Off-Topic: TMA Soviet Infantry

[$Pec5]

So, if you wanted something that would enable human wave-style behavior, maybe something like:

Experience = Conscript

Motivation = Fanatic

Leadership = -2

Fitness = Fit

That's exactly what I was getting at.

[c3k]

A lot of the Western view of Soviet-era soldiers were brought on by German propaganda. Surely, the superior Germans were only overcome through sheer mass. (/sarcasm off). The post-war/German POW accounts of their defeat in the East have been responsible for a lot of misconceptions. The secrecy of the totalitarian state and its suppression of individuals allowed those misperceptions to gain traction and flourish.

The Soviets had a lot of handicaps. The bravery and resiliency of the individual is not in question (or shouldn't be).

Ken

[Sublime]

Stop talk bull**** about soviet soldiers! Soviet soldiers was trained enough and have high motivation to protect their homeland, Red army has problems with officers because many of them was executed. What you know about Russia and Russian soldiers? Who say that behind all Russian soldiers was NKVD mans with machineguns? Hollywood?

Go watch your stupid yankee movies!

You.re being ridiculous. It sounds like you've watched too many stupid Russian movies. The person you insulted is quite well read and knowledgeable about WW2. I can tell you for a fact that the NKVD did have battalions set up to machine gun deserters and cowards. and I can also tell you that cowardice, and desertion were just as common in the Red Army, especially in early WW2. You could say that about any army, and it's ridiculous that you jump on any comment that isnt 100% positive about Russian 'super men'. By discouraging realistic discussion of this, all you're ensuring is that possibly the Ost Front games won't be as realistic, and that myths about wars get perpetuated.

[Broadsword56]

Yes, and it's a shame that we'll never see as many unvarnished, soldier-level accounts from the Red Army as we've gotten over the decades from the armies that fought WWII in the West (things like "A Bridge Too Far," "Band of Brothers," etc.)

As a result, the story of the Red Army soldier has largely been told in the West by their former WWII or Cold War enemies. I've seen some more recent books that have tried to rectify this -- but so many years have passed and so many of the veterans have passed away.

I just finished that 1940s novel "Star," which I really liked and which had a feel of authenticity to the patrol actions. But it was a Stalin-era novel (it even won the Stalin prize) and so it still had the whiff of propaganda about it.

[baron Jacquinot]

You.re being ridiculous. It sounds like you've watched too many stupid Russian movies. The person you insulted is quite well read and knowledgeable about WW2. I can tell you for a fact that the NKVD did have battalions set up to machine gun deserters and cowards. and I can also tell you that cowardice, and desertion were just as common in the Red Army, especially in early WW2. You could say that about any army, and it's ridiculous that you jump on any comment that isnt 100% positive about Russian 'super men'. By discouraging realistic discussion of this, all you're ensuring is that possibly the Ost Front games won't be as realistic, and that myths about wars get perpetuated.

Of course NKVD shot deserters and cowards and in 1941 we have many of them because not all population of Soviet Union to much love communist( in 1937 they kill two of my grand grandfathers and I not fan of Stalin), but many soldiers in red army was communist with high morale and motivation, but you yankee always think that we win because NKVD stay behind or Russian winter was so cold.

[agusto]

A lot of the Western view of Soviet-era soldiers were brought on by German propaganda. Surely, the superior Germans were only overcome through sheer mass. (/sarcasm off). The post-war/German POW accounts of their defeat in the East have been responsible for a lot of misconceptions. The secrecy of the totalitarian state and its suppression of individuals allowed those misperceptions to gain traction and flourish.

The Soviets had a lot of handicaps. The bravery and resiliency of the individual is not in question (or shouldn't be).

Ken

Mass did play an important role, though. AFAIK, western allies for exampe believed that they would be better off with producing a larger number of medium tanks like the m4 and its derivates instead of a lower quantity of heavier vehicles. The germans on the other hand followed more or less the opposite production policy wich resulted in ridicolous projects like the maus or the landcruiser P1000.

I am sure that one reason why the USSR was able to turn the tables during the course of the war was its ability to replace human and material losses much more easily than what the axis could ever dream of.

...but you yankee always think that we win because NKVD stay behind or Russian winter was so cold.

No, we dont always think that. I think what you want to point out is that factors that did play a role during particular phases of the great patriotic war were not of such great importance that they had changed the outcome of the war. It is matter of fact though, that the Wehrmacht was unprepared for the winter of 1941 due to its leaders failure to anticipate a winter war. It was believed by the german command that the USSR would be defeated within 3-4 months, wich was obviously an error.

