Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Elite Units

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Elite Units Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Elite Units - 10/12/2011 10:34:39 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 6567
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline
I had never done this before, but I selected from the Axis Unit list on T-17, and found 11 Elite Units.

You can't see on this, as they are RED, and JPEG doesn't like RED.

I am surprised which units are considered "ELITE". GD Regt isn't a shock, but some of the other units, like the Romanian Cav, and 1 Mountain Bde (but not the others) are also on the list.

The way I read it, all of these have a National Morale of +15. Is that correct? Even for the Italian Cav unit, for example?




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Post #: 1
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 12:07:57 AM   
kirkgregerson

 

Posts: 497
Joined: 4/9/2008
Status: offline
If those minor units are elite why are their 'WitE morale' (god I really had that use of morale almost as much as I hate how WitE uses ROUTE) and exp so crappy? WitE really screws and insults some of these minor unit formations that were a lot more capable historically then they get credit for in this game. Have about a dozen other friends that agree on this as well.

< Message edited by kirkgregerson -- 10/13/2011 12:08:41 AM >

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 2
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 12:11:54 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
It's just a means of qualifying those particular units for morale benefits beyond their respective nations National Morale, and those due to unit type differentiation.

In other words, a way of further stratifying the units.

(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 3
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 12:16:30 AM   
kirkgregerson

 

Posts: 497
Joined: 4/9/2008
Status: offline
Either way it's kind of silly to give these units 'elite' status and set them up with 50 'WitE morale' and exp.


Hope this was just an oversight and will be corrected in a future patch.

< Message edited by kirkgregerson -- 10/13/2011 12:17:52 AM >

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 4
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 12:18:54 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
Why?

(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 5
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 12:53:29 AM   
Great_Ajax


Posts: 4224
Joined: 10/28/2002
Status: offline
I removed the Elite status from these units. It was an idea I had to give a morale boost for Axis minor formations who performed better than their line infantry counterparts such as armored, cavalry, and mountain units. The idea was refined into the rule that gave all Motorized, Cavalry, and Mountain units some kind of morale bonus over the national morale. Once the rule was made, the Axis Elite unit status was supposed to be removed and I missed a few.


It wasn't a silly idea. It was to give these select units the ability to attain a fifteen point bonus in morale over the line units.

Trey

_____________________________

"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!"

WiTE Scenario Designer
WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead
Sabre 21's perpetual arch-nemisis

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 6
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 12:56:32 AM   
Great_Ajax


Posts: 4224
Joined: 10/28/2002
Status: offline
If you and your friends have the specifics and references, then by all means share them. I am not against giving the Axis minor allies a boost, which is what I attempted to do with the Axis elite status, but I was in the minority on this subject within the team.

Trey

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

If those minor units are elite why are their 'WitE morale' (god I really had that use of morale almost as much as I hate how WitE uses ROUTE) and exp so crappy? WitE really screws and insults some of these minor unit formations that were a lot more capable historically then they get credit for in this game. Have about a dozen other friends that agree on this as well.



_____________________________

"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!"

WiTE Scenario Designer
WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead
Sabre 21's perpetual arch-nemisis

(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 7
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 1:11:31 AM   
gradenko_2000_slith

 

Posts: 935
Joined: 12/27/2010
Status: offline
Q-Ball, you might want to try using saving in PNG format instead of JPEG. Much better quality that way, even if you're just using Paint.

(in reply to Great_Ajax)
Post #: 8
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 3:07:39 AM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 6567
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el hefe

I removed the Elite status from these units. It was an idea I had to give a morale boost for Axis minor formations who performed better than their line infantry counterparts such as armored, cavalry, and mountain units. The idea was refined into the rule that gave all Motorized, Cavalry, and Mountain units some kind of morale bonus over the national morale. Once the rule was made, the Axis Elite unit status was supposed to be removed and I missed a few.


It wasn't a silly idea. It was to give these select units the ability to attain a fifteen point bonus in morale over the line units.

Trey



THAT's why it seemed a bit random; you must have missed a handful of the Axis Minor Allies.

