Matrix Games Forums

Happy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser Trailer
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Entrenchment!- A solution to soviet manpower!

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Classic (Free) Games] >> War In Russia: The Matrix Edition >> Entrenchment!- A solution to soviet manpower! Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Entrenchment!- A solution to soviet manpower! - 3/26/2002 2:52:11 PM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1778
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline
Can the entrenchment value for German allies be lowered or slowed?

ie Rumanian units along the Don (Nov 42) had little anti-tank defenses (small calibre guns etc etc) low training, moral and leadership- and had an ability to abandon defensive postions at the drop of a hat (maybe not all ran- but many did).

Should not their entrenchment value be lowered to reflect their poor defensive skills?


Also believe German entrenchment should be lowered each year ie:

41-6
42 5-6
43 5-4
44 4-3
45 3-1
Maybe even greater cuts in entrenchment are called for- let me know!

Something along those lines- this would remove the need for increased manpower for the Soviets- if German defences are decreased each year. It would also reflect the ability for the Soviets to force attacks through Germaan lines.

German defensive barriers always suffered from a lack of material, as it stands in the game the Germans can build a retreat line and it will hold- but with a lack of entrenchment it will give away sooner and reflect the great defesive battles which actually took place to a greater degree of historical accuracy!

I may add this post to its own thread to also invite wider discussion!

Thanks.

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil
Post #: 1
- 3/26/2002 3:42:15 PM   
czerpak

 

Posts: 271
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Poland
Status: offline
Muzrub,
I have to agree and disagree in the same time ;)
I agree german (not talking about minor allies) defence lines are bloody strong thru whole war and in later years should be easier for soviets to attack.
From the other side from what I read germans were even better in defending then in blitzkrieg, so I am not sure if this is a right way to solve the problem.
Anyways interesting idea.
Maciej

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 2
- 3/26/2002 4:09:53 PM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1778
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline
[QUOTE]From the other side from what I read germans were even better in defending then in blitzkrieg, so I am not sure if this is a right way to solve the problem. [/QUOTE]

The Germans were very good at solving problems with quickly formed battlegroups ad hoc- but in the game reality the Germans can be very difficult indeed in defence- more than in real life at times.
Mind you if German defensive measures were so good they still would be in Russia today!

We have people saying the Soviets dont have enough manpower etc etc- this problem cannot be solved- but by lowering German defense entrenchment makes up for this loss!

It depends on how you read history- the germans though good in defense lacked the materials to truely create a good defensive barrier, by the later years though troops did fight hard they could not hold back the tide, areas of the front would slip away (due to lack of experience- equipment etc etc).

Now in reality Hitler held ground as much as he could- in the game players withdraw and build defensive lines, in reality Hitler was not a great believer in retreat lines- he believed German troops would just withdraw instead of holding ground!

As such in the game the Germans are normally in better condition than their real life counterparts and as such the entrenchment is a real issue!.

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 3
- 3/26/2002 5:02:33 PM   
czerpak

 

Posts: 271
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Poland
Status: offline
You are right Muzrub, there is a problem. I just dont agree with solving manpower problem with changing entrenchment levels. Only my opinion, nothing to fight about.
Maciej

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 4
Correct... - 3/26/2002 7:10:34 PM   
Rundstedt

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 7/23/2001
From: Sweden
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Muzrub
[B]

The Germans were very good at solving problems with quickly formed battlegroups ad hoc- but in the game reality the Germans can be very difficult indeed in defence- more than in real life at times.
Mind you if German defensive measures were so good they still would be in Russia today!

We have people saying the Soviets dont have enough manpower etc etc- this problem cannot be solved- but by lowering German defense entrenchment makes up for this loss!

It depends on how you read history- the germans though good in defense lacked the materials to truely create a good defensive barrier, by the later years though troops did fight hard they could not hold back the tide, areas of the front would slip away (due to lack of experience- equipment etc etc).

Now in reality Hitler held ground as much as he could- in the game players withdraw and build defensive lines, in reality Hitler was not a great believer in retreat lines- he believed German troops would just withdraw instead of holding ground!

