AFI Opfor company commander here, The battle was a Blufor tactical victory because of no decisive Opfor advantage on the final objective at mission end. Rather than a trigger objective, AFI games rely on tactical positioning and controlling terrain either through troop presence or by gunfire. Whoever has the best circumstances and has held or taken their objectives at mission time limit wins. During the battle our force lost nearly two companies worth of IFVs, something in the ballpark of 10+ BMPs and all but one of our tanks. Half of these vehicles were complete knock-outs or critical kills, even if the infantry survived a majority of the hits to their vehicles. Opfor's infantry casualties totaled up to nearly 100, meaning more than 50% of our initial combatants and follow-on reserves were killed or wounded. Blufor suffered similarly, losing their tank platoon and a majority of their infantry. The violence was intensified by terrain, with the major restricting feature being the mined and obstructed highway in the center that gave Blufor's well positioned tanks excellent fields of fire both north and south of it. It was bloody work in which grim determination and weight of fire was key. At the final objective four kilometers into our assault, we simply had no reserves left to commit. The supply depot was held by two battered squad sized forces of Americans that had emptied every magazine they had, had expended all of their anti-tank weapons and were using the bodies of their friends as sandbags. Opfor no longer had cohesion or momentum to continue, yet we'd completed two of our tasks. It just wasn't enough this time. Blufor's good maneuvers and excellent use of terrain in defense allowed them to succeed against a numerically superior enemy supported by indirect fires. I was hoping the minefield breach in the south would have been our ticket to achieving a quick win, but by sheer luck Blufor's tanks happened to be right there. Had they and a couple of plucky Americans led by a sleep deprived Australian not been there to dance around us with some Patton tanks, we'd have blazed to the second and third objectives in no time flat. It was by all means a close fought thing and I couldn't have asked for a better game.
Was the artillery you guys called down on the minefield on call or was it limited? I'm also surprised by how unafraid of mines that you guys seemed to be. Especially that armor column that took the road. I would be thinking constantly that there has to be player-placed mines or at least a LAW behind every rock on the side of the road.
@@matchesburn It was off-map controlled by an artillery liaison officer from inside the command BMP. We had 60 artillery shells to expend wherever we desired in the attack area and elected to use it all at once due to the low ammunition quantity. Prior to committing to the maneuver we'd reconnoitered the area for a period of 15 minutes and had come to the conclusion that the enemy's defenses were weakest at the edge of the minefield and that he was potentially neglecting to guard it. It was true that there was very little infantry, and with no visual confirmation of tanks we elected to go ahead with the southern minefield breach after we'd physically located the edge of it. We knew the rough area it was located because of pre-game intelligence information. The initial preparatory barrage targeted both the minefield and the assumed enemy defenses behind it and to the east. Our hope was that our heavy artillery would detonate or redistribute the mines. The initial squad sized force pushed across under the cover of this moving barrage and formed a human chain to indicate a safe route through the field, while they're getting shot at, then BMPs rolled through guns blazing and dismounted into depth. Turns out there were tanks there and my command vehicle was nearly hit by APFSDS that passed through two of the BMPs in front of me. One of them immediately burst into flames. I spent the first ten minutes of active combat laying in a ditch near my command BMP parked in a bush because I was worried the American tank would come back.
This was a very helpful comment, it was kind of hard to follow what Rimmy's title even meant and if the mission made their moves at the start of the video unique or something that the scenario called for them to spawn at
1:29 [Shoot from a pitiful range and then prepare to die] This is actually what was expected of most M47 Dragon teams. Because of the short range and it basically being only slightly less of a giveaway than a gigantic neon arrow sign pointing to you, it was suspected that if Fulda Gap ever went hot that M47 teams would receive some of the worst casualties of all. The fact that it was so lackluster is what gave the impetus to develop things like the FGM-148 (and if you're going "Wait, the Javelin was post-cold war - that can't be right" - consider that the program that would later become the Javelin... started in 1983 and finally went into low scale production in 1989) and to further improve TOW. Dirty little secret is that for most of the latter part of the Cold War, NATO at large had some god awful terrible man-portable ATGM systems. Which is kinda ironic when you consider that the biggest threat after nukes was a tidal wave of Soviet tanks.