[Broadsword56]

As someone once said, "quantity has a quality all its own."

[$Pec5]

Yes, and it's a shame that we'll never see as many unvarnished, soldier-level accounts from the Red Army as we've gotten over the decades from the armies that fought WWII in the West (things like "A Bridge Too Far," "Band of Brothers," etc.)

As a result, the story of the Red Army soldier has largely been told in the West by their former WWII or Cold War enemies. I've seen some more recent books that have tried to rectify this -- but so many years have passed and so many of the veterans have passed away.

I just finished that 1940s novel "Star," which I really liked and which had a feel of authenticity to the patrol actions. But it was a Stalin-era novel (it even won the Stalin prize) and so it still had the whiff of propaganda about it.

A good read to get a glimpse into an individual soldier's perspective on the Eastern Front is The Forgotten Soldier by Guy Sajer - a german soldier on the Eastern front. The historical accuracy of some of Guy Sajer's writing in this book has been questioned by historians, however, it seems to have withstood some of the scrutiny it has received.

I read this book years ago, but I remember there being parts of the book that describe Soviet attacks, artillery bombardments, etc.

[baron Jacquinot]

No offense intended, Baron. I'm sure the forum will benefit from the insights of real Russians once we in the West are playing CM on the Eastern Front. But the question I posed still remains. How would you set the soft factors to represent a Soviet soldier, and might there be any differences -- on average -- from the way the ratings might be set for Germans in that period?

The Soviet soldiers was different, first you must know that Soviet Union was polyethnic country which include 121 ethnic group with their own characters and genes, many of Soviet people hate communist because they do many crimes especial in civil war, but many people was a members of communist party which give them chance to new life.

I think it is impossible to represent a standart Soviet soldier, because he can be Russian or one from other 120 ethnic groups, he can be communist or he can be hidden anticommunist. Russians from Siberia and Ural are physical stronger than Russians from south part of Soviet Union, etc.

I think in new game need just include two variants for morale 1) Standart unite morale 2) Guard unit morale

[Sublime]

Of course NKVD shot deserters and cowards and in 1941 we have many of them because not all population of Soviet Union to much love communist( in 1937 they kill two of my grand grandfathers and I not fan of Stalin), but many soldiers in red army was communist with high morale and motivation, but you yankee always think that we win because NKVD stay behind or Russian winter was so cold.

I never said anywhere that Red Army soldiers 'needed' the NKVD or threats at all. I think Red Army soldiers fought for each-other and simply to survive, like brave soldiers anywhere have. Some were braver than others. I never have derided the Soviet contribution to WW2, and I know 3/4s of the German military was fighting Russia from 41-45. I also know that the land war in Russia in WW2 was probably the most savage land war of all time. But to say that all soldiers were brave or heroic is a lie. Some were heroes, some were cowards, most probably were just regular guys. I think if BF can model the US military, with 8 million troops by 1945, than they can do Russia as well. They did it in CMx1 and as far as 'guards and regular' settings you'll get more than your wish - it'll be like CMBN so you'll have the whole range and gamut I assume.

Oh and the NKVD was only getting started in 1941 - The "Not one step back" Directive was issued in mid '42 and that's when the Shtraf battalions and NKVD units with machine guns behind attacks began in earnest. Don't kid yourself, to the average Russian Boris the Soviet government was nearly as much an enemy as the Nazis.

[Sublime]

Broadsword where did you find a copy of Star in English?

[baron Jacquinot]

They did it in CMx1 and as far as 'guards and regular' settings you'll get more than your wish - it'll be like CMBN so you'll have the whole range and gamut I assume.

Oh and the NKVD was only getting started in 1941 - The "Not one step back" Directive was issued in mid '42 and that's when the Shtraf battalions and NKVD units with machine guns behind attacks began in earnest. Don't kid yourself, to the average Russian Boris the Soviet government was nearly as much an enemy as the Nazis.

1) Yes it is enough I think.

2) You not right, for many people communist party give a ticket to new life, not all Russians live good before 1917.

P.S. Personally, I think the world would be better off if it had happened this :-) -

[Broadsword56]

Broadsword where did you find a copy of Star in English?

My local library in the Bay Area is in an interlibrary loan system called Link+

So I searched for it online at the Library's website and it located a copy at San Jose State U. A few weeks later it arrived at my local library and I picked it up.

The volume itself felt like a historical artifact -- actually I'm surprised that the university let it circulate -- it was tiny, slender, pulpy-smelling, and printed in the late 1940s by the Foreign Language Publishing House, Moscow. The flyleaf said "Stalin Prize, 1947" in bright red type. It had a number of moody, evocative illustrated plates in a few places, too.