As such in the game the Germans are normally in better condition than their real life counterparts and as such the entrenchment is a real issue!. [/B][/QUOTE]

You are correct. Hitler was once quoted saying that "withdrawing our forces will only shift a disaster from one location to another". To some extent he was right... At least that's what my opinion is, and was. ;)

The single most terrible mistake Hitler, and the High Command, made was to send an unprepared German army into the Soviet Union. The lack of winterized equipment and inadequate supplies were the reasons why we...eeeh...Germany lost the war. It wouldn't have mattered if the the Wehrmacht was allowed to withdraw to "stronger positions", because there weren't any such positions prepared.

One of the German army's greatest assets in defensive combat was the German officer's adroit ability to swiftly mobilize improvised units. But it is also true that we often were unable to contain all enemy forces trapped in our encirclements, as the case was at Charkov in March 1943, due to manpower shortages which were becoming readily apparent even at that stage of the war.

Should the German player be penalized when entrenching units? No, not automatically anyway. It should strictly depend upon the shape of the German war industry, under the exceptional direction of Reichminister Speer. With enough reserves and equipment, the German player should be able to maintain a solid line against an offensive Soviet player, although this should rarely occur from early 1944 an onwards.



Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

_____________________________

"We never underestimated the Red Army, contrary to the general conception. The last German military attaché in Moscow, General Köstring - a very competent man - had kept us well-informed about the condition of the Red Army. But Hitler refused to believe h

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 5
- 3/26/2002 10:13:34 PM   
Montenegro

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 2/26/2002
Status: offline
The "what if's" in this campaign were what makes this one of the most scrutinized military actions of all time, and it goes without saying that more than a few eyes in the West were silently approving an all out assault on Communism. Just imagine if von Bock and Guederian would have been running the war in the East. The encirclement at Kiev cost them a month+ of good weather and material that would have easily increased the odds of Moscow's collapse had Army Group Centre been allowed to push on from Smolensk at somewhat full force. Or what if Zukov would have perished in the purges? Operation Barbarossa is the greatest riddle that will never be solved. I like the fact that this game also allows for historical input, and I suggest we keep this dialogue a going!

On entrenchment: swamp fighting around lenningrad is the ultimate bear in '41. Any suggestions for a newbie as to how to circumvent this or any suggestions for driving on Pskov and beyond. As I play now, I usually commit 40th Panzer to the frey and this is developing rather ok in my current game.

Thanks

Montenegro

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 6
- 3/26/2002 10:30:47 PM   
Rundstedt

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 7/23/2001
From: Sweden
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Montenegro
[B]On entrenchment: swamp fighting around lenningrad is the ultimate bear in '41. Any suggestions for a newbie as to how to circumvent this or any suggestions for driving on Pskov and beyond. As I play now, I usually commit 40th Panzer to the frey and this is developing rather ok in my current game.

Thanks

Montenegro [/B][/QUOTE]


Usually I would refrain from using panzer units, if possible, in static warfare (in your case south of Leningrad). It's such a waste of good tanks... Then again, if you don't have anything else, what choice do you have?

Yes, I agree that the campaign in the east is one of the most intriguing episodes of 19th century history. What should the Germans have done in order to win? There are many questions like this one to ask, but there is really no exact and true answers.

One common opinion is that the campaign against Yugoslavia and Greece critically delayed "Operation Barbarossa". From what I've read about this statement (mostly "The Other Side of the Hill" by B. H. Liddell Hart), it's not correct. Generaloberst(?) Franz Halder claimed the weather in early May 1941 didn't allow any offensive operations against the Soviet Union. So even if the forces were available, an invasion would have been nearly impossible.



Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

_____________________________

"We never underestimated the Red Army, contrary to the general conception. The last German military attaché in Moscow, General Köstring - a very competent man - had kept us well-informed about the condition of the Red Army. But Hitler refused to believe h

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 7
- 3/26/2002 11:28:28 PM   
Montenegro

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 2/26/2002
Status: offline
Yes, I don't use tanks in this situation, merely infantry and air assault before attacks. My main challange at this point is trying to seal off Lenningrad at least by end of Sept., although this objective is probably the most difficult due to terrain and defences. It is, however, possible if mobility is directed correctly in my opinion.

