Broadsword56 Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 German army experts: I'm curious to know what the historical Wehrmacht policy was on manning their dismounted Heer AT teams -- were they handpicked veterans and considered more elite than the average Grenadier, or just average Johans who were slected more or less at random, handed a tube and given a bit of specialized training? The dismounted German AT teams have been quite deadly to US infantry in various random patrol encounters in some of my recent HTH Wego battles, and sometimes even outnumbered individual AT guys seem prone to go berserk and let loose with a hail of 'schreck rounds, grenades and even pistol fire before showing any willingness to get suppressed/run/retreat. By and large, these have been ordinary veteran level troops, with +1 leadership. I'm not claiming anything is broken -- just curious and surprised to see them stand and fight so ferociously this way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 If you're playing QBs, I wouldn't be surprised if people are having their their AT teams be high motivation, high experience and well led. They're small teams so the cost for these augments is very low, and per man their cost to buy is quite large, so it's worth the extra points to get the bang for your buck. +1 leadership Vets aren't "ordinary". 0 leadership Regulars are the epitome of "ordinary". And their willingness to stand and fight is more related to their Motivation than Experience or Leadership (those latter two respectively affect how effective they are when they do stand, and how well they recover from morale hits, mostly, IME) If you're playing scenarios, it's down to the designer's whim. Just being an AT team doesn't confer any special resistances. One thing that does make them super effective, sometimes, is that they both have SMGs. MP40s are hellacious lethal at sub-100m ranges which is a "conservative" cover arc for an AT team, I'd say. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 No, these are battle scenarios on maps of my own design, not QBs. So I know for certain that these troops have normal motovation, +1 leadership, and are veteran experience. But my OP question has not to do with CMBN, but the real Wehrmacht in WWII, and how they selected Landsers for dismounted AT teams. Anyone? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 No, these are battle scenarios on maps of my own design, not QBs. So I know for certain that these troops have normal motovation, +1 leadership, and are veteran experience. But my OP question has not to do with CMBN, but the real Wehrmacht in WWII, and how they selected Landsers for dismounted AT teams. Anyone? Operating from memory, at some point I believe they were organized into AT battalions that had nothing but Shrek teams in them. The battalions were then split up and distributed as higher organization assets to sub units as specialist teams. So I'm thinking that the shrek teams were specialist teams that received specialized training rather than just having a squad leader say 'hey, Johann, your the shrek man now' because the squad happens to have a loose Panzershrek laying around. I don't know if that's what you were asking specifically though. Just because they were specialist troops wouldn't necessarily mean that all Panzershrek men were veterans with high morale or something. I'm sure that they just took whatever men were available and assigned them to the special training courses. From June of 1944 until the end of the war I don't think the Germans could be all that picky about who they put into the ranks. All it means is that the man using the Panzershrek was trained in it's use. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 ...Ordinary veteran level troops, with +1 leadership. Found this rather humorous. Veteran, +1 Leadership troops are in no way "ordinary". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger33 Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 I read the Forgotten Soldier recently and at point in at the author and some other men were doing a (near suicidal) rearguard action against approaching armor, some of the men were chosen at random, one was a veteran, and one was fairly fresh to the front, but was described as having special anti-armor training. I know that's just an anecdote, but there were definitely soldiers with special training. How that actually panned out in the field is probably anyone's guess. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 Novels aren't a good souce for this kind of information. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted July 3, 2012 Author Share Posted July 3, 2012 Found this rather humorous. Veteran, +1 Leadership troops are in no way "ordinary". Why do you say that? OK, good troops. But not extraordinary. This battle is happening on July 17, 1944. The 352nd Infantry Division has been continuously in action since D-Day. German replacement policies don't flood units with green replacements the way the US Army does. So, those Landsers who haven't died by now would defintely be veterans. What other rating makes sense? As for leadership -- that can vary but in this case, the unit still has a skilled cadre of small unit NCOs with Ostfront battle experience (by Market Garden those NCOs would be gone, but Normandy is where they still lived and could make a difference, at least until Cobra, Falaise, etc.). So I'd rate that a +1 in leadership, although maybe others might make that "average" (0) and have it be the baseline. In my system, 0 is the default for US leadership and +1 the default for German, unless specific circumstances of the battle dictate otherwise (for example, a deliberate attack gives the attacking side's leader ratings a +1 to reflect greater advance planning and higher-level support). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 For the 352nd division specifically, sure. It's a higher quality, more experienced formation, definitely not "typical" of the German formations that fought in Normandy. There were some other formations of comparable quality, but few that I would rate as unambiguously better. But you didn't mention that you were talking about this unit specifically in your OP. I would not model them as all Veteran, but I certainly would give them a higher percentage of Veterans than average (I am one of those of the opinion that CMBN yields more realistic combat if you assume the typical quality of units on both sides is Green, with Regular being uncommon, Veteran rare, and Crack/Elite reserved for truly exceptional). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 Basically you are agreeing with parents (and Garrison Keillor) who ALL believe that their children are above average. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger33 Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 Novels aren't a good souce for this kind of information. It's an auto-biography, and as I admitted, an anecdote. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted July 3, 2012 Author Share Posted July 3, 2012 (I am one of those of the opinion that CMBN yields more realistic combat if you assume the typical quality of units on both sides is Green, with Regular being uncommon, Veteran rare, and Crack/Elite reserved for truly exceptional). That is a really interesting opinion. I wonder how widely shared it is? Maybe I'll try it myself and see if it seems more realistic to me. I suppose I was taking the CMBN original manual at face value -- and how it described the various experience levels used in the game. Are you saying subsequent playing experience has led to to revise the way you look at the ratings, and that "Green" is the new "Regular?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 That is a really interesting opinion. I wonder how widely shared it is? Maybe I'll try it myself and see if it seems more realistic to me. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=102600&highlight=panacea You can see how the community felt about it in this thread . I reworked 'The Road to Montebourg' a few weeks back so that the US 2/8 INF were Green troops to keep it in line with the Green Scottish troops in 'The Scottish Corridor' campaign. Personally, I think the game plays in a much more realistic manner with Green experience troops and will be sticking with them for the forseeable future 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 Just don't confuse it with fitness level Damn it's hard to fight a battle with a bunch of old winded geezers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 Damn it's hard to fight a battle with a bunch of old winded geezers. That's right. It's best for all concerned if we just stay at home and console the widows. The new, young widows, that is. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 That's right. It's best for all concerned if we just stay at home and console the widows. The new, young widows, that is. Michael Hmm is that like "virtual" consoling? Sounds kind of creepy. Man the internet these days..even my pixeltruppen are not safe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artofwar Posted July 3, 2012 Share Posted July 3, 2012 "....there are courses designed to make soldiers antitank specialists. A document captured from a German prisoner in Libya gives a good idea of the content of such a course. A translation of his account follows: " "The course lasted from 8 to 10 weeks. During the mornings of the first 2 weeks, we learned ...." Here is the link lots of info (Probably somebody made all this up and made a website lmao) http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt08/german-antitank-units-tactics.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.