TheCrow Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 I discovered sturmkompany´s existence, playing CMBO and CMBB. could someone give me some information about this unit? Thank you 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 There were several in depth discussion’s of this unit type on the CMBO forum. A search using Fionn Kelley and/or Jason Crowely would be likely to dig them up. Basically they were locally formed special circumstances and use units. Heavily manned and equipped for a local situation. Not a common formation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Murray Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 I believe a Sturmkompanie is a unit akin to heavy infantry/pioneers. They're heavily armed with flamethrowers & smgs ( more so than the average unit ). Their role is to spearhead attacks; crushing resistance with overwhelming firepower & speed. The Germans first used this strategy in the Great War: heavily armed assault ( storm ) troops would be sent in to knock the daylights out of the enemy ahead of the main force. [ March 06, 2003, 05:01 AM: Message edited by: Rob Murray ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCrow Posted March 6, 2003 Author Share Posted March 6, 2003 Then... could all infantry division raise this special formation, for one attack? Or they are specialist troops, with independent structure/status. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 I always thought these were part of the Sturmbatallion, an Army level asset for special tasks, and Army reserve. Which would make them a regular formation with an established TO&E. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCrow Posted March 6, 2003 Author Share Posted March 6, 2003 ups..excuse me, but I have more doubts than before. :confused: In cmbb, They have heavy support, seems to be more a special-independent formation than a regular formation raised by one infantry regiment, or something similar. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 Here you go Click. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 I think Abbott has the right of it in the linked thread (or his mysterious source ). I have seen other references along the lines of 'The Army's Sturmbattalion did...', e.g. during the Bagration battles (about the same time as Cotentin, at the other end of the continent). Sufficient to make me believe that establishing such a formation was a doctrinal, and not an on-the-hoof event or project. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou2000 Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 Anybody know of any CMBB scenarios that have been created to use the Sturmkompanie realistically ... ie in a realistic setting against a realistic oposing force ? (doesnt need to be 'historical' just 'realistic' in use) Lou2000 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 I don't think they were permanent formations but rather had a doctrine to guide their formation. I know that Kokott (26th VGD) organized some of his lead elements into assault companies for the innitial assault during the Bulge. Other accounts seem to show them being organized to lead attacks rather than being attached to other units for an attack. IOW they were part of their parent organization. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary T Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 The Sturm Batallions were an Army level unit in existence in 1944-43. They weren't an adhoc unit formed briefly and then disbanded. I have documents and orders of battle that show these formations in the following Armies - 18th, 16th, 4th, 9th, 1st Panzer, 2nd Panzer, 4th Panzer and of course 7th. I have no doubt they existed in others as well. Off the top of my head I think 4th and 9th Armies actually had a Sturm Regiment, certainly in the summer of 1943 they did. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 A good explanation concerning some of the confusion on the units in question: Sturmkompanien AS CM models them are Army assets. Each German Army had 1 Sturm Battalion attached. These were organised along identical lines in different theatres etc and were the hard core of an Army's attacking force ( along with the usual organic Tiger Abteilung). What most people are referring to are "Sturmgruppe". THOSE were ad hoc and formed by Bns, Regts and Divisions etc. Sturm Battaillon and Kompanien were formations directly subordinate to Armees and were entirely different. [ March 07, 2003, 03:07 PM: Message edited by: Abbott ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shosties Posted May 25, 2003 Share Posted May 25, 2003 If the Sturmkompanie is an attack formation, why the organic PaK40s? Wouldn't they normally be employed with some StuGs or StuHs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaylord Focker Posted May 25, 2003 Share Posted May 25, 2003 Originally posted by Shosties4th: If the Sturmkompanie is an attack formation, why the organic PaK40s? Wouldn't they normally be employed with some StuGs or StuHs? The Eastern Front was enormous and lets face it, the Axis never had enough AFV's, especialy for a front as large as the East. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shosties Posted May 25, 2003 Share Posted May 25, 2003 Originally posted by Gaylord Focker: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Shosties4th: If the Sturmkompanie is an attack formation, why the organic PaK40s? Wouldn't they normally be employed with some StuGs or StuHs? The Eastern Front was enormous and lets face it, the Axis never had enough AFV's, especialy for a front as large as the East. