@@jantschierschky3461 I'm talking about the empty buildings. Obviously collapsing a building on someone is bad news. After a building is destroyed it can be even easier to set up "in plain sight" observers or snipers. I want to say it was the Serbians who did that really well in the 1990s.
@@apocratos0174 it’s absolutely not the most brutal battle in history was Stalingrad, which was based on urban warfare Urban warfare features the most defensive positions for the enemy to hide, requiring the most men to take, with the least maneuverability. The _deadlock_ of World War I is the only reason people think trench warfare is so brutal. Trenches have existed in every war and urban warfare has surpassed it in brutality everytime - to the point where many wars were fought entirely outside of cities
People miss the entire point about WW1. It wasn't that it was specifically terrible. It's that it was the beginning of modern warfare. And modern warfare is horrific at all levels
That is not valid if you actually want to capture the place (to establish further advancements) instead of just destroying everything for the sake of keeping hostiles at bay.
Can't do that these days. Warfare relies tremendously on the cooperation of the indigenous population. If you consistently level their cities, they will hate you and do everything they can to harass and mislead your force while helping your enemy. Even worse, they may outright become insurgents. We saw this happen regularly in Vietnam. We'd take a few potshots from a village, so we would turn and level it. The few survivors would harbor a hatred toward us that lead to them becoming part of the Viet Cong, thus replacing whatever few killed when leveling the village.
@@theirishempire4952 Why would you hide in a trench when there are not only perfectly good buildings all around you, but anyone in a nearby building will be able to look right down into your trench.
I mean at the time that was the Case the weapons were so Imprecise that even hitting your Line was a Challenge. Not to say it wasn't dangerous, but the Danger gets Overrated a whole lot.
@@cloudfanlp4923 I mean the weapons weren't all that inaccurate. Sure they're no 50cal hitting a mouse from 500m but rifling has existed since 1500. Lines were mostly inaccurate because soldiers were trained for speed, not accuracy. Better to shoot 3 or 4 slightly aimed balls than 1 well aimed one. The actual line formation was designed to be purely anti-cavalry seeing as horses would run riot on them otherwise. A line of bayonets deters that. That doesn't even factor in canons literally bombarding the area right around you. Take those three threats with being told to stand there until you die(at least that's how the English did it) and I can't think of much more danger
3k soldiers only? lmao are you belittling ukrainian forces? 20k non ukrainian soldiers have volunteered to fight for ukraine, let alone ukraine's active personnels
@@Joaquin546 oh... well 1000 of those ukrainian soldiers surrendered to russian forces 2 weeks ago, let alone last month, as they ran out of food, supply, and ammunitions in mairupol. theres actually a solid video showing a really long line of surrendering soldiers, so wdym by "holding out"?
@@Joaquin546 I dont think you understand how hard it is to conquor a city. Just like 10 000 us marines took over a month to capture Fallujah from insurgents (not properly trained soldiers). Not to mention Fallujah is not a concrete jungle with high-rises like mariupol.
Or just warfare in general regardless of the place? People we aren't in the age of melee combat anymore. Literally everywhere in the planet will be hell to you if guns and explosives are a thing.
@@victuz in Jungle warfare you have to deal with guns and explosives along with heat, moisture, diseases, complicated logistics, mosquitoes and other animals.
Any soldier can face on the battlefield today maybe.... i don't know if it tops trench warfare tho. Especially the British trenches in WW1. You knew where the enemy would engage you from, because its everywhere. Snipers, mortars, machineguns, rats, lice, trench foot, and getting pumped full of narcotics.
Trench was worse. You're knee deep in water, shit, blood rats. Then, when the whistle blew, you rose from your relative safety to be mowed down by pre-registered heavy machine guns and artillery. Trench foot and gangrene was common. Not to forget poison gas.
@@notofficialpickles507 it wouldn't work. City buildings would provide cover, which changes the strategies you'd use. Trenches are to make cover where there is little or none at all. I'd argue though that theres a point where urban combat can become similar to trench warfare, such as the battles of both Stahlingrad and Berlin in WW2. But its still different than what we know about the trenches
@@KittysInu No no I was just making a "joke" because someone said that urban city warfare is the worst while others say trench warfare is the worst so I just thought to combine em
The fricken Afghan caves were an absolute nightmare. Too large of an area to surround it, too many caves to close them off, you couldnt even starve them out of their position. Only good option was to wait for them to run out of bullets and go away for a few days.
