Andreas

Well, one could argue that had happened by about March 1945, and still the Germans did not get it. I also think that ACW is not quite comparable, since despite Sherman's rife up the Shenandoah Valley and the sacking of Atlanta, or the nastyness that was Andersonville POW camp, it was not a war of annihilation, as the Soviet-German war certainly was.

Michael, Zhukov was referring explictly to the actual crossing. I think by the standards of east front fighting, what happened there could be called 'skirmish' Regarding Berlin as an objective, I fail to see how the nerve centre of the military and political leadership of Germany can be seen as 'prestige-object'. The Wehrmacht was controlled from Zossen, just outside Berlin, until Rybalko's army overran it. All the government and Hitler himself were in the city. It is all well to claim that Germany would have surrendered in two weeks, but it sounds like a bit of a blithe statement to me. More like post-war posturing 'Yeah, we did not go for Berlin, because it would have been a waste. Silly Russians, they just did not get it. Always with the head through the wall, that Stalin.'

I am always very suspicious when someone tells me how other people will feel about something, based on, err, not a lot of evidence. I guess it is the empiricist in me. Well, I think that if you are totally new, you DL the demo from Happy Puppy, and you sit down and take your German tanks for a spin, you are going to have a riot of a time. If you are totally new, and you try to take your Soviet conscripts into the German lines in the Yelnia salient, you will tear your hair out, and curse Steve and his descendents for 7 generations. What you will not be is bored. If you care at all for wargames, and are not completely brain dead, you will then send a cheque, crawl on your knees to Steve's hut with cash, offer to repair his front door, order Madmatt a dozen bimbos through an escort service, or sacrifice your first-born just to be allowed to get this game. Why? Because it rocks, and the demo shows it. Why you ask? Because I say so. And let's face it, that is exactly the same evidence anyone complaining about the demo has too.

There was a post-war debate in Soviet circles on this. Chuikov, GOC 62nd Army (of Stalingrad fame), and an Army commander in Zhukov's 1st Belorussian Front during the Vistula-Oder and Berlin operations made the claim that when 1st Belorussian Front seized the bridgehead at Kuestrin, they could (and should) just have taken Berlin. Zhukov in his memoirs takes him to task for that in no uncertain terms, indicating this was indeed a touchy issue. According to Zhukov there were a number of reasons, and they sound fairly believable. </font> Supply lines were over-stretched. By mid-1943, the Soviets had understood the art of the possible. Going for Berlin without the required supplies would have been a huge risk, and had the potential to end up like Charkov in spring 1943, or Warsaw in 1920 (an explicit reference in Zhukov's memoirs)</font> Open flanks. The Baltic fronts had gotten stuck, leaving the northern flank of 1st Belorussian Front wide open (300 km or something), and a counter-attack from there was not just possible, but actually attempted. It was roughly handled by switching a tank army (IIRC) onto a northerly axis. Had that not been done, the main assault force on Berlin Feb.45 may have been cut off. In the south, Konev's 1st Ukrainian Front was busy clearing Silesia, a very complicated operation. They would not have been able to support a thrust.</font> Fest Plaetze. Posen/Poznan was still occupied until the end of February. It was a major communications centre, sitting on Soviet supply lines.</font> Risk. The operation would have been possible, but at a huge risk of failure. Had they failed, the Soviets may have ended up driven out of Poland again, something that they could not risk. </font> Western Allied advance. In February, the British and Americans were still very busy clearing the west bank of the Rhine. Nobody could know that (in Zhukov's words) they would get across it without a fight, or when. This put a major burden on the Soviets, and increased the risk that more units might be switched east to west by the Germans, to meet them. </font>Just off the top of my head - hope this helps a bit.

Does not either Ken Tout in Tank! or the chap who wrote '64 days of a Normandy summer' discuss bailing times? Tout also has at least one account where they bailed, after a non-penetrating hit tht set the twigs used as camo on fire.