@@kommissarjupiter7667 Yes and no. The Soviet counterpart (in role and doctrine/use) of the American M47 is the 9K115 Metis/AT-7 Saxhorn which... is almost exactly on par with the M47 Dragon. The main difference is that the Metis can penetrate 450mm+ of RHA whereas the original Dragon missiles could do about 600mm and, also, that the Metis missiles flew just ever so slightly faster. The range is the same. I can't find out when the extended range Dragon missiles came about, if they did at all, which increased the range to 1,500m, but the earliest attempts to upgrade the Dragon happened in 1986 to 1989, making it very late in the cold war. There's a lot that could be said about the 9M14 Malyutka/AT-3 Sagger which was continuously upgraded from MCLOS to SACLOS and went through so many iterations that you could probably write a book on it. On paper it was a very dangerous and capable ATGM, especially for its time. Reality? MCLOS guidance sucks and the SACLOS variants were vehicle mounted only. It required an EXTREMELY skilled operator to fire them "accurately." Even still, the Israelis learned the hard way that with good operators and use that they were very dangerous initially during the Yom Kippur war. Then, later on, they found ways to literally troll Malyutka operators in order to develop counter-measures that drastically reduced its capability as a man portable system. AT-4 Spigot/9K111 and (later, an upgraded version) the 9M113 Konkurs/AT-5 Spandrel showcase how far behind the west was in man-portable ATGMs. While the BGM-71 TOW is... technically... man-portable, so isn't a 120mm mortar. And they both weigh similarly and are about just as mobile as each other. That being "a lot" and "not very much at all." The Konkurs/Spigot were different. Both 1970s designs, but both having much longer range than the M47 while being slightly heavier, but still man-portable. Right out of the gate, the original AT-4s had a range of 2,000 meters, and the later Konkurs with a range of 4km. Even further than most TOWs. The Konkurs launcher platform weighs about 23 pounds and has the added benefit of launching both either/or Konkurs or Spigot missiles from the same launcher. Konkurs, especially, is pretty damn frightening with upping the armor penetration to ~800mm of RHA while having a range of up to 4km. Spigot is still pretty impressive with a range of 2-2,500 meters and an armor penetration capability between 400-600mm of RHA. Worse yet, Konkurs is pretty accurate. Like around on the level of TOW missile accurate. With greater range (except outside of some specialized TOW rounds). And capable of being truly man-portable. And the Soviets were doing this the entire time of the early 1980s. When you look at other ATGMs that aren't man-portable systems... the Soviets again had some impressive systems. We had out airborne M551 Sheridan "tanks" (read: aluminum bathtubs with tracks) that had lackluster 152mm low velocity cannon on it. Which isn't going to reach out very far, and doesn't have the power to kinetically kill much of anything. No problem, we Americans thought! We'll just fire a guided ATGM out of the cannon! Solves the issue of range and power! And... We spent lottsa money developing the MGM-51 Shillelagh for it (and later the M60A2 and MBT-70)... For a missile that didn't work very well at all and had the whopping range of 2-3,000 meters. And only capable of defeating about 400mm of RHA. While were still manufacturing the Shillelagh, the Soviets thought that was a cute attempt and developed the 9K112 Kobra in the early-to-mid 1970s which was also a gun-launched ATGM and had a range of up to 4km and could defeat 600mm of RHA from the original system before upgrades. Now, granted, it wasn't *_just_* the American military/NATO being dumb (but they were doing that too). There is kinda a demented reasoning behind this. With how many tanks would be involved in the Fulda Gap... and the fact that if it happened it would be WW3 (doctrine of Fulda Gap conflict basically boiled down to "Are the Soviets crossing the border? Yes? Then 3-2-1 keyturn, launch the tactical nukes!" because they realistically didn't see a way to A.) Not have this conflict go nuclear real fast and B.) Have a chance of "winning" without use of tactical nuclear warheads in stopping the Soviet tank zerg) and that there was a bigger emphasis on air support because we had things like the A-10 and AH-1 and later AH-64 and the fact that it would be a defensive war where we would lose a lot of ground real quick... I can kinda see why it wasn't their top priority to have really good man-portable ATGMs. They really had much, much more important things to worry about. That isn't really a defense for not trying, however.
@@matchesburn I will point out that NATO doctrine essentially sacrificed half of mainland Europe to buy time and that any real ground positions were expected to be overrun. When you understand that you, more or less, "can't" win a fight, why sink more money into it?