“However on modern battlefields soldiers must frequently resort to blowing these structures up.” Like…they didn’t in the past? Also…that’s not always the best thing. Sometimes when you level a city or a location, the ruins leave behind provide the fortifications the enemy needs.
That doesn't take away from the main point of the video, which is that urban combat is the most brutal form of combat in modern warfare. They even used an example from WW2 to reinforce one of the reasons why.
Urban Warfare: Death comes around every corner. Jungle Warfare: You lived uncomfortably and die the same. Trench Warfare: Every attack is like Omaha Beach.
Another reason why Urban Warfare is the worst nightmare for any soilders is how to identify who are civilians and who are enemies if they mis attack then we all know what happens
In my country, the Philippines. The military did the same strategy to urban warfare when they confronted a group that pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. They almost bombarded the entire city just to get rid of ISIS in the Philippines.
@@nella9115 "Not So Terrible" there is a professional who come to a jungle, explain why a tiny fount, a cliff, a hole in a jungle can easy break your legs or kill you, snake, wild animals, centipede, decease, hardly can see anything, easily to get lost, traps set everywhere by the enemy, mosquito, easily get triggered and ambushed...
@@fakerolnando think your getting mixed up with the fact the a forrest / woodblock is not a jungle, 2 entirely different things, jungle fighting is nails
To be honest, we should have dropped more of those in the past, Russia trys to steal your tech, and try to export communism? Goodbye Moscow, and, stalingrad. The middle east trying to terrorize the USA? Let them know what true terror means.
I am a US Army OIF veteran, 19K/M1 Abrams tanker. My first tour to Iraq was the invasion/Thunder Run into Baghdad, and over the course of nine years I went 3 more times, and yeah, urban warfare is nerve wracking and without the help of tanks and airstrikes, especially if we're fighting on the opponent's home turf, it is very dangerous and results in lots of casualties and injuries like you wouldn't believe. I still think though that jungle warfare is probably the worst and hardest to deal with, like our Vietnam vets had it bad/hard man.. like in the early years of the Iraq war, living in/on tanks is HARD and it sucks, like living in a small car, with three other people, and eventually we created FOBs and JSS's, COBs/COPs, essentially places to return to and lay your head down at.
Let me tell you, the game Tarkov has shown me no matter the plan you can always get popped up on and flanked. Move slow and clear everything also stay in cover to cover 🤷🏻♂️ I still get rocked like silly
Nothing will ever be worse than the first World War’s trench warfare. How those men could even function after living through that is beyond me. Modern urban warfare is a day out in the park compared to that
"Urban warfare ... undoubtedly the ... deadliest form of combat ... ." Source? -None. Coincidence that Stalingrad happened to be the deadliest battle? -Maximum.
yeah what about like trench warfare in WW1? Jungle Warfare like vietnam? Shit, how the world has been going i would be surprised if we started killing people in space like that MW3 mission
Actually many sources, the key is urban favours the defence, so attackers need around 10-1 ratio. Every urban battle showed high los rates. During stalingrad Russians lost about 4000 a day, 2000 for axis.
@@nyimdewan3353 Berlin was not a typical battle. You had 150 000 defenders were 80 000 were volkssturm and Hitlerjungen. 1.2 Millionen attacker's experienced. Even so it took considerable effort on the attacker's side. If you want urban warfare than smolensk, Kiew, Budapest, Aachen are better examples.
That’s why the United States should never disarm the people yes we do have Vilas in United States but it’s another country trust invade American citizens are very well armed and Minnie are skilled
They should also teach civilians to fight in platoon sized combat element or at least in squad size. If they cant be organized they are most likely in the way. Platoons of civilian fighters are easier to integrate in the fight formation than individual fighters
I love my 2nd amendment but no country would be that brave to invade with ground forces. Also our water and electric grids are unprotected. Covid and Joe Biden also proved our country moral is low, and our infrastructure/supply chain is also weak. We need to quit worrying about politics abroad and band together.
A video that shocks no one who has played any degree of combat games with varied terrain, studied history for an hour, or glanced outside a window for five minutes.
A soldier who described Stalingrad wrote that you did not need street or car lights at night because the flames of all the burning buildings provided more then enough light.