So, if your library has a loan system like this, do a search and you might be surprised.

[Sublime]

1) Yes it is enough I think.

2) You not right, for many people communist party give a ticket to new life, not all Russians live good before 1917.

Yes and it also killed many people. What about the Ukrainians? White Russians? The Tsarists? And the purges? Of course many people made careers in the Communist party, but life was very cutthroat and hard for it's entire existence in Russia. And yes I know life was awful before 1917 as well, I'm not saying the Tsars were better or worse. I'm American, I really have no opinion about it one way or another, how you live in your country is no business of mine. But as far as history is concerned I would much prefer we keep in discussing facts and leave opinions and nonsense behind, whether its Hollywood bull$hit or it's Soviet propaganda. I always much preferred studying the Eastern Front because both sides were bad at the government level. This led to intense fighting and made it easier for people to assess it from a neutral standpoint, I was tired of the 'Great Western Crusade of Good Against Evil'.

For both the Germans and Russians in WW2 life was awful for the regular people- civilians and soldiers, etc. When I say both sides were bad I mean the SS, NKVD, Gestapo, Einsatzgruppen.. Regular troops committing war crimes, etc. And the dictatorship governments that used their troops with blatant disregard to any humanity on either side. I think it still bears remembering they were people though, no side anywhere possessed 'supermen'.

Broadsword - lol did you tell me this before? I feel like maybe you did. I have a system very similar at my college (UMass Boston) called Interlibrary Loan. I'll check it out, thanks.

[Fernando]

I am afraid that generalizing about the Soviet soldier is ridiculous and a mistake.

His performance depended heavily on training, equipment and moral and the three factors changed a lot during the war as it happened with all other WWII armies.

In 1941 the Soviet soldiers fought hard, but also surrendered and deserted easily. It depended on leadership, training and luck

Just a small example:

On October 23rd, 1941 the II./269 battalion from the Blue Division, deployed in Sitno after crossing the Volchov river, was attacked at night by two Soviet battalions from 1.002nd Regiment and a pair of companies from 848th Regiment. One Soviet battalion managed to slip into Sitno so the fight was hand to hand there. The Spaniards lost 90 men (13 KIA and 77 WIA), but the Soviets lost about 700 men, including 250 prisoners. It seems Soviet moral started to sink.

On Oct. 24th 14 deserters gave themeselves to the battalion while 26 did the same on Oct. 25th. They informed another attack was going to be delivered at 6 A.M. next day so at 3 A.M. Spanish artillery concentrated its fire on the Soviet suspected concentration areas. That day the Soviet deserters were 18 and informed that the attack had been cancelled due to the Spanish artillery effectiveness.

On Oct. 27th , at 6 A.M. three battalions from 848th and 1002nd Regiments attacked Sitno again. They attacked for the full day but losses were so staggering that the attack was finally stopped. A Soviet group that tried to fortify the socalled "Sitno Mill" was assaulted by a Spanish Platoon at 1 A.M.. 22 Soviets were taken prisoners there. Next day, Oct. 28th 94 (NINETY-FOUR!!!) Soviet soldiers deserted.

The above Soviet regiments remained in line for several weeks. According to Spanish and German intelligence they got reinforcements, but most of these reinforcement were untrained men with low moral.

That was 1941, when the German tide seemed unstoppable and it is an example of Soviet soldier fighting really hard, but at the same time exhibiting a brittle moral.

The typical Soviet soldier in June 1941, inexperienced but trained, was not the same as the Soviet soldier in January 1942, inexperi3enced and untrained, which was different from the one in Stalingrad in Dec. 1942, in Kursk in July 1943 or unleashing hell over the Germans during Bagration in 1944 or during the Berlin battle in 1945.

I think no "national" trait for the Soviets is needed. Playing with leadership, training, moral and organization, as was the case with the CMFI Italians, would be enough.

That's a personal oppinion. Don't think it is a BFC official position.

[mjkerner]

Sublime, my friend, I like the way you think.

[Broadsword56]

I think Fernando has the persuasive argument, with the facts on his side.

Bottom line: For Soviet toops we'll just have to do our historical homework, depending on which specific situations we're trying to re-create with CM:EF.

[Sublime]

Exactly. And it's really no different than any other Army. The Soviet's gave amazing accounts of themselves in 41 - a single KV holding a German division up for a day, battles around Yelnia, the battles in front of Moscow from Sept thru Dec. They also surrendered in the hundreds of thousands.

US units in Africa surrendered in thousands, were scorned by Tommies. US units also devastated a major Axis attack at El Guettar and defeated Rommel with a gigantic force.

