Michael Emrys Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 They do some good books, I have a great one called "The Atlantic Wall". It gives details pictures various fortifications. Find it here: http://www.ospreypublishing.com/store/The-Atlantic-Wall-%281%29-_9781846031298 I have that one. It is pretty good. I don't believe I'd regard it as the last word on the subject, but good enough for the more than just casual reader. Nice to have at hand when reading other books on D-Day. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narses Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 Hi, im searching for books about the Battle for Normandy. A book that is about the operational-warfare and describes some company or battalion sized battles (CM scale) in detail with maps, Order of battle and casuality reports. Maybe AAR's from both sides would be nice. Most books look like they tell you the hole story, the big picture but i would like to get some informations about the many small sized battles that took place there in 1944. Can you recommend something ? I can recommend for division and lower Normandy combat & actions: 1) Normandy Front (D-Day from the German 352 Inf Div) by Vince Milano 2) Beyond the Beachhead (The US 29th Inf Div in Normandy) by J. Balkoski 3)Eagles & Bulldogs in Normandy 1944 ( US 29th Inf Div & British 3rd Div) by Maj Gen M. Reynolds 4)The Bloody Battle for Tilly (Normandy 44) by Ken Tout 5) A Fine Night for Tanks (The Road to Falaise) by Ken Tout NCO, 1st Northern Yeomanry fighting with Sherman Tanks) 6) From Normandy to the Ruhr ( With the 116 Pz Division) by Heinz Gunther Guderian (son of Heinz Guderian) 7) View From the Turret (the 743 Tk Bn D-Day) by W. Folkestad 8) Steel Inferno ( 1st SS Pz Corps in Normandy) by MG M. Reyolds 9) Sons of the Reich ( 2nd SS Pz Corps Normandy etc) by MG M. Reynolds 4) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wokelly Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 900 MIV quoted by Zetterling I'm presuming also include Flak Panzers, Jadgpanzer IV Hummel maybe even StuG IV ect Jentz's figures are for the actul PIV tanks in the Panzer Abt and does not include things built on PIV chassis. That might explain the discrepancy and the incorrect conclusion drawn by Buckley. You will have to find Zitterling's book if you want an answer, Buckley cites the book but doesn't give a detailed note explaining what you want answered. Buckley, citing Zitterling puts numbers at: 900 Mark IVs 650 Panthers 550 StuGs 120-30 Tigers (I and II) 300 "Others" If you have Zitterling's Normandy book, look around pages 65-68. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holman Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 What's the opinion on Max Hastings' Overlord? I understand that he's a good writer and a good historian, but is the book outdated? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wokelly Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 What's the opinion on Max Hastings' Overlord? I understand that he's a good writer and a good historian, but is the book outdated? Yeah personally I would avoid Hastings work. His book contains a number of questionable conclusions, such as the Regimental system in the British Army hindering inter-divisional cooperation, or that the Allies possessing tanks like the Panther would have made things significantly better (given most shermans were being knocked out from side shots the Panther would not have proved that much safer), and many other myths about the Allies and Germans that were promoted during the 1980's revisionism period. 30 years of subsequent research has produced much better books. Hastings and other revisionists (D'Este, Ellis) should get credit for getting the ball rolling on objective analysis of the Allies performance in the ETO, the problem is their works were too simplistic with their analysis (though previous work really had no analysis). In many ways the newer the book on the subject, the better (though there are still plenty of trash books coming out). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted June 9, 2011 Share Posted June 9, 2011 re Hastings: the research and writing are both pretty good, but the analysis and uber-Germans conclusions haven't aged well. I've also seen it claimed that he lifted large chunks out of the British OH without attributation. OTOH, I've also seen the opinion that Hastings sufficiently p!ssed off enough vets to spur the writing of some truly great memoirs, like Blackburn's trilogy, so there's that I think I'll probably always have a bit of a soft spot for this book anyway, though, because it was probably the first 'serious' military history book I read, and it was certainly the first one I bought. I still have my dog-earred old copy, and fondly remember obsessively referring to it during endless games of Fortress Europa In terms of recent, one volume potted historys of the Normandy campaign, the field is a bit sparse. In fact, I think it's basically limited to Hastings, D'Este, or Beevor, and in the case of Hastings and D'Este 'recent' is a very relative term. Despite reservations, any of them will give you a decent overview. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 For the cheapskates amongst you, you may want to check out this: http://www.ndltd.org/serviceproviders/scirus-etd-search Basically, it is an thesis finder, with links - in most cases - to the full thesis as a download. If you put, for example, Normandy 1944 in the search box, the first few pages of results includes: * Bitter harvest, a case study of Allied operational intelligence for Operation Spring Normandy, July 25, 1944, O'Keefe, David R. Jan 1997 * Canadians Against Fire: Canada's Soldiers and Marshall's "Ratio of Fire" 1944-1945 Engen, Robert Charles. Mar 2008 * 2nd TAF and the Normandy campaign, controversy and under-developed doctrine Johnston, Paul. Jan 2000 * Missed opportunities, first Canadian Army and the air plan for Operation Totalize, 7-10 August 1944 Perrun, Jody. Jan 1999 * Tactical air power in the Normandy campaign, the role of 83 group Evans, Christopher Robert. Jan 1998 * The quest for operational maneuver in the Normandy campaign, Simonds and Montgomery attempt the armoured breakout Jarymowycz, Roman Johann. Jan 1997 * The U.S. Army's 2nd Ranger Battalion beyond D-Day Quistorff, Alissa. Jan 2005 * Soldiers and stereotypes mountaineers, cultural identity, and World War II Keeney, Charles Belmont. Jan 2009 Some of these, including Jarymowycz's and Engen's, have subsequently become books. Jon 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Yeah personally I would avoid Hastings work. His book contains a number of questionable conclusions, such as the Regimental system in the British Army hindering inter-divisional cooperation... However, I have read the same thing in a variety of sources, mostly written before his book. So whether entirely correct or not, he wasn't just pulling that out of thin air. