Polar Bears, Tanks and Locked Units

[Sean E]

Does the American Polar bear expedition in Arkhangelsk ever become unlocked?
I have had it there for 6 months now and it is always locked and unmoveable?

Also I have had messages saying a general and his troops are active but looking at them they are locked. This happens a lot. British general Poole is the one in questions here. (in pic)

And don’t tanks seem to move a bit fast for the time? They seem to have the same move rates for cavalry.

[OneArmedMexican]

Nope. Only if attacked.

[cwegsche]

I always thought Poole was active from the Beginning for the southern Whites? Does he get locked later on (haven#t played so far)?

[OneArmedMexican]

Does the American Polar bear expedition in Arkhangelsk ever become unlocked?
I have had it there for 6 months now and it is always locked and unmoveable?

Also I have had messages saying a general and his troops are active but looking at them they are locked. This happens a lot. British general Poole is the one in questions here. (in pic)

And don’t tanks seem to move a bit fast for the time? They seem to have the same move rates for cavalry.

Sorry, just answered your first question.

1) Polar Bear Expedition never gets unlocked, unless it is attacked.

2) Poole shouldn't be locked here. That one looks like a bug.

3) Tanks have a different movement type from cavalry. They are actually considerably slower than cavalry.

[Sean E]

Well he is active sometimes for a few turns. But then get locked again.

[Cat Lord]

Well he is active sometimes for a few turns. But then get locked again.

That could come from the Activation Rules you are using in the Game Options on the main menu.

Cat

[Andriko]

How about tanks, which I also agree seem to move a bit too quickly. I am fairly sure in 1919 tanks were still doing 6-10mph at best.

[ERISS]

This tank maybe (says 4.3mph) (max speed was no more than 4.8mph):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_FT-17
http://www.jaegerplatoon.net/TANKS1.htm

The FT 17 was widely used by the French and the US in the later stages of World War I, after 31 May 1918. It was cheap and well-suited for mass production. It reflected an emphasis on quantity, both on a tactical level: Estienne proposed to overwhelm the enemy defences by a "swarm" of light tanks, and on a geostrategic level: the Entente was thought to be able to gain the upper hand by outproducing the Central Powers. A goal was set of 12,260 to be manufactured (4,440 of which in the USA) before the end of 1919.

After the war, FT 17s were exported to many countries (Poland, Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Brazil, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and Japan). As a result, FT 17 tanks were used by most nations having armoured forces, invariably as their first tank type, including the United States. They took part in many later conflicts, such as the Russian Civil War, Polish-Soviet War, Chinese Civil War, Rif War and Spanish Civil War.

The Soviet Red Army captured fourteen burnt-out Renaults from White Russian forces, and rebuilt them at the Krasnoye Sormovo Factory in 1920. The Soviets claimed to have originally manufactured these Russkiy Reno tanks, but they actually produced only one exact copy, named 'Freedom Fighter Comrade Lenin'. When Stalin began the arms race of the Thirties, the first completely Soviet-designed tank was the T-18, a derivation of the Renault with sprung suspension.

[Clovis]

How about tanks, which I also agree seem to move a bit too quickly. I am fairly sure in 1919 tanks were still doing 6-10mph at best.

You're right. Something to be checked. Thanks

[ERISS]

Up:
Edited my Renault FT-17 tank with Finnish Army link,
and funny quote about Bolsheviks (same wiki than 1st quote).

[Sean E]

Were the Tanks of the time moved by trucks or trains between battles? In WW2 it was mainly trains i think?

[Rafiki]

Up:
Edited my Renault FT-17 tank with Finnish Army link,
and funny quote about Bolsheviks (same wiki than 1st quote).

If I may interrupt a bit with a small remark; rather than updating previous posts with new info, it's better for people to see the updates in new posts, especially when some time has passed from the original posting till the update

[Andriko]

Were the Tanks of the time moved by trucks or trains between battles? In WW2 it was mainly trains i think?

I believe in this era it was usually trains. The British tanks could have their guns unhinged and folded in, to make them more transportable.

I don't think trucks of the time (or now even!) would have the strength to move those metal monsters in any great number!


Regarding the speed, I thought that by the end of WW1 they were moving a little bit faster then the 4mph of 1916? I am quite happy to be proved wrong, though!

[Kev_uk]

But what was their real effectiveness at such a low speed? At first during WW1 I guess it was more psychological effect than real firepower...? Dont know much however to make any comments.

[Carrington]

But what was their real effectiveness at such a low speed? At first during WW1 I guess it was more psychological effect than real firepower...? Dont know much however to make any comments.

They were line-breakers, not exploiters. They would have been armored primarily to withstand machine-gun fire, the scourge of WWI era attacking infantry.

The British continued to produce 'Infantry tanks' toward the same role in early WWII.

[Andriko]

But what was their real effectiveness at such a low speed? At first during WW1 I guess it was more psychological effect than real firepower...? Dont know much however to make any comments.

Osprey's 'Cambrai 1917' deals with WW1 tank tactics as they reached their maturity. Essentially, troops would walk behind them for cover, then once at the enemy trench, the tank would start to 'patrol' to line clearing anyone it found out of the way.

Though, their speed and lack of reliability meant they were not as useful as people think.