I suspect that 22nd Airlanding, 78 Sturm, and GD Div should still retain ELITE status. Certainly, the GD Division should, but the other two were high-quality formations.

Maybe the Finnish Jaegers as well should be Elite, but doesn't matter that much; they disappear in 1941

_____________________________


(in reply to Great_Ajax)
Post #: 9
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 7:12:39 AM   
vinnie71

 

Posts: 930
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: el hefe

If you and your friends have the specifics and references, then by all means share them. I am not against giving the Axis minor allies a boost, which is what I attempted to do with the Axis elite status, but I was in the minority on this subject within the team.

Trey

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

If those minor units are elite why are their 'WitE morale' (god I really had that use of morale almost as much as I hate how WitE uses ROUTE) and exp so crappy? WitE really screws and insults some of these minor unit formations that were a lot more capable historically then they get credit for in this game. Have about a dozen other friends that agree on this as well.




Well I'll need to find the quote, but as far as I know the Rumanian Cavalry divisions were all considered as elite units in their army and the Germans considered them as the best units in the army as well. Seemingly (at least at first), they attracted the cream of conscripts and though on the light side in TO&E scales, performed with elan both in Barbarossa and Case Blue. I also believe that they even managed to stop the Russians cold on the first days of Uranus, with the latter having to commit armour to overrun them. Some were slated to turn into light armour units later on in the war.

Other unit(s) which should be given elite status are the Italian Alpini. They had high esprit de corps which they showed in the retreat from Stalingrad, with the Julia (which had gained fame in the Greek campaign) and I believe the Tridentina maintaining cohesion and punching through Soviet roadblocks to save the bulk of 8 Army by arriving at Nikolyev.

What surprises me is the fact that German elite units tend to wither over time, which is a byproduct of the system as is. Ex GD when it expands to division status becomes a normal (in the 70's) division and will not get better unless you clean up a large pocket with it. Maybe a little idea for future games is the inclusion of 'elite' replacements with higher morale for elite units. This would mimick real life where elite units such as GD or HG siphoned off the best conscripts (or the SS Pz and PzGr remaining effective despite the batterings they recieved because Himmler controlled the Replacement Army and sent the best men to high profile SS units).

(in reply to Great_Ajax)
Post #: 10
RE: Elite Units - 10/13/2011 9:52:33 AM   
cavalry

 

Posts: 2414
Joined: 9/2/2003
From: Sampford Spiney Devon UK
Status: offline
In my reading and experience including gaming Stalingrad etc - this statement is true my lords...

Rumanian "elite" units like Cav and the armour were better than any non guards Russians, yes they did briefly hold the Russians north of Stalingrad( in bunkers). I will qualify that and say Rumainian troops may have had better morale but their equipment is what really let them down , WW1 rifles almost no AT etc.
SS replacements were generally high quality and were for most units volunteers . This would apply to all the front line SS units. It would also apply to many volunteer foreign troops in less well known units some of which do not even appear on the OOB- like 16th SS PZG ( or am i wrong ).

GD is I am afraid to say it really was a one off and should never have morale less than 95 , if you read what it did it is difficult to model it in the game. I do not think it ever suffered a tactical defeat.

I cannot comment too much on the Italians but the Blue and one or two other units were probably better than moddled.
Cav

(in reply to vinnie71)
Post #: 11
RE: Elite Units - 10/14/2011 4:07:22 PM   
JAS Gripen


Posts: 15
Joined: 2/21/2011
Status: offline
Btw. German Assault Artillery battalions(StuGs) really should be elite.

(in reply to cavalry)
Post #: 12
RE: Elite Units - 10/14/2011 6:12:48 PM   
abulbulian


Posts: 892
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAS Gripen

Btw. German Assault Artillery battalions(StuGs) really should be elite.


+1
Not sure everybody knows that the individuals pulled into these units where some of the best 'tank' soldiers. Michael Wittmann started out as a commander of a Stug III.

_____________________________

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

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to JAS Gripen)
Post #: 13
RE: Elite Units - 10/14/2011 6:15:32 PM   
abulbulian


Posts: 892
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

Why?



