German field fortifications/defense doctrine '44-45

[com-intern]

I'm looking at dabbling with a proof of concept map where I focus on defensive battle using the best sources I can find as exemplars of how to do AI plans and setups.

A Soviet attack versus German defense. I've found some decent description of Soviet assault practices in my Glantz books, but can't really find much in regards to German defenses. Would anyone here have either links to good sources or books that they would recommend?

[BornGinger]

Try this one German Field Fortifications on the Eastern Front

[UselessTalent]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRtwa9MNom0

 

Probably a bit simplified for what you're looking for but he has the references in the video description that can help out, although I think he tries to focus on primary sources so most of the stuff is in German.

Also I don't really know how credible MHV is as a source since I'm not really equipped to claim he is or isn't, but based on his videos he seems to have a pretty decent and unbiased scientific view on things. But I hope it helps

[com-intern]

Thank you both for these links they have been helpful. What I am missing now is any good overview of how a Battalion would deploy its defenses.

I've found some early-war documentation but I've done some reading and it appears that by '43/'44 (in the East at least) the Germans have gone from a strong-point system to continuous trench lines with strong-points being built directly into the line. Which would make the early war docs obviously obsolete.

[SimpleSimon]

Chief thing you should consider as you put yourself in the mind of the German commander thinking up his defense arrangement is "what can I do to minimize my own casualties" rather than "what can I do to stop the Russians from winning" if that makes sense. The favorite method, as well known, was the "denuded front" or outpost defense concept which wasn't universal or always desirable. Usually it enabled the Germans to compartmentalize their losses by ensuring most of the Russian's fire support fell on nothing, then hopefully outlying pickets consisting of snipers and machine guns might trick the Russians into deploying prematurely so that the Germans can most efficiently use their own limited fire support assets to inflict a disproportionate weight of casualties on the Russians while they're busy treating a sniper in a treeline like it's your whole force. 

That's the textbook success anyway. Savvy Red Army Officers knew better than to overthink every encounter they might have. Not every pinprick was worth committing an assault against and things could go wrong quickly for the Germans if the Russians had lots of dead ground to maneuver inside of. The Russians proved ridiculously good at infiltrating huge formations, entire Battalions even, in-between German positions and then just collapsing the defense from inside out by overwhelming enough "nodes" in the German defense that the other locations became irrelevant. Once a big enough hole is torn in the line the rest of the Russian's parent formation can just advance inside the gap and the rest of the German defenders are presented with the ugly choice of attempting to hold out being whittled away by starvation and partisans and the even worse choice of trying to withdraw while being enfiladed from multiple directions.

This is a major reason why the Germans had to use "conventional" trench-line tactics on the Leningrad front. Because the forests and swamps were so dense it was impossible for disconnected outposts to protect anything let alone themselves, so the Germans had to use a continuous line of trenches stretched through miles of forest. This is just to give you an idea of what you consider when you look at your map as the German commander. There's times doctrine is right, and times it's very, very wrong. 

[com-intern]

I took an initial swing at it this evening

https://imgur.com/a/ETHyvC1
 

The inset/detail view is a small section of the front held right now by ~14 men. I'm going to extend it over to the right past the houses up to the main road and fill out the wire and mines. Probably adding a few more riflemen to stretch it a bit. I've essentially converted a platoon into a series of small teams using the various purchasable teams and immobilized Opel Blitz drivers. The scale in CM is such that you can't really do proper keyholed firing slots unless you might rather obvious molehills around the fortifications. But IMO its worth giving up some concealment for added protection.

[SimpleSimon]

That looks about right actually. You start with a basic screening line, have a second, principle line consisting of outposts and a third line in firm positions behind geographic chokepoints. Supply and HQ elements occupy the back of the map pressed into service as last ditch infantry.

