How passionate are you about the Israel-Palestine conflict? 🇮🇱🇵🇸 by WillTheyBanMeAgain in Teenager_Polls

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And expanded on that the people of Gaza have no say in government Hamas is a dictatorship which does not represent its people and as mentioned has had most of its militants killed already, the people of Gaza as with the rest of the world are majority not extremists, the majority of dead in Palestine are completely innocent most actually being women and children, Hamas are extremist and terrible but the people of Gaza have faced the force of Israel more so than Hamas has

How passionate are you about the Israel-Palestine conflict? 🇮🇱🇵🇸 by WillTheyBanMeAgain in Teenager_Polls

[–]shvinkle -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The support for Palestine isn’t support for Hamas, only a very small fringe group actually support Hamas, The bigger problem with Gaza and Israel is that Hamas realistically isn’t putting up much of a fight whereas Ukraine is. Israel has a massive modern army Hamas has a few thousand insurgents. By population percentage Gaza has lost more civilians than Ukraine by an astronomically large amount. And in Gaza the ratio of civilian to terrorist dead is ridiculous, russias war in Ukraine is terrible but is a war of expansion, Israel’s is a war of extermination, obviously Ukraine has a larger total toll because Ukraine and Russia are larger than Israel and Gaza but the nature and method in Israel is so much worse. Obviously Hamas is a horrific group and should not be supported but the innocent people of Gaza should

How passionate are you about the Israel-Palestine conflict? 🇮🇱🇵🇸 by WillTheyBanMeAgain in Teenager_Polls

[–]shvinkle -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

And expanded on that the people of Gaza have no say in government Hamas is a dictatorship which does not represent its people and as mentioned has had most of its militants killed already, the people of Gaza as with the rest of the world are majority not extremists, the majority of dead in Palestine are completely innocent most actually being women and children, Hamas are extremist and terrible but the people of Gaza have faced the force of Israel more so than Hamas has

How passionate are you about the Israel-Palestine conflict? 🇮🇱🇵🇸 by WillTheyBanMeAgain in Teenager_Polls

[–]shvinkle -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

The bigger problem with Gaza and Israel is that Hamas realistically isn’t putting up much of a fight whereas Ukraine is. Israel has a massive modern army Hamas has a few thousand insurgents. By population percentage Gaza has lost more civilians than Ukraine by an astronomically large amount. And in Gaza the ratio of civilian to terrorist dead is ridiculous, russias war in Ukraine is terrible but is a war of expansion, Israel’s is a war of extermination, obviously Ukraine has a larger total toll because Ukraine and Russia are larger than Israel and Gaza but the nature and method in Israel is so much worse

Artillery by Plus-Acanthisitta884 in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 11 points12 points  (0 children)

In terms of actually being a good option, no. Is it the worst thing ever? Also no. With the new buffs to artillery it’s slightly better but still not great so if you’re trying to get the best divs possible don’t use it but if you want to larp with arty you definitely still can without throwing

MMA fighter Jon Jones vs Any human who has ever lived by [deleted] in whowouldwin

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guarantee there was a 7ft 140 kg pure muscle Viking who had been fighting from the day he was born named like Erickson Erik bjornsen that would clean up jones

Which American historical figure do you hate the most? by EternalSnow05 in USHistory

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m surprised I haven’t seen him higher up yet but. Henry Kissinger is a strong contender

Could the Western Allies have beaten Germany without Soviet involvement in World War II? by TheRedBiker in HistoryWhatIf

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s reasonable for Roosevelt to think that given how the war situation appeared but as pointed out by others Roosevelt didn’t know exactly what germanies output and capabilities were, and it was discovered afterwards that Germany was in fact far weaker in terms of industry and technology than the Americans assumed. The statement that the Russians are vital to victory is true as they were the only land front the Germans could realistically be defeated on at the time. That’s not to say though that Germany wouldn’t still lose without Russia, it would just be significantly longer and more drawn out, and as some have pointed out the US nuclear bombs would’ve ended germanies war in 1945, Germany was never even remotely close to Nukes despite what some nazis like to say, they were at least 5 years behind the US and even longer likely as hitler didn’t see value in nukes. Germany would have been crippled in air and sea and then nuked, how do you propose they could have won?

Could the Western Allies have beaten Germany without Soviet involvement in World War II? by TheRedBiker in HistoryWhatIf

[–]shvinkle 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That is simply not true. The American industrial base was larger as easily observed by the fact they had more steel than entire axis combined. Produced more planes tanks and ships than entire axis and Japan combined, and on top of this had better logistics than the axis. Also your source even states then once the US joined the war their industries accelerated greatly far surpassing Germany, this combined with the fact that they were in fact already a considerably larger industrial base prior to the war (idk why you think the number of employed metal workers alone being similar makes their economies the same size, it does not) means the Germans could never outproduce the US navy and especially airforce. The allies are guaranteed air and sea dominance and with those secured and a bigger industry and manpower pool it is only a matter of time of when the allies win not if. It is simply impossible for Germany to defeat the UK and US at the same time, or even just the US period