As someone whos dad was a tanker, stationed in that exact part of West Germany in the late 70s, that's pretty tough. I mean, the inside of an M60 Patton is definitely safer than on foot yeah, but he was still at Ground Zero of any theoretical fighting
"We got the Super Dragon back!" "The PWG World Champion wrestler, the hypergolic propellant liquid rocket engine, or the Anti Tank weapon?" "..what do you think?!?" "Well, the last Patton tanks were withdrawn from service in '87, and the Super Dragon AT was made in the 90's, so-" "This is why no one wants to date you!" "Я бы встречаться с ним." "You don't count, Vasily!"
@@blubbson True, but the Marine ones had reactive armor, and the others were Engineering vehicles. Pretty sure the Army ones weren't in front line service by the Gulf War, though that's going by memory.
"Guys move away from the cannon, move away from the tank they're firing." "...Wait like, their main cannon?" "No, the other cannon, move!" This was a gem of an exchange.
Finn translation: there is weapon boxes by the way so truck would you go and get them and there should be 2 for each team. well it's not perfect trans lation from finn to eng but i tried
Ya know, there was a bit of dust-up in Afghanistan where a Battalion Commander was super focused on a 2 company-strength air assault that encountered no resistance. Meanwhile, a platoon that got placed in blocking position ended up engaging something like 3 times their numbers. As they were fighting, the Battalion Commander pulled the platoon's air support and artillery to support the air assault mission which had encountered no resistance and had no need for the extra support. This kinda reminded me of that.
It’s actually funny how it mirrors the Winter War, after the initial shock of the Soviets invading, the Fins became a huge pain in the balls to the Soviets despite having way smaller forces. The only difference is that the Soviets ditched the multiple attacks just for one large charge.
Ah, the Finns. Second most sympathetic Axis sympathizers. EDIT: I should have figured that this would start shit. Anyway, what I meant by Axis sympathizer was the fact that Finland was forced into an uneasy alliance against the Allied powers due to Soviet imperialism, similar to how Ireland was in a similar situation via British imperialism. Small nations have little choice in how they can act when surrounded by superpowers. Now stop arguing. EDIT (EDIT): Ireland is the first. *Tiocfaidh ár lá*
What the Finn was saying at the start: Finnish: "Siellä on muuten aselaatikoita, hei (vaunu?) käyttekste nappaa tota..." English: "There's by the way gun boxes, hey (cart?) will you go grab uhm..."
FAR FROM THEIR LAND AS THEY MADE THEIR STAND! A DISREGARDED DEMAND! IT'S SURRENDER OR DIE AND THE STAKES ARE HIGH! LIVE OR DIE WHO CAN TELL THERE'S NO REPLY! WITH WEAPON IN HAND AS THEY MADE THEIR STAND! STILL DISREGARDING DEMAND! THEY WOULD NEVER COMPLY, THEY WOULD RATHER DIE! THEY STOOD STRONG AND THEIR LEGEND STILL LIVES ON!
@@damoclesecoe7184 In the early days when Arma YT was more dominated by actual Milsim / Tactical groups. Shacktac for example. But they fuck things up regular too so... x)
The back window of my car got busted when I hit the back wiper at _JUUUUUUUST_ the right angle, and the first thing I see in my notifications is this. Thank you, Rimmy.
4:37 yep. That's me, you're probably wondering how I ended up in this situation. ;) Was part of the Swedish part of the Russian army. It was an amazing op even though I didn't have any FPS.
Yup! Is nice to see Americans reacting to what we think American accents are like rather than reacting to what Americans think Australian accents are like for once!
Was I the only one thinking he was getting smacked on the Vindicta funny pills again when he was talking about a “Dragon” that was also a rocket launcher?
I didn't say I wanted to hear their debrief I said I'd enjoy a 5-10 min video of rimmy explaining what happened, cause 100 Russians attacking a recon squad tells me barely anything.
No, mainly because most people don't care for and won't watch that segment. It would make my views drop. It's also much harder to do a debrief for a video when I can't use something like AFI's AAR program. If you want to know the full story, there are full VODs on my twitch channel, with some even being uploaded to the second channel.
AFI Opfor company commander here,
The battle was a Blufor tactical victory because of no decisive Opfor advantage on the final objective at mission end. Rather than a trigger objective, AFI games rely on tactical positioning and controlling terrain either through troop presence or by gunfire. Whoever has the best circumstances and has held or taken their objectives at mission time limit wins.