The only note here to me is that your outposts are concentrated on geographic "set pieces". If I was the Russian commander you can bet i'm planning on dropping an avalanche of 122mm and 76mm fire on local high ground, *especially* named hills. The villages with the railway station, hospital, and school overlooking the bridges would get the heaviest fire. Perhaps rockets if I have em. Don't get me wrong this is all good and that's just what I'd do. You might consider eliminating some of your positions entirely and just folding them up into other locations to strengthen those positions and decrease the geographic footprint of your defense. If the Russians are supporting this attack properly you should expect them to just smash some locations while mostly ignoring some others. They might set aside smaller field guns for suppressing or pinning fires against suspect locations. 

Once you get an idea of how AI deployment plans work you can do some seriously diabolical things with randomized AI deployments that can add way more replay value to your scenarios too. You should consider deployment plans that are non-doctrinal or sub-optimal as well to undermine your opponent's expectations a bit. 

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by SimpleSimon

[com-intern]

Thanks for the tips!

I have been worried about my placement of the companies. Especially 1/1 and 2/1 in the towns I'll take your advice and move them out of those positions for now. Part of the challenge is that I don't recall many scenarios in CM where fortifications play a large role and where the attacker will be getting lots of artillery. So I really don't know what the effect will be on target. Once I get the initial line done I will likely run some tests to get an idea of what to expect.


I've been using Slaughterhouse The Encyclopedia of the Eastern Front to build out my Grenadier Division in defense (well Regiment thereof). The book makes no mention of the Division's AT Battalion having anything other than towed guns. However sources I've found online tend to state that the Divisions AT battalion should have a Company of Assault Guns. My gut feeling is that the online sources are leaning towards what should have been while the book is reflecting actual facts on the ground. Anyone have thoughts on this? While the scenario (if I ever finish it) will not be historical I would like it to reflect a rather generic Grenadier Division.

Additionally what I've found describes the Regiment as having an integral AT company. Is this correct or would that company be coming from the Divisions' AT Battalion?

Edited April 7, 2020 by com-intern
cleaning

[Pete Wenman]

 

I love this sort of stuff, so good to see you giving it a go. The real issue is what comprises you are happy to make to fit doctrine to the game and how important scenario balance is to you. I'll ignore the second point, and just throw out some thoughts on the first.

Reality on the ground is very hard to determine if not based on historical records, and even then it is likely the TOE is overstated in most case for this stage of the war, but some principles can be applied.

With regard to German outpost defense 

• ...the width of a defensive sector assigned to a unit is approximately twice the width of the sector the same unit attacks. Normal sectors are : Platoon, 220 - 550 yards, Company, 440 - 1100 yards Battalion 880 - 2200 yards
• ....advanced posn, the Germans organise the advanced position 5000 to 7000 yards in front of the MLR, within the range of their medium artillery.
• ....outpost posn's are normally established 2000 to 5000 yards in front of the MLR. When the fronts are stabilised the outpost position is the only position forward of the MLR
• .... outpost posn's are occupied from platoons to companies depending on mission, terrain, width of sector and number of troops available.
• ..... the main weapon, however, is the light machine gun which opens fire at ranges of about 1300 yards, while riflemen commence fire at about 850 yards
• ...positions normally are  selected at the edges of woods, villages, hedgerows or hills. A good field of fire is considered mandatory. Numerous dummy positions are constructed.
• Withdrawal of the outposts is conducted so as to not hinder fire from the main battle position. After the outposts are abandoned they are likely to be covered by carefully registered fire of heavy weapons in order to prevent occupation by the enemy. 

That's what the book says, well one book anyways, but the reality on the ground could be almost anything I would imagine.

 

I did try to give a sense of this in my Shadow of the Hill series of scenarios, where a British infantry brigade advances over some 4k distance through the German defences, spread across 4 separate scenarios.

 

P

Edited April 8, 2020 by Pete Wenman

[SimpleSimon]

You should be willing to use the game's wooden bunkers and pillboxes/shelters too. I know they look sort of hideous but in fact a strong defense absolutely needs to make use of positions with overhead cover or certainly be destroyed by a heavy bombardment. Everyone from the Germans to the Vietcong has practiced this against enemies wielding superior firepower and it wasn't cuz they just liked living in the mud. 

Edited April 7, 2020 by SimpleSimon