Nationality differences - not based on materials

[Wildhack]

I admit I'm not even a grog junior grade, but I noticed that one element not mentioned in this discussion was the Soviet strategy of placing execution squads behind front lines. Perhaps "broken" conscript level troops could have their status modified when receiving a little area fire from their own countrymen, hehe?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Wildhack:

I admit I'm not even a grog junior grade, but I noticed that one element not mentioned in this discussion was the Soviet strategy of placing execution squads behind front lines. Perhaps "broken" conscript level troops could have their status modified when receiving a little area fire from their own countrymen, hehe?

I believe the NKVD was discussed in depth just before CMBB came out. I seem to recall that those who have studied this concluded that many of the stories of "execution squads" were just that? At the least, not common enough to warrant seperate modelling/rules etc. Much like the unarmed types arriving in Stalingrad as in ENEMY AT THE GATES, this was rather a bit of anomoly rather than national characteristic - if I remember those conversations correctly.

The Germans also had flying courts-martial in 1945, Feldjäger, etc., but their activities were done behind the lines, not in the midst of a battalion action. Generally speaking, NKVD, Feldjäger and other military police ("meatheads" as we lovingly call them in Canada) are rather brave when disciplining their own countrymen, but probably aren't so keen on exercising their authority in the vicinity of the enemy.

[K_Tiger]

The Germans also had flying courts-martial in 1945, Feldjäger, etc., but their activities were done behind the lines, not in the midst of a battalion action. Generally speaking, NKVD, Feldjäger and other military police ("meatheads" as we lovingly call them in Canada) are rather brave when disciplining their own countrymen, but probably aren't so keen on exercising their authority in the vicinity of the enemy

Its only 2-3 Weeks where i saw a real good dokumentation from the eastfront. At the hight of the Operation of the Vistula River the interviewed vets sayed, that 100 meters away from the frontline or from her own unit you was a deserter and mostly shot. There was only one option..stay in the trenches and fight, there was no better changes to survife, he sayed.

[Los]

We on the CMBB team researched, in detail, NKVD operations against their own troops and the whole policy of Stalin's Order 227 did have an effect on the war, albeit the strongest effects lasting only for a certain period of time starting in the winter of 41 but tapering off after Stalingrad. There was neither a shortage of sources either official researched or anectdotal in supporting the extent to which 227 was implemented.

If one calculates the TOE and strengths of the penal units at Corps, Army and other levels and does the math, (13 fronts each with 1-3 Penal bns for officers and 5-10 penal coys for men per subordinate Army within the front) there were a significantly large amount of soldiers (up to a quarter million, well over two divisions per front)in the pipeline to give these soldiers an opportunity to "redeem their crimes against the Motherland by blood." Or essentially to be disposed of as Front and Army commanders see fit. (Note: this does not include outright executions.)

BUT>>>>

Most of this has nothing to do with CMBB's scale and the 30-60 minutes duration of those battles. Before testing started, we did slice and dice in great detail different ways to reflect Commissars and NKVD units' terror effect on Soviet morale on the CMBB battlefield, but given the engine as it is, many effects were found to be either unworkable, or would lead to an overeffect, or whatnot. The current rules with commisars as developed ended up doing a good enough job without complicating matters too much. Gamey effects to the Barrage units were considered to override some of the elements which were considered for inclusion at the time. Actually this was all stuff we worked out almost 3 years ago, so forgive me if I'm a little fuzzy on it.

BTW for interest's sake (and no other reason) I'll repost Stalin's "Order #227 by the People's Commissar of the defense of the USSR" here:

THE SUPREME COMMAND OF THE RED ARMY ORDERS:

1. The military Councils of the fronts and first of all front commanders should:

a) In all circumstances decisively eradicate retreat attitude in the troops and with an iron hand prevent propaganda that we can and should continue the retreat to the east, and this retreat will not be harmful to us;

In all circumstances remove from offices and send to Stavka for court-martial those army

commanders who allowed their troops to retreat at will, without authorisation by the Front

command;

c) Form within each Front 1 to 3 (depending on the situation) penal battalions (800 personnel),

where commanding, senior commanders and political officers of corresponding ranks from all

services, who have broken discipline due to cowardice or instability, should be sent. These

battalions should be put on the more difficult sections of a Front, thus giving them an

opportunity to redeem their crimes against the Motherland by blood.

