Jump to content

DMS

Members
  • Content Count

    590
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    DMS got a reaction from Lethaface in Soviet infantry squad organisation   
    In CM squad organization affect gameplay, unlike other games. You can't split Soviet squads, because they get morale penalty and start to panic after getting fire. The reason is absence of squad leader assistant. Soviet squad had only 1 NCO, while in German were 2. That is true... Until 27.09.1941. Below is Stalin's order №374. He states, that on machinegunners posts (Also ATR riflemen, mortar and artillery gunners) must be designated "most skillful and initiative" soldiers. They must be promoted to junior sergeants or gefreiters. In TO&E must be created new position - squad leader assistant. They got more salary, 12,5 rubles additionally. So, in Soviet squad of 1944-1945 were 2 NCOs, like in other armies. 
    Another question - squad headcount. In 1941 TO&E squad headcount was 11 men. In 1943 in 4/550 TO&E headcount was reduced to 9-10 (including platoon HQ or not). In 1944 high command decided to stop reinforcing rifle divisions too full strength (according 4/550 TO&E), leaving maximum strength 6-7 thousands men. HQs of rifle divisions started to make calculations to define subunits headcount (As far as I know, there was no centralized TO&E like before) Some of them are published, I post them below (in next comment): for 141 men company (full strength 4/550: 4 squads, 9 men), 111 men (4 squads, 7 men) and 90 men (3 squads, 7 men).
    I think these schemes are most close to reality. 1-st variant (141 men) is in the game already, it is called "1943". I would suggest to replace game TO&E "1944" by one of these schemes: for 111 men company or 90 men company. With 4 (3) squads, 7 men and 1 lmg in each one. I think 111 men companies are best for the game, because you can delete 4th squad if you want. Note that these schemes are not "under strength". They are for full strength divisions of 44-45 (6000 or 7000 strength). No divisions were reinforced to 4/550 TO&E as far as I know. May be few, coming from rear, that didn't take part in battles of 1943-1944. 11 men - this is from 1941, not 1944. And if some very lucky division would get large reinforcement, they would rather add 4-th squad instead of making 3 11 men squads. 
    So, Soviet squad had 2 NCOs and 7 men with 1 lmg. (And 2 or 6 SMGs) There were no official "teams", but according to regulations lmg could act separately, covering movement of the squad. So, I think that squad could be divided to 2 teams: lmg team leaded by machinegunner (SL assisnant), 3 men, and rest of the squad, 4 men. Actually, lmg team had 2 men, but it's hard to believe that 1 assistant could carry 6 DP disks, having weight 40kg. + his own rifle.
     
     