I do think that the Balkans crisis management that the Wermacht had to do for Italy did effect at least the potential involvement of troops in the East a bit earlier. But as we know, the Germans were quite into schedules and timetables, so this is probably a mute point. It is important to note that the Serbs and Montengrens did draw much blood from the German war machine throughout the war, but particullarly in conjuction with the Soviet winter offensive in '41. I really recommend "War without Garlands" by Robert Kershaw. It gives an unfettered account of German mortality and how titanic the invasion itself was in terms of realistic accomplishment. To this day, however, I agree with historians who believe that the failure to drive on Moscow in July/Aug was a decisive mistake. Hitler was a politician and a madman, and like most leaders with this MO, a terrible tactician. He clearly had the better generals, but much like the Confederacy in the Civil War, ya can't eat tobacco. I also think another great sub-plot in this struggle was how he basically fired his best leaders by the spring '42. Sans murder, he copied Stalin's ineptness almost to a T.

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 8
- 3/27/2002 12:00:18 AM   
davewolf

 

Posts: 1840
Joined: 2/14/2002
From: On world conquest.
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Montenegro
[B]Hitler was a politician and a madman, and like most leaders with this MO, a terrible tactician.[/B][/QUOTE]

Montenegro

Well I certainly know what you mean and that this is off topic. But anyway it hurt's me a bit to see Corporal Hitler being called a 'politician'. What about a megalomaniac mass murderer?

Dave

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 9
Sorry... - 3/27/2002 12:18:19 AM   
Rundstedt

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 7/23/2001
From: Sweden
Status: offline
...But you're not completely correct regarding Hitler. He was not a madman, at least not in the beginning. He had his visions, but he was not mad. There's a differense you know...

You should read "Inside the Third Reich" by Albert Speer and "On the Other Side of the Hill" by B. H. Liddell Hart. Hitler was a very poor tactician, but he did know what the troops needed in order to fight well, since he had been an infantryman himself during WW1.

He also proved his "experienced" generals wrong several times. Another example was that he approved von Manstein's plan to attack through the Ardennes Forest back in 1940, when the general staff opposed the idea.

I'm not defending what Hitler did, but it is very, very wrong to say that he was incompetent. [B]You really shoud read "Inside the Third Reich" by Albert Speer![/B] It's a great book, giving many insights about the Reich and Hitler's inner-circle.

Off topic? Oh, well....


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

_____________________________

"We never underestimated the Red Army, contrary to the general conception. The last German military attaché in Moscow, General Köstring - a very competent man - had kept us well-informed about the condition of the Red Army. But Hitler refused to believe h

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 10
Re: Sorry... - 3/27/2002 12:29:38 AM   
davewolf

 

Posts: 1840
Joined: 2/14/2002
From: On world conquest.
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rundstedt
[B]...But you're not completely correct regarding Hitler. He was not a madman, at least not in the beginning. He had his visions, but he was not mad. There's a differense you know...[/B][/QUOTE]

GFM

The difference is that being mad doesn't mean that the one cannot be intelligent. Like a lot of psychopaths he was a very intelligent man and by the way he had an almost photographic memory. But from a psychiatric point of view he was definitely insane from the very beginning.

Still off topic...

Dave

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 11
- 3/27/2002 12:38:39 AM   
RickyB

 

Posts: 1155
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Denver, CO USA
Status: offline
I don't feel the entrenchments should be altered to allow an easier time for the Soviets, or to make up for manpower shortages, etc. The Germans got better with their field entrenchments throughout the war, but the Soviets increased their firepower, experience and mobility even more, and the Germans didn't have the manpower to hold the lines against it.

I haven't seen enough of the last version after 1942, but earlier if the Soviets survived without losing Moscow at some point, they could push the Germans back no matter what the entrenchment level. Thus, i would put the blame for any problems on other issues, not entrenchments. The manpower issue can be fixed if there is one, by bumping up the city ratings. Even small changes here go a long way. A question on tanks though. If someone has recent experience with tank reserves, do the Soviets build up plenty of tanks in reserve? That to me would be key, by raising the capacity of their tank units to hold more tanks, or adding more tank units to the game, although that creates difficulties with getting them into battle anyway.

_____________________________

Rick Bancroft
Semper Fi





(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 12
- 3/27/2002 1:12:47 AM   
jontegrabben

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 1/14/2002
From: Suedois
Status: offline
Some thoughts.