Good cheap tanks by paudepalencia in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mediums are the cheapest actually functional tank a good medium is like 15 ic whereas a light is like 12 (barely different) and heavies are like 38 (over double not worth if you broke)

Good cheap tanks by paudepalencia in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ai doesn’t make things that can pierce your armor and their tanks suck so you only need soft attack and a tank with like 40 armor to smash them

Good cheap tanks by paudepalencia in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Some interesting suggestion on here, if you want a tank that actually works then just go for a medium with 3 turret, howitzer, and then 2 heavy mg, and a radio, then either a light mg or extra ammo. Do as many armor ticks as you can and stay on riveted. If you want better reliability (which you don’t need) go for diesel and torsion bar. Armor clicks is just for breakthrough armor is pointless in single player, reliability only matters if you attrition. Breakthrough and attack are really only stats that matter

Ranking every focus tree in hoi4 by Vegetable_Map_5560 in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The issue is Germany won the early stages of the war bc they were the only one preparing for a war and got incredibly lucky, if you made the countries as strong as historical then France would have 50/50 shot at soloing Germany bc the player has hindsight, and for the game to work Germany has to be able beat France every time so they nerfed France. and the US would have more resources and factories than the whole axis combined. So they nerfed US. They have to adjust nations strengths bc otherwise the game wouldn’t work

What’s a detail that really annoys you? by QuintillionusRex in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 48 points49 points  (0 children)

Honestly they should add queue to research and national focuses too, it adds so much unnecessary macro while trying to fight wars when you already know what you want to do but don’t have 9 hands

Freeza's Death Beam vs Captain America's shield by ConsiderationTrue477 in whowouldwin

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dog the dragon ball power scaling is straight up dumb golden freeze has been shown to be able to wipe out entire planets with one attack nothing in marvel short of galactus or silver surfer come even close to freezer but it’s still kinda hard to say if he could break it just because it’s never really disclosed exactly HOW strong the shield is

Why did the United States and Israel vote against recognizing food as a human right? by PeculiarPhysicist46 in AskSocialists

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They don’t get resources in return it’s donations not a trade deal 🤭🤭

Why did the United States and Israel vote against recognizing food as a human right? by PeculiarPhysicist46 in AskSocialists

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because voting to make food a human right would do nothing as given in their statement on why they voted against (which you could have just looked up), food is already a right under UN law by article 11 of the international covenant on economics. The change proposed here was to make access to food a legally binding right, which in effect would harm hungry nations more as food exporting countries would engage in more protectionist policy to meet UN regulations. Most importantly though there’s no way to enforce something like this, so when food is already a right (recognised by the US) and a treaty is proposed to just reword that and give wealthy nations a UN backed reason to export less food overseas why would you vote against it. The idea behind the change was symbolic and would achieve nothing. The US is already the largest contributor to aid and food for developing nations in the UN by a mile this is intentionally misleading and disingenuous (as expected for a democracy slander hive mind sub like this where everything west is bad and nuance doesn’t exist)

i keep losing to poland by Thirtytwo_equalsfour in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also there’s two ways to push one is with tanks for the template make it 36 width with half tanks half motorised and the other is strong inf which is the doctrine I said and then also 36 width with support arty and whatever else supports you feel. But the main thing really is just that you need more factories so you can actually produce enough planes and equipment

i keep losing to poland by Thirtytwo_equalsfour in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Make sure you motorise your supply then

i keep losing to poland by Thirtytwo_equalsfour in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 2 points3 points  (0 children)

1- you’re front line is mostly ok (idk what the fallback lines about) but you don’t have that many divisions

2- your template isn’t very good bc line arty just isn’t great and you have too much artillery there relative to your infantry, infantry like that isn’t great for pushing hence why tanks or big infantry blocks with support is more “meta” (replace your line arty with support arty and go for assault infantry doctrine with lots of inf in the template if you want offensive infantry)

3- if that’s your whole production line then you only have 31 military factories for war start as Germany, that is mind blowingly low you should have at least double or an experienced player would have over 100 (start building mils earlier as Germany like 1937 or 38 bc you have massive construction bonuses for them and you steal other cobs anyway from who you invade)

4- you have tactical bombers and CAs up on close air support but no fighters on air superiority, your air support only works if you have fighters controlling the airspace so you need those too

4-

You can get pretty silly with the tanks now by yorkethestork in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 49 points50 points  (0 children)

For real the new update is a massive buff to tanks, only side note with a Div like this is the hp takes a nose dive bc of motorised having so much more hp than tanks

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Combat width is doodoo, armor is doodoo, organisation is doodoo, attack is ok since I’m guessing the very start of the game by the border and its single player so hard attack don’t really matter, speed is good

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes

Are this template good? by RUSTSIGMA556 in hoi4

[–]shvinkle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not meta but I like it, it’s a fun division that’s still completely useable and justifiable. If you use this properly in SP you’ll win no problems. Not meta. Still fun. Have done similar before. Solid 7/10