When attacking Montecassino, the worst tactical mistake was bombing the complex to rubble; it made the job of digging out the Gemans much, much harder and more costly.
Cuz urban warfare requires you to be so close, you can see their face clearly, range is not option, which makes it easier to dehumanize what ur aiming at
On 7 November 2004, I was the company gunny for weapons Co. 3/5 Marines ( Dark horse ). We were the lead element on the assault for retaking Fallujah. We had in excess of 50 % casualties within the first four days of the operation. The OPFOR had WEEKS to prepare for our arrival. They had intersections zeroed in for mortars, IED's set up everywhere, ammo caches, rooftops manned, etc.... It was like a knife fight in a phone booth.... Hardly anyone came out unscathed.... I have got scars on my left leg from some shrapnel from an RPG, and scars on my face from being hit by shattered concrete.... Until the day that I die, I will never forget the sights, sounds, and smell from that shit hole.... Lost way too many good Marine brothers for nothing...
I’m in the marines, I’d probably would rather think trench warfare to be the worst. What would you’re worse one? Mountain, jungle, trench, desert, or amphibious(beach)?
@@chrisdominic5492 Your list is too generalized so I'll just say that I didn't like to being in open terrain with little cover/concealment. A big part of that comes from being a former 11C. Getting a fire mission for troops in the open was like waking up on Christmas morning as a kid.
I fought in Iraq so I’m very familiar with urban warfare, urban warfare is tricky AF, what makes it really scary is that danger is at every corner. Urban warfare makes it easier for friendly fire incidents too
FIBUA is crazy but definitely worth a mention is jungle warfare only done training for that environment it was crazy. The humidity, soaked most of the time, dangerous animals/plants and you can see more than a couple of feet in most areas if off a track or clearing 😳 that was training... the guys who fought in Vietnam in real combat against a very tricky enemy who knows the land and lays traps everywhere must of been really intense massive respect to those guys
A tactic used by the Soviets in the battle of Stalingrad was to fire a anti-tank Canon into the building from the side then charge in taking the stunned defenders at close range with submachine guns. This tactic was not always feasible for obvious reasons but it's effect was similar to the modern tactic of using a flashbang before building entry.
I think that jungle warfare and urban warfare are even. Urban warfare provides shelter from elements and maneuvering opponents while jungle warfare allows engaged troops to quickly evade on unpredictable routes. Supply routes can be engaged for both, surveillance is hard to maintain, in urban situations its impossible to tell noncombatants from combatants, while the jungle canopies allows excellent cover and even can disrupt different camera types. I dont know.
I’ve only trained in different environments, never had the chance to fight in any of them against an actual enemy. But my least favorite was mountain warfare. Oxygen is thinner, rains all the time and weather can change in an instant. It’s freezing cold, impossible to extract casualties, and you’re hiking some of the most unbelievably tough terrain you could imagine. Urban warfare is purely about attrition. But when you mix that with the environment,you end up with broken morale on both sides. Or if one has a home advantage, I suppose just one.
I wonder what the reality of a city designed to be a urban fort would be like. The amount of hidden tunnels, alleys and firering positions all to benefit defenders in such a city must be crazy. And heck maybe some of them already exist and we don't know.
I agree, in Philippines during the Marawi siege were Local Terrorist allied themselves to ISIS took over a city which is a great challenge for the Philippine Army since they are much used to jungle combats. There are less than 2000 militants against tens of thousands Soldiers and still hold the city in hostage for about 5 months.
I've had both WW2 and Vietnam Vets tell me, an OIF & OEF Vet that they would rather fight their respective wars than fight in the desert/ cities/ mountains like us GWOT generation did. It blew my mind because I personally consider both of those wars worse than the GWOT.
During Stalingrad blowing up whole buildings were common place. So nothing new there
That is urban warfare my friend…
That just made bunkers for the soviets
Blowing up whole buildings can actually make it easier on defenders too.
@@charlesdoesstuff7379 those buildings are collapsed. Killing any defenders in the basement. After is pancake
@@jantschierschky3461 I'm talking about the empty buildings. Obviously collapsing a building on someone is bad news. After a building is destroyed it can be even easier to set up "in plain sight" observers or snipers. I want to say it was the Serbians who did that really well in the 1990s.