  2. Like
    DMS got a reaction from Bulletpoint in Soviet Infantry Battalion Attack   
    Well, IRL Germans had solid trench line, occupied by minor forces. They tried to avoid massive artillery strike on their main forces and used to set them back. Soviets knew this and tried to assault 1-st trench line by surprise. In the game there is no solid trench line and player didn't get divisional artillery, looks like battle in the depth of defense. I would play like usual, slow advance, spot MG nests, call mortar fire on them. Attack on broad front, clear flanks, be aware of mines and AT guns. Assault guns should be 50m behind infantry line according to regulations.
  3. Upvote
    DMS reacted to Ts4EVER in Fire and Rubble DAR: BFCElvis vs Ithikial_AU - Soviet Side   
    Not an expert on Soviet TOE, but did they still use 11 man squads after 1942? As far as I know they switched to 9 man squads at some point?
  4. Like
    DMS got a reaction from Freyberg in Soviet infantry squad organisation   
    Once I dispersed platoon (1943) in 300-400m wide area. I splitted squads, set teams 50m from each other. Then my opponent attacked and teams on my far flank started to surrender without taking any losses. ) Really, they are "fragile" when splitted.
  5. Upvote
    DMS got a reaction from Aurelius in Soviet infantry squad organisation   
    Insert other media.url
  6. Upvote
    DMS got a reaction from Aurelius in Soviet infantry squad organisation   
    In CM squad organization affect gameplay, unlike other games. You can't split Soviet squads, because they get morale penalty and start to panic after getting fire. The reason is absence of squad leader assistant. Soviet squad had only 1 NCO, while in German were 2. That is true... Until 27.09.1941. Below is Stalin's order №374. He states, that on machinegunners posts (Also ATR riflemen, mortar and artillery gunners) must be designated "most skillful and initiative" soldiers. They must be promoted to junior sergeants or gefreiters. In TO&E must be created new position - squad leader assistant. They got more salary, 12,5 rubles additionally. So, in Soviet squad of 1944-1945 were 2 NCOs, like in other armies. 
    Another question - squad headcount. In 1941 TO&E squad headcount was 11 men. In 1943 in 4/550 TO&E headcount was reduced to 9-10 (including platoon HQ or not). In 1944 high command decided to stop reinforcing rifle divisions too full strength (according 4/550 TO&E), leaving maximum strength 6-7 thousands men. HQs of rifle divisions started to make calculations to define subunits headcount (As far as I know, there was no centralized TO&E like before) Some of them are published, I post them below (in next comment): for 141 men company (full strength 4/550: 4 squads, 9 men), 111 men (4 squads, 7 men) and 90 men (3 squads, 7 men).
    I think these schemes are most close to reality. 1-st variant (141 men) is in the game already, it is called "1943". I would suggest to replace game TO&E "1944" by one of these schemes: for 111 men company or 90 men company. With 4 (3) squads, 7 men and 1 lmg in each one. I think 111 men companies are best for the game, because you can delete 4th squad if you want. Note that these schemes are not "under strength". They are for full strength divisions of 44-45 (6000 or 7000 strength). No divisions were reinforced to 4/550 TO&E as far as I know. May be few, coming from rear, that didn't take part in battles of 1943-1944. 11 men - this is from 1941, not 1944. And if some very lucky division would get large reinforcement, they would rather add 4-th squad instead of making 3 11 men squads. 
    So, Soviet squad had 2 NCOs and 7 men with 1 lmg. (And 2 or 6 SMGs) There were no official "teams", but according to regulations lmg could act separately, covering movement of the squad. So, I think that squad could be divided to 2 teams: lmg team leaded by machinegunner (SL assisnant), 3 men, and rest of the squad, 4 men. Actually, lmg team had 2 men, but it's hard to believe that 1 assistant could carry 6 DP disks, having weight 40kg. + his own rifle.
     
     