During the battle our force lost nearly two companies worth of IFVs, something in the ballpark of 10+ BMPs and all but one of our tanks. Half of these vehicles were complete knock-outs or critical kills, even if the infantry survived a majority of the hits to their vehicles. Opfor's infantry casualties totaled up to nearly 100, meaning more than 50% of our initial combatants and follow-on reserves were killed or wounded. Blufor suffered similarly, losing their tank platoon and a majority of their infantry. The violence was intensified by terrain, with the major restricting feature being the mined and obstructed highway in the center that gave Blufor's well positioned tanks excellent fields of fire both north and south of it.
It was bloody work in which grim determination and weight of fire was key.
At the final objective four kilometers into our assault, we simply had no reserves left to commit. The supply depot was held by two battered squad sized forces of Americans that had emptied every magazine they had, had expended all of their anti-tank weapons and were using the bodies of their friends as sandbags. Opfor no longer had cohesion or momentum to continue, yet we'd completed two of our tasks. It just wasn't enough this time.
Blufor's good maneuvers and excellent use of terrain in defense allowed them to succeed against a numerically superior enemy supported by indirect fires. I was hoping the minefield breach in the south would have been our ticket to achieving a quick win, but by sheer luck Blufor's tanks happened to be right there. Had they and a couple of plucky Americans led by a sleep deprived Australian not been there to dance around us with some Patton tanks, we'd have blazed to the second and third objectives in no time flat.
It was by all means a close fought thing and I couldn't have asked for a better game.
Was the artillery you guys called down on the minefield on call or was it limited? I'm also surprised by how unafraid of mines that you guys seemed to be. Especially that armor column that took the road. I would be thinking constantly that there has to be player-placed mines or at least a LAW behind every rock on the side of the road.
@@matchesburn It was off-map controlled by an artillery liaison officer from inside the command BMP. We had 60 artillery shells to expend wherever we desired in the attack area and elected to use it all at once due to the low ammunition quantity.
Prior to committing to the maneuver we'd reconnoitered the area for a period of 15 minutes and had come to the conclusion that the enemy's defenses were weakest at the edge of the minefield and that he was potentially neglecting to guard it. It was true that there was very little infantry, and with no visual confirmation of tanks we elected to go ahead with the southern minefield breach after we'd physically located the edge of it. We knew the rough area it was located because of pre-game intelligence information.
The initial preparatory barrage targeted both the minefield and the assumed enemy defenses behind it and to the east. Our hope was that our heavy artillery would detonate or redistribute the mines. The initial squad sized force pushed across under the cover of this moving barrage and formed a human chain to indicate a safe route through the field, while they're getting shot at, then BMPs rolled through guns blazing and dismounted into depth.
Turns out there were tanks there and my command vehicle was nearly hit by APFSDS that passed through two of the BMPs in front of me. One of them immediately burst into flames. I spent the first ten minutes of active combat laying in a ditch near my command BMP parked in a bush because I was worried the American tank would come back.
@@svir1115 Sounds like a crazy fun time for everyone involved with lots and lots of back and forth fighting.
Insane losses of both equipment and men? Barely able to complete any objectives? Sounds like a victory by Russian standards to me.
This was a very helpful comment, it was kind of hard to follow what Rimmy's title even meant and if the mission made their moves at the start of the video unique or something that the scenario called for them to spawn at
Alternate Title: “The Finnish came back to haunt the Russians when they launch a attack”
Yes yes
Alternate title: "5 russians in BRDM stop all of Rimmy's reinforcements";)
Finnish Winter War Part 3: This Time its Personal
@@miles1034 Finnish War 4: My balls were taken by a russian wh- nevermind.
No one:
COH2 Squad Efficiency: 737329%
when ur stolen Pak-40 kills 2 panthers and peppers a Köningtiger into retreating
When a conscript grazes a grenadier with his bullet and it kills him.
"Uh. Help?" may as well be the tagline for anyone brave enough to open a map in the Cadian XXth and any other unit Rimmy finds themselves with.
Too true
"Is this the rare Finnish battle-chant i'm currently hearing?"