Trench warfare: hold my trenchfoot
Agreed, WWI was crazy
This short is pure bs
Trench warfare is urban warfare but worse
@@apocratos0174 it’s absolutely not
the most brutal battle in history was Stalingrad, which was based on urban warfare
Urban warfare features the most defensive positions for the enemy to hide, requiring the most men to take, with the least maneuverability.
The _deadlock_ of World War I is the only reason people think trench warfare is so brutal. Trenches have existed in every war and urban warfare has surpassed it in brutality everytime - to the point where many wars were fought entirely outside of cities
People miss the entire point about WW1. It wasn't that it was specifically terrible. It's that it was the beginning of modern warfare. And modern warfare is horrific at all levels
If ww2 taught me anything. It's that you just need to completely level cities instead of losing the manpower to capture it.
That is not valid if you actually want to capture the place (to establish further advancements) instead of just destroying everything for the sake of keeping hostiles at bay.
...or move through the area after the fact. A leveled city requires a bypass.
Can't do that these days.
Warfare relies tremendously on the cooperation of the indigenous population. If you consistently level their cities, they will hate you and do everything they can to harass and mislead your force while helping your enemy. Even worse, they may outright become insurgents.
We saw this happen regularly in Vietnam. We'd take a few potshots from a village, so we would turn and level it. The few survivors would harbor a hatred toward us that lead to them becoming part of the Viet Cong, thus replacing whatever few killed when leveling the village.
Unfortunately.
@@oxide9679 Not indigenous, just the locals.
But yeah you're right, if you level the cities you're going to make another enemy.
Use headphones, urban maps will become your favourite
Headphones on shooters are overpowered
When will devs remove the sounds smh they can't even balance it.
The TTK is so low the Devs should do something I get one shot sometimes
@@raghavrana2434 that would be a low TTK if you can get 1-shot.
@@pixel-genius oh yes sorry XD
“Urban warfare is brutal”
Trench Warfare: Am i a joke to you?
Trench warfare in a Urban Enviroment...
@@theirishempire4952 Why would you hide in a trench when there are not only perfectly good buildings all around you, but anyone in a nearby building will be able to look right down into your trench.
@@guydunn5354 is joke
@@theirishempire4952 “Guy Dunn is joke”
😢😢😢
Jungle warfare: Allow us to introduce ourselves.
Idk man, standing still in lines shooting at each other still seems a little more dangerous
It's easier to retreat though
@@theoutlook55 Retreating is just turning your back on the people still shooting directly at you
@@ALittleMessi fr
I mean at the time that was the Case the weapons were so Imprecise that even hitting your Line was a Challenge. Not to say it wasn't dangerous, but the Danger gets Overrated a whole lot.
@@cloudfanlp4923 I mean the weapons weren't all that inaccurate. Sure they're no 50cal hitting a mouse from 500m but rifling has existed since 1500. Lines were mostly inaccurate because soldiers were trained for speed, not accuracy. Better to shoot 3 or 4 slightly aimed balls than 1 well aimed one. The actual line formation was designed to be purely anti-cavalry seeing as horses would run riot on them otherwise. A line of bayonets deters that. That doesn't even factor in canons literally bombarding the area right around you. Take those three threats with being told to stand there until you die(at least that's how the English did it) and I can't think of much more danger
It’s why in modern times we see 3k soldiers holding out against the Russian forces for 60 days!
3k soldiers only? lmao are you belittling ukrainian forces? 20k non ukrainian soldiers have volunteered to fight for ukraine, let alone ukraine's active personnels
@@f-16viper99 I meant in Mariupol.
@@Joaquin546 oh... well 1000 of those ukrainian soldiers surrendered to russian forces 2 weeks ago, let alone last month, as they ran out of food, supply, and ammunitions in mairupol. theres actually a solid video showing a really long line of surrendering soldiers, so wdym by "holding out"?
@@f-16viper99 yes I know. Still amazes me that it could hold out for two months given their proximity to Russia and the length of time.
@@Joaquin546 I dont think you understand how hard it is to conquor a city. Just like 10 000 us marines took over a month to capture Fallujah from insurgents (not properly trained soldiers). Not to mention Fallujah is not a concrete jungle with high-rises like mariupol.
Medieval warfare, when you can smell the breath of your enemy and have his intestines as a necklace.
I'd say jungle warfare is more brutal.
Jungle Warfare is a mess all it’s own. It’s close quarters, barely any visibility, and the humidity and germs will kill you.
