Biggest masses in ww2?

[Fenno]

Now this is not a thread abaut über Finns, but a genuine question: Tali-Ihantala was one of the biggest battles of the hole war (biger than El Alamein), and it was fought on a relatively small area. At breakthrough point the russians had 14 divisions (+ armor and artillery) on a stretch 10 km wide. At one point of battle a whole guards army was located and allmost surrounded (after finnish counter attacs) on an area of 2x5 km. With such force concentrations it is no wonder that the artillery was decisive factor and the finnish artillery, although not as numerous as russian one, was in the end able to halt these attacs.

Now my question to all you grognards is, were there other battles with similar or even more dense troop concentrations?

[PiggDogg]

One of the most dense, if not the most dense, troop concentrations of WW2 - the German attempt to reduce the Russians as Stalingrad. This would have been before the encirclement of the German 6th Army.

No cheers yet, Richard

[Slapdragon]

Although we may need to look at the pacific when 3 divisions went ashore on Iwo Jima side by side (something like 40,000 men on 4 kilometers of beach less than 100 meters wide) facing 11,000 forward deployed Japanese defenders. This was one of the most "dense" battles of that war, even if the number of soldiers do not come up to sStalingrad.

[Fenno]

Certain pacific Islans sure, and Stalingrag very propably, allthough I must again reveal my ignorance and to ask what were the numpbers engaged and how wide was the area. Artillery to my understanding was not as decive factor as in Tali Ihantala.

This raises also the question, that if japanese would have hade a lot of good artillery on those islands, would the marines have succeeded?

[Andrew H.]

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

This raises also the question, that if japanese would have hade a lot of good artillery on those islands, would the marines have succeeded?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, because Naval bombardment would have destroyed the artillery (choose 14" guns as artillery to see how that goes). The problem with a lot of the pacific island fighting was that the Japanese would wait out the naval bombardment in deep caves or fortifications, and then come back up when it was over. Individual guns could be manhandled up and down the caves as well, but this wouldn't have worked with large scale artillery units; they would have just become targets for planes and more naval bombardments.

Putting an army in a 2km by 5km space is going to really get pretty crowded. A sov. army is approximately equivalent to a Western style Corps...but that's still an awful lot of men.

[Slapdragon]

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

Certain pacific Islans sure, and Stalingrag very propably, allthough I must again reveal my ignorance and to ask what were the numpbers engaged and how wide was the area. Artillery to my understanding was not as decive factor as in Tali Ihantala.

This raises also the question, that if japanese would have hade a lot of good artillery on those islands, would the marines have succeeded?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

All I can do to illustrate Iwo better if to say imagine a 4 kilometer long stretch of Finnish highway. Now stick every soldier in the modern Finnish army in there. This was the density found at the initial stage of Iwo Jima since the landings stalled on the beach. By day 3 all three divisions were moving inland and spread out again, but the initial landing was a disaster.

And artillery did chop the hell out of the Marines.

[Fieldmarshall]

ahem..........Kursk!!! What about Kursk!!

[Kanonier Reichmann]

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

ahem..........Kursk!!! What about Kursk!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Love your signature Fieldmarshall. "Springtime.. for Hitler and Germany" sung to the appropriate tune.

BTW, I second Kursk

Regards

Jim R.

[Slapdragon]

At one point in Kursk, a Russian counterattack of 250 tanks went into battle tread to tread. Very impressive for tank density, even if the human density was not as high as the pacific islands like Iwo and Betio.

[Fieldmarshall]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann:

Love your signature Fieldmarshall. "Springtime.. for Hitler and Germany" sung to the appropriate tune.

BTW, I second Kursk

Regards

Jim R.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL!! Thanks Reichmann!

--Field

[Fenno]

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

All I can do to illustrate Iwo better if to say imagine a 4 kilometer long stretch of Finnish highway. Now stick every soldier in the modern Finnish army in there. This was the density found at the initial stage of Iwo Jima since the landings stalled on the beach. By day 3 all three divisions were moving inland and spread out again, but the initial landing was a disaster.

And artillery did chop the hell out of the Marines.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Iäm glag finnish army was never in thatationsian unlike our russsian does, 2 divisions on Raate roud, they couldn't expand and were destroyed.