1. Rumainians have a really bad reputation and thats wrong to a degree. Officers, equipment and tactics really didnt excel BUT the troops usually put up a fight. Exempel, Stalingrad it took Sovjet elite panzer troops days to smash through Rumainian defence lines and they lacked everything!!!!!

2. The eastfronts main problem was that army groups never could support each other (Kiev really being the only time it happend). There never where any mobile reserves (neither "unmobile" reserves for that matter). They just pulled troops from the front who didnt where up to strenght, enough equipped and rested. Had this been the case many Sovjet breakthroughs would have been crushed. Kharkov is an example when this happend.

Any holes in my "bulletproof" stratagem? :D

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 13
- 3/27/2002 1:53:30 AM   
moonfog

 

Posts: 70
Joined: 7/21/2001
From: Switzerland
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by davewolf
[B]

Montenegro

Well I certainly know what you mean and that this is off topic. But anyway it hurt's me a bit to see Corporal Hitler being called a 'politician'. What about a megalomaniac mass murderer?

Dave [/B][/QUOTE]

Dave,

if you are interested in some reading, concerning Hitler's personality and a probable answer to the question how he became the maniac he was I recommend you Ian Kershaw's biography of the "Führer" in two volumes (both also available in german):

Kershaw, Ian, Hitler. 1889-1936: Hubris, London/Stuttgart 1998
Kershaw, Ian, Hitler. 1936-1945: Nemesis, London/Stuttgart 2000

They are both really worth the money...

Regards
Ray

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 14
- 3/27/2002 2:01:28 AM   
Montenegro

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 2/26/2002
Status: offline
Thanks for bringing this discussion full circle. I really like the fact that people of strategy and history have a forum such as this, and my very still newbie cudos to the designers of the update!

The only thing I have left to say on the previous topics...I have read much on the topic, including Speer's work. I have and will as a lot of historians have, a careful, intellectual respect for the Wermacht. What that army did in terms of military success is staggering, and I think that the fact that so many people today still cite their impact in the very unfotunate scope of warfare will stand the test of time. It goes without saying that both principle parties in this struggle---Stalin and Hitler---were beyond reproach to all involved, including their own men. Stalingrad seems to me insanity for starters...

On entrenchment: I like the way the game is now. For all intents and purposes, I think the game makes the important distinction btw German defenders and Rumanians, Italians, etc., the latter obviously being inferior. Personally, I would like to see more Soviet capabilities in this and all respects in matters of defense and attack as of Sept '41. I have noticed higher interdiction losses for the Soviet tanks, but also stark losses to the Germans if joint attacks are not coordinated properly by Aug turns. I'm no pro, but maybe we should just play on!

Sincerely,

Montenegro

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 15
I stand corrected - 3/27/2002 3:17:55 AM   
Rundstedt

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 7/23/2001
From: Sweden
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by davewolf
[B]

GFM

The difference is that being mad doesn't mean that the one cannot be intelligent. Like a lot of psychopaths he was a very intelligent man and by the way he had an almost photographic memory. But from a psychiatric point of view he was definitely insane from the very beginning.

Still off topic...

Dave [/B][/QUOTE]


OK, I agree to some extent. But the people who met Hitler never thought he was insain, especially early in the war and before. If you are looking for insain people then you should looka at Hitler's henchmen. Himmler, Göring etc. Those people really scare me...


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

_____________________________

"We never underestimated the Red Army, contrary to the general conception. The last German military attaché in Moscow, General Köstring - a very competent man - had kept us well-informed about the condition of the Red Army. But Hitler refused to believe h

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 16
- 3/27/2002 4:16:08 AM   
Guardsman

 

Posts: 162
Joined: 10/17/2000
From: Calgary, Canada
Status: offline
I think Hitler succeeded early in the war becasue his delusions turned out to be fairly reflective of reality. However when the reality changed Hitler's delusions did not and he became increasingly out of touch with the conduct of the war.

Like any other bully Hitler had a certain ability to know when his victims could be pushed and how far to push them, at first. Like every other bully, once his victims decided to fight he was totally out of his element. He consisntently believed that his enemies "were on the verge of collapse" when in fact they were not.

