[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Sorry guys - thanks for playing but you need to look at all three guides and you havent.

You poor deluded fool. Do you really think I and others don't THOROUGHLY research ALL the materials before posting? Of course the Soviet numbers haven't changed - the game focus is squarely on the US troops and GDW simply didn't have the time available to update every little insignificant detail the PCs were unlikely to encounter before their deadline! They were publishing something like 3 titles a week at the time which isn't bad for a small company like they were! Of course they had to focus on what the players were most likely to encounter!

Originally Posted by Olefin

The Soviet Vehicle Guide that has the strengths of the Soviet Units in Iran as of July 1, 2000 show the same numbers of men and tanks that are in the RDF guide for Jan 1, 2001

if it says a unit has 18 tanks in the Soviet Guide for July 1, 2000 it shows that same unit with 18 AFV in the Jan 1, 2001 entry for the same unit in the RDF

We know from the RDF Sourcebook that the US I Amphibious Corps, supported by elements of the Iranian Army (specifically their 44th IB) carried out an offensive operation from June 2000. There is no date when this was concluded besides the US 24th ID being relieved in October 2000. Are you trying to tell us the Soviets facing them didn't loose a single man or machine!?
Have you even once considered that if the US can get reinforced, the Soviets will too? That they've had six months to repair vehicles, for men to heal, or new recruits drafted, trained and sent to the front?
Also, looking at a map shows that many of the Soviet units are quite a distance from the front - are they supposed to suffer battle damage?

Originally Posted by Olefin

Thus an AFV, as defined by Frank, is a tank, not an armored car, not a Bradley, a tank.[/B]

As you seem so keen to point out when it suits you, the designers make the occasional mistake. The world wide accepted definition of AFV is anything with armour and a weapon and is not ONLY tanks.

Originally Posted by Olefin

Thus we have CONCLUSIVE CANON PROOF OF A SHIPMENT OF TANKS AND HELOS TO THE RDF FROM GERMANY.

Only in your mind. As I have proven in my last post, there is NO evidence of such an occurence and OPORD OMEGA clearly states this was NOT to happen. Or is this a piece of evidence you'd like to ignore also?
I have also shown that OH-58's and UH-60's were not included in the earlier OOB. Exclude them and the numbers work perfectly. Now tell me there's irrefutable evidence helicopters were taken...

Originally Posted by Olefin

Thus there was a second convoy, that took men, heavy equipment and aircraft from the Germany to the RDF.

There is NO evidence of a second convoy. There was no fuel for them AND the US had to borrow German ships for Omega in the first place. Is it reasonable to assume the Germans are going to allow the US to go back on their word and send tanks and aircraft they'd paid for using yet more ships and fuel which belonged to the Germans?

Originally Posted by Olefin

Oh and the ships may have gone thru the Med and docked in Israel if the canal is closed. Those ships woudl thus not be in the RDF area of operations. The men and equipment then could have gone to a Jordanian or Israeli Red Sea port and gone around the peninsula or come overland - and used a lot less oil for the ships.

Yes, that is possible, but it's easier to sail the whole way, and since your proposal that anything beyond personal equipment has been blown out of the water, it's also a LOT quicker and more likely everyone will survive. Walking across deserts isn't my idea of fun.
Catching more ships from the Red Sea is also very unlikely. Remember that even the Tarawa class can only carry about 1,900 men - where are the ships coming from? Does Israel really want 6,000 foreign troops marching through, eating their food and using up their limited supplies (even if they are allies)? I think not. Imagine the massive logistical challenges an overland route would face. Imagine the challenges of organising a second fleet of transports and the fuel for them!
Simple logic dictates that as extremely improbable - possible sure, but very, very improbable and certainly very impractical.

Originally Posted by Olefin

Sorry - but its canon guys.

So you say, yet, once again, you've got holes in your argument large enough to drive a truck through. Every point you've made has been disproved, or at least been proved as unlikely.

Originally Posted by Olefin

So either you change canon and reduced those units or acknowledge we were right - the second convoy wasnt part of Omega, in fact it may have even left earlier (i.e. the V Corps units that were already in Bremerhaven when Omega started)

WHAT SECOND CONVOY!? Where are you getting that idea from? It simply does not exist in the books!

Originally Posted by Olefin

You have to wonder - if the order had just been issued what was the V Corps doing already in Bremerhaven -

Answer: They were being shipped to the RDF.

Better answer - they were held in reserve for the Spring Offensive. You should read the various threads on it, it's been exhaustively written about and discussed.
Also, if the US had to borrow ships from the Germans, AND didn't have the fuel in the first place, why, how could they plan to send an entire Division to what throughout the war was considered a third grade backwater of a front (see how little importance was given to deploying units there in the first place - unit histories). Additionally, why would they send a strong Division out of the area when the Spring offensive was aimed at taking control of virtually all of northern Poland (at least the coastal area anyway)? Wouldn't they be needed as a follow on force to shore up the line for the expected Pact counter attacks?

Now nobody is saying you can't do what you like in your own game with your own group, but to come here and try to convince this global community that you are "RIGHT" with such obvious drivel and combative attitude...