  7. Upvote
    DMS reacted to RockinHarry in Fire and Rubble DAR: BFCElvis vs Ithikial_AU - German Side   
    with the round going straight through I wonder all these guys were casualties. The middle guy surely had to abandon family planning, but the rest? 
  8. Upvote
    DMS reacted to Haiduk in Book outlining Partisan Ops (for scenario generation?)   
    This was short-time episode in mid of 1944, when Germans were leaving territory of Western Ukraine and UPA High Command at last allowed to commanders to negotiate with Axis units and make agreements "weapon in exchange on neutrality and safe pass without confrontations and on recon information about Red Army". Before this decision the same High Command restricted any contacts with Germans and several local commanders were executed for betrayal, when they tried to make contact with German units by they own. Most good relations was between UPA and Slovakian units, they often supplied Ukrainians with weapon and ammunition and as a rule sabotaged any orders of Germans, directed against UPA. Most bad relations were with Hungarians and Russian Cossacs in German service, so weapon from them Ukrainians got only in battles.  
    UPA was established in the end of 1942, so most of weapon until this unofficial pact in 1944 were got from old stores, partially from OUN members in Ukrainian Shutzmanschaft, which by the order deserted from German service and went off to the forests. Further the weapon mostly captured in different actions against Red Partisan, Axis occupation forces and Armia Krayowa. After 1945 most of weapon already was captured Soviet. 
    Лента за лентою - this also could be Maxim %) Though, most of weapon in 1943-45 was German/Hungarian with some number of Soviet, taken in in 1941. Unlike Red Partisans, UPA as well as their enemy Polish Armia Krayowa, operated in Ukraine territory, hadn't centralized supply and solved a problem with weapon and ammunition and as they could.
  9. Upvote
    DMS reacted to MikeyD in Fire and rubble (questions) :-)   
    They were considering other nationalities but the module had already grown to massive proportions. New fall, winter and spring foliage, terrains and horizons,. Snow, whitewash for all vehicles, a new region (Germany) and specialized artwork for the Berlin maps, Lend Lease vehicles, late war vehicles, partisans and Volkssturm, multiple uniform swap-outs for the seasons. Plus some vehicles even got alt late war camou schemes. This module is a monster.
  10. Upvote
    DMS reacted to Bozowans in German SMG formations?   
    This reminds me of the US Army slang where they would refer to "burp guns" among the Germans, but I was always very confused about what weapon is actually meant by that. One of my old WW2 books (I forget which one, I think about the Normandy campaign) mentioned American soldiers talking about burp guns, but then the footnote said it referred to an MP-40. The footnote said something along the lines of soldiers calling them burp guns because the Germans "relied heavily on automatic fire from MP-40 machine pistols, which had a very high rate of fire and had a distinctive rapid 'brrrrrrrrp' sound."
    Yet that sounds more like an MG42 to me. The MP-40 doesn't even fire that fast. As we all know here, machine guns were the primary weapons in German squads and that's probably what soldiers on the ground would have been hearing the most. Yet the book made no mention of MG42s, although the soldiers kept talking about "burp guns" all the time. That made no sense to me so I thought the book might have been wrong about that. Why would MP-40s be so important to talk about all the time but not MG42s?
    Upon searching Google for "burp gun" however, I find results that are almost entirely about the Soviet PPSh41. I see headlines like "Firing the Iconic PPSh41 'Burp Gun!'" This made me even more confused.
    On the second page of Google results I found a site (https://ww2db.com/weapon.php?q=8) which repeats the MP-40 as burp gun thing.
    So which one is it? The whole thing gives me a headache. Some of the Google results suggest "burp gun" just being a generic term for an SMG. It kinda makes me think that during the actual war, none of the soldiers on the ground would have had any idea of what was going on around them, and every enemy automatic weapon was a burp gun regardless of what it was, just as how every tank was a Tiger or whatever.
  11. Upvote
    DMS reacted to Bozowans in German SMG formations?   
    It does make sense that a PPSh could be called a burp gun because of the high rate of fire. It can shoot 900-1000 rounds per minute. The old PPSh sound effects from CMBB even sounds like a 'brrrrrp brrrrrrp'. That article mentions soldiers in Korea calling them burp guns.
    The term certainly does go back to WW2 though. Looking into it a little bit further, it seems there was even a firefight called the "Battle of Burp Gun Corner" during Operation Varsity in WW2, where a bunch of glider pilots fended off a German attack. It's kinda hard to find detailed information about it, but I found an article (https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/2019/01/21/the-birdmen-of-varsity/) that again repeats the claim that burp guns were MP-40s. It said, "In nearby farmhouses, enemy soldiers relentlessly fired their MP-40 submachine guns—nicknamed 'burp guns' for their rapid rate of fire." It went on to say that the battle was named the "Battle of Burp Gun Corner" by a journalist from Stars and Stripes.
    This still makes no sense though. Could MP-40s really have been such a dominant part of that fight that the battle would be named after them? Why not MG-42s? Something seems fishy. The MG-42 can vary from 900-1500 rounds per minute, so it's not that much different from the PPSh. The MG-34 gets 800-900 per minute, so also not that different. It should have a brrrrrrrrrp sound. The MP-40 only fires 500 rounds per minute, so it should be more like a pop-pop-pop-pop sound. Also, the officers carrying MP-40s would likely not have been firing them very much. They would be busy communicating, directing their men and observing the fight. It doesn't make sense that there would be all these relentless volleys of MP-40 fire that drowns out everything else.
    When I Googled MP-40s, the first video result was this:
     
