New book series, fodder for scenerio designers...

[civdiv]

I've been reading a new series of books that center on the exploits of individual German soldiers. The series; 'The Stackpole Military History Series', contains at least 5 books centered on German experience in WWII. I have purchased and read three of the books;

Panzer Aces

Panzer Aces II

Infantry Aces

There are several more available, and it seems as if more are appearing everyday. I'm not sure if the level of granularity is present to be able to build scenarios, based solely on these books, but they may serve to fill in some gaps. They all seem to be in the style of 'The Battery Commander, his Batman, and a Cook', at least what I have read in the chapters available w/o purchase. The books can be found at www.stackpolebooks.com and many can be found on www.amazon.com.

[stoat]

Originally posted by civdiv:

I've been reading a new series of books that center on the exploits of individual German soldiers. The series; 'The Stackpole Military History Series', contains at least 5 books centered on German experience in WWII. I have purchased and read three of the books;

Panzer Aces

Panzer Aces II

Infantry Aces

There are several more available, and it seems as if more are appearing everyday. I'm not sure if the level of granularity is present to be able to build scenarios, based solely on these books, but they may serve to fill in some gaps. They all seem to be in the style of 'The Battery Commander, his Batman, and a Cook', at least what I have read in the chapters available w/o purchase. The books can be found at www.stackpolebooks.com and many can be found on www.amazon.com.

These are not new books. I have had Panzer Aces for several years. Its copyright date is 1992, but it was not translated into English until 4-5 years ago.

[civdiv]

[The DesertFox]

Originally posted by civdiv:

I didn't say they were new books, I said there was a NEW series. Out of the three books I have, one has NEVER been published, and two others bear the ENGLISH publication date of 2002 and 2005 respectively. And I had the wrong books for myself, I didn't read Panzer Aces II, I read Tigers in the Mud. [/QB]

Although they are certainly interesting reads and good for entertainment, keep in mind that Mr. Franz Kurowski isn´t writing reference based military history but is mixing real life events with pure fantasy. So take it with a grain of salt.

cheers

Helge

[Michael Dorosh]

Do these loveletters to Heinz Guderian have topographical maps and detailed Russian orders of battle?

If not, they're not "ideal" for scenario designers; in fact, I'd call them hopelessly average.

[civdiv]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Do these loveletters to Heinz Guderian have topographical maps and detailed Russian orders of battle?

If not, they're not "ideal" for scenario designers; in fact, I'd call them hopelessly average.

First I mention a NEW SERIES, and someone points out the books aren't new because a couple of them were published in German 15 years ago.

Then I mention that they are possibly of use for sceneraio designers, but I point that they would be used to fill in gaps, as the level of granularity is probably not up to snuff. And someone chimes in and points out that they don't have detailed topographical maps and lack the Russian OOBs. No scenario designer is going to utilize one source for information. Scenario design is basically puzzle building, using whatever sources can be found. SO these are a tool. And as they portray the dates, the german units involved, the German weapon and personnel strength, and the individual engagements timelines, they seem like a good source. And as they center on company and battalion level operations, their scale fits neatly into CM. They also discuss, in some detail, both Russian and German tactics. Are they one stop shopping for scenerio designers? No, of course not.

Forgive me for letting the board know about a new, and to me, interesting series available on WWII.

[Michael Dorosh]

All will be forgiven after you design a kick-ass Battle or Operation from one of those books.

I'll be happy to help playtest, email is in my profile. After all, if I'm not part of the solution, I'm part of the problem, right?

[Bannon DC]

civdiv -- thanks for the contribution.

I'm reading "Stalin's Folly, the tragic first ten days of WWII on the Eastern Front."

"Folly" is an appropriate word. Good look at the utter cluelessness of the Soviet High Command. Little by way of detail for company/battalion design, but inspiring for design of early war scenarios. Good companion to Guderian's "Panzer Leader" and other accounts. Reads well and is a quick page turner.

Author is Constantine Pleshakov, 2005

[civdiv]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

All will be forgiven after you design a kick-ass Battle or Operation from one of those books.

I'll be happy to help playtest, email is in my profile. After all, if I'm not part of the solution, I'm part of the problem, right?

