Jump to content

Cuirassier

Members
  • Posts

    555
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cuirassier

  1. Given that the Tank and Mech corps are division sized units, yes, it is a fair amount.
  2. Hetzers? Na, three King Tigers and a Maus. Shot down an Fw-190 too while returning to base.
  3. Indeed, "Bandera's Bandits" did us military enthusiasts a great disservice by killing Vatutin. I've always wondered what post-war memoirs by Vatutin would have been like, considering he had a brilliance for mobile warefare right up there with Manstein. It would have been interesting, of course, to compare Vatutin's memoirs directly to Manstein's, as they were frequent opponents in south Russian and Ukraine. Alas, he did not survive long enough for this to happen.
  4. If memory serves me correct, this is only part of the statement. It went something along the lines of "I have no Suvorov, but Rokossovsky is my Bagration." Stalin was stating that he had no military geniuses under his command of the Napoleon, Moltke, Suvorov, etc calibre. I wouldn't say this is true, (Vasilevsky and Vatutin were both excellent), but Stalin hated to give such praise. However, in comparing Rokossovksy to Bagration, Stalin was saying that he was a reasonably skilled commander that was extremely tenacious and courageous. That is what Bagration is known for, by the way. He held the Russian far right together at Austerlitz and was killed in action at Borodino, courageously facing the French main effort, if I remember correctly. Again, going off memory, the comparison arose during the planning phase of Operation Bagration. Stalin wanted a less risky, straight push through Bobruisk. Rokossovsky favoured a double envelopment and then exploitation. After giving Rokossovsky some time to 'change' his mind, Stalin again strongly urged that Rokossovsky use a single thrust. Rokossovsky nevertheless stood his ground and said that a double envelopment was preferable. Hence the courage and tenacity similar to Bagration. Note that during 1940 Rokossovsky had been imprisoned and tortured by the regime and suffered all sorts of trials during the early war period. So standing up to Stalin like this took considerable courage and resolve, and Stalin recognized this. Plus Rokossovsky had an impressive military record to back up his argument. In the end, Rokossovksy proved to be correct and 20 Pz.D showed considerable confusion in response to Roksossovsky's duel thrusts. I hope this provides some insight into it.
  5. Without putting too much thought into it, I would get rid of the T-26 and the Char B1 and put in the IS-2 and Pz. 38. I would also rate the Pz. III higher than the Tiger. The Pz. III was a fantastic early-mid war tank, when compared to other, competing designs. Five man crew, radio, cupola, reliable, etc.
  6. Maybe so, but what do cars know of Stalingrad? Seriously though, I've always wanted to read Marks, but he was also out of my price range. And to make matters worse, my University library doesn't have any of his work.
  7. Looks like one of Bil's recon squads stopped for a quick photo before the action begins.
  8. Hordes that were only created due to the irresponsible Nazi decision to use tactical nukes at Kursk.
  9. Your opponent clearly wasn't expecting contact that close to his front.
  10. Nice to see you doing a defense AAR Bill. Any local counterattacks planned?
  11. True. For example, the Soviet Union produced more tube artillery than it could realistically supply. It was extremely cheap to make and they never had a global shortage of guns. And they lost a lot, particularly during the German offensive periods of the war. But the real resources that were valuable and needed to be husbanded were manpower, first and foremost, and armor.
  12. That is not data. That is an anecdote. And that is fantastic that Mr. Litvin could hit parts of a tank with his 45mm ATG at 500m. I'm sure Wittman could do the same in his Tiger. Who cares? Practically all major armoured attacks (using proper combined arms eg early war Brits/Soviets don't count) were stopped by repositioning armoured reserves (tanks or TD's), not ATG's. ATG's never had the mobility nor durability under artillery fire to have much of an operational impact. They could give a bloody nose tactically here and there, but were too often simply avoided, suppressed by artillery fire or smashed through by more concentrated armour. I would take the T-34 every day of the week, attacking or defending. CM and real life.
  13. I forsee someone putting an infantry battalion in two action spots and driving a tank regiment over it.
  14. Indeed. Point hard targets do not become viable targets for aircraft until the advent of PGM's and modern targeting systems. I'm sure a Spitfire wouldn't even register as a threat to the crew of a pillbox. Just spotting the thing from the air with Mark I eyesight would be tough, let alone actually getting bullets through the embrasure (and those doing any damage if they do find a way through. Overall, its a poor, poor weapon for the job. It should be fighting Bf-109's and maybe strafing the odd truck convoy, not chipping concrete away from a pillbox roof. Leave pillbox busting to direct lay artillery and armor.
  15. I would give HOI a 50 on that scale. Not that that is a good thing. It always baffled me how a game covering the whole world and conflict would use divisions as the operational units, and be real time. Its a fun game, but I found the eastern front to be unplayable. Far too many units to keep track of and move around.
  16. Yes they are online: http://www.history.army.mil/html/bookshelves/resmat/ww2eamet.html The Lorraine volume is quite good. However, it takes some combing through to find the specific actions involved, as the books cover lots of higher level operational stuff as well.
  17. Very unfortunate. His book on Epsom was excellent. His battlefield photos really helped one understand the terrain and how it influenced that tactics involved.
  18. It is true that Hitler and the OKW prevented the full implementation of Rommel's plan. However, 21st Panzer on the edge of the Brit sector, along with actions in Italy (eg Salerno, Gela) showed conclusively that Rommel's strategy was unworkable. Massing more PD's into Allied naval gunfire would not have improved the chances of success; it would only result in higher German casualties. The reason being the naval gunfire stripped German tanks of their supporting arms and rendered them quite vulnerable. I think the only reason the 'drive them back into the sea' method is still kicked around as a viable tactic is because Rommel was its greatest proponent. If a less well known General had managed the defense of Normandy, and advocated the same tactic and it failed, it would probably not be as well regarded as it is today.
  19. Even Russia is aware that such a response equals a dead Russian naval group. Won't happen. Only Syria and non-state actors (eg Hezbollah) will actually engage US forces (and likely ineffectually). Iran and Russia will only support them indirectly as proxies. They would be insane to engage the US directly.
  20. I believe it was meant in the Napoleonic sense. In that if I destroy the enemy, secondary matters will take care of themselves. If you succeed in killing the enemy then you will get all of his VL's as a result; he can no longer defend them.
  21. At first I thought it was nothing, but then I noticed the name in the story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23553074
  22. Empiricism is also a good route to take. Don't think that reading tactics articles is the only way to learn basic tactics. Play small scenarios and quick battles and try to really think about the tactical problem you are confronted with. Come up with a plan that seems reasonable and realistic to you, and then give it a try. Take note of what worked, what didn't, and why. Experience against the AI will give you the basic skills. From there you can start looking into the more nuanced bits of tactics.
  23. usgubgub, I recommend this thread to further flesh out the "superior operational play by the Soviets" thesis: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=90838 FWIW.
×
×
  • Create New...