    There is a guy halfway through the video who praises the MP-40 for its SLOW rate of fire. He said it was a good SMG because it's simple and fires slow enough that it's easily controllable and doesn't need a mechanism to toggle between semi-automatic and fully-automatic. It only fires fully-automatic, yet slow enough that you can still squeeze off aimed single shots if you want. That doesn't really sound like a rapid-firing burp gun to me.
    I'm gonna go ahead and make the bold assumption that every one of these sources about WW2 burp guns are wrong. Burp guns were really MG-42s (and 34s), but when Korea came along, the slang shifted to mean the PPSh, because it made a similar sound. Perhaps this meaning continued into Vietnam, and the term must have been used to refer to other SMGs that looked similar to the PPSh as well. The Vietnamese were known to use MP-40s mixed with PPSh-41s and whatever other SMGs they could get their hands on. If you look at the Wikipedia article for the PPSh-41, there is a photo of a captured NVA MP-40 alongside a PPS-43 and a K-50M, the Vietnamese variant of the Chinese variant of the PPSh-41. So all of these weapons would have been lumped together by the Americans until "burp gun" just meant "generic SMG that isn't ours". Then the WW2 burp gun somehow got retconned into meaning the MP-40.
    Maybe decades after WW2, someone was reading accounts from WW2 soldiers talking about burp guns, and they thought, "Burp gun? That's like one of those SMGs right? Must have been an MP-40 then." And then that got repeated over and over and over again ever since. Then once people started thinking burp guns meant MP-40s, they would read the original accounts from the war and think that MP-40s were much more important than they really were, since why else would the soldiers talk about these "burp guns" all the time right?
  12. Upvote
    DMS got a reaction from Warts 'n' all in German SMG formations?   
    No, this is just a slang. Any German infantrymen were called "avtomatchiki", because Germans relied on heavy automatic fire (from their MG-34).
  13. Like
    DMS got a reaction from Freyberg in German SMG formations?   
    No, this is just a slang. Any German infantrymen were called "avtomatchiki", because Germans relied on heavy automatic fire (from their MG-34).
  14. Upvote
    DMS got a reaction from BletchleyGeek in Fire and Rubble   
    Nice example of folk history. But why not to post this on forum.axishistory.com? You would find qualified answers there. Why to post this doubtful statements on wargame forum?
  15. Like
    DMS got a reaction from Bud Backer in Fire and Rubble   
    Nice example of folk history. But why not to post this on forum.axishistory.com? You would find qualified answers there. Why to post this doubtful statements on wargame forum?
  16. Like
    DMS got a reaction from _Kraut_ in Fire and Rubble   
    Nice example of folk history. But why not to post this on forum.axishistory.com? You would find qualified answers there. Why to post this doubtful statements on wargame forum?
  17. Upvote
    DMS reacted to Haiduk in The Year Ahead Bone Post   
    I have conducted some research about B-4 heavy guns in Berlin assault, so 102nd, 104th, 120th and 124th high-power artillery brigades were involved. In street fights for direct firing were used 38 B-4 guns of theese brigades. They turned out single weapon system, wich could defeat extremely strong stone buildings in the Berlin center. Germans also blocked streets with heavy barricades, built with massive blocks, so for its destruction also used direct fire of 152-203 mm barrels. If direct fire with heavy guns wasn't possible, 280 mm Br-5 mortires (34th sep.high-power artillery battalion, 6 barrels) and 305 mm howitzers mod.1915 (322nd sep.high-power artillery batalion, 6 barrels) were coming to game. Was enough 1-2 305 mm shells to collapse heavy fortified building. 
    As told memories, using of heavy guns for direct fire also had a next reason - artillery spotters often could't see places of indirect fire shells impact because of high density of tall buildings and couldn't ajust fire. Indirect firing also couldn't supress enemy strongpoints on lower floors of buildings. Also bad communication between infantry and artillery, fast changing of tactical situation caused Soviet artillery and rockets often hit with indirect fire own troops, sufferng to them heavy losses and foling further advance.
    Here some examples:
    1. Assault group in 80 SMG gunners and riflemen, having in support 4 tanks, 6 76 mm guns, 4 45 mm guns, 4 120 mm mortars, 4 82 mm mortars, 2 152 mm howitzers had a task to advanse in Alexanrowplatz area from the crossroads of Fridenstrasse and Lansbergstasse. During advansing the group encountered that crossroads was blocked by heavy barricade and main buildings turned out in fortified positins. In the night B-4 has arrived and set up in front of barricade road block. On the morning the 20 minutes artillery barrage was conducted on nearest deep of enemy defense. Under artillery cover, part of the guns, appointed for direct fire, rapidly moved forward. B-4 with several shells wiped out the part of barricade. In the hole Soviet infantry rushed, supported by tanks, arttillery pieces moved with infantry by pairs  - all forces mutually covered each other.
    2. Rifle unit couldn't take a heavy fortifierd building. All attempts to blow up the walls by sappers failed, because from the deep of the street this building covered by MG nests and snipers. B-4 has arrived. Infantry moved two regimental guns, which opened fast fire along the street in direction of MG nests. The street LOS was closed by smoke and dust and in that moment loaded B-4 moved to the street and hit the building.
    3. During the fighting in Warshauerstrasse area, Soviet infantry was stopped by heavy resistanse - Germnas turned out dozens buildings in deadly fortress. Artillery of assault groups was useless. Even support fire of 122 mm barrels didn't give anything. Then four B-4 were moved there and they during 20 minutes from 200 m distanse complitely destroyed 11 buildings - infantry moved further.    
    4. One Army, which operated in Berlin on the front of 3 km, used during several days for street fights and direct fire 14 203 mm howitzers, 34 152 mm guns and 12 152 mm howitzers, not counting barrels of less caliber.  
    In most cases big guns were taking own positions after meticulous recon and as a rule under the cover of darkness, rarely in the daylight when it was extremely needed. Before opening fire, guns covered behind the buildings, covering by its walls. In some cases guns deployed in rubbles, behind ruined walls (its height adjusted if needed by crews and sappers). Range of using was 150-300 m, rarely 500-600 m. For the covering of guns infantry commanders detached special groups. Guns almost didn't fire in spotted targets, they often fired in middle part of buildings, causing severe destructions. As a rule about 7-10 203 mm shells was enough to destroy heavy building. More strong churches and stone buildings demanded 9-12 shells. 
    Though were single fortifications in Berlin, which couldn't be crushed with no one of Soviet heavy artillery system - that are Flack-towers. Their walls has 2,8 m of thick, overlaps had 4 m, windows had steel plates 50-100 mm. For example flack tower in Tiergarten (Zoo-tower) was shooting out with 152 mm and 203 mm guns from 200 m but shells left only dents in the walls! 
     