My copy of CMBB-SE should be here today or tommorrow, so I may take you up on that. I am interested in trying my hand at a scenario, and I really like the 'outpost line' fights in Infantry Aces. I can think of long, open fields covered by minefields and wire. And night or dusk/dawn infiltration attempts. German dug in up to their eyeballs, Russians attacking across open ground with tank support, etc. The play balance will be tough as most of the accounts from the book revolve around 15-man German companies taking on, and destroying Russian battalions on a daily basis. That includes killing a multitude of tanks with just grenade bundles.

[Keith]

I would have to agree with Micheal Dorosh here. The Stackpole books are, in my mind, little more than unsupported German propaganda with very little scholarly value. I avoid them like the plauge.

Regarding "Stalin's Folly", I am very suspicious about this book because the author writes as if he was in the room with the Russian commanding generals, recording their conversations word-for-word and documenting their inner most thoughts. There are no historical documents or notes that support these "conversations" and I suspect that they are fabricated out of whole cloth, being the personal musings and hunches of the author. Most of these Russian generals died in battle or where subsequently shot by Stalin. There was not time for them to write memoirs ala Rommel or Guderian for prosperity.

[ January 18, 2006, 07:24 AM: Message edited by: Keith ]

[Mad Russian]

I have used the books in the series for scenarios. I don't use them for primary sources of information if there are other sources but they are often fairly accurate on German forces. They aren't normally too accurate on Allied forces mentioned in the accounts.

No maps and a complete lack of any reference or research material makes them next to impossible to use as the basic source of a historical scenario though.

[Bannon DC]

Originally posted by Keith:

...

Regarding "Stalin's Folly", I am very suspicious about this book because the author writes as if he was in the room with the Russian commanding generals, recording their conversations word-for-word and documenting their inner most thoughts. There are no historical documents or notes that support these "conversations" and I suspect that they are fabricated out of whole cloth, being the personal musings and hunches of the author. Most of these Russian generals died in battle or where subsequently shot by Stalin. There was not time for them to write memoirs ala Rommel or Guderian for prosperity.

I had the exact same feeling. However -- he does have a 35 page section in the back of the book in which he addresses this, including: notes on sources and methodology, chapter notes in which he quotes his sources (he attributes the quotations and apparent musings), and a bibliography. His epilogue covers who lived and who died. The index is very good as well.

The style of the musings and quotes did seem a little thin in a historical context, however, I think he covered himself well and it did turn out to be just a matter of style. I am suspect of any Soviet era source (as is the author)... anything printed during that time went through the machine and came out exactly how they wanted it.

I just happened to have downloaded an article for the Red Army Studies web site click that included one of his sources and I could see where he pulled his quotes and musing from. It checked out. Article was "Previously Unpublished Excerpts from (General) Rokossovsky Memoirs." Supposedly stuff the Soviet censors had taken out. Rokossovsky commanded the Ninth Mech Corp near Kiev and went on to have a long career in the system.

* thanks to whomever posted that Red Armies site a few days ago.

[JasonC]

The Stackpole books are Signal magazine style propaganda. You'd get more history from a Sergeant Rock comic book. Stalin's Folly is revisionist nonsense, axe grinding and fiction, meant for present political purposes.

As for the statement that anything Russian written at the time is propaganda, it is not remotely accurate. Public relations stuff, yeah, but that is pretty darn thin. Some of the lessons learned stuff for lower officers is trying to keep up morale in "we can do this" fashion, though it is easily looked past. The internal consumption stuff for higher echelons is as objective as anything in German archives. The general staff studies are entirely professional. Though there is a progression noticable in them, over the course of the war.

The earliest, e.g. the battle of Moscow one, is ruthless about recording weaknesses and failings, as it obviously necessary in order to correct them. The later the study, the more the tendency has entered to report reams of dry statistics in a stereotyped pattern (probably because lower staffers were entrusted with sections, later on) - but the operational narratives of unit movements etc, are still perfectly objective and accurate.

The contemporary Russian operational maps are things of beauty, and indispensible. There is nothing comparable from the German side.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by JasonC:

The Stackpole books are Signal magazine style propaganda. You'd get more history from a Sergeant Rock comic book. Stalin's Folly is revisionist nonsense, axe grinding and fiction, meant for present political purposes.