That's what I was thinking. Landmines easily hidden, wooden spikes with feces like in Nam, the dreadful heat, and yes diseases such as malaria.
Desert warfare is the best no germs no snick attacks
Only one problem and that's water but if air force is good then no problem 🙂
Marawi:💀💀💀💀
Don't forget about all the biological landmines like snakes
Jungle warfare: Am I a joke to you??
Jungle warfare is hard on everyone, urban warfare favours the defender
@@oi2837 yea but jungle warfare also favors the enemy in the sense that they know their land can set up traps and shit
Talking trees: "Hahahahaha!"
Or just warfare in general regardless of the place?
People we aren't in the age of melee combat anymore. Literally everywhere in the planet will be hell to you if guns and explosives are a thing.
@@victuz in Jungle warfare you have to deal with guns and explosives along with heat, moisture, diseases, complicated logistics, mosquitoes and other animals.
Any soldier can face on the battlefield today maybe.... i don't know if it tops trench warfare tho. Especially the British trenches in WW1. You knew where the enemy would engage you from, because its everywhere. Snipers, mortars, machineguns, rats, lice, trench foot, and getting pumped full of narcotics.
Bruh imahine trench warfare in an urban city
Trench was worse. You're knee deep in water, shit, blood rats. Then, when the whistle blew, you rose from your relative safety to be mowed down by pre-registered heavy machine guns and artillery. Trench foot and gangrene was common. Not to forget poison gas.
@@notofficialpickles507 it wouldn't work. City buildings would provide cover, which changes the strategies you'd use. Trenches are to make cover where there is little or none at all.
I'd argue though that theres a point where urban combat can become similar to trench warfare, such as the battles of both Stahlingrad and Berlin in WW2. But its still different than what we know about the trenches
@@KittysInu No no I was just making a "joke" because someone said that urban city warfare is the worst while others say trench warfare is the worst so I just thought to combine em
The old stand and shoot in a line warfare also isn't great. Imagine that shit with the accurate weapons we've developed
Mountain warfare...
Hold my snow...
And the worst thing about it was you can't even destroy a mountain like you do to buildings
Gen z when ww3 happens and they freeze to death in the alps instead of rescuing zoomer anime waifus and 1080 noscoping russian tanks
Right? When the battleground exists and goes unused, you know it's dangerous.
Read up on what happened when Napoleon's army went up against the Russians, quite interesting
@@carlosmontanez1173 lol read about how India army faught in the highest battle ground ever faught by humans The Siyachin Glacier
The fricken Afghan caves were an absolute nightmare. Too large of an area to surround it, too many caves to close them off, you couldnt even starve them out of their position.
Only good option was to wait for them to run out of bullets and go away for a few days.
"A handful of motivated troops can hold off an entire army."
Hmm, when and where would that information be useful? 🤔☠️
*terrified russian screams*
Marioupol.
@@shadowslayer9988 Mariupol is already fallen though, except Azovstal
@@kam2894 yet it was hold off for two months, plus azovstal is a part of mariupol
@@questionableargumentations1364 which is why I said, “except Azovstal.”
“However on modern battlefields soldiers must frequently resort to blowing these structures up.”
Like…they didn’t in the past? Also…that’s not always the best thing. Sometimes when you level a city or a location, the ruins leave behind provide the fortifications the enemy needs.
That doesn't take away from the main point of the video, which is that urban combat is the most brutal form of combat in modern warfare. They even used an example from WW2 to reinforce one of the reasons why.
Just give me plot armor. Then I can defeat everyone
Truly. It's stronger than Beskar.
Bilbo baggins Hobbit and john snow has taken all the stock, noting left for youn
This guy gets it…
Trust me pal your not that guy your not that guy
Thank you for telling me the most basic of information mr. Know it all
It's a pat on the back for the millenials who spent their young years in the war we lost
Ah yes, WP, my favorite Geneva convention violation.
Any warfare you find yourself in is the most brutal.
Urban Warfare: Death comes around every corner.
Jungle Warfare: You lived uncomfortably and die the same.
Trench Warfare: Every attack is like Omaha Beach.