The Germans also had air superiority at the Oder bridgeheads for a while in 1945, because the Red Army Airforce could not operate from the forward airfields in western Poland after the rapid advance in the Vistula-Oder operation. This was due to weather and supply problems. The Germans used the concrete runways near Berlin. Ais power was never as one-sided in the east as it was in the west. One sign for that is that the Ju-87 was used to the last in the east. In CMBB, airpower has been changed considerably, and vehicle morale has a huge effect on it. I have seen some fun stuff, that made people at the second preview at my place scream.

A good example of what Greg talks about can be found here.

Pre-ordered barrage - part of the fireplan set up by higher level artillery command. can be set for any location on the map, at any point in the game, through the delay function. Can not be altered if your plan happens to fall foul of the central command's ideas of where you ought to be at any given point. Why? Reality. You own (and presumably have read) Harrison-Place on the straighjacket that artillery can be for an attack. Flexible barrage - fully under control of local commander. Can fire anywhere, anytime, subject to delays for plotting and inaccuracy if unobserved. Why? Reality. Takes time to calculate target, transmit orders, re-arrange gun layout. You want to have your cake and eat it? Fine, buy more than one FOO. In a scenario, it is not entirely unlikely that the designer intentionally forced you to make a decision, to demonstrate your tactical acumen. Who benefits to what level from pre-barrages (generally speaking)? Minor advantage - mortars, light artillery Good benefit - divisional artillery Recommended - Heavy divisional Unplayable without - super-heavy, rockets

Hortlund, I am not putting anything in your mouth, you do that very well yourself. If you want to play semantics games, find yourself somebody else to play with.

Uh, when did I make that assertion? </font>

Well, off the top of my head, US army...1 (might have been more though, but I know that at least one were executed) CW army...lots (they were having huge problems with some of the local units in India and Burma early in the war) German army..I have no idea whatsoever, and I strongly suspect that you dont have a figure either other than some estimation. </font>

All WW2 armies were executing their deserters? Care to tell me the number of executed deserters in the US and Commonwealth armies? And that in the German army, with a particular subset in January to May 1945? Quite apart from that, these men were not deserters, and executions of those with 'good reasons' to be away from the frontline happened. See the example I previously mentioned. Drafting 12-year olds and 60-year olds to defend the Heimat - care for the soldiers, the German way... Yeah, sure - the Wehrmacht and the Nazi state were just models of humanity, right up there with the US and the Commonwealth. There really is precious little left to say. Those with eyes and minds open read and learn, the rest live in ignorance.

Now there is not, since most of those German soldiers treated to this summary 'justice' were not deserters (a good example of how they worked is in 'Panzer Commander' by von Luck). It was a terror method to keep the men in line that had nothing to do with justice/fairness. The same as blocking detachments were when the Soviets were losing. This is the first time that I hear blocking detachments were used at Seelow - any sources?

Yes, pretty much, except that the Soviets were better at what they were doing and understood it better. I also think that just saying 'western societies' is a bit erroneous, if that to you includes the Germans. They happily hung, shot and wasted their Landsers, something the US and the Commonwealth never did. I don't read propaganda, but you do if you rely on Carrell (who is also a proven liar about his own combat experience) for your picture of the war in the east. I actually read the combat regulations, and material like TM30-4430 'Handbook of Soviet Forces'. Maybe you should give that a try. Until then, you are welcome to your opinion, no matter how wrong it is.

Well, and when was the last time that was used? Care to explain to me how that was different from the random hangings and shooting on the spot that went on in the German army during the last few weeks of the war? Hanging from a lamp-post with a sign around your neck 'Ich bin ein Deserteur' or being shot in a backyard after some flying judgement detail determined you were a deserter - the German way of caring for their troops?

Fact is, you are wrong. As a look in mid to late-war Soviet infantry doctrine would show you. Like it or not. If you base your statements about Soviet doctrine on things written by those on the receiving end, that is a mistake. To insist that they are right and refuse to even try and inform yourself, would be ignorance. The material is out there, so why not check it and see what your opinion is afterwards? What have you got to lose apart from some long-held opinions, maybe? Of course the Soviet officers are biased. But to understand what happened you need to look at both sides.