"No, we are making fun of a half-Chinese guy"
Yup sounds like Finnish people
Thats not Right
We make fun of everybody thats not a finn
@@eeuusi779 Especially Swedes I hope.
@@eeuusi779 Quick, I'm American, make fun of me!
@@Thomas-fz9xwUS be like: haha free healthcare? Whats that?
@@Thomas-fz9xw Just to get a drive to the hospital in the yellow weee wooo wagon you have to pay thoushands of dollars
1:29
[Shoot from a pitiful range and then prepare to die]
This is actually what was expected of most M47 Dragon teams. Because of the short range and it basically being only slightly less of a giveaway than a gigantic neon arrow sign pointing to you, it was suspected that if Fulda Gap ever went hot that M47 teams would receive some of the worst casualties of all. The fact that it was so lackluster is what gave the impetus to develop things like the FGM-148 (and if you're going "Wait, the Javelin was post-cold war - that can't be right" - consider that the program that would later become the Javelin... started in 1983 and finally went into low scale production in 1989) and to further improve TOW. Dirty little secret is that for most of the latter part of the Cold War, NATO at large had some god awful terrible man-portable ATGM systems. Which is kinda ironic when you consider that the biggest threat after nukes was a tidal wave of Soviet tanks.
Was the soviet portable Anti-Tank Equipment any better than the M47 ?
@@kommissarjupiter7667
Yes and no. The Soviet counterpart (in role and doctrine/use) of the American M47 is the 9K115 Metis/AT-7 Saxhorn which... is almost exactly on par with the M47 Dragon. The main difference is that the Metis can penetrate 450mm+ of RHA whereas the original Dragon missiles could do about 600mm and, also, that the Metis missiles flew just ever so slightly faster. The range is the same. I can't find out when the extended range Dragon missiles came about, if they did at all, which increased the range to 1,500m, but the earliest attempts to upgrade the Dragon happened in 1986 to 1989, making it very late in the cold war.
There's a lot that could be said about the 9M14 Malyutka/AT-3 Sagger which was continuously upgraded from MCLOS to SACLOS and went through so many iterations that you could probably write a book on it. On paper it was a very dangerous and capable ATGM, especially for its time. Reality? MCLOS guidance sucks and the SACLOS variants were vehicle mounted only. It required an EXTREMELY skilled operator to fire them "accurately." Even still, the Israelis learned the hard way that with good operators and use that they were very dangerous initially during the Yom Kippur war. Then, later on, they found ways to literally troll Malyutka operators in order to develop counter-measures that drastically reduced its capability as a man portable system.
AT-4 Spigot/9K111 and (later, an upgraded version) the 9M113 Konkurs/AT-5 Spandrel showcase how far behind the west was in man-portable ATGMs. While the BGM-71 TOW is... technically... man-portable, so isn't a 120mm mortar. And they both weigh similarly and are about just as mobile as each other. That being "a lot" and "not very much at all." The Konkurs/Spigot were different. Both 1970s designs, but both having much longer range than the M47 while being slightly heavier, but still man-portable. Right out of the gate, the original AT-4s had a range of 2,000 meters, and the later Konkurs with a range of 4km. Even further than most TOWs. The Konkurs launcher platform weighs about 23 pounds and has the added benefit of launching both either/or Konkurs or Spigot missiles from the same launcher. Konkurs, especially, is pretty damn frightening with upping the armor penetration to ~800mm of RHA while having a range of up to 4km. Spigot is still pretty impressive with a range of 2-2,500 meters and an armor penetration capability between 400-600mm of RHA. Worse yet, Konkurs is pretty accurate. Like around on the level of TOW missile accurate. With greater range (except outside of some specialized TOW rounds). And capable of being truly man-portable. And the Soviets were doing this the entire time of the early 1980s.
When you look at other ATGMs that aren't man-portable systems... the Soviets again had some impressive systems. We had out airborne M551 Sheridan "tanks" (read: aluminum bathtubs with tracks) that had lackluster 152mm low velocity cannon on it. Which isn't going to reach out very far, and doesn't have the power to kinetically kill much of anything. No problem, we Americans thought! We'll just fire a guided ATGM out of the cannon! Solves the issue of range and power! And... We spent lottsa money developing the MGM-51 Shillelagh for it (and later the M60A2 and MBT-70)... For a missile that didn't work very well at all and had the whopping range of 2-3,000 meters. And only capable of defeating about 400mm of RHA. While were still manufacturing the Shillelagh, the Soviets thought that was a cute attempt and developed the 9K112 Kobra in the early-to-mid 1970s which was also a gun-launched ATGM and had a range of up to 4km and could defeat 600mm of RHA from the original system before upgrades.
