Spur of the Moment Complaining.

[Seanachai]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy:

I am a non-native speaker of English, French and Japanese. That does not make it okay for me to go around and insult people. I personally think that as a non-native speaker in any language, it is my responsibility to take sufficient care of my usage of said language not to cause offense. If I do, despite my efforts, I would apologise. But maybe that's just funny old me...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hell, man, your English is better than most of the people I go to the bars with, and on par with people I went to college with. Your posts are always respectful, tactful, reasoned, and in my opinion, in excellent English. I've enjoyed your posts on this forum. (how many smilies do you think it takes to excite the tiger?) (smilies used to incite Peng to invective, gods know, I do love invective! Wouldn't mind engaging in a hideous invective overmatch with Peng, but don't feel enough a part of the fellowship to try my luck that far...)

------------------

After witnessing exceptional bravery from his Celtic mercenaries, Alexander the Great called them to him and asked if there was anything they feared. They told him nothing, except that the sky might fall on their heads.

[Guest Captitalistdoginchina]

Gee it has taken me ages to read all those posts. Sorry for butting in but i do feel some of you are far more rude than MG , Steve i do not think his comment was meant for you - you have been very patient and factual but others have in fact resorted to name calling.

Can some people please stop taking things personnaly, i have enjoyed reading most of this thread but i have to wince at some of the posts you guys are making (Especially Germanboy). Maybe he is a bit stubborn and believes what he is writing, and yes he is not listening to some points of view - but that is his only fault. Freedom of speech guys.

Keep it polite gentlemen. Please.

CDIC

PS. Please don't take offence at my opinion.

------------------

"Death solves all problems - no man no problem"

J.V.Stalin, 1918

[Darren J Pierson]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Formerly Babra:

Curious now. How come a Texan wants to play Canadians? Seriously, is it the equipment or what?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I'm Canadian by birth and citizenship, but have lived most of my life in the U.S., mainly Texas. My family that fought in World War II did so in the Canadian Army. Unfortunately, all of the vets in our family have passed away and I can't talk to them about what it was like. My folks tell me though, that they wouldn't discuss it anyway.

I do know that I had 4 great-uncles that served in tanks in NW Europe, but I am trying to find out in what unit(s).

So, I guess I still have maple syrup running through my veins after all. Although I want it with some jalepeno in it too!

Darren

[This message has been edited by Darren J Pierson (edited 06-06-2000).]

[Ben Galanti]

Ok, I ran down to my local library this evening and grabbed a copy of Buchner's 'The German Infantry Handbook 1939-1945' (as translated into English). I'm going to try and answer some of the questions asked about it, but please feel free to ask more if you'd like.

The book describes the basic infantry division TO&E (usually listing number of MGs and heavy weapons per platoon, but no more detail then that) for a division at the start of the war. It also has a brief appendix on the changes made in 1943. In the opening pages the book states that there were differences in divisions established later (a la the panzergrenadier divisions). The book only details the standard formation.

Lorak said

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>MG,

that sounds resonable to me. " a first supply of 1500 rounds." Sounds to me they were setting up in a static position and could retrieve more rounds from the cart as needed. It doesn't sound like they took 1500 rounds and ran to the front.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Later in the book, it describes the 'First Ammunition Supplies' for an infantry division in 1941. The First Ammunition supplies are those that the troops were to have available at the front (either on their combat vehicles in their columns, or at the division supply services) For the Heavy MG it states there were to be a total of 6750 rounds available. It also states that 1500 MG bullets could be carried in one ammo box which weighed 46.4 kg. If my mathi is correct, that's over 100 pounds... Also, interestingly, in it's description of the MG42, it says:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>When used as a heavy machine gun, the weight was decreased to 29.7 kilograms (65 pounds)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is somewhat odd as just above the listed weight of the gun in 11.6 kilograms. I assume that the 'decreased' is a translation error and should be 'increased'.