I think Kirk believes that these units are not correctly being represented in WitE with the stats they are given on exp and morale. Why ask why? BTW, I happen to agree with him. But, compared to some of the other axis initial set-up values I have with WitE this is almost trivial.


_____________________________

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

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 14
RE: Elite Units - 10/14/2011 8:06:56 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian


quote:

ORIGINAL: JAS Gripen

Btw. German Assault Artillery battalions(StuGs) really should be elite.


+1
Not sure everybody knows that the individuals pulled into these units where some of the best 'tank' soldiers. Michael Wittmann started out as a commander of a Stug III.


Care to cite a source about StuG Abt as elite tank soldiers outfit?

They weren't even part of the schnelle Truppen but until late war solely of the arty branch. And even in late war Inspektor der Panzertruppe, Guderian couldn't get admin competence for all StuG, because as the arty branch chief put it, the StuG was the only weapon for arty men to earn the knight's cross.
Source: Karl Walde, Guderian, p. 187.
Edit: http://www.feldgrau.com/artillery.html

Wittmann was not the only one StuG commander. So what does this proof for all StuG. Bns? Wittmann btw started in infantry (I.R. 19).
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wittmann

I didn't say, StuG Abt. weren't good. But were they tank elite? Besides, German tank doctrine saw StuG as inferior to tanks, less flexible due to missing turret. In the PD Panzer companies StuG were stop gaps, because they were cheaper to produce, and tactically not very easy to integrate with real tanks companies.
Source: Jentz, Die deutsche Panzertruppe, Vol. 2.





< Message edited by wosung -- 10/14/2011 8:07:45 PM >

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 15
RE: Elite Units - 10/14/2011 8:53:54 PM   
wosung

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball


quote:

ORIGINAL: el hefe

I removed the Elite status from these units. It was an idea I had to give a morale boost for Axis minor formations who performed better than their line infantry counterparts such as armored, cavalry, and mountain units. The idea was refined into the rule that gave all Motorized, Cavalry, and Mountain units some kind of morale bonus over the national morale. Once the rule was made, the Axis Elite unit status was supposed to be removed and I missed a few.


It wasn't a silly idea. It was to give these select units the ability to attain a fifteen point bonus in morale over the line units.

Trey



THAT's why it seemed a bit random; you must have missed a handful of the Axis Minor Allies.

I suspect that 22nd Airlanding, 78 Sturm, and GD Div should still retain ELITE status. Certainly, the GD Division should, but the other two were high-quality formations.

Maybe the Finnish Jaegers as well should be Elite, but doesn't matter that much; they disappear in 1941


Care to elaborate why exactly 78. Sturmdivision should be an elite formation?

Sure, it had more firepower and, in summer 1943 a reinforced personnel strenght, which is reflected in its WitE TOE. But is that enough to make it Elite, exceptionally proficient?

Its predecessor, 78. I.D. was only of second wave, so none of the top notch first wave I.D. In spring 1942 it wasn't even capable of fullfilling every mission. Twice the 78. was nearly totally annihilated (in Dec. 1942 and Summer 1944).

All in all the 78. could deliver more lead than the usual I.D., but nothing more. It was rather an experimental division, reflecting the Wehrmacht's mid-war need to husband and focus its limited manpower and to substitute men by weapons.

Sources:
Burkhart Mueller-Hillebrand, Das Heer, Vol. 2, p. 21.
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite WK, Vol. 6, p.791.
James Lucas, Handbuch der Wehrmacht, p. 33-34.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/78._Infanterie-Division_%28Wehrmacht%29

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 16
RE: Elite Units - 10/14/2011 10:57:10 PM   
abulbulian


Posts: 892
Joined: 3/31/2005
Status: offline


Sorry Wosung, but I think your very wrong if you don't think Stug units shouldn't be considered elite. Here's something you may or may not know. Quoting this, but I've heard the same facts from many other sources.

"The Sturmgeschütz III Ausf. G was the most common of the StuG's produced with over 1053 units in service and over 9000 units of various designs completed from 1942-1945.
Though Tigers and Panthers have earned more notoriety, assault guns (like the StuG) collectively destroyed more tanks than any other vehicle. The crews of Sturmgeschutz were considered the Elite and their kill record showed for it with over 20,000 enemy tank kills by 1944."


