Newbie scenario designer research question

[Juju]

Hi all.

I'm researching some stuff for an upcoming historical scenario I'm going to design, and I'm running into some thingies. Maybe one of you grognards (no offence intended) can help me out here.

#1 - I need to know what type of M4's the US used during, and directly after the landings on Omaha Beach (specifically B/745 Tank BN).

#2 - I need to use elements of the German 352/Ersatz BN. While finding out what particular units to use was relatively easy, it's much more difficult to gauge the experience level of the actual troops used.

Are Ersatz troops usually lower quality, or can I assume that since the 352 Div. was a veteran division, their Ersatz BN must have seen some combat on the eastern front, as well?

#3 - Experience seems to be a major factor. I'm sure the proper/improper use of it while designing a scenario will make or break it. My knowledge about this is very minimal. Are there, like, guidelines to do this? some of you all must have designed scenarios before. Any help would be most welcome.

#4 - Final question to any Beta-testers or BTS :Are there specific rules/problems/drawbacks when using artillery at night? (I'm picturing this FO that calls a turn of artillery on an advancing troop, then silently disappears into the night, take up new positions and then do it again ).

Thanks in advance

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

Combat Axiom 46. Do unto others, before they do unto you.

[Guest Germanboy]

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

#2 - I need to use elements of the German 352/Ersatz BN. While finding out what particular units to use was relatively easy, it's much more difficult to gauge the experience level of the actual troops used.

Are Ersatz troops usually lower quality, or can I assume that since the 352 Div. was a veteran division, their Ersatz BN must have seen some combat on the eastern front, as well?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not being a Grognard, I try to answer two of these points.

Hmm, I think at least some German units had their own, unit-specific RDs. My grandfather told me that. These would handle all soldiers being fed into a unit or soldiers returning to service in the unit after being wounded or absent for longer. I can not imagine them being staffed with 1st class officers and NCOs, since they would only have administrative tasks to fulfill. The ordinary soldiers then would be a mix of green (recently conscripted, with some or no training) and veterans (wounded with a blighty, and on their way back to the front). No idea whether 352/Ersatz was such a unit.

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

#4 - Final question to any Beta-testers or BTS :Are there specific rules/problems/drawbacks when using artillery at night? (I'm picturing this FO that calls a turn of artillery on an advancing troop, then silently disappears into the night, take up new positions and then do it again ).

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not being an expert, would you not have observation problems? I think MacDonald in 'Company Commander' relates an example of that, and they just did it by sound, with no idea whether they had hit anything. It did not appear overly effective to me from that account.

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

Andreas

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

[Juju]

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

would you not have observation problems<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm actually counting on observation problems.

On the other hand, after the initial spotting of enemy forces you would have a vague knowledge of their 'axis of advance.' Since artillery in this example is going to belong to the defending side, I'd want to go for disruption and suppression. I'm not counting on a big kill-rate, really. In the scenario I'm planning the attacking side won't get a lot of time to cower in the dirt, or they won't make it to their objective at all!

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

Combat Axiom 46. Do unto others, before they do unto you.

[Murx]

The word Ersatz doesn't mean that these troops were all greenies or hurt veterans. In fact Ersatz Bn. means it was the reserve of a Brigade or even Divisional Command. These units were neither for administrativ services but a backup for bad situations where at a special point of the front support was in dire need. The second thing You have to look on is that at the time D-Day happened there weren't those all greeny or conscript / Volkssturm units. The average German soldier at that time had a 3-5 year premilitary time at the Hitlerjugend with straight military discipline, weapons and physical fitness training. Then two years of Arbeitsfront, another premilitary training where they mostly build/worked at autobahn/rail or other important infrastructure including military fortifications. Then they had one year of hard military drill both on infantry combats as on their special proficency (tank, AA, arty etc). Only then they would be sent in real service. So most units at D-Day (except those few low motivated StrafKompanien) were much better trained then the average US soldier.

murx

[Juju]

Thank you Murx.

That's just the answer I needed. If the Ersatz units were to be green in the scenario I'm planning they wouldn't have stood a chance.

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

Combat Axiom 46. Do unto others, before they do unto you.

[Guest Germanboy]

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

The word Ersatz doesn't mean that these troops were all greenies or hurt veterans. In fact Ersatz Bn. means it was the reserve of a Brigade or even Divisional Command. These units were neither for administrativ services but a backup for bad situations where at a special point of the front support was in dire need. The second thing You have to look on is that at the time D-Day happened there weren't those all greeny or conscript / Volkssturm units. The average German soldier at that time had a 3-5 year premilitary time at the Hitlerjugend with straight military discipline, weapons and physical fitness training. Then two years of Arbeitsfront, another premilitary training where they mostly build/worked at autobahn/rail or other important infrastructure including military fortifications. Then they had one year of hard military drill both on infantry combats as on their special proficency (tank, AA, arty etc). Only then they would be sent in real service. So most units at D-Day (except those few low motivated StrafKompanien) were much better trained then the average US soldier.

murx<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My grandfather, an average soldier had neither Arbeitsdienst nor HJ (due to age). At this stage in the war a lot of soldiers were so old that they might not have been in the HJ at all.

A lot of the units on the Atlantikwall were lower quality, not very well equipped static defense units, AFAIK.