Which is just what you would expect from Paul Carell, erstwhile Paul Schmidt, chief of the propaganda department in the Nazi foreign office, and editor-in-chief of 'Signal' magazine. The thing about it is quite simple. What to you looks like a human wave attack on the receiving end could just be the application of overwhelming force in a concentrated sector to achieve a rapid breakthrough with minimal losses. Of course the Germans never understood what happened to them post-1943, so they preferred to think they were outnumbered, and not outfought.

Yes, but not as you think. It makes an allowance for training deficiencies up to 1944, which is generous, and maybe too long. People here (and in other threads) are not talking about the demo scenario. They are extrapolating, so I have to correct you there. If Paul Schmidt is your guide on eastern front history, and the use of Soviet infantry in the fighting, I strongly suggest broadening your horizon. You will be surprised. If you speak German, pick up the memoirs of Soviet officers that were published in East Germany, they go cheaply now (sold off by public libraries for next to nothing), and are very interesting. I own a good number of them, by various ranks. A good counterpoint to the German officer memoirs, particularly if you read up on the same operation in parallel. If you are restricted to English - Glantz is the answer (isn't he always...) The ultimate word on this for me is still Koniev. In short he said: 'you achieve nothing by using infantry instead of firepower. Gain freedom to maneuver through firepower, and then insert your infantry. Which is what the Red Army did from late 1943. Guards, regular rifle units, anyone regardless of designation. [ September 04, 2002, 05:48 PM: Message edited by: Andreas ]

Well, you keep saying that. Funnily, you are the one who has not brought any concrete example (I could give you 1(!), but I won't). Instead you tell us your unshakeable belief. Well, being the agnostic type, I go with the examples.

Err, I think there maybe a tiny difference between a Sherman in 1944 receiving a penetrating hit from a 75L40, and a Panzer III in 1942 receiving a penetrating hit from an ATR or a 45mm gun. The difference being that the tank crew stands a good chance to survive the next hit in the second case, but has used up all their luck for this battle in the first case, if they survived. They have to weigh the risk of staying inside against the risk of receiving a nice burst from a Maxim if they bail, and that could really ruin their day. So examples from late war are not necessarily a good guide to early war happenings.

Christ on a crutch! Does anyone here realise that you are playing a DEMO with a very restrictive troop selection? Play regular/veteran Soviet guards in 1945 in Berlin against green/conscript Fallschirmjaegers (sacrilege! he says there were conscript Fallschirmjaegers!! Burn him!!!), and see if your German Ueberhamsters do any better. As for the Red Army not caring about its infantry, compared to the other nations. Bollocks. How much did Adolf care about his infantry that he left to be slaughtered in Stalingrad, or the ones who froze to death before Moscow? How much did the average German general care about their infantry who had to fulfill another 'hold to the last man' order? The point about the Americans and their crap Repple-Depple system was well made already. The Red Army used its 10:1 odds precisely to minimise casualties. The amount of generalisation going on here from looking at a very small part of the game is quite frankly astonishing.

I always thought their raison d'etre was to utilise the car manufacturing assembly lines that could only churn out light tanks to produce somefink with a decent gun. The SU76 is on the T70 light tank chassis, not? So basically the same idea as the Germans with the Panzerjaeger I. Use a hopelessly outdated chassis to make something semi-useful.

Oh, and stop being so English - 'Boody good' or 'This rocks' (if you are a cousin from over the pond) would have been sufficient as a thread title.

James, I hope things went alright for you the other day. I let you know when I organise drinks again. I just want to say, that I remember when I got the first version of the Beta for me, in [CENSORED], and after designing a quick scenario, firing it up and playing it, I knew I would never go back to CMBO again. Easy to forget, in many ways the whole testing has made me a bit jaded to all the improvements, so it is very good to see people post about them. There is so much new stuff going on in the game, beyond what can be seen in the demo, and what you will notice until you have played a while, that the game will be a whole new discovery. It is CM, but not as we know it.

Rock on DeanCo