- Military Vehicle Technology Foundation


I'm not sure where you came up with this concept of them being inferior??

quote:

"German tank doctrine saw StuG as inferior to tanks, less flexible due to missing turret"


what is your source?

Also, did you know Manstein was one of the major factors to get stugs into mass production? He loved them.



< Message edited by abulbulian -- 10/14/2011 11:01:07 PM >


_____________________________

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

"Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 17
RE: Elite Units - 10/14/2011 11:11:35 PM   
kirkgregerson

 

Posts: 497
Joined: 4/9/2008
Status: offline
Yeah, wosung I think your 'whack' to even throw some of that nonsense out there without any legit source.  I've read Mainstein's Lost Victories and he does praise the Stugs and their valiant crews.  It's a good read, suggest you look into it. 

Sure it was turret-less and not as powerful as some German tanks, but that doesn't equate with them not being elite units.  Considering how cheap they were to produce in respect to tigers and panthers, they gave you more bang for your buck!



(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 18
RE: Elite Units - 10/14/2011 11:33:12 PM   
heliodorus04


Posts: 1621
Joined: 11/1/2008
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian


quote:

ORIGINAL: JAS Gripen

Btw. German Assault Artillery battalions(StuGs) really should be elite.


+1
Not sure everybody knows that the individuals pulled into these units where some of the best 'tank' soldiers. Michael Wittmann started out as a commander of a Stug III.


Care to cite a source about StuG Abt as elite tank soldiers outfit?

They weren't even part of the schnelle Truppen but until late war solely of the arty branch. And even in late war Inspektor der Panzertruppe, Guderian couldn't get admin competence for all StuG, because as the arty branch chief put it, the StuG was the only weapon for arty men to earn the knight's cross.
Source: Karl Walde, Guderian, p. 187.
Edit: http://www.feldgrau.com/artillery.html

Wittmann was not the only one StuG commander. So what does this proof for all StuG. Bns? Wittmann btw started in infantry (I.R. 19).
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wittmann

I didn't say, StuG Abt. weren't good. But were they tank elite? Besides, German tank doctrine saw StuG as inferior to tanks, less flexible due to missing turret. In the PD Panzer companies StuG were stop gaps, because they were cheaper to produce, and tactically not very easy to integrate with real tanks companies.
Source: Jentz, Die deutsche Panzertruppe, Vol. 2.





This is why I hate historians.
Only out to make others look wrong.


_____________________________

Spring 2018-Playing: Demyansk Shield: Frozen Fortress; Advanced Squad Leader,
Reading: Bonhoeffer
Rulebooks: ASL (always ASL), Holland'44, Demyansk Shield: Frozen Fortress

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 19
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 12:11:43 AM   
Schmart

 

Posts: 662
Joined: 9/13/2010
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian
"The Sturmgeschütz III Ausf. G was the most common of the StuG's produced with over 1053 units in service and over 9000 units of various designs completed from 1942-1945.
Though Tigers and Panthers have earned more notoriety, assault guns (like the StuG) collectively destroyed more tanks than any other vehicle. The crews of Sturmgeschutz were considered the Elite and their kill record showed for it with over 20,000 enemy tank kills by 1944."


By that reasoning, AT guns should be SUPER elite, as they were far more numerous and were generally the primary killer of enemy tanks. Since Wittmann has been mentioned in this thread, IIRC he took more pleasure in destroying AT guns than tanks, as he hated them the most because they were such a tank killer.

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 20
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 1:50:50 AM   
randallw

 

Posts: 2043
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline
I don't have numbers in front of me but I suspect that Stugs were built in numbers much larger than Panthers and heavy tanks, partly resulting in that heavy kill ratio ( kills by Stugs vs kills by tanks ).  Now if the Stugs were built in these huge numbers and also had elite crews, doesn't that make most German armor crews elite?.....which is sort contrary to the concept of being elite?