His strategic thinking, while sharp in the political arena, was not suited for war, and his tactical thinking was still in the trenches of WWI France.

In short, Hitler has always lived in his own world. As the world changed around him he was completely unable to deal with it and withdrew deeper into his mental illness.

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 17
- 3/27/2002 5:31:29 AM   
Possum

 

Posts: 349
Joined: 3/27/2000
From: Adelaide, SA, Australia
Status: offline
Hello all
Sorry, but altering entrenchment ability is beyond my abilities.
The only thing that could be done would be to increase the city size for the Soviets, to give them more manpower

_____________________________

"We're having a war, and we want you to come!"
So the pig began to whistle and to pound on a drum.
"We'll give you a gun, and we'll give you a hat!"
And the pig began to whistle when they told the piggies that.

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 18
- 3/27/2002 7:40:29 AM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1778
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Rumainians have a really bad reputation and thats wrong to a degree. Officers, equipment and tactics really didnt excel BUT the troops usually put up a fight. Exempel, Stalingrad it took Sovjet elite panzer troops days to smash through Rumainian defence lines and they lacked everything!!!!! [/QUOTE]

Really?- well thats wrong.

On the Southern front during operation Uranus Yeremenko's procesed 10,000 Rumanians within a few hours- the Soviets described masses of Rumanain infantry moving towards them with their hands up. If not for the 29th Motorized Division attacking on the right flank of the Soviet Fifty-Seventh Army the attack on the Southern sector would have been more rapid!

On the Northern front the Soviets drove through the lines and gained 20 miles in one day "Most succumbed to tank fright, leapt from cover and ran. Only a few stayed to duel the armour"

The fact is of the 22 divisions 9 where destroyed, 9 other fled and only 4 were fit for battle.

So in essence they were not up to the task and in many cases just fled at the first sign of trouble and paniced others!

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 19
- 3/27/2002 7:50:59 AM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1778
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline
[QUOTE]I don't feel the entrenchments should be altered to allow an easier time for the Soviets, or to make up for manpower shortages, etc. The Germans got better with their field entrenchments throughout the war, but the Soviets increased their firepower, experience and mobility even more, and the Germans didn't have the manpower to hold the lines against it. [/QUOTE]


Thats why game reality and real life are different.

The Soviets only stopped after smashing Army group centre due to a lack of supplies- the Germans had nothing.

But the game the Germans do- players dont make the same mistakes at Hitler so the reserves are in place and in general fighting troops are in better condition.
As such it very much harder and based on historical events? no.


Maybe an increase in Soviet manpower could do the trick- but a while ago when many of had that discussion people thought the Soviets had enough. I disagreed with too, I also believe Soviet production should be higher, penalty movies (41) should be changed, lower German production (or heavy penalties for factory changes) more Soviet experience for the Air force- and [B]lower rates of experience for the Germans[/B] etc etc- the list continues.

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 20
Perhaps... - 3/27/2002 7:53:20 AM   
Rundstedt

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 7/23/2001
From: Sweden
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Guardsman
[B]I think Hitler succeeded early in the war becasue his delusions turned out to be fairly reflective of reality. However when the reality changed Hitler's delusions did not and he became increasingly out of touch with the conduct of the war.

Like any other bully Hitler had a certain ability to know when his victims could be pushed and how far to push them, at first. Like every other bully, once his victims decided to fight he was totally out of his element. He consisntently believed that his enemies "were on the verge of collapse" when in fact they were not.

His strategic thinking, while sharp in the political arena, was not suited for war, and his tactical thinking was still in the trenches of WWI France.

In short, Hitler has always lived in his own world. As the world changed around him he was completely unable to deal with it and withdrew deeper into his mental illness. [/B][/QUOTE]



You read that in "Inside the Third Reich" by Albert Speer, dind't you? :)

I note you are very well-read and have analysed the matter very well indeed. I can't help but agree, to some extent.

Hitler was not mad, in my opinion. He had extravagant and perhaps unrealistic (or horrible if you wish) visions, and also was a bit too soft on his old friends from "the movement".

The German war effort would have lasted longer and more successfully without the bunglers Himmler, Göring, Bormann and so on. The only people really capable and sain enough to hold their offices were, in my opnion, Albert Speer and maybe also Joseph Göbbles.

Don't you agree?