Also on the same p.48 that MG quoted before about the Machine Gun Company (which, is my assumption as to were the HMG teams in CM are coming from, though that may be way off base. Can anyone confirm this?) There is an interesting statement. Here it is in it's entirety (well, any typos are mine ):

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The heavy machine guns used by the machine gun companies were - as noted - the flat-fire weapons of the battalion and simultaneously represented the heaviest infantry firepower. They were used in all kinds of combat and formed the "backbone" of the fighting at medium and long ranges. Their assignment was to fire on all targets (other than tanks) that were most dangerous to the infantry. The heavy machine guns supported the attacks of the rifle companies by firing on and holding back the enemy attacks.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

later it says

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>the heavy machine guns were deployed in platoons or squads (combat units) in companies, and often subordinated to thm for long periods as directed by the battalion commander<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what I'm assuming is shown in CM, and it seems to be represented correctly. If anybody else wants to know anything. Just ask. I'll try to answer.

Ben

[This message has been edited by Ben Galanti (edited 06-06-2000).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

Perhaps there are translation errors, but that isn't our problem (I also don't think this is the case). Plus, when this duo goes off on us for using The Handbook, and then quotes the exact sort of stuff The Handbook has got all wrong (namely what a Volksgrenadier Division is) really is hard to overlook. If I can't quote from it because it is all wrong, why can the MG duo? The funny thing is that we only use this as one of several sources and only for TO&E becaues the other stuff we have found to be unreliable.

To clarify what a VG division is to anybody who might be confused by the errors MG seems to think are "facts"...

The Volksgrenadier divisions were nothing more than REGULAR Infantry divisions with a slightly different TO&E (organization and equipment). The were primarily formed from the 32nd "wave" of draftees (Sept 44) after the utter destruction of the German Army on both Eastern and Western Fronts. As a note, the famous "stomach" division was the 70th and was formed as part of the 24th Wave in April of 1944. It was not a Volksgrenaider division.

Its primary purposes of the Volksgrenadier Division was to better maximize firepower, reduce manpower requirements, and conform to shortages of equipment. For example, they used 75mm guns which had already been determined to be obsolete at this point, but sufficient numbers of 105mm guns were not available.

The divisions intially came in two flavors; Good and So-So. The former were made up of remains streaming back from the Eastern Front (post Operation Bagration) and the best of the new recruits. The poor ones were basically whatever was left. In October 44 a further nine divisions were created from existing reserve and security units.

I am fairly certain that it was Goebels who came up with the Volksgrenadier title, as it was he and Hitler that came up with a lot of name changes at this point. I'd be surprised if Himmler came up with this title. After the reverses on the battlefields during the summer of 1944 and the assasination attempt on Hitler, a *lot* of names started to be changed to try and boost morale. For example, the MP44 was changed to "Sturmgewehr". This was also the time that the standard military salute was replaced with the "Heil Hitler" arm gesture. Trying to push "National Socialism's fighting spirit" into the Wehrmacht was applied to the entire war effort, military and civilian alike. It was partly an act of despiration but more a means of making sure the Army knew who was the boss (especially after the assasination attempt).

Anyway... the Volksgrenadier formation REPLACED the Pattern 44 infantry division, and the inbetween "Speer" version. The VG formation was then changed into the Pattern 45 Infantry division. Few of conversions were actually done and only a handfull saw service.

Sources... accumulated knowledge from 15 years of study and thousands of dollars spent on books. But the core info can be found in Nafziger's "German Order of Battle" series on Infantry (I have the old serries, this being Volume IV). For a good source on the German High Command, and the results of the assination attempt had on the age old struggle between the Nazi Party and the Army, check out "History of the German General Staff" by Goerlitz.

Steve

[This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 06-06-2000).]

[Bobbaro]

Stupid things happen when one writes in a condition of heavy post bed time traumatic eyelid condition. Of course replys don't appear injected inbetween older items, but always at the current end. (slapping my own face) So much for appearing in context. Wiped this one out. It did not make sense here.

[This message has been edited by Bobbaro (edited 06-06-2000).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

Ben,

Well, seems there was a few ommissions on MG's part there. Yes, this is exactly whate we have been saying all along. Also, if you have Gajkowski's tranlation of the German Squad Tactics In WWII" you can look at Figure 10 on page 17. Check out where the HMGs are positioned. They are about 300m to the rear of the MRL, which says alot about how they were used.

