Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

Post Reply
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by wosung »

ORIGINAL:
As Comrade has already mention in his game, I've seen the same thing with my stacks of mobile units in spring 42. I had a stack of 2 Pz Div and an SS Mot Div with a display CV def of 56. Here's some details of the defenders and attackers:


Defender (averages across 3 units)
Moral : 85
Exp (lower cause TOE bug): 75
fatigue: 35
fort level: 0
about 60k men and 350 afv?

Attacker:
4 sov rifle corps w/some art su and sappers
about 120,00 men

*air was about even

My German defenders we're displaced with about 7k loses and the attack had 9k loses. I'm just not buying that would have been realistic. Part of my issues is that large scale operations carried out by the sov in early 42 were always a disaster. The C&C issue with these sov large scale operations were very real and still existed even later in the war.

I think any intrinsic advantages that the German units (especially mobile units) with exp and training and operations planning/execution are negated already in 42. So then if it comes down to just the troop #'s game. Sov will always have the edge in 42. Also, with all the fort levels 3-4 and deep lines are created through the spring mud turns, the axis player is faced with an impossible task to do much of anything as far as a breakthrough.

Care to give some historical examples for a non pocketed Soviet rifle army attacking a German Panzer corps in spring 1942? Like, short citation, reference work, page?


wosung
kirkgregerson
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:21 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by kirkgregerson »

I'll get you some when I get home to books. Off hand if you read a bit about the final stages of the failed spr 42 Kharkov offensive, you should see some examples of this. There were many other examples of the is 42.

Look specifically for the 1st Panzer Army counterattacks around mid-May 42!

One of the issues in WitE is that the mechanics of carrying out a large scale offensive in early 42 was still very problematic for the soviets. Don't see any of that modeled in WitE. My human vs human game in Spr-Sum42 made this very apparent. Have you read many books that focus on 42 campaigns on the east? You'll see many examples of these issue with C&C for soviets. Operations Mars, Jupiter, and the offensive in the Kerch Peninsula. Just to name a few.
MengJiao
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:32 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by MengJiao »

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

I'll get you some when I get home to books. Off hand if you read a bit about the final stages of the failed spr 42 Kharkov offensive, you should see some examples of this. There were many other examples of the is 42.

Look specifically for the 1st Panzer Army counterattacks around mid-May 42!

One of the issues in WitE is that the mechanics of carrying out a large scale offensive in early 42 was still very problematic for the soviets. Don't see any of that modeled in WitE. My human vs human game in Spr-Sum42 made this very apparent. Have you read many books that focus on 42 campaigns on the east? You'll see many examples of these issue with C&C for soviets. Operations Mars, Jupiter, and the offensive in the Kerch Peninsula. Just to name a few.

Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by wosung »

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

I'll get you some when I get home to books. Off hand if you read a bit about the final stages of the failed spr 42 Kharkov offensive, you should see some examples of this. There were many other examples of the is 42.

Look specifically for the 1st Panzer Army counterattacks around mid-May 42!

One of the issues in WitE is that the mechanics of carrying out a large scale offensive in early 42 was still very problematic for the soviets. Don't see any of that modeled in WitE. My human vs human game in Spr-Sum42 made this very apparent. Have you read many books that focus on 42 campaigns on the east? You'll see many examples of these issue with C&C for soviets. Operations Mars, Jupiter, and the offensive in the Kerch Peninsula. Just to name a few.

Thanks for the answer. I know about 1st Pz. Army's offensive ops in "Friedericus" 1-2 and in "Wilhelm" ops and about Soviet C&C problems.

The in-game situation you described in the OP citation above, if I see it correctly, is about an army sized Russian rifle formation attacking a German fast armored corps, not vice versa.

I'm just interested in your data about Russian rifle armies attacking German armoured corps in spring 1942.

Regards
wosung
User avatar
abulbulian
Posts: 1101
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:42 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by abulbulian »

ORIGINAL: MengJiao

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

I'll get you some when I get home to books. Off hand if you read a bit about the final stages of the failed spr 42 Kharkov offensive, you should see some examples of this. There were many other examples of the is 42.

Look specifically for the 1st Panzer Army counterattacks around mid-May 42!

One of the issues in WitE is that the mechanics of carrying out a large scale offensive in early 42 was still very problematic for the soviets. Don't see any of that modeled in WitE. My human vs human game in Spr-Sum42 made this very apparent. Have you read many books that focus on 42 campaigns on the east? You'll see many examples of these issue with C&C for soviets. Operations Mars, Jupiter, and the offensive in the Kerch Peninsula. Just to name a few.

Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.
Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.

LOL, please MengJiao... why are you attempting to take things out of context again? I find that rude. Please let me look at Kirk's original post was dealing with early 42 sov operations?
Part of my issues is that large scale operations carried out by the sov in early 42 were always a disaster.

How did you miss that? How can anybody now trust anything you post regarding what you're READ as it's seems your reading comprehension is a bit challenged.

Just for others to know:
========================
Saturn: Dec 42 - Feb 43
Star: BEGAN in Feb 43
Gallop: Jan 29, 43 - Mar 6, 43
Uranus: prep'd about Sept, ran late Nov

So MengJiao, are these operations that you'd consider as early 42? If so, please explain. I know about all of these and have ready books about each. So if you have any questions, let me know.

Please understand I'm not trying to pick on MengJiao. It's just another example where people have tried to post information without understanding the thread just to counter what the author has posted without facts or context.

- Beta Tester WitE and ATG
- Alpha/Beta Tester WitW and WitE2

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu
kirkgregerson
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:21 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by kirkgregerson »

Yes, I just have a large concern about the soviets ability to conduct large operations in early 42. In my human PBEM game, by spr 42 my opponent already has about 50 corps size units. He's able to hit me with mayb 4-9 of these at times and not suffer any coordination penalties. Even my best units in fort 4 will crack and retreat from these attacks of 200,000 men. Sure he will take large loses approx 15k to my 7-10k. But, I think it's very problematic for the axis when the soviets can conduct these types of attacks without some penalties in early-mid 42.

This would have to be a change in WitE, but it would make sense.
Zort
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 2:33 am
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by Zort »

I think the main issue that allows for attacks across the entire front all the time is supply.  It seems no matter how it is modeled so the player doesn't have to micromanage logistics, fails in the effort to limit supply to 'historical' usage.  What I would like to see:
1.  Supply reduced. Player has to build it up to get the big pushes.
2.  Player has more control of where (by army/supply depot or something) the higher percentage of supply is going.  For ammo, fuel and supply.
3.  (getting old can't remember the rest of the items I would like to see for supply)
MengJiao
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:32 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by MengJiao »

ORIGINAL: abulbulian
ORIGINAL: MengJiao

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

I'll get you some when I get home to books. Off hand if you read a bit about the final stages of the failed spr 42 Kharkov offensive, you should see some examples of this. There were many other examples of the is 42.

Look specifically for the 1st Panzer Army counterattacks around mid-May 42!

One of the issues in WitE is that the mechanics of carrying out a large scale offensive in early 42 was still very problematic for the soviets. Don't see any of that modeled in WitE. My human vs human game in Spr-Sum42 made this very apparent. Have you read many books that focus on 42 campaigns on the east? You'll see many examples of these issue with C&C for soviets. Operations Mars, Jupiter, and the offensive in the Kerch Peninsula. Just to name a few.

Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.
Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.

LOL, please MengJiao... why are you attempting to take things out of context again? I find that rude. Please let me look at Kirk's original post was dealing with early 42 sov operations?
Part of my issues is that large scale operations carried out by the sov in early 42 were always a disaster.

How did you miss that? How can anybody now trust anything you post regarding what you're READ as it's seems your reading comprehension is a bit challenged.

Just for others to know:
========================
Saturn: Dec 42 - Feb 43
Star: BEGAN in Feb 43
Gallop: Jan 29, 43 - Mar 6, 43
Uranus: prep'd about Sept, ran late Nov

So MengJiao, are these operations that you'd consider as early 42? If so, please explain. I know about all of these and have ready books about each. So if you have any questions, let me know.

Please understand I'm not trying to pick on MengJiao. It's just another example where people have tried to post information without understanding the thread just to counter what the author has posted without facts or context.


He listed Mars, which was the same time period as Uranus and Little Saturn (so that's two successes to one failure).
kirkgregerson
Posts: 497
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 2:21 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by kirkgregerson »

Well supply is a considerations. But when I've read all the accounts and analysis about the failed soviet 42 offensive it was mostly about C&C problems. Many sov div and corps level leaders missed opportunities or just did not coordinated with other units involved in the operation. The concept of 'I have a bunch of men' (maybe 10x more than opponent) and I can throw them at him and should win is not reality. The more troops involved the more difficult the execution of the operation and skill needed at lower leadership levels.