Now, granted, it wasn't *_just_* the American military/NATO being dumb (but they were doing that too). There is kinda a demented reasoning behind this. With how many tanks would be involved in the Fulda Gap... and the fact that if it happened it would be WW3 (doctrine of Fulda Gap conflict basically boiled down to "Are the Soviets crossing the border? Yes? Then 3-2-1 keyturn, launch the tactical nukes!" because they realistically didn't see a way to A.) Not have this conflict go nuclear real fast and B.) Have a chance of "winning" without use of tactical nuclear warheads in stopping the Soviet tank zerg) and that there was a bigger emphasis on air support because we had things like the A-10 and AH-1 and later AH-64 and the fact that it would be a defensive war where we would lose a lot of ground real quick... I can kinda see why it wasn't their top priority to have really good man-portable ATGMs. They really had much, much more important things to worry about. That isn't really a defense for not trying, however.
@@matchesburn I will point out that NATO doctrine essentially sacrificed half of mainland Europe to buy time and that any real ground positions were expected to be overrun. When you understand that you, more or less, "can't" win a fight, why sink more money into it?
@@AlvorReal
I said just about as much in my earlier reply.
As someone whos dad was a tanker, stationed in that exact part of West Germany in the late 70s, that's pretty tough. I mean, the inside of an M60 Patton is definitely safer than on foot yeah, but he was still at Ground Zero of any theoretical fighting
"We got the Super Dragon back!"
"The PWG World Champion wrestler, the hypergolic propellant liquid rocket engine, or the Anti Tank weapon?"
"..what do you think?!?"
"Well, the last Patton tanks were withdrawn from service in '87, and the Super Dragon AT was made in the 90's, so-"
"This is why no one wants to date you!"
"Я бы встречаться с ним."
"You don't count, Vasily!"
M60 tanks were still used by the USMC in the Gulf War (1991).
@@blubbson True, but the Marine ones had reactive armor, and the others were Engineering vehicles. Pretty sure the Army ones weren't in front line service by the Gulf War, though that's going by memory.
"Я бы встречался с ним."*
i know that google translate russian is probabably a part of this joke but it's really painful to look at.
Super Dragon could probably curb stomp a tank.
"Last transmission - HELP"
The ATGM hitting "victor" was so fucking cinematic
Victor isn’t a callsign. “Victor” or “Vic” means vehicle.
@@Pointblank539 oh thanks for the info mate
Actually yes, Victor was their callsign. I'm not a fan because I use victor as a shorthand all the time.
@@RimmyDownunder So... basically the vehicle version of Major Major Major Major from Catch-22?
@@evanwickstrom5698 yep. I kept saying "Victor's victor".
"Guys move away from the cannon, move away from the tank they're firing."
"...Wait like, their main cannon?"
"No, the other cannon, move!"
This was a gem of an exchange.
Sam Green from Space Station 13 Colonial Marines is always a gem :D
If it was a Baneblade I'd understand but this wasn't Warhammer 40k Arma
Has a Red vs Blue Vibe to it. XD
Ah nothing like a good lunch break with Rimmy
6 finns vs 100 Russians
So the odds are in your favour Timmy
John Marston with the two LAW's was a good joke.
Imagine trying to dual wielding those LAWs and succeed!
This entire video can be summed up in: "I did that?"
BRUVVA
"There firing the cannon! Which cannon? The main cannon!" That line got me good it felt like a RVB line but was delivered so well
Just wanna say, thanks for uploading these, they’re always hysterical to watch
Agreed!
3:07 Last radio transmission : "HELP" and I immediatly got after a red cross advertisement , yep seem about right
Watching these events from the enemy teams perspective is always so much fun. Great video Rimmy
Wait is this online gaming?
@@pihlajafox Yes. This is a TVT game hosted by Arma Finland.
@@svir1115 I thought they were alway pve games
@@pihlajafox Well usually they are pve but the title literally says “TvT” so it is a TvT
@@Mahons oooouh... I'm probably blind
This Aged extremely well.