Mountain warfare :- even a fucking stone and avalanche can kill you
I can tell you from experience… death usually comes from above, you missed that
So your dead?? Ur spirt typed this comment ig
Another reason why Urban Warfare is the worst nightmare for any soilders is how to identify who are civilians and who are enemies if they mis attack then we all know what happens
You forgot that death can come from above aswell
In my country, the Philippines. The military did the same strategy to urban warfare when they confronted a group that pledged allegiance to the Islamic State. They almost bombarded the entire city just to get rid of ISIS in the Philippines.
Onga eh
That 3D render at the start hurts my brain.
Nuclear Missiles: hold my mid-air explosion spreading radiation everywhere randomly
More like nuclear warheads
Death can also come from ABOVE the invaders (rooftops, etc.).
TACTICAL NUKE INCOMING
In 2016 the Marine Corps fired the most artillery shells in the history of war leveling the city of Rahmadi bc of this exact reason
Any city under siege will become a pile of rubble if the defenders dont surrender
Damascus is a good example of that. Also damn near most cities in Iraq, Syria, Or Afghanistan
@@TrueBlueKing or the new ones like mariupol
@@randomtiger605 true true
@@randomtiger605 yep, or that.
The problem with that is now you have a pile of rubble that you can’t run logistics through
Guerilla warfare: the trees are shooting me, which one... that one. where? over there. They're everywhere!!
Trench warfare in the back where you had to run into fully loaded weapons and bayonets
"Forcing enemies into submission" is a pretty clean euphemism for "cooking human beings alive"
Defenders of..... 'oil'.
Special WMD hunting operation.
@@worldoftancraft like bush?
@Sameer Nazir to be honest, I wish we looted the oil, but to bad we didn't, we just make the dollar = oil, to back our currency.
Fun fact. Medieval or ancient warfare is way more brutal then any kind if modern warfare.
Wait till you play in the forest
Forests aren't that terrible to fight in
@@nella9115 "Not So Terrible" there is a professional who come to a jungle, explain why a tiny fount, a cliff, a hole in a jungle can easy break your legs or kill you, snake, wild animals, centipede, decease, hardly can see anything, easily to get lost, traps set everywhere by the enemy, mosquito, easily get triggered and ambushed...
@@fakerolnando think your getting mixed up with the fact the a forrest / woodblock is not a jungle, 2 entirely different things, jungle fighting is nails
I blow up into smitherines and spew my tiny symphony
heheheheheh
Nah just drop "freedom " on them like USA
Just JDAM things
To be honest, we should have dropped more of those in the past, Russia trys to steal your tech, and try to export communism? Goodbye Moscow, and, stalingrad. The middle east trying to terrorize the USA? Let them know what true terror means.
My man was leaning like it’s r6
Sounds very familiar...
Oh wait, yeah, i forgot ww2 happened. Silly me.
I am a US Army OIF veteran, 19K/M1 Abrams tanker. My first tour to Iraq was the invasion/Thunder Run into Baghdad, and over the course of nine years I went 3 more times, and yeah, urban warfare is nerve wracking and without the help of tanks and airstrikes, especially if we're fighting on the opponent's home turf, it is very dangerous and results in lots of casualties and injuries like you wouldn't believe.
I still think though that jungle warfare is probably the worst and hardest to deal with, like our Vietnam vets had it bad/hard man.. like in the early years of the Iraq war, living in/on tanks is HARD and it sucks, like living in a small car, with three other people, and eventually we created FOBs and JSS's, COBs/COPs, essentially places to return to and lay your head down at.
Trench warfare: Hold my beer
Trench warfare was limited mobility compared to urban
@@michaelsanchez1361 Yes but due to that low mobility you are forced to battle the elements in a small hole.
Pavlov's House was an absolutely insane story
Thats last scene looked like fallujah
Or Mosul, or Allepo, or alot of places in the middle east
@@TrueBlueKing
Alot of places in "middle east" where democracy arrived*
This is actually super accurate surprisingly from a TH-cam short.
The Marawi War of the Philippines was an urban warfare
no one asked
yep that was brutal
@@joshuacadiz7074 i did
Everybody writes about jungle warfare, but somehow no one brings up desert warfare
Yey Czech army XD
Oh thank God. I was terrified death could come from above but this just confirmed that it's not one of the options. Whew!
This is why rainbow six seige trains us🤣
I was trying to find a good explanation on why attack and defense is unbalanced in the game. They are trying to make it better though!
