Legend of Grimrock, an RPG done right, basically oldschool RPG). Everything about EFT seems great, the slow paced hardcore realism element, but the RPG element is what turned me off the moment I learnt about it, hence I'm going to wait. Also it is too fast paced. Movement, magazine refilling, medical treatment. It feels COD like indeed.
  9. Escape From Tarkov

    @SiC-Disaster: That was pretty good. A first run, without knowing the "exploits", being nervous and just exploring and feeling one's way, because the searching and grabbing gear (restocking magazine, etc) is too fast in the game and you made it feel natural. I like how the game punishes you for getting cocky or careless by the end. The sounds are priceless in this. Especially the footsteps (like stepping on debris or a sound when turning around).
  10. Escape From Tarkov

    It's not much the details like food/water gathering that I miss, but a greater meaning to being out there in the wild. Like a mini-plot of some sorts. Something that gives sense for you to go out on those missions. Mini-quests and blatant scavenging doesn't do it for me.
  11. Wisdom Thread

  12. Escape From Tarkov

    Exactly. The title suggests a form of progression in form of battling for survival and moving through a dangerous place to leave it behind. Paired with the realism and Stalker like gritty atmosphere and co-op it sounds just exactly a game I'd want (Infiltration co-op is kind of like this, but I'd like something recent and rooted in a real world game and not a 90's fantasy sci-fi game). But so far it's just boring looting and loot management, so I lost interest in watching gameplay videos some time ago. Maybe the plan is to get it there, that's why I will wait until it's there, but I'm sceptical given how much time and resources have been spent on customization and all that fluff.
  13. Escape From Tarkov

    This was pretty good to watch.
  14. Escape From Tarkov

    This is my main issue with the game so far. Game looks great (minus some generic game design elements, which don't overshadow the good too much), but the gameplay/objective concept does not feel very "organic" at all. Like a grind looter, where it's all about snatching stuff. Hoped it would be a more traveler/survivor type of game. Keeping an eye on it and might get it some time when it's ripe.