Comments by "TIKhistory" (@TheImperatorKnight) on "Military History not Visualized" channel.

  1. Just shows the value of a well prepared ambush
    109
  2. So oil was the most important factor?
    21
  3. :)
    18
  4. I actually have some very old historical animation videos on the channel too. One discussing the shortest war in history. But nobody watches them.
    13
  5. I'll admit, I'm not a tank expert. But I've realized that it's all about perspectives. I tend to look at things from the operational level, rather than the tactical. For me, the doctrines, formation and organization of a larger combined arms unit is more important than the sum of it's parts (the individual tank). Obviously everyone wants a better tank, but a lot of the time it's the misuse of the tanks on the operational level that ends up getting them killed, not necessarily the poor performance of the individual tanks themselves (although that is certainly a factor).
    10
  6. Yes, it was very good of MHV to do that :)
    10
  7. I would argue that you should point out that the sources differ and explain why. This then tells the viewer/reader that this is up for debate. At that point, a decision should be made as to what the most likely result/story was and again explain why (with evidence). The purpose of making this decision is so 1) the story moves on, and 2) that others can question it. If people do question it, and your argument doesn't hold up, and theirs does, then you know you were wrong and can adjust accordingly. If your story does hold up in the debate, then it's probably correct. I say probably because, of course, new evidence or perspective could come along and change everything, and we have to be ready for that change.
    10
  8. Neil, the next Battlestorm will be Crusader (the battle after Battleaxe). If complexity is bad, I think a lot of people will have a hard time with this one. Several historians just throw their hands up and go "no idea what's happening right now!". And that's partly why it's taken so long for me to make it. But I'm not one to cut corners :) And there's pros and cons to everything. I prefer making in-depth videos because I want to know everything inside and out about the topic. For some people, that's not necessary, and I get that. Different styles, different tastes
    7
  9. Yeah, that's pretty much right. Only thing I would say is that the Italian navy didn't have enough oil, which caused all sorts of problems, and they sat in port for a good deal of time. Coupled with British air attacks from Malta, the Italians were resorting to using battleships to send supplies to North Africa (yes), with limited storage capacity, as these had more anti-aircraft and anti-ship deterrent than the standard convoys. So, it may not necessarily be a lack of learning that was the difference between the Allies and the Axis, but more practical problems like the lack of oil and the failure to take Malta.
    6
  10. Just a degree, not masters. Never saw the need to go higher as my degree hasn't been much use as it is.
    6
  11. Can confirm, I do have a 2:1 degree in history.
    6
  12. Very nice observation
    5
  13. When I started my channel, it was all about playing Close Combat games, and I wanted a name that sounded dominating (since I planned to get pretty good at the game - which I more or less did). Therefore, I went with "The Imperator Knight". Imperator means 'he in absolute command' in Latin, and is where we get the English word 'Emperor' from. But nobody could say it, so I shortened it to TIK.
    3
  14. And the point of a debate is to test which argument (case) works or not. If it holds water, perhaps it's better than the old argument.
    2