2. The Military Councils of armies and first of all army commanders should:

a) In all circumstances remove from offices corps and army commanders and commissars, who have allowed their troops to retreat at will without authorisation by the army command, and send them to the Military Councils of the Fronts for court-martial;

Form 3 to 5 well-armed guards (barrage) units (zagradotryads), deploy them in the rear of unstable divisions and oblige them to execute panic-mongers and cowards at site in case of panic and chaotic retreat, thus giving faithful soldiers a chance to do their duty before the Motherland;

c) Form 5 to 10 (depending on the situation) penal companies, where soldiers and NCOs, who have broken discipline due to cowardice or instability, should be sent. These units should be deployed at the most difficult sectors of the front, thus giving their soldiers an opportunity to redeem their crimes against the Motherland by blood.

3. Corps and division commanders and commissars should:

a) In all circumstances remove from offices regiment and battalion commanders and commissars who allowed their troops to retreat at will without authorisation from divisional or corps command, deprive them of their military decorations and send them to the Military Councils of fronts for court-martial;

Provide all possible help and support to the guards (barrage) units (zagradotryads) of the army in their work of strengthening discipline and order in the units.

This order is to be read aloud in all companies, troops, batteries, squadrons, teams and staffs.

The People’s Commissar for Defence

J.STALIN

[ October 10, 2003, 02:34 PM: Message edited by: Los ]

[CombinedArms]

I think BFC is wise to be very conservative when it comes to building national differences into the CMBB or CMAK engine. They did it with command delays for early Russian inf and tanks because that was quite well documented and generally agreed on by all observers of the early Russian army. But most of the differences we've been talking about are very hard to document or agree on, and thus it's probably not a good idea to build these differences in on the engine-wide level. It's wiser to allow individual adjustments to be made on the unit level in scenario design.

There's also the problem of troop quality tending to rise with experience and fall with rapid mobilization or extreme attrition...What might seem like a national positive or negative in 1939 can get lost in the shuffle by 1945. I have no doubt the German army was a very well trained and high-performance in 1940-42, but by 1944-45 they were fielding some units of dubious nationality and also of genuinely dubious quality.

Many of the characteristics that have been requested above exist already within the CM system. For example, do you want squads that recover morale and respond to orders more quickly after losing their HQ? Make them vet/crack/elite. Want a unit that's lost w/o it's HQ. Make it green/conscript...

The US army is a good example of an evolution process in terms of performance--the rep of US troops was pretty negative with both German enemies and British allies early in North Africa, but as American units gained experience they became pretty effective. Some Sgts. who had been around a while became in effect surrogate platoon commanders as different Lt's came and went. These guys could and id command when the latest Louie went down. By the end of the war, some divisions had fought their way across North Africa, through Sicily, up the boot of Italy, across France and deep into Germany. The character of the companies and platoons in such a division would have changed many times during the course of the war. And to try to model a consistent set of national characteristics with such a changeable force seems difficult indeed.

Similarly, some "German" units in France were in fact made up of Russian prisoners forced into the German army. When they got the chance they shot their officers and NCO's and surrendered en masse. If we set up a group of German characteristics, do we have to create exceptions for units like these, or for the Volksturms of the late war? Or do we have a separate category for "Axis troops who didn't have their heart in it"?

Until the good folks at BFC are able to come up with an engine that can reflect unit behavior with considerably more subtlety than at present, I think they are wise to take a very conservative approach to the treatment of national characteristics.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

You can't guess.

Michael

Hmm. Since this isn't the Peng Thread, or syrup and waffles, nor anything equestrian, I fear I should have included one each of these: , in my last post. Apologies all round, and for the love of calories, please don't hide my breakfast!

Regards

JonS

Edit: because sometimes its even possible to mis-spell a smiley!

[ October 11, 2003, 02:43 AM: Message edited by: JonS ]

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by JonS:

Edit: because sometimes its even possible to mis-spell a smiley!

Thought you'd be clever and walk on the water after it froze, but fell through anyway, eh, Jon? Heh, heh.

BTW, no imaginable offense was taken. You may have your breakfast...though I can't promise it won't be your last.

[cruel, mocking laughter]

Michael & Famine