BTW, I have an orginal printed copy of the 1941 timeframe manual as translated by the US Military Intelligence Service, dated January 25, 1943 and entitled "The German Squad In Combat". It is amazing how little changed from that time until the end of the war. In fact, the same exact figures in Gajkowski's translation are in the 1943 one.

Steve

[Ben Galanti]

Steve,

One of your points reminded me of another quote from Buchner's book.

Steve said:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The Volksgrenadier divisions were nothing more than REGULAR Infantry divisions with a slightly different TO&E (organization and equipment). The were primarily formed from the 32nd "wave" of draftees (Sept 44) after the utter destruction of the German Army on both Eastern and Western Fronts.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

On page 1 of Buchner's book he states:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...and ad hoc units established in the last months of the war, which were scarcely or not at all representative of a normal infantry division.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Buchner is stating that the information in his book does not apply to such units (like the Volksgrenadiers). His book only describes the pattern 39 (with an appendix for pattern 43)

Ben

[This message has been edited by Ben Galanti (edited 06-06-2000).]

[RMC]

Anybody notice a quantum jump in the readibility of MG's last post? I suspect that that was the firt post by the 52 year- old dad. IIRC in older thread MG identified himself as the 17-18 reenactor guy. I remember him talking about the MG42 and the tripod before.

ANyway his source was highly recommended by Jason Pipes on his site. I have been looking for the original German version but it is nowhere to be found. I am waiting for the reprint this fall. It looks to me like the translation is a little bad. "first Ammunition supply?" what kind of term is that? This is the inverse of the bad english to german translations that plague the german versions of most PC games.

[This message has been edited by RMC (edited 06-06-2000).]

[Bastables]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RMC:

. "first Ammunition supply?" what kind of term is that? This is the inverse of the bad english to german translations that plague the german versions of most PC games.

[This message has been edited by RMC (edited 06-06-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think it has the same meaning that ‘front line’ ammunition holds in English speaking Commonwealth militaries. For instance the ‘front line’ for the I.W. Steyr in the NZ army is 120 rounds per soldier. Its oddness may be because it is a direct translation of a military term, but hell front line is a frigging weird short hand for standard pre battle ammo levels anyway.

[This message has been edited by Bastables (edited 06-06-2000).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

Ben,

You mean Buchner, not Mechner, right? Or is this a different book?

Well, I have to say that if Buchner is only covering the 1939 Pattern with an addedum for the 1943 Pattern, this book is not relevant to our discussion in so far as the Volksgrenadiers are concerned. No wonder why MG couldn't find any info since the book doesn't cover the period of time. But of course, instead of figuring this out we are attacked for inventing German unit types...

And this quote has me very concerned about the credibility of Buchner's work:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...and ad hoc units established in the last months of the war, which were scarcely or not at all representative of a normal infantry division.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow is all I can say. Dismissing Pattern 44, the Speer, and Volksgrenadier divisions like this is not winning him any points in my eyes. These were NOT "ad hoc" formations, but rather evolutionary development of the basic German Infantry Division. Several dozen divisions were made using these patterns. There are plenty of other formations that aren't "ad hoc" as well, though they were not usually of divisional size (exception -> Security Divisions). Yesh... I can understand the guy wanting to narrow his focus, but this is not a cool thing to say.

Steve

[This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 06-06-2000).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

Hey Ben,

I just realized you might have accidentally clipped out something just before this quote I take exception to that might explain him better. Could you do me a favor and quote the entire paragraph, or whatever is directly relevant to what he didn't include? Thanks!

BTW, I have passed up buying this book for years. I only have so many dollars to spend and this book appeared to overlap many that I already had plus (now that I think of it...) it didn't cover the later war period.