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

_____________________________

"We never underestimated the Red Army, contrary to the general conception. The last German military attaché in Moscow, General Köstring - a very competent man - had kept us well-informed about the condition of the Red Army. But Hitler refused to believe h

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 21
You are fogetting... - 3/27/2002 8:01:24 AM   
Rundstedt

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 7/23/2001
From: Sweden
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Muzrub
[B]


Thats why game reality and real life are different.

The Soviets only stopped after smashing Army group centre due to a lack of supplies- the Germans had nothing.

But the game the Germans do- players dont make the same mistakes at Hitler so the reserves are in place and in general fighting troops are in better condition.
As such it very much harder and based on historical events? no.


Maybe an increase in Soviet manpower could do the trick- but a while ago when many of had that discussion people thought the Soviets had enough. I disagreed with too, I also believe Soviet production should be higher, penalty movies (41) should be changed, lower German production (or heavy penalties for factory changes) more Soviet experience for the Air force- and [B]lower rates of experience for the Germans[/B] etc etc- the list continues. [/B][/QUOTE]


It seems to have slipped your mind that it wasn't only the thin Soviet supply lines which halted the Soviet summer offensive in 1944.

The last reinforcements, still capable of putting up a credible defense, were rushed to the front line as soon as possible. One example would be the Hermann Göring Panzer Korps, if my memory serves me well.

Another contributing factor was the Vistula river, running in a north-south direction. It came to act as a natural barrier against the advancing Red Army.

Yes, I know, I'm a know-all... :D


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

_____________________________

"We never underestimated the Red Army, contrary to the general conception. The last German military attaché in Moscow, General Köstring - a very competent man - had kept us well-informed about the condition of the Red Army. But Hitler refused to believe h

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 22
- 3/27/2002 10:40:57 PM   
Guardsman

 

Posts: 162
Joined: 10/17/2000
From: Calgary, Canada
Status: offline
Actually, I've never read that book. I thought I was being original but I guess I must have read it somewhere else.

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 23
Re: You are fogetting... - 3/27/2002 11:29:46 PM   
davewolf

 

Posts: 1840
Joined: 2/14/2002
From: On world conquest.
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rundstedt
[B]It seems to have slipped your mind that it wasn't only the thin Soviet supply lines which halted the Soviet summer offensive in 1944.

The last reinforcements, still capable of putting up a credible defense, were rushed to the front line as soon as possible. One example would be the Hermann Göring Panzer Korps, if my memory serves me well.

Another contributing factor was the Vistula river, running in a north-south direction. It came to act as a natural barrier against the advancing Red Army.

Yes, I know, I'm a know-all... :D [/B][/QUOTE]

You know it all, Herr GFM! ;)

Behind army group North Ukraine, where Hitler expected the Soviet summer offensive '44, were 4 PzKps (8 Pzdiv and 2 PzGrendiv). Most of them helped to rebuild a front line in the middle sector.

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 24
Re: I stand corrected - 3/28/2002 12:34:02 AM   
davewolf

 

Posts: 1840
Joined: 2/14/2002
From: On world conquest.
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rundstedt
[B]OK, I agree to some extent. But the people who met Hitler never thought he was insain, especially early in the war and before. If you are looking for insain people then you should looka at Hitler's henchmen. Himmler, Göring etc. Those people really scare me...[/B][/QUOTE]

Once again some things have to be told apart.

First did you ever hear of Ted Bundy? (I said Ted, not Al...) He was a handsome, charming guy living in the U.S., I think it was in the seventies or eighties. Many predicted a great political career for him. But in some nights he used to cut women to pieces. And even after he was arrested most people couldn't believe that he was guilty and, now hold your breath, he got many love letters!

Second of course looking at a period when being a fascist was quite normal in Europe and when Amon Goeths were walking throuh their concentration camps and killing people whenever they liked to how could someone who loved his german shephard be insane? But today we know more about it (if we want to) than the people who were trapped by Hitler's charisma.
There's no serious doubt that he at least (if not more) knew about the mass murders. So he knew it and did nothing to stop it! Wouldn't you call such person insane? Is violence already that ordinary that this might not be abnormal? If so then I wouldn't definitely want to be 'normal'!