British units were devastated in France in 1940, but would also fight heroic actions throughout the war, Arnhem, etc.

The Germans conquered Europe, and then lost it. Their story is full of heroism, and abject cowardice. I could go on but it speaks for itself. Generalizations are nonsense. This by the way isn't a problem, it actually adds to the game and makes it much more dynamic. In fact, even the suckier units and formations add to it - if the game was all super units it'd suck. Having Romanians, Italians in the Eastern Front will be great, along with partisans, to complement the PzGrenadiers, SS, Guards, etc.

[baron Jacquinot]

I am afraid that generalizing about the Soviet soldier is ridiculous and a mistake.

His performance depended heavily on training, equipment and moral and the three factors changed a lot during the war as it happened with all other WWII armies.

In 1941 the Soviet soldiers fought hard, but also surrendered and deserted easily. It depended on leadership, training and luck

Just a small example:

On October 23rd, 1941 the II./269 battalion from the Blue Division, deployed in Sitno after crossing the Volchov river, was attacked at night by two Soviet battalions from 1.002nd Regiment and a pair of companies from 848th Regiment. One Soviet battalion managed to slip into Sitno so the fight was hand to hand there. The Spaniards lost 90 men (13 KIA and 77 WIA), but the Soviets lost about 700 men, including 250 prisoners. It seems Soviet moral started to sink.

On Oct. 24th 14 deserters gave themeselves to the battalion while 26 did the same on Oct. 25th. They informed another attack was going to be delivered at 6 A.M. next day so at 3 A.M. Spanish artillery concentrated its fire on the Soviet suspected concentration areas. That day the Soviet deserters were 18 and informed that the attack had been cancelled due to the Spanish artillery effectiveness.

On Oct. 27th , at 6 A.M. three battalions from 848th and 1002nd Regiments attacked Sitno again. They attacked for the full day but losses were so staggering that the attack was finally stopped. A Soviet group that tried to fortify the socalled "Sitno Mill" was assaulted by a Spanish Platoon at 1 A.M.. 22 Soviets were taken prisoners there. Next day, Oct. 28th 94 (NINETY-FOUR!!!) Soviet soldiers deserted.

The above Soviet regiments remained in line for several weeks. According to Spanish and German intelligence they got reinforcements, but most of these reinforcement were untrained men with low moral.

That was 1941, when the German tide seemed unstoppable and it is an example of Soviet soldier fighting really hard, but at the same time exhibiting a brittle moral.

The typical Soviet soldier in June 1941, inexperienced but trained, was not the same as the Soviet soldier in January 1942, inexperi3enced and untrained, which was different from the one in Stalingrad in Dec. 1942, in Kursk in July 1943 or unleashing hell over the Germans during Bagration in 1944 or during the Berlin battle in 1945.

I think no "national" trait for the Soviets is needed. Playing with leadership, training, moral and organization, as was the case with the CMFI Italians, would be enough.

That's a personal oppinion. Don't think it is a BFC official position.

1) Read about Brest fortress! You cited the example of a single sided.

2) Typical soviet soldier its s myth.

3) You think Russians is same like Kazahs, Uzbecks, Georgians, etc? Soviets usually tried to assemble a Division so that the Russians were not less than 60%, but there were exceptions, of course, these parts were much less capable.

[baron Jacquinot]

Exactly. And it's really no different than any other Army. The Soviet's gave amazing accounts of themselves in 41 - a single KV holding a German division up for a day, battles around Yelnia, the battles in front of Moscow from Sept thru Dec. They also surrendered in the hundreds of thousands.

Zinovi Kolobanov commander of KV-1 tank, 20 august 1941 destroy 22 german tanks in one day.

[LukeFF]

So, if you wanted something that would enable human wave-style behavior, maybe something like:

Experience = Conscript

Motivation = Fanatic

Leadership = -2

Fitness = Fit

More like this, IMO:

Experience: Green

Motivation: High

Leadership: whatever one wants it to be. Anywhere from -2 to +0.

Fitness: Fit

Conscript experience only really applies to troops who have been given practically zero training before being sent to the front. That wasn't the Red Army in 1944.

[baron Jacquinot]

More like this, IMO:

Experience: Green

Motivation: High

Leadership: whatever one wants it to be. Anywhere from -2 to +0.

Fitness: Fit

Conscript experience only really applies to troops who have been given practically zero training before being sent to the front. That wasn't the Red Army in 1944.

