Unarmed Soviet conscript squads, prime for the wave attack

[The Commissar]

I have an idea that would better simulate the dire situation during the early days of Barbarosa. That is, the well documented and immensely wasteful wave attacks made by conscript mobs of UNARMED men, used primarily as bullet fodder for the actual armed troops who would be advancing behind them.

These would be large in size, be available only with conscript experience level (you wont get to be a vet if you participate in these wave attacks), and be unarmed. Of course, when/if these hordes get into close combat, they would be able to inflict damage. The cost would have to be very low per platoon,(or maybe they should be sold as companies only to represent the "mob" mentality?) lower then regular conscripts by a good ammount. Not only would this be historicaly correct, it would also encourage the early Soviet player to use "realistic" tactics.

Of course, unless sweeping machine gun fire is fixed in CM2 (not that I doubt it will) these cannot go in - these unarmed mobs would simply overpower the enemy by pure mass.

What do you say? Do you think these could go in? Should they go in? I realise this is a game, but I doubt that many players will even send virtual men into certain death just to get a few armed squads up close.

Suggestion appreciated.

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: The Commissar ]

[The Commissar]

Just a bump. I want to see this idea realised...

[lcm1947]

I normally agree with just about any new idea but on this one I just don't see anybody actually wanting to buy them? Not being negative just wanted to see some thoughts on the subject. I may not be seeing the picture the way you are. It does kind of sound neat but I just don't know. :confused:

[Loki]

I really like this idea. There are some that would be horrified to do this, but it really happened. I would have to admit that it may be difficult to impliment in a game. What kind of points would you give the unit? Lots a play balance issue's here, but I would like to see it done.

I guess the best way to balance them would be to have near by Russian units open fire on the constripts when they flee. That way they would be a hinderance to the Russians as well as the Germans.

[Guest ckoharik]

Heck, I'd love to see those kind of troops in the game. I agree that they would have to be very, very cheap, break easily, and that MG fire would have to be altered to counter their numbers.

On second thought, the morale aspect would have to allow for them to be willing to go down to the last few men. Having "friendly" units fire on them would be an option, but I don't think I would want the game to have other units do this. Rather, as part of the "Humanski Wave" company add a couple "motivation" platoons that do have weapons and will fire on retreating conscripts.

[Skipper]

Bother to post any historical example of it?

[Jarmo]

I was thinking of this a while back. I believe it could work best if you had maybe a 15 men squad with 5 rifles. The weapons would have a chance of being picked up when the shooter gets wasted, just like the LMG's are handled now.

There's also the advantage, that even a large conscript squad would be easy to pin down or rout with MG fire. So there'd be no need to change the MG system..

[tss]

The Commissar wrote:

That is, the well documented and immensely wasteful wave attacks made by conscript mobs of UNARMED men, used primarily as bullet fodder for the actual armed troops who would be advancing behind them.

Are you really certain about that? The way that I've read it is that the unarmed men followed the armed men and picked up the weapons of their fallen comrades.

- Tommi

[Jarmo]

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

[QB

Are you really certain about that? The way that I've read it is that the unarmed men followed the armed men and picked up the weapons of their fallen comrades.[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I almost mentioned this, but I couldn't remember any other examples of this than the "enemy at the gates" and I hesitate to quote hollywood products as historic proof..

[Skipper]

> and I hesitate to quote hollywood products

> as historic proof

Wise man!

Remember, there was a discussion on the destiny of liberated Soviet POWs? There was a widespread opinion that one would go straight to "Gulag" or shot on spot?

Today I came across the following figures:

QTE

From October 1941 to 1 October 1944, a total of 302,992 former POWs had undergone filtration. Of that number 11,556 (3.81%) were arrested.

Starting November 1944 liberated POW's were sent to reserve units without filtration.

After the war, a total of 1,539,475 former POW's were repatriated. Of that number, 226,127 (14.69%) were transfered into NKVD custody (mostly Vlasovites and such).

UNQTE

These stories about unarmed wave attacks are of approximately the same quality. Ie, fairy tales. One man who for whatever reason had no hand weapon could have been ordered to join in attack without it (I've seen a photo of a bayonet lashed to a stick). A unit or formation??? As a tactical decision? No.

[tss]

Jarmo wrote:

I almost mentioned this, but I couldn't remember any other examples of this than the "enemy at the gates" and I hesitate to quote hollywood products as historic proof..

One historic example, but not a Soviet one:

During the February battles at Taipale in 1940 several unarmed replacements arrived to the 1./JR 21 just before a counter attack. They were ordered to follow the attack and pick up weapons of the wounded and KIAs.

Or was it just before the counter attack to Patoniemi on Christmas 1939. I can't remember for certain and my sources are at home.

(Just to clarify the part that I accidentally cut out when writing the message: the counter attack was Finnish. And thinking again, it was the Patoniemi attack and the unit was then still called 1./JR 30 (the name of the regiment was later changed in an effort to confuse Soviets into thinking that new reinforcements had arrived.) ).