But I stil wonder wheather we can create plausible battles on the finnish fron in the summer 44. 60 minutes time line and artillery modellimg (maybe) wont allow for these decive battles. Any ideas?

[Grisha]

I would say the Vistula-Oder operation in January of 1945. The build-up of Soviet force concentrations on the two bridgeheads were mostly undetected, and resulted in up to 16:1 numerical superiority. German line forces were quite literally swept aside as was an entire Panzer division in reserve.

[Slapdragon]

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

Iäm glag finnish army was never in thatationsian unlike our russsian does, 2 divisions on Raate roud, they couldn't expand and were destroyed.

But I stil wonder wheather we can create plausible battles on the finnish fron in the summer 44. 60 minutes time line and artillery modellimg (maybe) wont allow for these decive battles. Any ideas?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Model the parts, not the whole.

[Fenno]

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

I would say the Vistula-Oder operation in January of 1945. The build-up of Soviet force concentrations on the two bridgeheads were mostly undetected, and resulted in up to 16:1 numerical superiority. German line forces were quite literally swept aside as was an entire Panzer division in reserve.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The question was about masses concentrated in a small area, not about superiority. The nest iteresting quudstion in suchc coditons is the role of artillery, This might beoyond the scope of thiis game. Not just finns but also pacific front. Very hard to modell.

[Slapdragon]

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

The question was about masses concentrated in a small area, not about superiority. The nest iteresting quudstion in suchc coditons is the role of artillery, This might beoyond the scope of thiis game. Not just finns but also pacific front. Very hard to modell.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well not really the Finns. There artillery worked on the continental model. The American Artillery used a different model, that is much more difficult to model, but for game simplicity they also got the continental model.

For scenario design, you can place rubble and the like, along with broken units. You can also rig a game for a round one artillery fire before opposing forces enter. More tricks will be available in CM:BB

[The Commissar]

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

The question was about masses concentrated in a small area, not about superiority. The nest iteresting quudstion in suchc coditons is the role of artillery, This might beoyond the scope of thiis game. Not just finns but also pacific front. Very hard to modell.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Arty hard to model? Hmm, not from what Ive seen. Arty is the biggest danger to me when I play QB against talented opponents. If you mass your men up, and your foe sees this, you can bet your money that a hulluva lot of arty will reduce what might have been a company to whimpering sissies covered in the guts of what was once their comrades in arms.

Try it. Put a battalion on a small map, then take a few salvos of heavy arty to them. Works just like in real life I would imagine.

[Yowie]

Although far removed from the European front, the battle at Tarawa should easily be among the biggest in WW2.

http://www.shoup.navy.mil/Web/Tarawa.htm http://geocities.com/jonathan.e.stevens/

[Grisha]

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

The question was about masses concentrated in a small area, not about superiority. The nest iteresting quudstion in suchc coditons is the role of artillery, This might beoyond the scope of thiis game. Not just finns but also pacific front. Very hard to modell.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Believe me, you want masses in a small area, Vistula-Oder has massive Soviet deployment by any standard per given area. If you spend some time and study this operation, you will not be disappointed in either masses of forces and/or artillery.

[ 09-24-2001: Message edited by: Grisha ]

[Tero]

I think what Fenno means by "hard to model artillery" is the fact that the shell fall pattern and density in CM seem to be modelled and optimized to favour the large bore artillery with the target point in unobstructed LOS.

The 14" are absolute killers while the big arsed Screaming Mimmies fall all over the place killing friendlies more than the enemies. The effect of the lower scale 81mm mortars and 75mm artillery, and to some extent even the 105mm's and 155mm's, are downplayed in their lethality with the need to have clear LOS to the target spot to attain maximum density in the fall pattern. Any and all fire missions that are directed at a spot out of LOS deteriorate into harrassing fire by default. It is hard to get a realistic shock effect of a surprise fire mission on troop concentrations out of LOS when the fall patterns are what they are in CM now.

Target reference points alleviate this but even I would hesitate to call for the TRP's to be made to cost next to nothing for the Finns to model the Finnish artillery practises, procedures and abilities. The RL Finnish artillery was developed to operate in a terrain that translates into CM as rural map with few roads, dense woods and moderate hills. The CM current artillery model is made with favours the use of artillery in relatively flat and open terrain.