Red Army troops who have focused on the western border had enough experience and have been well trained, but the training has focused on the offensive (on some versions Stalin wanted to attack first), the same defense was given little time and in defense of the Red Army was not strong. But when disaster struck on June 22 and many trained forces were defeated, they were little trained recruits to replenish. Of course, over time, the Red Army began to gain experience both in defense and in attack.

I think we should set the parameters according to the year of the war.

[LukeFF]

I think we should set the parameters according to the year of the war.

Sure, and as well we should also take into account what type of formation is being simulated. For instance, Soviet snipers should almost always be Veteran or greater. Even before the war the Soviet Union had a well-developed sniper program, and that only improved as the war went on.

Our training in the school lasted 9 months – since November 1943 till late August 1944. We were trained thoroughly. At that time the situation at the Soviet-German front no longer required “raw meat” to be sent to the front line untrained.

http://english.iremember.ru/snipers/24-nikolai-nadolko.html?q=%2Fsnipers%2F24-nikolai-nadolko.html&start=1

[Fernando]

1) Read about Brest fortress! You cited the example of a single sided.

2) Typical soviet soldier its s myth.

3) You think Russians is same like Kazahs, Uzbecks, Georgians, etc? Soviets usually tried to assemble a Division so that the Russians were not less than 60%, but there were exceptions, of course, these parts were much less capable.

1) Yes, it was just an example. It is known that Soviet soldiers fought incredibly hard in some places sometimes and not as hard in some other places and times. It depended on a lot of factors. It means that....(see next point)

2) Typical Soviet soldier is a myth I fully agree with you and that was the purpose of my post. It means there are/were no "national" treats. It depended on training, moral, leadership and overall conditions. In my example the same forces that fought hard one day, the next one, after suffering a pair of severe defeats and catastrophic losses, deserted almost en masse. Other troops were able to survive and fight well while some other weren't able to fight at all due to very bad leadership at the higher level because they were caught in huge encirclements then surrendered en masse before beign able to prove themselves.

3) I know Russians were not Georgians, Uzbecks etc. In fact the 1002nd Rifle Regiment of my example were Ucranians under Russian leaders (305th Division, 1000th, 1002nd and 1004th Regiments) while the 848th Rifle Regiment (267th Rifle Division) were Russians. Ucranians from the 305th division were prone to surrender and desert after severe defeats while Russians fought a bit harder.

Another small example:

The Volchov was crossed by the Blue Division on Oct. 19th. The spearhead was a reinforced Platoon (an infantry patoon + an MG section and radio) from the II./269 under 2nd Lt Escobedo. It was a surprise and 42 Soviet soldiers surrendered almost withouth firing a shot but 2nd battalion from 848th Rifle Regiment quickly counterattacked the small Spanish bridgehead. Defeating the uncoordinated attacks was quite easy at first then elements from 3rd Battalion/848th Rifle added to the fray. This time the attacks was more coordinated. Soviet forces tried to outflank the Spanish line trying to take advantadge of their superior numbers. Escobedo extended the line but there were too many Soviet soldiers and a HMG stopped its fire at the worst moment (I guess they were firing too fast). Soviets took the oportunity. They tried to breach the Spanish line by pouring men at the breach but Escobedo quickly counterattacked with a 8-man reserve squad. Soviet attack collapsed then their forces quickly "melt" away.

As I previously said, it heavily depended on leadership, moral and organization and their changed over time. Spanish forces in the example were motivated volunteers led by a cadre of Spanish Civil War veterans, some of them highly decorated and carefully chosen at the higher levels (company and up), while their Soviet opponents were Russian and Ucranian conscripts led by unexperienced leaders who were most of the time untrained for the task. Please, remember that many Soviet officers had been promoted to quickly to learn their trade due to Stalin purges and Soviet army expansion just before Barbarrossa, so a platoon leader could find himself commanding a battalion then forced to lead it in battle against the well-trained and experienced Germans before he could learn their trade at the battalion level.

I recommend reading David M. Glantz books about the Soviet army. Stumbling Colossus is a very good book about the Soviet army on the eve of the war.

[womble]

...Soviet snipers should almost always be Veteran or greater. Even before the war the Soviet Union had a well-developed sniper program, and that only improved as the war went on.

It's probably worth reminding that sniper-school trained snipers are, as BFC have said, not represented in the game. Germany also had a well developed sniper program and those exceptional fellows are not represented by the "sniper" teams available to buy in setup. Those are "marksmen": the company's best shot given a scoped rifle and a buddy to watch his back. IIRC BFCs position correctly, they hold that snipers generally operated outside the scope of a CM battle.

Of course, that might change in CM:Bagration (or whatever it gets called) but until it does, it's probably unwise to assume that there'll be an "enemy at the gates" scenario...