Part of the idea of having a Stug is that it used less resources to build than a tank, something you needed on the battlefield in reasonable time.....but wouldn't a lot of them be sitting around waiting if the crews are getting an amount of time to train them to elite status?

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 21
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 5:39:53 AM   
jzardos


Posts: 588
Joined: 3/15/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Schmart


quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian
"The Sturmgeschütz III Ausf. G was the most common of the StuG's produced with over 1053 units in service and over 9000 units of various designs completed from 1942-1945.
Though Tigers and Panthers have earned more notoriety, assault guns (like the StuG) collectively destroyed more tanks than any other vehicle. The crews of Sturmgeschutz were considered the Elite and their kill record showed for it with over 20,000 enemy tank kills by 1944."


By that reasoning, AT guns should be SUPER elite, as they were far more numerous and were generally the primary killer of enemy tanks. Since Wittmann has been mentioned in this thread, IIRC he took more pleasure in destroying AT guns than tanks, as he hated them the most because they were such a tank killer.


Don't follow your logic or lack of logic here. You're wrong about what was killing tanks on the east front if you think it was AT guns. Also, you need to look at the survival ratio of the units involved. I think Stugs had a very high(elite) ratio of loses to kills. That's like saying, well the Americans Sherman killed so many German tanks so they should be elite? Really? No not really, because they lost a fricken ton of shermans to kill a few Germans tanks.

Schmart, I suggest next time you post you might want to back it up with something intelligent.

And Randallw, do some research and you'll find out the stugs that fought on the east front had the highest kill ratios.

Bottom line is the stug units should be elite, if you don't understand than you need to educate yourself.

thanks

< Message edited by jzardos -- 10/15/2011 5:41:40 AM >

(in reply to Schmart)
Post #: 22
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 8:22:43 AM   
lastdingo

 

Posts: 110
Joined: 7/31/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung
They weren't even part of the schnelle Truppen but until late war solely of the arty branch. And even in late war Inspektor der Panzertruppe, Guderian couldn't get admin competence for all StuG, because as the arty branch chief put it, the StuG was the only weapon for arty men to earn the knight's cross.
Source: Karl Walde, Guderian, p. 187.
Edit: http://www.feldgrau.com/artillery.html


They were part of the artillery branch because that was the idea all along. They were not Guderian's idea, but Manstein's. There was a meeting where Manstein and other officers attempted to convince the then-General der Artillerie of the concept and made him accept the idea over old-fashioned horse-mounted field cannon batteries.
The idea was to give the infantry mobile, protected offensive direct fire HE support. It was basically an "infantry tank" concept, and in stark contrast to Guderian's sharp focus on concentrating all armor in operational exploitation formations.

A justification for the "Elite" status would be that StuG crews were volunteers until late in the War, just as were Waffen-SS personnel. Many of these crews were composed of experienced artillerymen, not 19 year-olds. In cotnrast to early Waffen-SS, the StuG units were tactically competent all the time. The Waffen-SS was too reckless until it was bled white of officers who believed to know tactics better than the army.

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 23
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 10:23:52 AM   
wosung

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: lastdingo

Yes, the idea was to give the infantry mobile, protected offensive direct fire HE support. It was basically an "infantry tank" concept, and in stark contrast to Guderian's sharp focus on concentrating all armor in operational exploitation formations.


Thank you, lastdingo, for posting infos, even if without sources, and not opinion.

That’s the point. StuG originally were meant to give some punch to the I.D.s, being cheaper than tanks and being separated from tank branch. It was about concentrating or parcelling out ressources. Later on they became a stopgap measure even for the P.D.s simply because they were cheaper to produce than tanks. Yes because of their sheer numbers, they shot down a considerable ammount of Soviet tanks.

So does being volunteer equal being elite? Maybe some more info on this point by those who support the StuG = elite idea would help.

How many StuG members during the war were volunteers?
What was their background?
How long were they retraind for the StuG?
Was this retraining time longer than the one for the tankers?
Is this true for heavy and light StuG?
And last not least what exactly warrants “elite status” inWitE?