A simple solution is to have a modified for each year or (quarterly) which would imposed coordination issues for large sov offensive. Maybe not all units make it into the combat, maybe some make it but staggered and fight more piecemeal. This is a better modeling. Leadership values can also have to mitigate these C&C penalties for Sov. I think the same should be involved for axis minors as well. On both attack and defense (less so).

wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by wosung »

ORIGINAL: abulbulian
ORIGINAL: MengJiao

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

I'll get you some when I get home to books. Off hand if you read a bit about the final stages of the failed spr 42 Kharkov offensive, you should see some examples of this. There were many other examples of the is 42.

Look specifically for the 1st Panzer Army counterattacks around mid-May 42!

One of the issues in WitE is that the mechanics of carrying out a large scale offensive in early 42 was still very problematic for the soviets. Don't see any of that modeled in WitE. My human vs human game in Spr-Sum42 made this very apparent. Have you read many books that focus on 42 campaigns on the east? You'll see many examples of these issue with C&C for soviets. Operations Mars, Jupiter, and the offensive in the Kerch Peninsula. Just to name a few.

Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.
Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.

LOL, please MengJiao... why are you attempting to take things out of context again? I find that rude. Please let me look at Kirk's original post was dealing with early 42 sov operations?
Part of my issues is that large scale operations carried out by the sov in early 42 were always a disaster.

How did you miss that? How can anybody now trust anything you post regarding what you're READ as it's seems your reading comprehension is a bit challenged.

Just for others to know:
========================
Saturn: Dec 42 - Feb 43
Star: BEGAN in Feb 43
Gallop: Jan 29, 43 - Mar 6, 43
Uranus: prep'd about Sept, ran late Nov

So MengJiao, are these operations that you'd consider as early 42? If so, please explain. I know about all of these and have ready books about each. So if you have any questions, let me know.

Please understand I'm not trying to pick on MengJiao. It's just another example where people have tried to post information without understanding the thread just to counter what the author has posted without facts or context.


Well arguably an example for not completely unsuccessful Soviet offensives in summer 1942 would be the Rzev Op by Konjev’s Kalinin (30. and 29 army) and Zhukov’s Western Front (31. army) in July and Aug. 1942. They mauled the German 9th army (then Vietinghoff) and overrun German 161th I.D. on the first try. The crisis only could be managed by Heersgruppen reserves and by minimizing the then unsuccessful German OP Wirbelwind towards Uljanov (Aug. 1942).
In the North, Soviet ops against the German Slisselburg Corridor, blocking Leningrad, by Volkov and Leningrad Front, 8th Army, 4th Guard Rifle Corps, 2nd Shock Army) in Aug. Sept. 1942, against Urick towards Oranienbaum and against the Demiansk corridor (July and Aug. 1942) could only be stopped by using German reserves and forces, planned for minor German offensives (OP Nordlicht, the assault against Leningrad, OP Moorbrand against Pogost’e and OP Schlingpflanze for widening the Demjansk corridor).
Thus, some Soviet offensives in summer 1942 at least managed to hinder sucessful German minor offensives. Arguably, in 1942 in the Centre and in the North, where Russian strength was pitted against German weakness, existed an operational equilibrum.

Source: Das Deutsche Reich und der 2. Weltkrieg, Vol. 6, pp. 898-910.
wosung
User avatar
abulbulian
Posts: 1101
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 5:42 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by abulbulian »

I think that the general trend was that the majority of large scale soviet offensive is early and mid 42 were failures. The game doesn't model that. True, that offensive did force the Germans to commit forces that were schedule for a renewed assault in the Leningrad area (part of the famous 11th Army).

But now we digress. I still find consideration to large soviet forces not suffering historical C&C penalties very problematic in the game. This has been documented by some of us that have been as far as 42 against a decent sov opponent.

If people want to 'drink the cool-aide' that the soviet army was holding it's own in 42 and could be considered a well oil fighting machine comparable to the Germans executing large scale operations... well I can't stop you from believe what you want. All this information is very well documented in the non-fiction history books.

Yes, due to the large amounts of manpower the soviets still had in 42, they were at times able to throw a monkey wrench into German plans.

By no means were the soviets soldiers or generals a bunch of incompetents in 1942. It's just that they were, in most cases, learning how to fight and what tactics to use to best their enemy. Later in 43, with these tactics in place, it was a different story. The Germans were somewhat predictable in their combat doctrines .. and in some cases paid for it dearly.

- Beta Tester WitE and ATG
- Alpha/Beta Tester WitW and WitE2

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by JeffroK »

I love the accuracy of saying "Early and Mid 1942"

Just when do you mean??