As for the statement that anything Russian written at the time is propaganda, it is not remotely accurate. Public relations stuff, yeah, but that is pretty darn thin. Some of the lessons learned stuff for lower officers is trying to keep up morale in "we can do this" fashion, though it is easily looked past. The internal consumption stuff for higher echelons is as objective as anything in German archives. The general staff studies are entirely professional. Though there is a progression noticable in them, over the course of the war.

The earliest, e.g. the battle of Moscow one, is ruthless about recording weaknesses and failings, as it obviously necessary in order to correct them. The later the study, the more the tendency has entered to report reams of dry statistics in a stereotyped pattern (probably because lower staffers were entrusted with sections, later on) - but the operational narratives of unit movements etc, are still perfectly objective and accurate.

The contemporary Russian operational maps are things of beauty, and indispensible. There is nothing comparable from the German side.

So how does a mere mortal go about accessing these modern miracles?

[Bigduke6]

civdiv,

you might want to check out an author called David S. Glantz, he's very thorough on the Soviet side. He has books on most the major battles.

After you read his stuff you begin to doubt those stories of 15 German infantrymen destroying a Soviet battalion advancing in the open.

[JasonC]

Mike - you go to a good library. In my case it was the Regenstein library at the University of Chicago (4.4 million books, easily many thousands on this subject alone).

[civdiv]

Originally posted by Bigduke6:

civdiv,

you might want to check out an author called David S. Glantz, he's very thorough on the Soviet side. He has books on most the major battles.

After you read his stuff you begin to doubt those stories of 15 German infantrymen destroying a Soviet battalion advancing in the open.

I just took advantage of an Amazon gift certificate I got for Kwanza and ordered a bunch of Glantz's books. Ok, the Kwanza part was a joke. I just ordered;

The Battle of Kursk

When Titans Clashed

Colossus Reborn

Before Stalingrad

The Siege of Leningrad

If I like them, I'll make another purchase at Barnes and Noble, I have a gift card there also.

[civdiv]

P.S. I also just got my copy of CMBB the other day, and I'm busy playing the advanced tutorial, Jaegermeister, or whatever it's called. I'm on about turn 15 right now. I've traded one JS-2 and one SU-152 for a couple of German AT guns. And two of my infantry platoons got hammered in a German arty stonk in the woods above the village, in the middle of the ridgeline. Besides having 2 of my tnak commanders shot out of the turret, things are going well. I have one inf platoon about to break into the village from the right, with another close on their heels. They are about to move into the church. And I have another inf platoon about to move into the rear of the village after crossing the ridge from the left.

This bog thing, I can't find much mention of it in the rulebook, besides the fact that vehicles can bog. I've had two tanks bog, and both have unstuck themselves and they are back in the van. That sort of answered my question before I had a chnace to ask it. My question would have been; 'Is bogging permanent?'. I guess not.

[JasonC]

Here is a sample of the sort of Russian operational maps I was talking about, from a guy who has put a number of them on the web. The general staff study quality books have lots of them -

http://www.serpukhov.su/dima/war/defmos.jpg

That covers all of 9 days of the defenses of the northwest approaches to Moscow, at the turn of the tide. Try finding that kind of thing in a Signal magazine "we beat an army with two toothpicks and a handful of rocks! Gosh that was hard!" comic book...

[civdiv]

Originally posted by JasonC:

Here is a sample of the sort of Russian operational maps I was talking about, from a guy who has put a number of them on the web. The general staff study quality books have lots of them -

http://www.serpukhov.su/dima/war/defmos.jpg

That covers all of 9 days of the defenses of the northwest approaches to Moscow, at the turn of the tide. Try finding that kind of thing in a Signal magazine "we beat an army with two toothpicks and a handful of rocks! Gosh that was hard!" comic book...

Nice map. IMHO, about one level above CM. That was an operational map, whereas, you need a tactical one for CM. Good for locations and units involved. I really like this site for some maps, but still operational in nature;

http://www.dean.usma.edu/history/web03/atlases/atlas%20home.htm

[Abbott]

I own all three of them Civdiv. I just recently purchased Panzer Aces II at Barnes and Nobel, some two weeks ago while looking for a Glantz title. They are enjoyable books to own and read and yes, they can be helpful in scenario design.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by JasonC:

Here is a sample of the sort of Russian operational maps I was talking about, from a guy who has put a number of them on the web. The general staff study quality books have lots of them -

http://www.serpukhov.su/dima/war/defmos.jpg

That covers all of 9 days of the defenses of the northwest approaches to Moscow, at the turn of the tide. Try finding that kind of thing in a Signal magazine "we beat an army with two toothpicks and a handful of rocks! Gosh that was hard!" comic book...