"Recce element, doing recce, which means looking down a pair of binoculars! Why is it so much fun?"
because *_s t e a l t h ._*
And if you thought these were cool, AFI does these WEEKLY.
POV: Finnish bois share secrets of winter war with Ozzie
Finn translation: there is weapon boxes by the way so truck would you go and get them and there should be 2 for each team. well it's not perfect trans lation from finn to eng but i tried
As a Cav Scout this is my worst nightmare.
"Hey, Command, I'm gonna need a bit of help here."
_sam, 2021_
Just sitting in the truck eating a Popeyes biscuit no drink watching an Aussie yell at a Finn.
real shit?
Ya know, there was a bit of dust-up in Afghanistan where a Battalion Commander was super focused on a 2 company-strength air assault that encountered no resistance. Meanwhile, a platoon that got placed in blocking position ended up engaging something like 3 times their numbers. As they were fighting, the Battalion Commander pulled the platoon's air support and artillery to support the air assault mission which had encountered no resistance and had no need for the extra support. This kinda reminded me of that.
"Sam, they're making fun of Chinese people in the tank."
"Ah! I'm missing it!?"
*_a n g e r y_*_ ccp noises_
Rimmy sit, Rimmy speak
9:15
I think we could consider this as Russia's revenge for the Winter War.
Gone wrong (again) :D hahahaha
@@manaco8440 They had them in the first half atleast. Mr. Gorbachev's not gonna be happy.
It’s actually funny how it mirrors the Winter War, after the initial shock of the Soviets invading, the Fins became a huge pain in the balls to the Soviets despite having way smaller forces. The only difference is that the Soviets ditched the multiple attacks just for one large charge.
blufor: nooooo you cant just blow up our minefield before it blows you up!
opfor: haha artillery go *PEW.*
This title and video in general aged like a fine wine XD
Ah, the Finns. Second most sympathetic Axis sympathizers.
EDIT: I should have figured that this would start shit. Anyway, what I meant by Axis sympathizer was the fact that Finland was forced into an uneasy alliance against the Allied powers due to Soviet imperialism, similar to how Ireland was in a similar situation via British imperialism. Small nations have little choice in how they can act when surrounded by superpowers. Now stop arguing.
EDIT (EDIT): Ireland is the first. *Tiocfaidh ár lá*
Hey!.... That true...
Who’s the first?
wait who's the first
Could they be considered less "axis sympathizers" and more "commie haters"?
@@rileyhaynes2515 I mean they deported Jews from their occupied parts of Russia to the Nazis, so definitely axis sympathizers.
So this is basically the winter war: back with a vengeance electric boogalo 2, cold war europe edition?
The fact this came out on my Birthday makes me ecstatic, love you Rimmy. The Cadian has been a favorite I aspire to be
Happy birthday ;D
@@damoclesecoe7184 thank you
Seriously rimmy I love your content you never fail to make me laugh keep up the good work
What the Finn was saying at the start:
Finnish: "Siellä on muuten aselaatikoita, hei (vaunu?) käyttekste nappaa tota..."
English: "There's by the way gun boxes, hey (cart?) will you go grab uhm..."
0:50- 0:56 A true Russian right there!
7:05 By the tank, the map has a marking that says jude [HÅRD] which is Jew Hard in Swedish
Rimmy predicted the future, huh.
FAR FROM THEIR LAND AS THEY MADE THEIR STAND!
A DISREGARDED DEMAND!
IT'S SURRENDER OR DIE AND THE STAKES ARE HIGH!
LIVE OR DIE WHO CAN TELL THERE'S NO REPLY!
WITH WEAPON IN HAND AS THEY MADE THEIR STAND!
STILL DISREGARDING DEMAND!
THEY WOULD NEVER COMPLY, THEY WOULD RATHER DIE!
THEY STOOD STRONG AND THEIR LEGEND STILL LIVES ON!
Sam is an absolute master with the grenade launcher.
Yay the one thing I subscribed for, FUSTERCLUCKS!
Last time I was this early arma players were competent
ARMA players? Competent? Which alternate universe are you from? :P
@@damoclesecoe7184 In the early days when Arma YT was more dominated by actual Milsim / Tactical groups. Shacktac for example. But they fuck things up regular too so... x)
The back window of my car got busted when I hit the back wiper at _JUUUUUUUST_ the right angle, and the first thing I see in my notifications is this. Thank you, Rimmy.
