Comments by "Seven Proxies" (@sevenproxies4255) on "The V-2 Rocket (A 4) - How Effective was it?" video.

  1. SteveOwnsMC: Dude, if you believe that "german made" = good, then clearly you haven't studied engineering or dealt much with german machinery. Yes, they are filled with technical finesse... But when it breaks down... You"re in for a shitstorm.
    4
  2. Hitler really seemed to have an obsession with "super weapons" (in the sense that "super" means exceedingly expensive and usually extrwmely large). Schwerer Gustav, V-2 rockets, the Maus and proposed Ratte tanks etc. I know full well that these weapons were more of a strategic detriment to the Germans rather than a benefit. But I can't help but have a soft spot for them. :) There's simply something so visionary with building the largest tank or artillery cannon in the world. Charming in it's absursity. I just love mega tanks and super weapons in general. Effective, and proven weapons are nice, but in terms of craftsmanship amd ingenuity they tend to be quite bland and repetitive.
    2
  3. Yes, the Ratte would be useless. But complete garbage... I don't know. A giant machine rolling across the landscape spitting death at the same strength of a naval vessel. It would be epic! I don't care how ineffective it would be from a strategic perspective. It would still be epic! :P
    2
  4. Probably not. But I damn sure would've wanted to see a V-2 slinging Landkreuzer rolling across a field made a reality. So badass! :D
    1
  5. Bryan Olson: Which means the rockets were wasted, since you don't hurt the enemys war effort by slaughtering civilians for no reason. Winning wars is about neutralizing enemy troops and weapons, by killing/injuring/capturing soldiers and destroying tanks, planes, ships amd the means of which the enemy has to produce these. If you waste ammunition and divert resources purely to destroy civilian targets, then you're not damaging the enemy's war effort, only your own.
    1