Let me tell you, the game Tarkov has shown me no matter the plan you can always get popped up on and flanked. Move slow and clear everything also stay in cover to cover 🤷🏻♂️ I still get rocked like silly
Kudos to the animator In the intro, I thought that was a real person
There was a saying, which could also apply here; „One Defender is worth ten Attackers during a siege”
Smithereens where did that come from
From Irish "smidiríní" meaning 'little bits'.
@@simianto9957 Ok wise guy lol
Nothing will ever be worse than the first World War’s trench warfare. How those men could even function after living through that is beyond me. Modern urban warfare is a day out in the park compared to that
"Urban warfare ... undoubtedly the ... deadliest form of combat ... ."
Source? -None. Coincidence that Stalingrad happened to be the deadliest battle? -Maximum.
Coincidence that urban environments cause more casualties in a smaller area?
yeah what about like trench warfare in WW1? Jungle Warfare like vietnam? Shit, how the world has been going i would be surprised if we started killing people in space like that MW3 mission
Actually many sources, the key is urban favours the defence, so attackers need around 10-1 ratio. Every urban battle showed high los rates. During stalingrad Russians lost about 4000 a day, 2000 for axis.
Do you even read history?Have you ever heard about the Battle of Berlin?
@@nyimdewan3353 Berlin was not a typical battle. You had 150 000 defenders were 80 000 were volkssturm and Hitlerjungen. 1.2 Millionen attacker's experienced. Even so it took considerable effort on the attacker's side. If you want urban warfare than smolensk, Kiew, Budapest, Aachen are better examples.
Urban Warfare: I’m the deadliest
Vietnam: Am I a joke to you?
That’s why the United States should never disarm the people yes we do have Vilas in United States but it’s another country trust invade American citizens are very well armed and Minnie are skilled
Want to try and make a coherent paragraph one more time?
Was that English ?
They should also teach civilians to fight in platoon sized combat element or at least in squad size. If they cant be organized they are most likely in the way. Platoons of civilian fighters are easier to integrate in the fight formation than individual fighters
@@samsara5214 are your reading comprehension skills that bad you couldn’t make this out?
I love my 2nd amendment but no country would be that brave to invade with ground forces. Also our water and electric grids are unprotected. Covid and Joe Biden also proved our country moral is low, and our infrastructure/supply chain is also weak. We need to quit worrying about politics abroad and band together.
Vietnam was Americas first urban warfare.
Remember WWII? there are lots of urban warfare that the US troops had involved
And that's why 13 hours is so hard for airsoft 1 team with respawns attacking a team with 1-2 medics and 5 total players
I did training for stuff like this, and it’s genuinely really tough but by far the most fun
The one good thing about urban warfare is that its a lot easier to predict the terrain. Especially if you can access a cities plans.
Jungle warfare: am I joke to you
A video that shocks no one who has played any degree of combat games with varied terrain, studied history for an hour, or glanced outside a window for five minutes.
Idk I’m not a historian or anything but from what I’ve read, WWI gotta be the most brutal battles every fought
A soldier who described Stalingrad wrote that you did not need street or car lights at night because the flames of all the burning buildings provided more then enough light.
It’s also really fucking hard to miss when you are that close so it’s a guarenteed casualty mission
In the word of the great Sun-Tzu
"All warfare is based"
When attacking Montecassino, the worst tactical mistake was bombing the complex to rubble; it made the job of digging out the Gemans much, much harder and more costly.
"Get as close as you can and make your enemy a hostage"
Basically every urban warfare
Meanwhile Jungle warfare on mountainous tropical rainforest has left the chat😂
Cuz urban warfare requires you to be so close, you can see their face clearly, range is not option, which makes it easier to dehumanize what ur aiming at
Thanks for the defense tips.
On 7 November 2004, I was the company gunny for weapons Co. 3/5 Marines ( Dark horse ). We were the lead element on the assault for retaking Fallujah. We had in excess of 50 % casualties within the first four days of the operation. The OPFOR had WEEKS to prepare for our arrival. They had intersections zeroed in for mortars, IED's set up everywhere, ammo caches, rooftops manned, etc.... It was like a knife fight in a phone booth.... Hardly anyone came out unscathed.... I have got scars on my left leg from some shrapnel from an RPG, and scars on my face from being hit by shattered concrete.... Until the day that I die, I will never forget the sights, sounds, and smell from that shit hole.... Lost way too many good Marine brothers for nothing...