"Last radio transmission: HELP"
6:02-6:22 so cinematic man
Maan everytime I watch one of these it makes me miss my old arma group so much
*sees an atgm wiz by*
ohhh no
"RUNNNN FEKING RUNNNNN.mp3"
This aged well
Fustercluck videos are my favorite ones! I got Arma 3 on the last steam sale because of these vids. Going to try and get used to the game!
Im-friggen-pressive Rimmy. Good job.
Me watching Rimmy playing ARMA 3:
Ahhh the good shit....
This op is every AT soldiers dream
And every riflemans nightmare
Rimmy team: Tactical operation
Maxor team: "How many bullets from my pistol will i need to destroy a tank?"
I heard the blyat tractor video
i am happy
I watched Nearly Sam's stream for this. It was great, dude fought a tank with just his rifle.
grenadier sam, actually my first gamertag ahahaha didnt expect to see that
Absolutely loving the videos lately rimmy! Keep up the good work
4:37 yep. That's me, you're probably wondering how I ended up in this situation. ;) Was part of the Swedish part of the Russian army. It was an amazing op even though I didn't have any FPS.
Hey Rimmy, can you try tabg it’s very accurate. So I think you’d like it
Oh yes. Totally Accurate.
@@side-beeetaloniswolfwolfac4179 Perfectly Balanced
Rimmy and TABG is a recipe for disaster and shouldn't be done by any sane man
But SANITY IS FOR THE WEAK!
Wau Arma FINLAND
I am finnish btw Rimmy so hello from Finland
Rimmy's videos help my work day go by so fast.
Wow, I'm surprised someone performed Deep Battle Operations here.
This video felt like resist and bite
its like the 99th i&r battalions stand during the battle of the bulge but cold war
Love seeing my SOG lads turn up in these videos
6:13 "It was at this moment that Rimmy knew. Not that he had fucked up, but that he was about to be fucked up."
This seems oddly similar to something right now.
These are honestly the reason I want to build a PC for gaming
…this feels relevant today…
Rimmy: *does an American accent*
Me: Is that genuinely what we sound like you y'all?
Yup! Is nice to see Americans reacting to what we think American accents are like rather than reacting to what Americans think Australian accents are like for once!
Sam is like a ANTI tank ninja
Ukrainian army watching this video: write that down! Write that down. !
"Wait you mean their main cannon?"
"No their other cannon, move you fuck"
Love these people
Ah these are fantastic
Kinda sad it was not longer but anyway a banger of a video
Starcat? As in the youtuber Starcat that does hilarious shenanigans?
Starcat as in Norderns friend?
Yes, that is me.
Would really like to see more of these PVP events
Se tunne kun älyää että pystyy ymmärtämään jotain mistä Rimmy ei tajua sanaakaan
Was I the only one thinking he was getting smacked on the Vindicta funny pills again when he was talking about a “Dragon” that was also a rocket launcher?
Понимабельно, хорошего вам дня
Great content can’t wait to see more rimmy hope u are doing well.
Main MSR is like saying Main Main Supply Route 🤣
*The border war which might have happened, but both kept it a secret.*
Last transition: HELP
6:02 (genuine terror)
Always watch all the video before commenting. Pog
We def leaving a comment for the algorithm
The fins were informibg some ifv about gun crates and asuin if they had goten them at the start
Ah yes STARCAT is somewhere in there
looks at the title
"welp, this is going to end with too much dakka"
The Cold War did indeed get hot.
Good to see star cat and rimmy in the same video
Amazing op
can u do a debrief for these kinds of vids
i too would like to know who won who lost and what exactly happened otherwise
They don’t record or stream the debriefs
I didn't say I wanted to hear their debrief I said I'd enjoy a 5-10 min video of rimmy explaining what happened, cause 100 Russians attacking a recon squad tells me barely anything.
No, mainly because most people don't care for and won't watch that segment. It would make my views drop. It's also much harder to do a debrief for a video when I can't use something like AFI's AAR program. If you want to know the full story, there are full VODs on my twitch channel, with some even being uploaded to the second channel.
@@RimmyDownunder thanks for replying and I understand keep making videos and stay safe
This looked fun
Oh boy, more ARMA 3
god, wish i could od stuff like this
Best wishes
Suomi mainittu, torilla tavataan!