Question about tactics?

[WEAPON42]

We are all familiar with the war scene in Saving Private Ryan at the end with the 2 tiger tanks.My question is was that german co a complete idiot or were they real life tactics?Knowing about cm tactics now I would have turned my 2 tigers at the street and kept them there for my base of fire and support.I would have sent 1/2 squads sneaking thru the rubble and bldgs to scout out the enemy.The german co just sent the tank down the street 1st with about 2 sqds behind it.The tank got takin out and the infantry got mowed down.So was that just bad tactics or what a real co would do?

[Silvio Manuel]

I've wondered a lot about that- was the T.C. so absurdly overconfident that he was just going for shock effect, knowing that the Allies probably didn't have AT assets worth a damn? At any rate, I would think that they would want *someone* out in front, at least to spot mines or AT ditches or something.

I also get a kick out of the non-chalant way that the SS troops run in many parts of that battle, for example when the Marder comes down the US right flank (right before Sgt.Horvath KO's it w/ a bazooka), and the men are just jogging thru heavy fire, with no suppressing fire, not even 75mm from the Marder. I like the sound of the MG42's firing in the background a few times, even though you don't actually see any fire in Ramelle.

[CMplayer]

I just figured that the Germans were in a serious hurry to secure the bridge. They knew it could be rigged for demolition and that it was an objective of the advancing regular infantry. So they threw caution to the wind and attacked as quickly as possible.

[ July 02, 2002, 06:13 PM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

[CMplayer]

Seriously, if you read first person accounts of real battles things often happened that would seem unbelievable to a CM player knowing he has his 30 minute-length turns. Like airborne infantry doing bayonet charges through bocage field after bocage field, getting mowed down in droves but making an inspiring enough example to jumpstart the regular infantry bogged down behind them.

[zukkov]

well i was going to say that it was more hollywood than history, but cm put an important light on the subject i hadn't thought about. the hollywood part is that when captain miller talked about making sticky bombs, you knew they had to have an opportunity to use them, thus the tiger came down the street to make that possible. but as cm said, they were in a hurry to grab the bridge before it blew, so at least some of the action may have been reallistic. but i think the germans weren't firing near enough. in any case, it's still the best movie i've seen about ww2. but i haven't seen wind talkers yet, is it good??

[MajorTaktik]

Originally posted by WEAPON42:

We are all familiar with the war scene in Saving Private Ryan at the end with the 2 tiger tanks.My question is was that german co a complete idiot or were they real life tactics?Knowing about cm tactics now I would have turned my 2 tigers at the street and kept them there for my base of fire and support.I would have sent 1/2 squads sneaking thru the rubble and bldgs to scout out the enemy.The german co just sent the tank down the street 1st with about 2 sqds behind it.The tank got takin out and the infantry got mowed down.So was that just bad tactics or what a real co would do?

Dont you know! All Hollywood German soldiers are deaf, dumb and blind!

LOL

Seriously, IMHO, the attack into that town was fundementally wrong on many levels and was a staged showcase for Tom Hanks and his para-boys. For the most part, Hollywood war movies provide sad renditions of the German solider. To me, that whole battle was just a bunch of spliced scenes showing Germans doing stupid things and Americans doing brilliant things. Rushing to take a bridge or not, there are many scenes that illustrate how NOT to attack a town.

Also, the KG moving in to attack the town during daylight hours on the Western Front may be the most unrealistic thing of all! JABOS!

[russellmz]

Originally posted by zukkov:

but i haven't seen wind talkers yet, is it good??

i'm not very well versed in pacific war tactics, but they japanese seemed to do fairly well at the beginning, only to drop in skill steadily as the movie progressed(like most war movie bad guys).

the parts where they were fighting well were pretty good: japs popping out of the brush a few feet from some marines and jabbing them, actual attempts to flank, and use of grenades etc.

towards the end though there was some silly stuff done by the japanese: the "attack a soldier from behind but scream the whole time so he hears you and turns around and kills you" type of thing.

overall i liked the movie.

[zukkov]

thanks russ, think i'll go see it this weekend..

[PiggDogg]

zukkov,

I saw "Windtalkers" this past weekend. Good flick. Go see it.

Very, very John Woo-ish who is the successor to Sam Pekenpaugh. Lots of people (way too many) shot a close range (way too close). Lots of tumbling and writhing bodies after being injected by bullets.

There waw some cool and realistic stuff like artillery tubes recoiling. Very, very unusual for almost all war movies.

Most of the tactics used by both sides seem quite a bit over the top which means quite unrealistic.

For example, in the last battle, some big Japanese arty fires on an advancing Marine road column. After the arty impacts, instead of the marines scattering into the bush around the road, they hug near the road near targeted vehicles.

Quibble, quibble. Too much quibbling from me. I enjoyed the flick; go see it.

Cheers, Richard

[K_Tiger]

Wasnt it a a rule, after the germans lost so many Pz III and IV`s in the early stage of war thrue molotovs and other infatrie weapons, to avoid citys until the inf hase cleared a way ?

Even the germans r in hurry to secure the bridge, every CO know that he cant hold the bridge only with 2 Tigers and without inf.

The funniest thing were the germans in the middle of the street some r standing....like "come kill me, im not the main actor"..

[tar]

Warning: Cheap shot.

One reason you wouldn't do the SPR tactics in CM is that moving tanks don't provide any cover for following infantry.

That said, one needs to be very leary of learning tactics from Hollywood movies. For one thing, soldiers are almost always too bunched up -- they need to get their faces on the screen after all. Unlike actor-soldiers, real soldiers prefer NOT to be seen.

[vbfg]

The thing that really, really annoys me about that scene is where they put the MG. I mean, a church tower? What were they thinking? They hang on until the infantry is right beneath them and then open fire, thus giving the opportunity to shoot them in the top of the head or deny that 6" square piece of ground that the bullet hits if you miss. Why not shoot down the length of the street, deny them the whole thing for a period *and* have an escape route when the tank rounds the corner? And why, for blinkin' flip's sake, do you then go and put your sniper in the same tower? Hey guys! Hear that *big* rattling, machine gun noise? Well I'm hiding behind it! Can't hear me breathing, huh?

Rant over. Good film otherwise. It was the first DVD I bought after I plugged my surround sound speakers in.

[Redwolf]

I can't believe we seriously discuss tactics from SPR.

I think the Germans lost that battle because they couldn't imagine the Americans knew what socks are.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by K_Tiger:

Even the germans r in hurry to secure the bridge, every CO know that he cant hold the bridge only with 2 Tigers and without inf.

Tell that to Viktor Gräbner.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by vbfg:

Good film otherwise.

Like the heavy tripod-mounted machine gun left in the middle of nowhere to defend a knocked out radar site, with no other Germans within earshot of all that shooting? And the ridiculous decision to attack it frontally, with the medic and sniper (sans scoped rifle) leading the charge?

Or the miraculous recreation of Omaha Beach where the first wave is up to the top of the cliffs in 20 minutes?

Or the 1 in a million through-the-scope shot (yeah, I know, Hathcock did it, but so what) from a sniper who changed his scope on the fly without rezeroing the weapon?

Or the guys with grenades hanging off their belts throwing mortar rounds? (yeah, I know it was done once in the Pacific, but so what)

Emotionally it packed a punch, but militarily? Puh-lease....

[ July 03, 2002, 08:00 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[zukkov]

oh come on mike, you're just jealous cuz they were american troops instead of canadian!