Stacheldraht

Perhaps along the same lines, you may want to read Michael D. Doubler's Closing with the Enemy: How the GIs Fought the War in Europe, 1944-1945 (University Press of Kansas, 1994). I've only gotten to skim parts of it so far, but it looks as fascinating as it sounds and is a scholarly work (part of the Modern War Studies series) based on extensive recourse to primary sources. The book discusses the different tactical problems faced by the GI's and how they developed ways to overcome them, evaluates their effectiveness, etc. It also discusses Marshall's arguments.

Nurse, nurse! Give me that cup back!

Not at all, actually. I'm fully cognizant of the distinctions, including the facile nature of the convenient distinction some make between the good, old patriotic Landser and those nasty Waffen SS and Gestapo folk. Anyone who believes there was a clear and simple demarcation should study the issue more, imo. Anyway, much of my knowledge of WWII stems from scholarly sources, btw, not S. Ambrose (And, yes, I'm of course aware of Allied issues like military racial segregation, Japanese internment, "Bomber" Harris and friends, unrestricted sub warfare, the GUlag system, the NKVD, etc.) Anyway, as far as a German forum or league goes, it may surprise people to know that lots of us are multilingual. I'm not German but I can read that forum easily enough, for instance. My brain hurts (Btw, I merely found the initial post rather amusing, given the context. I for one am certainly not so easily offended.) [ February 18, 2002, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

Do you realize how that sounds, particularly in the context of a WWII game?

Just wanted to link this recent interview since it doesn't seem to be mentioned here: http://www.gamespydaily.com/news/fullstory.asp?id=2923

Well, iirc, the Nebelwerfer rockets did have something of a morale-reducing effect, thanks to their notorious screaming sound. Hence the "screaming meemies" moniker.

I was thinking of the early-morning attack on the German defenses near the Seelow heights, where, according to When Titans Clashed p.263, they pointed 143 searchlights at the defensive positions, but disoriented their own advancing troops in the process. I.e., I seem to have recalled this incorrectly, though one would imagine the lights could have disoriented the opponents were it not for the smoke of an arty bombardment still hanging in the air.

Which is why I always get a chuckle out of people describing that mod as realistic. It's basically team deathmatch with vaugely real-world guns. Still fun, though

Probably some truth there, but do remember that some shooters strive for at least some degree of realism, too, like Rogue Spear, SWAT 3, Ghost Recon, Operation Flashpoint, etc. And also some shooters, like Tribes 2 and even dear old TFC, can be quite sophisticated tactically.

Found some good details: http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Waffen/raketenwerfer-R.htm#werfer15I41 Re: the 15cm Wurfgranate 41 "war 34,2 kg schwer und 931 mm lang. Der Treibsatz mit einem Gewicht von 6,5 kg befand sich im vorderen Teil des Geschosses und beschleunigte das Geschoß durch 26 schräg angebrachte Düsen, die auch den notwendigen Drall erzeugten. Die 2,4 kg schwere Sprengladung befand sich im Heck der Granate, wodurch eine erheblich größere Splitter- und Druckwirkung erzeugt wurde." I.e., it weighed 34.2kg total, propellant 6.5kg, explosive 2.4kg Hogg (cited above) details a number of 15cm arty shells, weighing somewhere around 90-100lbs. Will need to search for more details. [ February 06, 2002, 01:37 PM: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

The Soviets also used searchlights to disorient German defenders on occasion.

Regarding the Nebelwerfer, the Handbook on German Military Forces says the 15cm Nebelwerfer HE rocket weighed 75.3 pounds, though it doesn't give further details on the rockets themselves that I can see. Ian Hogg's German Artillery of World War Two doesn't seem to have any info since it concentrates on conventional artillery and guns, recoilless weapons, and their ammo. You might find more info in Michael Foedrowitz's Deutsche Nebelwerfer an der Ostfront 1941 - 1945 or Wolfgang Fleischer's Die Heeresversuchsstelle Kummersdorf, Bd.1, Maus, Tiger, Panther, Luchs, Raketen und andere Waffen der Wehrmacht bei der Erprobung. (Anyone read either of these? They sound very interesting.) A little more: http://www.achtungpanzer.com/rockets.html [ February 06, 2002, 01:38 PM: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

Here's another source, fwiw: James Lucas. Alpine Elite: German Mountain Troops of World War II. Jane's, 1980.

Before you're too harsh: http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/previews/0,10869,2775850,00.html What does that have to do with games like Age of Wonders II mentioned in the article, btw? [ February 05, 2002, 05:53 PM: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

http://www-cgsc.army.mil/csi/PUBS/Pubs%20Intro.htm "Seek, Strike, and Destroy: U.S. Army Tank Destroyer Doctrine in World War II"

Don't forget those by Spielberger, either in translation through Schiffer, or the originals from Motorbuch Verlag. Those are some extremely detailed books. Definitely a must for anyone seriously interested in German armor. 272pp. with extensive illustrations and a decent amount of data for each entry. Appendices on armament, ammmo, engines, etc.