Steve

[Guest grunto]

mgman,

with all due respect, no matter who is typing on the other end, a dude carrying 1000 rounds of ammo is not - in a practical sense - going to keep up with a dude carrying a rifle and 150 rounds or whatever.

on the hmg issue we've been discussing two points... one in which everyone is arguing the actual use of the weapon in real life, and the other which was represented by your quote of 'marine machinegunners always leading the attack' or something. i'm not interested in discussing the former but as for the latter, yes i'm sure mg crews led the attack at times... maybe you'll get a fanatical crew in cm and see it for yourself... as an everyday occurence though i don't see how a gun with optics, heavy tripod, and 3-6000 rounds of ammo is going to lead the attack... it's a better long range infantry weapon... why use your optic-sighted mg on point when it is so much more useful at 500 meters?

you went from fanatical american machinegunners in the pacific to everyday german tactical doctrine and tried to make it the same argument. i want my optic-sighted mg42 in a nice fire lane with supporting mg42s, and the squads moving in the 'dead' areas or 'undereath' the supporting fire. everything has got to be timed right though or you'll get your butt kicked... in basketball, in sl/asl, in cm, in your wargames i'm sure, and in paintball, etc... ad nauseum.

get there the firstest with the mostest and especially if you catch them out of position you win.

andy

[Rookie]

Steve,Charles,

I just have to applaud you guys for administering this board. I help with a small Flight Sim Board on Delphi and If I had to deal with this I would have no hair left. That and I woulda gagged MG until he got his Recto-cranial inversion problem worked out

-Rookie

[Rommel]

Hey well maybe your carefully laid out plans in reality were sucky ill conceived mistakes.

If the computer kicks your butt that badly, I think you should be re-examining your own strategy rather than blaming the game and the programmers.

[Kraut]

Hmmmm ... i'm not sure what's worse. MG's attitude or his spelling ... lol

Do us all a favor MG and read through your posts *at least* once before hitting the submit button, mmm k?

MK

[Guest Big Time Software]

OK folks, please stop the MG duo bashing. It really isn't necessary as there has been enough to balance MG's own disrespect and abuse. I don't want this thing to drag out any more than it has already.

If MG wants to come back here and take another swing at a well reasoned point of view, then hopefully they will do a better job than they have up until now. If that doesn't happen (i.e. more of the same confused and abusive postings), or the MG bashing posts continue I'll have to close this one up.

Thanks everybody for taking a Chill Pill

Steve

[Seanachai]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MG Mannschft:

Germanboy,

In Responce to Rate of Fire, And Burning up Ammunition on a MG-42, Its not like a .30 Cal american Gun Inwhich you need a Screw driver and about 20 minutes to change a Hot Barrel, the Allies just let the gun Cool down, If you are a True German who Has seen or heard of a German MG-42, Then you already know they the Barrel On a MG-42 can Be Changed in Seconds but just Poping the Barrel out by the side.

Obviously, You dont know the Gun.

MG<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You know, I was right up there on 'discussion', 'language differences', etc. right up until I hit this reference posted to Germanboy about "If you are a True German"; that went right over the top, for me. Where does this (heavily edited) get off telling others what a 'True German' would know? He's not of an age to have fought in WWII. And he says he's had no military service. Why should anyone pay any attention to this (again edited). There's a heavy stench of 'Übermensch' about this guy's supposedly 'discussion' posts regarding German troops. He seems more intent on proving that his (edited for family content) re-enactment buddies are more correct than any other source of unit tactics. I know that Steve has asked us to lay off bashing this poster, but I can't get over that 'True German' post. That's outside the pale.

Post repeatedly edited to avoid unforgiveable statements which might have involved something approximating the Brit/Aussie/Commonwealth use of the term 'wanker'.

------------------

After witnessing exceptional bravery from his Celtic mercenaries, Alexander the Great called them to him and asked if there was anything they feared. They told him nothing, except that the sky might fall on their heads.

[This message has been edited by Seanachai (edited 06-06-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Seanachai (edited 06-06-2000).]

[Miyamoto Musashi]

I read through all six pages of this thread and all I got was this lousy... oh, wait a minute... I didn't even get a t-shirt. Bummer...

[snagdad]

well, I know alot more about LMG's and HMG's and related stuff than I did before. It's gotten a bit ragged; perhaps its time to be quiet for a moment and think about what was going on about now 56 years ago...