Regards

(in reply to lastdingo)
Post #: 24
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 10:25:43 AM   
wosung

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: abulbulian



Sorry Wosung, but I think your very wrong if you don't think Stug units shouldn't be considered elite. Here's something you may or may not know. Quoting this, but I've heard the same facts from many other sources.

"The Sturmgeschütz III Ausf. G was the most common of the StuG's produced with over 1053 units in service and over 9000 units of various designs completed from 1942-1945.
Though Tigers and Panthers have earned more notoriety, assault guns (like the StuG) collectively destroyed more tanks than any other vehicle. The crews of Sturmgeschutz were considered the Elite and their kill record showed for it with over 20,000 enemy tank kills by 1944."


- Military Vehicle Technology Foundation


I'm not sure where you came up with this concept of them being inferior??

quote:

"German tank doctrine saw StuG as inferior to tanks, less flexible due to missing turret"


what is your source?

Also, did you know Manstein was one of the major factors to get stugs into mass production? He loved them.




Thank you for the info.

But it remains to be proven if the fact that big numbers of StuG killing big numbers of enemy tanks made them elite. My source below says that StuG only counted for 70% of Pz IV enemy tank kills. And Pz IV even wasn’t the German tank with the highest first shot kill probability. This was the Panther. Besides, in German doctrine the tank had more tasks then killing tanks.

“Notoriety” is a very subjective fluid concept, like in enemy grunts & tankers fearing StuG because usually this were the only German armoured vehicles they encounterd. But if StuG for German standards were the mass armoured weapon, it makes them just the opposite of elite.

Jentz, Die deutsche Panzertruppe, Vol. 2
(Same as in post to Mr. Kirkgregerson)

Report Panzer Reg. 36, 7.12.1943 [p.122]
“The only advantage of StuG compared to tanks in a mission is that they they have a lower profile than Pz IV. Disadvantages are: ... A StuG always has to orientate its front to the enemy. ... This turning delays the combat with the enemy targets and slows down the attack of the Panzergruppe. Esp. hard and restricting is this when one has to fight enemy targets in rough terrain or rain season. The frequent steering overburden the gear and the breaks. Sometimes in rough terrain even the tracks are thrown down.
[...]
It’s best to use the StuG together with the Panzergrenadiere.
[...]
StuG kill relation compared to Pz IV is roughly 70%.”

Report III/ Panzer Reg. 24, 9. 11. 1943 [p. 120]
“1. To the question whether Panzer and StuG should be used in a mixed formation, I stay firm, never mix them in any case in one formation.
2. ... The advantage of the StuG is its small silhouette, which makes it easier to hunt down tanks. It’s disadvantage is its lack of a M.G.. The StuG is an ideal weapon for fighting tanks in Southern Russia. But never ever it will substitute the tank.”


Regards


< Message edited by wosung -- 10/15/2011 3:45:16 PM >

(in reply to abulbulian)
Post #: 25
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 10:27:06 AM   
wosung

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kirkgregerson

Yeah, wosung I think your 'whack' to even throw some of that nonsense out there without any legit source. I've read Mainstein's Lost Victories and he does praise the Stugs and their valiant crews. It's a good read, suggest you look into it.

Sure it was turret-less and not as powerful as some German tanks, but that doesn't equate with them not being elite units. Considering how cheap they were to produce in respect to tigers and panthers, they gave you more bang for your buck!





Thank you for calling my post „nonsense“.

My “legit” sources I already did present in that “nonsense” post. Please take a second look.
To be more precise, I’ll even add some citation from Jentz, Die deutsche Panzertruppe, Vol. 2
(Same as in post to Mr. abulbulian)

Report Panzer Reg. 36, 7.12.1943 [p.122]
“The only advantage of StuG compared to tanks in a mission is that they they have a lower profile than Pz IV. Disadvantages are: ... A StuG always has to orientate its front to the enemy. ... This turning delays the combat with the enemy targets and slows down the attack of the Panzergruppe. Esp. hard and restricting is this when one has to fight enemy targets in rough terrain or rain season. The frequent steering overburden the gear and the breaks. Sometimes in rough terrain even the tracks are thrown down.
[...]
It’s best to use the StuG together with the Panzergrenadiere.
[...]
StuG kill relation compared to Pz IV is roughly 70%.”

