I mean, WW1 in general was a pointless war but what did America have to gain from it? Nothing as far as I can see. And guess what? We didn't get get anything except about 25,000 dead and 25,000 wounded(I'm sure those numbers are off) troops. And unlike WW2, nothing on the home front really changed unlike in WW2 where women's rights grew. Unless you count black troops being more respected because of the Harmlem Hell fighters.

So can anyone here not say WW1 was a huge waste of life and resources, for America in particular?

5326139

The USA actually got some positive effects from World War 1 (WW1), though they certainly aren't as major as what we got out of World War 2 (WW2). Economically, we got a nice boost to our industry (to assist in supplying the war effort). Our foreign policy also changed quite a bit, seeing as this was our first involvement in a European conflict; though we certainly returned to our isolationism, it certainly made it easier for us to enter WW2. Our Federal government also saw an increase in it's size and overreach to help accommodate the draft and movement of soldiers/war goods.

So in general, we pretty much benefited the same from WW1 as WW2, just to a far lesser degree. I honestly think we lost more than we gained, I mean we still would have become the economic superpower we did anyways.
Oh, we also got doughboys and marines in the game Verdun, that's a plus right?

5326139
Not really, as it still showed we had progressed to a powerful nation and it served as a sort of first step into major interactions on a global scale. There have been far more pointless wars, though in reality it's rare to actually not get anything out of a war. Hell the War of 1812 was more pointless in that regard but we still got the national anthem and the Era of Good Feeling.

Unless you count black troops being more respected because of the Harmlem Hell fighters.

Someone's been looking into BF1 ey? And no, black troops were not more respected after this war. After WW2 and somewhat after the Civil War there was an increase in respect, but not the Great War, not nearly to the scale that the segregated units in WW2 did. This is especially considering the Red Summer of 1919.

5326177
5326184 you both make very good points

and yes, have doughboys and marines in Verdun is a plus

5326184 Plus, we got some decent music

5326205
From the era or from the trailer of that God awful EA monstrosity?

5326211 I mean during the war and which one exactly?

5326217
Good answer, and Battlefield 1

5326220 I'm just gonna say "Over there" an be done with my examples. And battlefield 1 looks kinda fun

5326222

And battlefield 1 looks kinda fun

It looks like the exact same kind of gameplay that Battlefield has run on in a WW1 skin with multiple additional aggression against the history that earn it an extra level of disgust.

5326224 Add France and Russia being DLC and go fuck yourselves gamers and historians!

That's a quote from EA

5326139 WW1 was the most pointless war of the 20th century.

5326456 Agreed

5326456

Most pointless, but ironically it has had more effects than arguably any war. It caused WW2, the USSR, instability in the Middle East, set the decline of all the European Empires, set the US on the route to be a Superpower around the globe, and more.

5326187

I sorta wanna play some more Verdun right now, anyone else up for it?

5326228

Don't you just love EA? And no, I'm not crying about BF1 looking worse and worse, and not at all what I wanted. They're tears of manliness from all the (360) quickscoping 12 21 year old's, you know, the quickscoping we asked for in our WW1 game. Right guys? Right?

5326139

So can anyone here not say WW1 was a huge waste of life and resources, for America in particular?

Yes.

We saw Europe committing suicide through three years of dreadful stalemate and the loss of millions of lives and decided we wanted in on that shit.

At least fucking Vietnam had solid motivations at first (keeping France as an ally). WWI had nothing for us but a heap of shallow graves.

5326552 Come here*manily hug* we'll always have Verdunr

5326554 Pretty much

5326554 Well, we grew our industry and places like Florida, where I live and my home state, really boomed

5326564

What if EA buys up the developers?

5326624 *slap slap* Don't you dare think that way solider!

5326624 And we'll always have it's awesome soundtrack!

5326630

Thank you sir, sorry sir!

5326639

Message from EA - After buying the developers of Verdun, the soundtrack has been turned into DLC, $14.99 per song. Thank you for supporting our business model.

5326665 God damn it EA! Alright, go tell the tommies, frogs, ruskies and even the bouche to go grab boots bayonets and rifle and we're gonna do something about EA!

5326672

My Landser squad is ready to hold the grounds we capture.

5326680 Good. Johnny get your gun, get your gun, get your gun! And let's do this like it was 1917 motherfuckers!

5326686

Johnny show the hun, you're a son-of-a-gun!

Does Battlefield 1 even have proper artillery?