Should have leveled it instead of getting troops killed. Iraqi Army when pushing ISIS out used lots of artillery to level towns and cities.
Imagine chilling in your living watching TV and a bomb shell crashes through your ceiling.
Urban operations were my favorite when I was serving as an infantryman.
I’m in the marines, I’d probably would rather think trench warfare to be the worst. What would you’re worse one? Mountain, jungle, trench, desert, or amphibious(beach)?
@@chrisdominic5492 Your list is too generalized so I'll just say that I didn't like to being in open terrain with little cover/concealment. A big part of that comes from being a former 11C. Getting a fire mission for troops in the open was like waking up on Christmas morning as a kid.
I fought in Iraq so I’m very familiar with urban warfare, urban warfare is tricky AF, what makes it really scary is that danger is at every corner. Urban warfare makes it easier for friendly fire incidents too
FIBUA is crazy but definitely worth a mention is jungle warfare only done training for that environment it was crazy. The humidity, soaked most of the time, dangerous animals/plants and you can see more than a couple of feet in most areas if off a track or clearing 😳 that was training... the guys who fought in Vietnam in real combat against a very tricky enemy who knows the land and lays traps everywhere must of been really intense massive respect to those guys
Missile and artillery system made warfare horrible than ever.
A tactic used by the Soviets in the battle of Stalingrad was to fire a anti-tank Canon into the building from the side then charge in taking the stunned defenders at close range with submachine guns.
This tactic was not always feasible for obvious reasons but it's effect was similar to the modern tactic of using a flashbang before building entry.
Cant ambush me in the city if there is no city
Absolutely Right 👍
Any combat is the deadliest and most brutal combat a soldier can face for those who don't make it home.
Yeah? And urban combat is some of the worst fighting a soldier can go through so..?
@@flailingelbows7073 ?
Warzone players watching this just nodding
I think that jungle warfare and urban warfare are even. Urban warfare provides shelter from elements and maneuvering opponents while jungle warfare allows engaged troops to quickly evade on unpredictable routes. Supply routes can be engaged for both, surveillance is hard to maintain, in urban situations its impossible to tell noncombatants from combatants, while the jungle canopies allows excellent cover and even can disrupt different camera types. I dont know.
I’ve only trained in different environments, never had the chance to fight in any of them against an actual enemy. But my least favorite was mountain warfare. Oxygen is thinner, rains all the time and weather can change in an instant. It’s freezing cold, impossible to extract casualties, and you’re hiking some of the most unbelievably tough terrain you could imagine. Urban warfare is purely about attrition. But when you mix that with the environment,you end up with broken morale on both sides. Or if one has a home advantage, I suppose just one.
Something to look forward too
Finally, a video that isn't about how "great" the US military is
here comes the urban warfare expert
"Urban combat is the most dangerous"
Me, a BF player, sipping my coffee from my cozy home: "I encountered many such situations! 😌"
Any form of CQB warfare or direct engagement combat is going to be brutal. PERIOD
Mountain Warfare : Hold my Oxy...oops nevermind, no oxygen. hold my -60 deg celcius instead.
I wonder what the reality of a city designed to be a urban fort would be like. The amount of hidden tunnels, alleys and firering positions all to benefit defenders in such a city must be crazy. And heck maybe some of them already exist and we don't know.
I agree, in Philippines during the Marawi siege were Local Terrorist allied themselves to ISIS took over a city which is a great challenge for the Philippine Army since they are much used to jungle combats. There are less than 2000 militants against tens of thousands Soldiers and still hold the city in hostage for about 5 months.
In general modern warfare is the deadliest warfare any human ever in the world has had to endure.
Mountain Warfare with Soldiers on foot is even more Brutal.
So that's where Pavlov VR got it's name, gotcha
The Jungle of Vietnam:”am i joke to you?”
In turkish we have a saying that goes sth like "For inadequately trained soldiers, urban combat is hell made out of concrete."
I've had both WW2 and Vietnam Vets tell me, an OIF & OEF Vet that they would rather fight their respective wars than fight in the desert/ cities/ mountains like us GWOT generation did. It blew my mind because I personally consider both of those wars worse than the GWOT.
I agree, urban warfare is the worst. To go from a common city atmosphere to a killing zone, can happen in seconds.
see, what they're missing is, "how capable and trained are the soldiers"