Got any info on the fight at Mtzensk in October 1941 on the road to Tula between 3 and 4 Pz Divs and Russian armor units...?

[civdiv]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JasonC:

Here is a sample of the sort of Russian operational maps I was talking about, from a guy who has put a number of them on the web. The general staff study quality books have lots of them -

http://www.serpukhov.su/dima/war/defmos.jpg

That covers all of 9 days of the defenses of the northwest approaches to Moscow, at the turn of the tide. Try finding that kind of thing in a Signal magazine "we beat an army with two toothpicks and a handful of rocks! Gosh that was hard!" comic book...

Got any info on the fight at Mtzensk in October 1941 on the road to Tula between 3 and 4 Pz Divs and Russian armor units...? </font>

[JasonC]

Mike - Russian operational descriptions are quite high level for something like that. It is covered as part of the Orel-Bryansk defensive operation. The staff narrative runs -

"The Soviet High Command began (around 6 October) focus in area Mtsensk reserve formations of 4th and 11th Tank Brigades, 36th Motorcycle Regiment, 201th Parachute Brigade, 6th Guards Rifle Division, the cadets of the Tula artillery school and other formations.

Moscow airgroup of the special Civil Air Fleet and distant bomber aircrafts actively participated in transfer this reserves. For three days they have delivered to a line of front almost 5500 soldiers with arms and 13 tons of ammunition.

From these forces 1st Guards Rifle Corps of general D.D.Lelushenko was generated. (26th Army forms around it, extending north to cover the withdrawal of large forces from Bryansk).

On approaches to Mtsensk Germans was stopped by fire from ambushes Soviet 4th and 11th Tank Brigades. Wehrmacht tanks have tried to bypass them from flanks, however shock group of 4th Tank Brigade of the colonel M. E. Katukov broken this attempt by vigorous counter-offensive.

As a a result the enemy was detained on the river Zusha for the whole week. For strong resistance and unprecedented actions 4th Tank Brigade of the colonel M.E.Katukov was transformed into the 1st Guards Tank Brigade."

Naturally this action is famous on the other side as the first time Guderian records encountering T-34s in numbers.

[Bannon DC]

Originally posted by JasonC:

The Stackpole books are Signal magazine style propaganda. You'd get more history from a Sergeant Rock comic book. Stalin's Folly is revisionist nonsense, axe grinding and fiction, meant for present political purposes.

As for the statement that anything Russian written at the time is propaganda, it is not remotely accurate. Public relations stuff, yeah, but that is pretty darn thin. Some of the lessons learned stuff for lower officers is trying to keep up morale in "we can do this" fashion, though it is easily looked past. The internal consumption stuff for higher echelons is as objective as anything in German archives. The general staff studies are entirely professional. Though there is a progression noticable in them, over the course of the war.

The earliest, e.g. the battle of Moscow one, is ruthless about recording weaknesses and failings, as it obviously necessary in order to correct them. The later the study, the more the tendency has entered to report reams of dry statistics in a stereotyped pattern (probably because lower staffers were entrusted with sections, later on) - but the operational narratives of unit movements etc, are still perfectly objective and accurate.

The contemporary Russian operational maps are things of beauty, and indispensible. There is nothing comparable from the German side.

By definition, wouldn't most Russian historical works covering WWII released in the post-Soviet era be "Revisionist?" When the facts were control by a dictitorial regime that controlled all publishing and distribution from start to finish, anything published under those circumstance was exactly what the state wanted presented... truth, half-truth or outright lies. ("He who controls the past controls the present.") Now that the chains are off, writers have a chance to look at some archives and revise the past lies. The Soviet state's total control of the past has so muddied the record that I doubt a complete reconstruction of the facts is possible. I did not use the word "propaganda" but you go on to support my point of state-controlled information.

If an author draws from some of these source you extol, how can the work be considered fiction? I go back to my statement that it is a matter of style which is subjective to the reader.

Thanks for the link.

Bannon