5326736 Over there! Over there! Send the word send the word to prepare and for EA to stop being douchbags!

Probably not

5326757

How unfortunate, a combined arms WW1 game could be so amazing. All they had to do was adopt Verdun, add tanks and planes, and boom. Ah well, I guess expecting EA to not be idiots might be a tad much.

5326803 That's like excepting the British to not use artillery

5326816

Ha ha unfortunate, esspecialy because I'm sure they'll ruin Mass Effect: Adramada as much as they did to 3.

Since this is a WW1 thread, if this is too off topic then just ignore it, anyone know a good WW1 naval game? Or aviation?

5326846 I know a good ww2 games for both

War thunder for aviation and tanks and world of warships for naval

5326862

I enjoy both of those games from time to time, unfortunate that there doesn't seem to be any good WW1 varients. Ah well, I guess Verdun will have to state my WW1 lust for sometime longer, ha ha.

5326877 Good look then, sir!

5326884

I'm gonna make an assumption, and say that you play Verdun, yes? We should play together sometime, always looking for more people to send into the meatgrinder charge valiantly at the enemy lines.

5326904 I don't

5326922

Oh you don't? If I may, why not? Just don't have a PC/Steam, or jsut don't care to?

5326996 No PC, just a shitty laptop and a PS4

5327001

If I remember correctly, Verdun is coming to PS4 and XBox1, so you have that to look forward to! I think it's coming out in August. Verdun isn't that amazing looking, a moderate-subpar rig might be able to run it. Not too sure really. I have a 580gtx and get 100-120 frames without V-sync on.

5327026 I don't understand computer talk so that last part made no sense

5327034

It's a pretty old graphics card from, like, 5-6 years ago, and it wasn't the very best of the 500 series (just the graphics cards called 5xx). You could check the min specs on Verdun, and check what your laptop has (should be easy, they're realy standardized compared to PC's). Heck, it's on sale. If you think you can run it, I'd be willing to drop the 10$ to pick it up for ya.

5327056 I don't have steam either. Wish you had a PS4

5327065

Yeah, I may have bought an Xbox 1 Never making that mistake again. Meh, Steam is free, it's just a store. Ah well, it sucks mate. Maybe if console and PC can play together, then I'd get to see you on the battlefield

5327086 I know war thunder has PC and console play

5327091

I could reinstall Warthunder (Uninstalled because I hadn't played it in so long), maybe play it sometime later, if ya felt like it. I feel like we're being derailed off the initial discussion, ha ha. Sorry for knocking it off tracks. Ha ha

5327113 Sure! And it's fine

5326680
Perfect.

I've heard WWI was the first "modern war"

5327387 Belgium wouldn't of been drawn into the war if not for the Triple Entente and contrary to popular belief, Serbia wasn't a sweet innocent nation that was bullied by the Austrians. Serbia was actually trying to use the war as an excuse to try to annex most of the Balkans into one. But the German and Bulgarian army stopped that dream.

In all honesty it was the military alliances that caused the war. If the Triple Entente and Triple Alliance were never formed, WW1 would've just been a minor border skirmish between Austria and Serbia.

5327601 Nope. That title goes to the Russo-Japanese war.

5327794

To an extent. The Great War is called the "First Modern War" by most people, and it did have some unique aspects (such as have European countries that didn't suck). The Russo-Japanese was very similar to the Great War, there is something major it lacked. Tactics that changed. I mean in large meaningful ways, like how Germany, Britain, and France changed their tactics by the end of WW1: Emphasis on smaller units, with more ability to command themselves, as well as better communication between ground-areal-naval forces. Even further than that is the technology, and how it was used: planes were used to bomb/strafe, dog fights in the air occurred, submarine combat became much larger (Not certain if there even was any in the Russian-Japanese conflict), armored vehicles entered combat, machine-guns and artillery became massively expanded upon (granted, it was ridiculously expanded upon), and uniforms massively changed.
(And yes, I know Britain and Germany and Russia were way better than France when it came to sensible uniforms, but the fact one of the strongest nations in the world still dressed like this speaks volumes about the ideas of the time).

(If there's anything you have to give to France, it's the fact that they have some damn good fashion sense... Too bad it's bad camouflage).

Ultimately, WW1 really was the first modern war, but it wasn't the first-first modern war. Other wars had elements of modern wars, but the reason WW1 gets the title is for how giant the conflict was, and the fact most historians in the States (at least where I live) are very Euro-American centric; plus it really involved what we think of for modern war (armored vehicles, planes, small unit tactics, ect).