My opinion is - I don't know if it's new but at least I never read about it - that he had not only a strong inferiority complex tending to be destructive, but he was a potential suicide.
If you want to know why you'll have to wait for another post. I'm too lazy to go on writing now...
Anyway trying to understand someone's mind is like trying to look behind a curtain.

Dave

P.S. Even more off topic: Why Rundstedt, Herr GFM? Why not Rommel, Guderian, Manstein (if a german at all)?

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 25
- 3/28/2002 12:37:57 AM   
jontegrabben

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 1/14/2002
From: Suedois
Status: offline
Muzrub!

I wasnt saying that every tropper stayed in place and fought vicious! :D But for example "General Lascar Group" of the 3:rd army fought for about 4 days and when the supply was all out they tried to break out, unfortunately for them the most was annihilated! But my point is that when digged in and EVEN led properly they where not that bad. The strategy in all times has been to diigg in bad troops, this has many obvious advantages. But one important factor many times overseen is that a troop with bad morale, training, motivation etc is much more keen to stay put and fight beacuse living trenches and bunkers (read safety) isnt an option. Ok surrending could in theese times be an tempting option to.......LOL.

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 26
- 3/28/2002 2:41:54 PM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1778
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline
[QUOTE]It seems to have slipped your mind that it wasn't only the thin Soviet supply lines which halted the Soviet summer offensive in 1944.

The last reinforcements, still capable of putting up a credible defense, were rushed to the front line as soon as possible. One example would be the Hermann Göring Panzer Korps, if my memory serves me well.

Another contributing factor was the Vistula river, running in a north-south direction. It came to act as a natural barrier against the advancing Red Army.
[/QUOTE]

Nothing has slipped my mind my friend.

Of couse the Soviets were going to have to call a halt to the offensive that drove 450 miles in 5 weeks and yes they reached the Vistula and ground to halt- and static warfare ensued for 6 months ( along the central front ).

But in Lithuania great gains were also enjoyed by the Russians though the central front finally stabalised after the loss of over 200,000 men. But by the 20th of August Soviet troops also advanced 250 miles in 12 days takiing Bucharest and the Ploesti by the 27th.

The point is it was the supply problem that ground the Soviets to a halt- if not for supply problems they could have continued on all fronts- German troops were either sweeped away or surrounded.
Only supply issues gave them the time to mount any type of defense.
You must remember everytime a panzer unit comes to eastern front it is removed from another. The SS Panzer units who arrived on the 29th of july? were sorely needed elsewhere- German defensive capabilites were pushed to the limit- under sized divisions, routed divisions, under strength panzer divisions held thinly defened natural barriers against an "exhausted enemy".

Not mention German troops during 44 had to be removed from Greece and the Balkans- a 600 mile retreat battling partisans all the way- the battles that surrounded Budepest the Hugarian capital etc etc etc.

Supply was the Soviet problem, though German battle groups and a had hoc defence showed brilliance at times the Soviets lack of transport and crippling supply issues stabalised the front. If supply and transport were not an issue then german troops would have been sweeped aside.

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 27
- 3/28/2002 2:48:32 PM   
Muzrub


Posts: 1778
Joined: 2/23/2001
From: Australia, Queensland, Gold coast
Status: offline
[QUOTE] Lascar Group[/QUOTE]

Lascar is but a drop in the ocean- he basically disbanded his group- many who marched east and joined Wencks (Holldite? something like that cant remember) battlegroup to defend the southern approachs to Rostov.

Never the less the Rumainans on a whole performed badly.
Yeremenko believed his Southern (the southern pincer of the stalingrad offensive- Uranus) was not strong enough to push by Rumanian troops, but he was shocked when he found out how fast the surrendered or abandond positions.
Until the 29th Motorised counter attack- th Soviets faced very few problems on the Southern pincer.

_____________________________

Harmlessly passing your time in the grassland away;
Only dimly aware of a certain unease in the air.
You better watch out,
There may be dogs about
I've looked over Iraq, and i have seen
Things are not what they seem.


Matrix Axis of Evil

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 28
Re: Re: I stand corrected - 3/28/2002 9:06:28 PM   
Rundstedt

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 7/23/2001
From: Sweden
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by davewolf
[B]

Once again some things have to be told apart.