- Tommi

[ 04-18-2001: Message edited by: tss ]

[Skipper]

Note the "several replacements" part. A few men.

[Tiger]

"Though generally no master of improvisation, the Russian command nevertheless knew how to bring battered infantry units up to strength and how to constitute new units as replacements for destroyed ones. This procedure frequently was accomplished with startling speed, but it soon turned out to be a game played with human lives. For example, the inhabitants of a threatened city, or perhaps the entire male population of areas which the Germans had recently evacuated, were gathered up quickly by means of excellent organization. Regardless of age, nationality, deferred status, or fitness, they were used to fill out these units. With no training at all, or at most only a few days of it, and often without weapons or uniforms, these "soldiers" were thrown into battle. They were supposed to learn in combat all that was necessary, and to aquire their weapons from their dead comrades. The Russians themselves were aware of the fact that these men were not soldiers, but they filled the gaps and supplemented the sinking numbers of the human mass. During the fighting in a bridgehead southeast of Kremenchug in September 1943, the Russians at nighttime used to drive ahead of their armed soldiers large numbers of civilians whom they had gathered up, so that the German infantry might expend its scant supply of ammunition."

from Generaloberst Erhard Rauss's post war "German Report Series" & "Fighting in Hell, the German Ordeal on the Eastern Front".

from the preface:

"Described by Guderian as one of the German Army's finest panzer generals, Rauss commanded the Fourth and Third Panzer Armies in succession on the Eastern Front, having risen from command of division and corps. His defense of Kharkov in 1943 with the XI Corps was a masterpiece of skill and leadership. His subsequent commands of two panzer armies when the tide had turned in the East against the Germans were virtuoso performances of stubborn, wiley, and often brilliant employment of the defense. He was ultimately sacked on a whim by Hitler in the last months of the war."

-Tiger

[ferdinand]

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

Originally posted by Skipper:

...There was a widespread opinion that one would go straight to "Gulag" or shot on spot?

Today I came across the following figures:

....

(3.81%) were arrested.

...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Off-topic, but do you have a source for these numbers ?

I remember reading in Shalamov the story of Russians (not from Vlassov's army) who surrendered during the war and escaped from the Germans only to be send to the gulag.

So, the fact that *some* were sent straight to the gulag seems well documented, if the number is not.

[Stefan Fredriksson]

As far as I have understood it from reading and seeing interviews on TV with Russian veterans, the idea was more like Tommi described it. The unarmed was to follow, and pick up rifles from their fallen comrades.

And commissars shooting people not wanting to rush forward was not uncommon.

Think of it - how do you best motivate people to rush straight into mg-fire...?

At the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum (sp?) in Vienna I saw Russian dummy-rifles. Simply wooden rifles Russian soldiers were issued, with the instruction to replace it with real ones from fallen comrades.

From Beevor's "Stalingrad" - Russian soldiers returning to their own lines, after having been pows or simply gotten lost, getting shot as deserters...

A human life simply was not worth much.

[ 04-18-2001: Message edited by: Stefan Fredriksson ]

[tss]

ferdinand wrote:

So, the fact that *some* were sent straight to the gulag seems well documented, if the number is not.

There are a lot of different numbers floating around and it is very difficult to say what are the most reliable. Most of the relatively recent estimates that I've seen put the figure of POWs sent to Gulag to somewhere between 200-500 thousand.

I would guess that the fate of the POWs depended highly on who interrogated them after release.

Also, the treatment got more lenient by time. In 1940, well over 90% of the ~3500 soldiers that had been captured and then released by Finns were sent to Gulag. In Stepakov's book "Sodalla on hintansa" (I don't know whether it is published amnywhere outside Finland) the author told that he had interviewed one former POW who had been one of the lucky ones to escape a sentence to prison camps. He and several other heavily wounded men were simply released without any official statement at all after they had been held in custody for several months. He believed that somebody had forgotten them and that they were released by mistake.

- Tommi

[Skipper]

Your source is a nice storyteller. His favorite myth, obviously is "how gallant german knights bravely fought bolshevik hordes and were overwhelmed by sheer human mass in the end".

See, population of USSR was not that much bigger than Germany and allies. And I posted loss figures sometime ago. We are talking roughly 6 million soviet troops lost vs 3 mln Axis troops between Dec 41 and Jan 45. Ie, not including the catastrophe of the first few months.

> For example, the inhabitants of a

> threatened city, or perhaps the entire

> male population of areas which the Germans

> had recently evacuated, were gathered up

> quickly by means of excellent

> organization.

Note the use of words. The "areas that germnans recently evacuated" we will call "liberated occupied territories". The "gathering of civilians" we will call "drafting citizens to the army service".

> Regardless of age, nationality, deferred

> status, or fitness, they were used to fill

> out these units

People over 50, disabled etc were not drafted - only volunteered. And volunteered they did!