As for mid 42, 12 May 1942, the South West Front began its offensive to liberate Kharkov using 760,000 men, 1200 AFV, 13000 artillery pieces and 900 aircraft. 17 & 51 Korps lost heavily in the defensive fighting.
It was to be supported by cordinated attacks from other fronts but these did not occur.

Given the single offensive Soviet action above, the potential that this would happen is high, of course the Wermacht usually tried to keep the Panzers in reserve so the PBI copped the attacks.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
alfonso
Posts: 470
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Palma de Mallorca

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by alfonso »

ORIGINAL: wosung

Care to give some historical examples for a non pocketed Soviet rifle army attacking a German Panzer corps in spring 1942? Like, short citation, reference work, page?

Seems as if you still have not had an answer....
MengJiao
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:32 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by MengJiao »

ORIGINAL: abulbulian

I think that the general trend was that the majority of large scale soviet offensive is early and mid 42 were failures. The game doesn't model that.

I'm not sure how a game is supposed to model a trend in large scale offensives. Couldn't the player just launch slightly smaller offensives?

What you're describing is not a matter of modeling, you're asking the game to somehow duplicate a set of particular outcomes. I guess you could script that, but you really can't model things like that.
MechFO
Posts: 767
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:06 am

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by MechFO »

ORIGINAL: wosung
ORIGINAL: abulbulian
ORIGINAL: MengJiao




Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.
Little Saturn and Star and Gallop and Uranus just to name some Russian offensives in 1942 that went very well.

LOL, please MengJiao... why are you attempting to take things out of context again? I find that rude. Please let me look at Kirk's original post was dealing with early 42 sov operations?
Part of my issues is that large scale operations carried out by the sov in early 42 were always a disaster.

How did you miss that? How can anybody now trust anything you post regarding what you're READ as it's seems your reading comprehension is a bit challenged.

Just for others to know:
========================
Saturn: Dec 42 - Feb 43
Star: BEGAN in Feb 43
Gallop: Jan 29, 43 - Mar 6, 43
Uranus: prep'd about Sept, ran late Nov

So MengJiao, are these operations that you'd consider as early 42? If so, please explain. I know about all of these and have ready books about each. So if you have any questions, let me know.

Please understand I'm not trying to pick on MengJiao. It's just another example where people have tried to post information without understanding the thread just to counter what the author has posted without facts or context.


Well arguably an example for not completely unsuccessful Soviet offensives in summer 1942 would be the Rzev Op by Konjev’s Kalinin (30. and 29 army) and Zhukov’s Western Front (31. army) in July and Aug. 1942. They mauled the German 9th army (then Vietinghoff) and overrun German 161th I.D. on the first try. The crisis only could be managed by Heersgruppen reserves and by minimizing the then unsuccessful German OP Wirbelwind towards Uljanov (Aug. 1942).
In the North, Soviet ops against the German Slisselburg Corridor, blocking Leningrad, by Volkov and Leningrad Front, 8th Army, 4th Guard Rifle Corps, 2nd Shock Army) in Aug. Sept. 1942, against Urick towards Oranienbaum and against the Demiansk corridor (July and Aug. 1942) could only be stopped by using German reserves and forces, planned for minor German offensives (OP Nordlicht, the assault against Leningrad, OP Moorbrand against Pogost’e and OP Schlingpflanze for widening the Demjansk corridor).
Thus, some Soviet offensives in summer 1942 at least managed to hinder sucessful German minor offensives. Arguably, in 1942 in the Centre and in the North, where Russian strength was pitted against German weakness, existed an operational equilibrum.

Source: Das Deutsche Reich und der 2. Weltkrieg, Vol. 6, pp. 898-910.

Considering the density of the line, the average German company had a responsibility of 2km, the paucity of results and the extremely heavy losses, a "partial success" isn't the best way to describe that operation.
MengJiao
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:32 pm

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by MengJiao »

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: wosung
ORIGINAL: abulbulian




LOL, please MengJiao... why are you attempting to take things out of context again? I find that rude. Please let me look at Kirk's original post was dealing with early 42 sov operations?



How did you miss that? How can anybody now trust anything you post regarding what you're READ as it's seems your reading comprehension is a bit challenged.

Just for others to know:
========================
Saturn: Dec 42 - Feb 43
Star: BEGAN in Feb 43
Gallop: Jan 29, 43 - Mar 6, 43
Uranus: prep'd about Sept, ran late Nov

So MengJiao, are these operations that you'd consider as early 42? If so, please explain. I know about all of these and have ready books about each. So if you have any questions, let me know.