First did you ever hear of Ted Bundy? (I said Ted, not Al...) He was a handsome, charming guy living in the U.S., I think it was in the seventies or eighties. Many predicted a great political career for him. But in some nights he used to cut women to pieces. And even after he was arrested most people couldn't believe that he was guilty and, now hold your breath, he got many love letters!

Second of course looking at a period when being a fascist was quite normal in Europe and when Amon Goeths were walking throuh their concentration camps and killing people whenever they liked to how could someone who loved his german shephard be insane? But today we know more about it (if we want to) than the people who were trapped by Hitler's charisma.
There's no serious doubt that he at least (if not more) knew about the mass murders. So he knew it and did nothing to stop it! Wouldn't you call such person insane? Is violence already that ordinary that this might not be abnormal? If so then I wouldn't definitely want to be 'normal'!

My opinion is - I don't know if it's new but at least I never read about it - that he had not only a strong inferiority complex tending to be destructive, but he was a potential suicide.
If you want to know why you'll have to wait for another post. I'm too lazy to go on writing now...
Anyway trying to understand someone's mind is like trying to look behind a curtain.

Dave

P.S. Even more off topic: Why Rundstedt, Herr GFM? Why not Rommel, Guderian, Manstein (if a german at all)? [/B][/QUOTE]


Well, I like von Rundstedt and he differed from the rest, or at least several, of the other personalities in the German Wehrmacht. Rommel for instance can be described as a social climber, a "career gold-digger". In the beginning of the war he, along with many other officers of the German army, greeted and joined Hitler and his expansionistic visions. Then, later on when the German war fortune was gone, he suddenly suddenly turned against the nazis. Furthermore, I believe Rommel was and is an overestimated superior commander. He was a good tactician and knew how to motivate his men to perform their best at all times, [I]but[/I] he lacked some strategical abilities. Of course he anticipated that Allied air power would disrupt German counter-attacks at Normandy if the armored support was placed too far away from the beaches. In short, I think he was an exceptional corps commander but not suited for higher commands. But that's only my personal opinion and i do not expect you to agree.

v. Manstein on the other was in many ways the opposite character of Rommel. He excelled in strategy, but lacked Rommel's seductive charisma. v. Manstein was somewhat short of character, if I may say so. Knew about the Einsatzgruppen, but refused to act. At the same time he didn't follow Hitler's orders and fell from grace. Perhaps foolish orders, but orders are orders... Most of the time anyways... ;)

Guderian was a bulldog, and a successful one too, and he, not Rommel, was in my opinion Germany's answer to Patton. A very competent commander and co-inventor of the German blitzkrieg doctrine. He even had the balls to oppose Hitler at several staff meetings, when he served as CoS at OKH. My choice was between v. Rundstedt and Generaloberst Guderian, but it's more fun to be v. Rundstedt because he outranked "alte Heinz".

v. Rundstedt was respected by both German nazis/officers, especially Hitler himself, which was very important in those days, and the Allies. He was an organizer, not a warrior; a staff officer, not a grunt. He did his job well and even managed to live through the entire war, without being killed by American bombs or the Gestapo. :D

I hope this answers your question?



Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

_____________________________

"We never underestimated the Red Army, contrary to the general conception. The last German military attaché in Moscow, General Köstring - a very competent man - had kept us well-informed about the condition of the Red Army. But Hitler refused to believe h

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 29
- 3/28/2002 9:18:28 PM   
Rundstedt

 

Posts: 149
Joined: 7/23/2001
From: Sweden
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Muzrub
[B]

Nothing has slipped my mind my friend.[/B][/QUOTE]


Dear me, my Aussie friend, aren't we feeling very self-confident today?? :)

Yes, the Red Army did suffer a little from strained supply lines and, as usual, poor logistics. [B]But[/B] you didn't mention my previous arguments earlier, and I thought you missed out on some facts. :cool:


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

_____________________________

"We never underestimated the Red Army, contrary to the general conception. The last German military attaché in Moscow, General Köstring - a very competent man - had kept us well-informed about the condition of the Red Army. But Hitler refused to believe h

(in reply to Muzrub)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Classic (Free) Games] >> War In Russia: The Matrix Edition >> Entrenchment!- A solution to soviet manpower! Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.121