> With no training at all, or at most only a

> few days of it

Every young soviet citizen had a basic infantry training as part of his/her school education, and good many of older generation had a combat experience from WWI, civil war etc. That's not much, but they all knew how to shoot a rifle (or an AKM later) and throw a hanfd grenade.

> these "soldiers" were thrown into battle

For all I know, they were used as replacements in regular squads. Ie, nobody was dumb enough to form separate units out of such troops. There was no reason to do so. There were also partisan brigades taking part in frontline operations (very common practice) - these would be strangely armed guys without uniforms. But that is another story.

> During the fighting in a bridgehead

> southeast of Kremenchug in September 1943,

> the Russians at nighttime used to drive

> ahead of their armed soldiers large

> numbers of civilians whom they had

> gathered up, so that the German infantry

> might expend its scant supply of

> ammunition."

This particular bit sounds like a sheer nonsense.

[Skipper]

> Off-topic, but do you have a source for

> these numbers ?

http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?id=145020&article=3731

Primary sources are mentioned somewhere down the thread.

> At the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum (sp?)

> in Vienna I saw Russian dummy-rifles.

These were made for basic tactical training in secondary schools and boot camps. They are quite heavy and totally useless in combat. Why would anyone give them to a frontline unit escapes me. Even the described above stick with bayonet would be a much better weapon.

> And commissars shooting people not wanting

> to rush forward was not uncommon.

It wasnt, indeed. I've even seen some figures suggesting that germans executed MORE of their own soldiers in similar circumstances.

> A human life simply was not worth much.

Very truly so.

> I would guess that the fate of the POWs

> depended highly on who interrogated them

> after release.

Yup. Some "osobists" were bad pricks. But not "all", or even "most".

[tss]

Skipper wrote:

Note the use of words. The "areas that germnans recently evacuated" we will call "liberated occupied territories".

Terminology is a pretty interesting thing. Not relevant to this topic, but I've always been amused on Soviet historians who write about the "liberation of the old Russian town Vyborg from occupation on 20 June 1944". (For those who don't about Isthmus history: Vyborg was founded in the end of 13th century by Swedes at the place of an old Karelian trading post and up to 13.3.1940 vast majority of its inhabitants were Finns or Karelians).

[i would like to add that I find the deluded visions of the "Greater-Finland" activists almost as amusing when they wrote about their plans of liberating most of the Northern Russia. But then again, I've always been fond of bad propaganda.]

- Tommi

[ 04-18-2001: Message edited by: tss ]

[Skipper]

> These would be large in size, be available

> only with conscript experience level (you

> wont get to be a vet if you participate in

> these wave attacks), and be unarmed.

Yeah. And look like this:

[ 04-18-2001: Message edited by: Skipper ]

[Skipper]

> but I've always been amused on Soviet

> historians who write about the "liberation

> of the old Russian town Vyborg

"Liberation" vs "conquest" was an official classification, used for example to name combat medals. Thus, there was a medal for "Liberation of Warshaw", but a medal "For conquest of Berlin".

Criteria for "liberation" was that pre-war the place belonged to USSR or a country that was not officially at war with USSR prior to its "liberation".

In this context, I always wondered how would Soviet leaders resolve this issue with Paris, if they had a chance to get there before Western Allies?

[Jeff Heidman]

WHo would want to be the Russian player to use these?

THis sounds like little kids playing Cowboys and Indians.

"OK, Bobby, you be the Indian, and I will stand over here and shoot you. Won't that be fun!"

Besides, if you want this, you can do it in CM1. Just take a bunch of scripts, remove all their ammo, and there you go. You can mow them down to your hearts content.

Woopeee.

Jeff Heidman

[Stefan Fredriksson]

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

...

> At the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum (sp?)

> in Vienna I saw Russian dummy-rifles.

These were made for basic tactical training in secondary schools and boot camps. They are quite heavy and totally useless in combat. Why would anyone give them to a frontline unit escapes me. Even the described above stick with bayonet would be a much better weapon.

...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was some years ago since I was there. But iirc, the text elaborated a bit more. That the dummy-rifles would make the hords *look* all armed. The dummies were not that well made even, they had the shape of a rifle, not much more.

This is my reflection:

The ones in charge on the Russian side decided that it is better to rush with people looking to be armed, than not. But they are not expected to make it all the way, so why give them bayonets if they will not get within striking distance.

The dummy rifles were for looks only, someone lucky enough to survive, would probably have no problem finding a real rifle, among his wounded or dead comrades.

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

Personally I would not find one of these scenarios that much entertaining in CM(2), since there is no real tactical value in them.

[Skipper]

>But iirc, the text elaborated a bit more.

>That the dummy-rifles would make the hords

>*look* all armed.

Myth. Nice museum...

[Stefan Fredriksson]

I took a picture of said rifle(s) while there. Will try to find it tonight.

Why would it be a myth?

To me it makes perfect sense. And personally I'd rather hold on to *something* looking like a weapon (for morale), than nothing, while rushing an enemy position.

As I said, will try to find the picture, scan it, and post it here.