You're kidding, right? Judging from the screens, CMBB won't look anywhere close to what you see in today's shooters and many strategy games. Some hardcore shooter fan, for instance, isn't going to rush to play CMBB because of slightly improved visuals. (And hardcore shooter fans are hardly just interested in graphics anyway.) You won't suddenly see a bunch of bunny-hopping, wall-cheat-using CS players storming the gates with their AWP's (remember those? ). I imagine--and hope--that just like CMBO, CMBB will draw more than just a tiny hardcore grog crowd. CMBB might well introduce people with a moderate interest in WWII or people who are curious about wargames to what it's all about. Welcome them and help them out. The genre needs all the new blood it can get before it dies out. Adopting some superior us vs. them attitude won't help wargaming. The loudmouths that might come should just be ignored and they'll leave when you don't take their bait. [ February 02, 2002, 08:13 AM: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

Earlier in the thread I mentioned how one source noted that at times manpower shortages meant that the T-34 sometimes was used without the MG/radio operator and asked whether the crews were trained to take over other positions if need be (this in the context of the TC in a two-man-turreted tank getting wounded in CMBB). Here are some interesting excerpts from David M. Glantz's Stumbling Colossus: The Red Army on the Eve of World War (Kansas UP, 1998): "Compounding these deficiencies, since the [mechanized] corps were formed on the basis of existing cavalry corps and divisions, many of its new officers and men had no familiarity with the basics of armored warfare. Hastily organized remedial courses failed to solve this problem. Moreover, since the new model KV and T-34 tanks were secret, training in their use was limited, and by 22 June only 20 percent of corps personnel had any experience operating them." p. 118 "Numerous archival documents indicate that, on the eve of war, many of the older Soviet model tanks had been allowed to fall into disrepair and the new Soviet tanks often were not even bore-sighted and, hence, could not fire. Furthermore, many tank crews had not received the requisite driver and crew training [emphasis mine]. All of this, together with the surpise nature of the German offensive, negated any Soviet numerical or qualitative advantages." p. 119

That's a major key right there. It's usually not until graduate-level critical theory, philosophy, and historiography classes that you really delve into the concept of history as contested narratives. History as a field of scholarly (often not so scholarly with WWII) endeavor is incredibly far from just recounting the facts, though the naive belief that that's the case abounds. History writing involves selection, filtering, creation, and all those involve biases, whether cultural or individual. Unfortunately, assuming people even get taught some history these days (and liberal arts education in the US is frighteningly bad), history education usually just does amount to the laundry list or calendar approach. Critical thinking and research skills definitely are paramount: with those, any reasonably intelligent person can seek out and evaluate source material on their own.

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq96-1.htm

Another good place to seek out rare or used military books (or any kind of books, really) is http://www.powells.com (No, I don't work for or with them.)

Goldhagen's book has been the subject of scathing criticisms from a number of scholars. There have been a bunch of books in both German and English that have taken it task, or at least seriously questioned its conclusions. It sounds like the book has been more a succes de scandale than anything. There are, nevertheless, lots of books and articles (again in both English and German) by major scholars that do raise related questions about the guilt or sins of ommission of the German populace and/or the Wehrmacht (as opposed to the SS). And after all, the Wehrmacht was by and large fighting unprovoked campaigns of aggression and eradication--and hardly just against opposing militaries. Nowadays, it's PC to find excuses and ameliorating explanations for everything, but some things shouldn't be excused.

Though I haven't gotten to read it yet, Alan Clark's Barbarossa : The Russian-German Conflict, 1941-45 is supposed to argue that Hitler was a better strategist than he was given credit for in that context. It's not all surprising that the German generals, soldiers, and populace would frequently try to pass the buck after the war. How many generals want to admit to professional failings when they can blame a political leader? How many soldiers want to admit to war crimes or atrocities when they can blame the SS? How many civilians or police want to admit to their role in the Holocaust when they can point at Hitler, or Himmler, or their neighbor Hans down the Straße? But that's a whole gigantic topic in its own right. Look at how much controversy that Hitler's Willing Executioners alone has caused. *** Anyone know of some good books or documents that detail Soviet armor training and doctrine during the period? Thanks.

Well, citing sources (as admittedly tedious as it can be!) is what helps keep scholarship going, and in a sense, it really sounds like the research put into CMBB--judging by the discussions around here--could provide both serious and armchair historians with some useful information. It seems like it would be a shame to keep all that hard-won info private.

These are admittedly two bibles instead of one but for basic illustrated armor references, they're great: Chamberlain, Peter and Chris Ellis. British and American Tanks of World War Two. Cassell & Co. " and Hilary Doyle. Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two. Arms & Armour/Cassell & Co.