[Moon]

MG - do you really want to say that the finest suppressive fireweapon ever made (the MG42) is supposed to charge while the lousiest suppressive fireweapon ever made (the bolt-action (!) Kar98) is giving covering fire? Sheesh... I'd like to visit one of your re-enactment events once to see how that is supposed to work; say, do the Germans always lose when you guys "play"?

[Lee]

MG: I am all too aware of the disgusting and artificially high cost of

machine guns in this country. Please don't remind me, it's too painful.

As far as my comment about knowing there just had to be large numbers of

combat troops running around with tons of MP-40's, I was just joking.

I happen to be a big fan of that gun and was just having some fun.

But I was pleased to see that, in fact, whole platoons were armed with

them. Just because there is a shortage of them here doesn't mean

there was a shortage of them there.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CapitalistdoginChina:

Can some people please stop taking things personnaly, i have enjoyed reading most of this thread but i have to wince at some of the posts you guys are making (Especially Germanboy). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

CDiC, I reread how this whole thing started, and I would like to respectfully yet completely disagree with you here, for all the reasons already outlined. I try not to lose it whenever I post, and I re-read my posts before posting. I would like to believe that I usually do quite well in that, and I also do apologise where I have made mistakes and/or rash statements. This is the first time I resort to this kind of language on the board, and I am unfortunately convinced that I was right in doing this. I guess we just have to disagree here. No offense please, but you singled me out, so I thought I better respond to it.

Now after all this, I would like to thank those of you who have made an effort and dredged up lots of stuff that I find extremely interesting. So while the original purpose of this discussion was almost certainly not achieved, at least I, and probably others have learned something from it. I am just sorry that people like Steve had to waste their time here. Could have been better spent driving the Weasel, I guess.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Seanachai:

Hell, man, your English is better than most of the people I go to the bars with, and on par with people I went to college with. Your posts are always respectful, tactful, reasoned, and in my opinion, in excellent English. I've enjoyed your posts on this forum.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh, thanks Seanachai, now I am embarassed. BTW, I am not really a true German - I hate Eisbein (pig's foot) and I sort of like the warm flat stuff the English believe is beer... Off to shine my jackboots now.

------------------

Andreas

The powers of accurate perception are often called cynicism by those who do not possess them. (forgot who said it)

[This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 06-06-2000).]

[RMC]

Back to the SMG squads. OK. They didn't have enough MP-44s available to equip these units as intended. Do we agree, though that that was the intent?

If you accept that as the intent, would it not be more flavorful and more realistic to vary the compositions of these squads so that some have mixtures of MP-44s, MP-40s, or any of a variety of captured SMGs? This probably isn't possible since CM uses fixed team types and doesn't allow for variation within a given type without just adding a bunch of versions of a SMG squad. Not that this really bad, but I always liked having units that were unique because they were missing members or had more MGs than they were supposed to etc. I guess in the game you have to focus on the TO&E though I haven't been a unit yet that was organized on the ground like it was on paper and that's without going to combat.

[aka_tom_w]

I would like to voice my opinion to keep this thread open.

To MG's credit they have never used abusive language or flamed, or hurled nay personal insults of any kind. I while I disagree with their position, and research, I would suggest that the thread not be closed as a punitive action to "silence" them. I don't think at this point that is fair or necessary, it is clear that most here (if not all) disagree with them, but that is no reason to close the thread.

I commend Steve for leaving it open and, as he suggested, the thread remaining open does serve to highlite their "exposed" position with regard to their interpretation of the use of the HMG in WW II German infantry tactics.

I have learned a great deal from this thread and would like to thank all the other people who have posted information about this topic from such authoritative sources.

Please leave it open as long as there are no personal attacks. If my previous post was a personal attack (which I'm not sure it was) then it may have been inaproriate and I will formally and publically appologize if that is deemed necessary.

Thanks for all the great info and the wildly sarcastic and highly entertaining post about the, "Gehensiemachschnellüberflydeathspeedjetpack Mark IIIA" Type HMG, I laughed myself SILLY over that one, and the source was truly inspired. I now read this thread for its great wit and sarcasm and entertainment value.

-tom w