Are you sure about this use of the term 'Ersatz' - it is the first time I heard it used like this.

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

Andreas

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

[Murx]

On the meaning of Ersatz Bn. - yes - I'm sure, for the equipment sure it wasn't the best in most western units at that time but I don't know to which Divisional/Brigade Command the unit is attached, so I can't say anything.

And for the soldiers, sure not all were that young but the average.

murx

[Juju]

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

for the equipment sure it wasn't the best in most western units at that time but I don't know to which Divisional/Brigade Command the unit is attached, so I can't say anything.

murx<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Murx, the unit in question here is the 352/Ersatz Bn, attached to the 352 infantry division during the D-Day landings.

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

Combat Axiom 46. Do unto others, before they do unto you.

[Keith]

I am afraid I will have to agree with Germanboy here. Based on my readings, Ersatz battalions served as a training and replacement unit for German divisions. Obviously the Germans only committed such units in desperate situations. I would model such a unit as being "Green" with a sprinkling of high quality platoon leaders representing veteran NCOs returning to the front after being wounded/on leave etc. I have read about the 352nd Ersatz in the US Army Center of Military History "Greenbook" on Normandy. This text clearly implies the battalion was inferior. As far as the American unit is concerned, I would rate them as a being "Green" also unless the unit saw service prior to Normandy. As far as the entire 352nd is concerned, I would rate them as being "Regular" rather than "Veteran" because the bulk of the division was comprised of 17 year olds and old men with no previous battle experience; however, there were enough EF veterans to warrant the division not being "Green". I think people tend to overrate the qualties of German troops in general. Most of these divisions were burnt-out veteran units with a huge influx of replacements or completely Green. On the other hand, most of the US units were Green themselves.

[Murx]

I'm not quit sure but I feel a kind of 'undercurrency' pointing that most of the German troops were either, green, wartired & wounded Veterans or undermanned, or, most of the time alltogether. But if that was the fact then, I would like to ask(please don't feel offended), why the hell took it so much time even with massiv air-superiority, outnumbering the German troops with tanks and infantry with 3-1 at least to get Germany surrender ?????

I'm surely happy that Germany has lost the war (or I would be guarding the German Chinese border right now ) but it sounds like most of you seem to underestimate the German Wehrmacht and attached units and industry! A population of less then 100 million kept the complete industrial world hold the breath for 5 years!

I'm not proud of German atrocies or genocides done - but what they achieved military, industrially and in science was nearly unbelievable. Sure the western Allies and Russia achieved very much in the war but if You disrespect the German achievements You lessen the Allied victory.

It's a greator victory to struggle a worthy enemy then to crush a lesser one.

Just my opinion, and I hope no one feels offended.

murx

[Guest Germanboy]

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

I'm not quit sure but I feel a kind of 'undercurrency' pointing that most of the German troops were either, green, wartired & wounded Veterans or undermanned, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Murx, I am German and my grandfather is a veteran of Poland, France and Russia, where he served as a counterbattery observer. I think most people here are well aware of the fighting quality of the German troops. In this thread, the discussion centered on an Ersatz Bataillon, and these in mine and Keith's understanding were made up of a curious mixture of troops. Neither of us made a general statement about the German soldiers at all. No hard feelings.

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

Andreas

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

[Wayne]

Originally posted by Murx:

I'm not quit sure but I feel a kind of 'undercurrency' pointing that most of the German troops were either, green, wartired & wounded Veterans or undermanned, or, most of the time alltogether. But if that was the fact then, I would like to ask(please don't feel offended), why the hell took it so much time even with massiv air-superiority, outnumbering the German troops with tanks and infantry with 3-1 at least to get Germany surrender ?????

It has been my impression that the Allied Army which landed in Europe in 1944 was well equiped, well supplied and had the airforces of the U.S. and Britain for cover, but that the men of that army were, for the most part, inexperienced in the practical aspects of war. How do you mount an effective assault on an enemy you can't see until you come into contact with it? How to defend against an attack of Panther tanks with bazooka rounds that bounce off the hull like rubber balls? These were issues that were not fully covered in stateside training or pre-invasion exersizes.

The Germans had been fighting this war since 1939, and even though their armies were beat up and under-equipt they had the knowledge of five years of everyday combat. Most units we fought against in France and Belgium were veterans of the Rusian Front where they face 5-10 times their number in a no-holds barred type of war.

By the time the American Army met the German counter-offensive in the Ardennes in December 1944, we learned the hard trade of combat in Western Europe. That green army which landed in Normandy grew up to be the finest fighting machine in the world by 1945.

It's too bad that the Americans and their Allies did not have a combat simulator like Combat Mission to, at least, train platoon, company and battalion leaders what not to do in combat against the Germans.

Thank God we did not have to face the German Army of say 1942 with 1-2 million of them before their experienced divisions were cut up by the Russians.

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

Blessed be the Lord my strength who teaches my hands to war and my fingers to fight.

[Murx]

With 'undercurrency' I don't meant this thread in particular, but after reading lots of statements aiming in that direction I couldn't keep my mouth shut

Hopefully I didn't annoy anyone and maybe I misinterpreted some threads/posts.

Thanks for your answers then ...

murx