Please understand I'm not trying to pick on MengJiao. It's just another example where people have tried to post information without understanding the thread just to counter what the author has posted without facts or context.


Well arguably an example for not completely unsuccessful Soviet offensives in summer 1942 would be the Rzev Op by Konjev’s Kalinin (30. and 29 army) and Zhukov’s Western Front (31. army) in July and Aug. 1942. They mauled the German 9th army (then Vietinghoff) and overrun German 161th I.D. on the first try. The crisis only could be managed by Heersgruppen reserves and by minimizing the then unsuccessful German OP Wirbelwind towards Uljanov (Aug. 1942).
In the North, Soviet ops against the German Slisselburg Corridor, blocking Leningrad, by Volkov and Leningrad Front, 8th Army, 4th Guard Rifle Corps, 2nd Shock Army) in Aug. Sept. 1942, against Urick towards Oranienbaum and against the Demiansk corridor (July and Aug. 1942) could only be stopped by using German reserves and forces, planned for minor German offensives (OP Nordlicht, the assault against Leningrad, OP Moorbrand against Pogost’e and OP Schlingpflanze for widening the Demjansk corridor).
Thus, some Soviet offensives in summer 1942 at least managed to hinder sucessful German minor offensives. Arguably, in 1942 in the Centre and in the North, where Russian strength was pitted against German weakness, existed an operational equilibrum.

Source: Das Deutsche Reich und der 2. Weltkrieg, Vol. 6, pp. 898-910.

Considering the density of the line, the average German company had a responsibility of 2km, the paucity of results and the extremely heavy losses, a "partial success" isn't the best way to describe that operation.

I guess you mean the summer operations up north? I sounds like they caused the Germans to bolster that line and call off some build up for some offensives. That sounds like a partial success of sorts.
wosung
Posts: 610
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:31 am

RE: Fact finding question to kirkgregerson: Rifle vs Pz 1942

Post by wosung »

ORIGINAL: MengJiao

ORIGINAL: MechFO

ORIGINAL: wosung



Well arguably an example for not completely unsuccessful Soviet offensives in summer 1942 would be the Rzev Op by Konjev’s Kalinin (30. and 29 army) and Zhukov’s Western Front (31. army) in July and Aug. 1942. They mauled the German 9th army (then Vietinghoff) and overrun German 161th I.D. on the first try. The crisis only could be managed by Heersgruppen reserves and by minimizing the then unsuccessful German OP Wirbelwind towards Uljanov (Aug. 1942).
In the North, Soviet ops against the German Slisselburg Corridor, blocking Leningrad, by Volkov and Leningrad Front, 8th Army, 4th Guard Rifle Corps, 2nd Shock Army) in Aug. Sept. 1942, against Urick towards Oranienbaum and against the Demiansk corridor (July and Aug. 1942) could only be stopped by using German reserves and forces, planned for minor German offensives (OP Nordlicht, the assault against Leningrad, OP Moorbrand against Pogost’e and OP Schlingpflanze for widening the Demjansk corridor).
Thus, some Soviet offensives in summer 1942 at least managed to hinder sucessful German minor offensives. Arguably, in 1942 in the Centre and in the North, where Russian strength was pitted against German weakness, existed an operational equilibrum.

Source: Das Deutsche Reich und der 2. Weltkrieg, Vol. 6, pp. 898-910.

Considering the density of the line, the average German company had a responsibility of 2km, the paucity of results and the extremely heavy losses, a "partial success" isn't the best way to describe that operation.

I guess you mean the summer operations up north? I sounds like they caused the Germans to bolster that line and call off some build up for some offensives. That sounds like a partial success of sorts.

Sure, Soviet losses still were far heavier than German ones. Sure, Soviet planned battle goals were'nt achieved. But what Soviet forces mostly achieved was to wrestle the initiative from the German side and deny them to achieve most of their limited goals in the centre and in the north. For me that's a partial success.

It all comes down to the benchmark you use. Compared with German successes in June 1941 the above mentioned ops surely were defeats. Compared with Soviet battlefield performance in June 1941 improvements were made. If you just distinguish between (complete) defeat and (complete) victory, you'll have rather crude means of analysis. Often battlefield performance isn't unambiguous (Jutland).

Bottom line remains: In 1942 Wehrmacht wasn't any longer in the driver seat at over 50% of the Ostfront's frontline. There the driver seat was disputed.

And I'm still waiting for the data I asked for in the OP.

Regards
wosung
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”