Report III/ Panzer Reg. 24, 9. 11. 1943 [p. 120]
“1. To the question whether Panzer and StuG should be used in a mixed formation, I stay firm, never mix them in any case in one formation.
2. ... The advantage of the StuG is its small silhouette, which makes it easier to hunt down tanks. It’s disadvantage is its lack of a M.G.. The StuG is an ideal weapon for fighting tanks in Southern Russia. But never ever it will substitute the tank.”

Besides:
The fact that your only source for “all StuG must be elite” is, as you call it, “Mainstein’s Lost Victories” in so many ways speaks volumes, that I frankly wouldn’t know were to start.

Regards




< Message edited by wosung -- 10/15/2011 11:57:10 AM >

(in reply to kirkgregerson)
Post #: 26
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 10:28:58 AM   
wosung

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heliodorus04
This is why I hate historians.
Only out to make others look wrong.



Thank you for hating historians.

You know, maybe some other posters want to take a look at the sources as a proof.
You may find sources disgusting. All the power to you.

Besides, with posts like these you really don’t need anybody else to make you look wrong.
You are fully capable of accomplishing this yourself.

Regards


< Message edited by wosung -- 10/15/2011 3:47:05 PM >

(in reply to heliodorus04)
Post #: 27
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 11:09:57 AM   
Wild


Posts: 316
Joined: 12/10/2007
Status: offline
Don't take it personally Wosung. It's always this same group of people on this forum that set themselves up as the only arbiters of knowledge here, plus one who hates history but plays historical games and then denigrates others when they want the game to be, wait for it.... Historical.
Go figure. I just ignore them all.

Anyway i'm with you Stugs are not elite units. Guderian himself lamented the fact that they were forced to make them (due to the fact the were cheaper then panzers)rather then Panzers.
Having said that, they did perform well and were good value for the money,and Guderian did prefer them over the JPZ IV, but definitely not elite.


< Message edited by Wild -- 10/15/2011 11:35:43 AM >

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 28
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 11:44:43 AM   
wosung

 

Posts: 683
Joined: 7/18/2005
Status: offline
Thank you.

Funny thing is

1. somebody just states StuG units must be elite, without any source.

2. He is applauded, "+1".

3. I post doubts and give references.

4. Now a *dwarf* hell breaks loose.

5. Some people are yelling "nonsense!", "hate historians!", "where are the sources?", yadda, yadda...

6. I answer, pose more questions, cite unit reports with reference.

7. Next thing that will happen is that my questions won't be answered, my citations will be done away with and the demand for immediately upgrading all WitE StuG outfits to elite status will be renewed.

That's it.



Now what I'm really interested in are those questions:

What makes an elite unit in WitE?
How are proficiency and weapon efficiency and other factors weighted when translating IRL unit high kill ratios into WitE?
How to weight the status of different unit types in relation to each other? Like in StuG III was more numerous than the Panther but less efffective per unit.
How to grasp a rather fluid concept of "elite" in numbers? (If somebody fails to grasp the connection between "elite", "myth" & good propaganda, he certainly is lacking life experience).


I mean, should all StuG outfits made elite in WitE, because IRL they were numerous? Or because their former main proponent, "Mainstein" after the war said so?

Regards

< Message edited by wosung -- 10/15/2011 11:58:37 AM >

(in reply to Wild)
Post #: 29
RE: Elite Units - 10/15/2011 12:02:45 PM   
vinnie71

 

Posts: 930
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wosung

Now what I'm really interested in are those questions:...

What makes an elite unit in WitE?


Regards


I agree that Stugs shouldn't be considered elite - its like saying that the Africa Korps was elite when in point of fact, it was a normal outfit fighting admittedly in hostile territory.

Actually I feel that wosung hit the nail on the head? What exactly makes an elite unit in the game? Is it high morale only? Coz if its just that, than the Axis player will have no elite units by '42 due to replacements.

(in reply to wosung)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> Elite Units Page: [1] 2   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

0.203