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastables Posted May 25, 2003 Share Posted May 25, 2003 Originally posted by Gaylord Focker: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Shosties4th: If the Sturmkompanie is an attack formation, why the organic PaK40s? Wouldn't they normally be employed with some StuGs or StuHs? The Eastern Front was enormous and lets face it, the Axis never had enough AFV's, especialy for a front as large as the East. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou2000 Posted May 25, 2003 Share Posted May 25, 2003 This gives some details of the compsoition of a Sturmkompanie Sturmkompanie Its only an extract from this book . Leaping Horseman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted May 25, 2003 Share Posted May 25, 2003 Can somebody explain to me what the CMBB Sturmkompanie is doing with all these PaK40? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted May 25, 2003 Share Posted May 25, 2003 Originally posted by redwolf: Can somebody explain to me what the CMBB Sturmkompanie is doing with all these PaK40? I don't know, but they sure do well in defense (as Nekander can affirm)! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted May 26, 2003 Share Posted May 26, 2003 The organic PAK seem to me to be a misunderstanding (more on that below). Platoons like those were present in regimental AT companies in each Heer infantry regiment - 3 PAK, 3 LMG. I can imagine a full Sturmbattalion having 1 of those. But 18 PAK for a single battalion (as 6 per company implies) suggests an attached Pz Jgr unit co-located with the sturmbattalion, not organic guns. Yes, Sturmbattalions were army level reserve formations. They were not used only for attacks, and certainly weren't armored or equipped with AFVs. In Normandy the Sturm battalion of the 7th Army formed part of a "reaction reserve" along with the bulk of the 243rd infantry division. They had bicycles. The 243rd is also missing 1 battalion from its 920th regiment, and the 3rd company from its pioneer battalion. Its other two regiments and two pioneer companies are all bike mounted, while the remainder of the 920 is on foot. This suggests a designation and control change. It was certainly doctrinal to have a reserve battalion, more heavily equipped and hopefully more mobile as well, at army level as a reaction reserve or to strengthen an important attack. But this doesn't mean the men so organized and designated didn't originally come from a sub-unit organic to the army. Sturm just means "assault" in German - as in "storm the castle" or "storm the beaches". So loosely any special party assigned a leading role in an attack could be called the "sturm" this or that - the "storming party", we'd say in English. That a small army level reserve unit was officially so designated does not change the basic meaning. It just indicates what they imagined forming that reserve for, at the time they named it. Which doesn't mean that is how they actually used that unit in practice (e.g. the St-Abt AOK 7 was a reaction reserve), or that other units didn't form "storming parties" tactically. What is the origin of the PAK misunderstanding? Perhaps a tactical description where a certain Sturmbattalion was fighting alongside a Pz Jgr unit, but I doubt that is the basic cause. I suspect instead it was a misunderstanding of "14th companies" in regimental organizations. Regiments had added companies for their gun units and various other extras. It was common for the 14th company to be the PAK company. The typical force at that level was 3 75mm PAK with a few LMGs for security, just like a single one of the platoons in the Sturmkompanie. It was, however, a company level formation, and a 3 gun battery is a platoon sized unit. Maybe somebody thought there had to be more than one in a full company. Not so, actually. An additional platoon would have Panzerschrecks, which would be farmed out to the subunits. The 13th company was typically the infantry gun company, with 6 75mm infantry guns and sometimes 2 150mm ones. Sometimes a 15th was present, too - additional regiment-level pioneers for example. But sturmkompanies as parts of army level sturmabt. were not added regimental level infantry type companies. [ May 25, 2003, 06:31 PM: Message edited by: JasonC ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shosties Posted May 26, 2003 Share Posted May 26, 2003 Would the Sturmkompanie have mixed the pioneers and infantrymen together in the Sturmgruppe squads, or was there a separate "Sturmpioneer"-type squad with FT teams? If the TO&E really calls back to the WW1 assault detachments, then you'd expect to see FT teams, LMGs (ok, accounted for in the squads), mortars, and infantry guns in there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted May 26, 2003 Share Posted May 26, 2003 In reality, the Germans saw those nice 12 man american squads and got jealous. They had such a hard time winning those blasted ME QB's with only 1000 points and 9 man squads. So the formed a 13 man squad! Thats one more than those darn Ami's! All your ME QB's belong to us now! Chad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.