      
     
           
     
     
     
  18. Upvote
    DMS reacted to General Jack Ripper in The Year Ahead Bone Post   
    I see none of these jokes you mention.
    Are you off your meds?
  19. Upvote
    DMS reacted to Ts4EVER in Fire and Rubble Update   
    Nice to hear about the improved Soviet oob. Lots has been said about smg issue, but what about carbines? The long mosin nagant rifle was phased out of production in early 1944, with front line infantry receiving the M44 Carbine instead. The 57th Guards Rifle Division, which took part in fighting around Berlin, reported 806 M44 Carbines, compared to only 580 M91/30s, on 1st of March 1945.
  20. Like
    DMS got a reaction from Aurelius in The Year Ahead Bone Post   
    Hm, I didn't expect that B-4 can hurt someone's feelings so much! 
  21. Upvote
    DMS got a reaction from BletchleyGeek in The Year Ahead Bone Post   
    It's interesting to see how players will use this organization. IRL were very different opinions about using smg platoons. From screening flank to attaching SMG groups to rifle squads (in defense). Most obvious - fire and maneuver tactic where rifle platoons are firing elements, smg platoon - maneuver element.
    What do you think, did Germans adopt this organization with their Sturmzugen? Or did they come to it independently, basing on 1-st world war assault groups? 
  22. Upvote
    DMS reacted to akd in The Year Ahead Bone Post   
    The change to organize 1x SMG in each rifle company was made in mid 1943.  All the rifle companies in current version have larger numbers of SMGs than the shtat provides for seeded throughout the rifle company.  With this fix, they will be concentrated in an SMG Platoon and rifle platoons will have the authorized shtat allocation of SMGs.
    Note that the 43 and 44 rifle battalion orgs are really not earlier and later orgs, but rather the full shtat authorized org (from Dec 42 with changes through mid 43) for the "43" battalion and a more typical reduced org for 1944-45 (not a new shtat) for the "44" org.  
    In 1944-45, the Red Army was short of men, not SMGs.
  23. Upvote
    DMS reacted to DougPhresh in I like neither parapets nor foxmounds.   
    Fortifications need a fix. They're annoying to place to the point of widespread un-use in QBs, and the objects themselves and how troops interact with them could be improved. I can't imagine the poor scenario designers right now working on The Seelow Heights.
    Can you imagine trying to place this in the editor? In QB?!

  24. Upvote
    DMS reacted to akd in ZIS-2 57mm AT Gun CMRT Performance   
    I believe this is a test using standard AP, but not sure:
    http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/07/soviet-57-mm-guns.html
  25. Upvote
    DMS got a reaction from Denis1973 in The Year Ahead Bone Post   
    What's about TO&E, will we get SMG platoons in rifle companies? Any "assault group" formations for urban combat?
×
×
  • Create New...