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastables Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 However, I have read the same thing in a variety of sources, mostly written before his book. So whether entirely correct or not, he wasn't just pulling that out of thin air. Michael Yeah, NZ now has one regt, it's 60 years on but the amount of unit parochialism I experienced as a attachment (so not only not part of the regt but not even part of the same Corp) would tend to show Hastings is not entirely wrong wrong in how bad it can get. The Regt is an excellent system of instilling loyalty within the unit it's not good nor was every really ment for smooth inter regt cooperation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastables Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Ok have got beevor, will be buying John Buckley's British Armour from amazon tonight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Ok have got beevor, will be buying John Buckley's British Armour from amazon tonight. use The Book Depository - they don't charge postage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Ok have got beevor, will be buying John Buckley's British Armour from amazon tonight. You can get it electronically from eBooks.com if you want it right now 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrailApe Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 John Buckley will be wondering why there is an increased demand for his book - I've ordered it too! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 From the very limited reading on Normandy (thanks for all the suggestions) I thought the regimental system particularly affected infantry armour cooperation, which caused needless casualties for both. Beevor is not very highly regarded by his peers, partly jealousy about his success with Stalingrad, but also his more recent books are seen as rehashes. Which, reading this thread seems to be borne out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 From the very limited reading on Normandy (thanks for all the suggestions) I thought the regimental system particularly affected infantry armour cooperation, which caused needless casualties for both. Not so much the Regimental system itself but rather the habit of swapping units about to form battle groups so that often a particular infantry unit may not have worked with a particular armoured brigade so they were not as cohesive. That tended to extend from units not necessarily being assigned to a specific division. Buckley notes that units that had trained together in previously tended to perform better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcmil Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Death Traps - Belton S. Cooper & Invasion - They're Coming - Paul Carell ( Harrap, 1962).(Link to reprint) - Were 2 tales that gave a good comparative overview from several perspectives. Easy to read too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daft Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 You will have to find Zitterling's book if you want an answer, Buckley cites the book but doesn't give a detailed note explaining what you want answered. Buckley, citing Zitterling puts numbers at: 900 Mark IVs 650 Panthers 550 StuGs 120-30 Tigers (I and II) 300 "Others" If you have Zitterling's Normandy book, look around pages 65-68. I've got Zetterling's book in the basement. Will have to look it up when I get home. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Not so much the Regimental system itself but rather the habit of swapping units about to form battle groups so that often a particular infantry unit may not have worked with a particular armoured brigade so they were not as cohesive. Thanks for the clarification, did German troops train more with armour or was that left to the Panzer Grenadiers. Would it be possible to build in the lack of cooperation into CM, or would it have to be through a set of house rules? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 the figure Jentz (I have both vol. 1&2 at home) quotes is from a report Guderian presented to Hitler on AFV strength in the west, as of june 10, 1944, the numbers are: 39 Pz III 758 Pz IV 655 Panthers 102 Tiger I 158 Stugs 179 Captured tanks(mostly obsolete french models) The actual numbers of AFVs in each Panzer division in the West on june 10 are: division---------------PzIII----PzIV----PzV----Stugs--------- 2nd Panzer-----------------------96------79----------------- 9th Panzer-----------------------78------40-------5---------- 11th Panzer-------------26-------89---------------8---------- 21st Panzer---------------------112-------------------------- 116th Panzer------------13-------86---------------6---------- Panzer Lehr-----------------------98------88----------------- 1st SS Panzer--------------------45-------54-----45-------- 2nd SS Panzer--------------------54------78------42-------- 12th SS Panzer-------------------98------66---------------- 17th SS Panzer-Grenadier--------------------------42------ (note: does not include independent units, like Tiger battalions. It also does not necessarily matchup to their TO&E when they went into combat, since some were still rebuilding.) The official TO&E of a 44 Panzer Division had a PzIV battalion and a PzV Battalion, so 50/50 PzIV and Panthers although in RL, the split was more 60/40. However, from the numbers Jentz quotes on production numbers (he has tables in the back on monthly production of tank models), IIRC that PzIV numbers were going down and PzV numbers were going up after june 44 as production was being shifted to Panthers. I will have to check when I get home. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockinHarry Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Thanks for the clarification, did German troops train more with armour or was that left to the Panzer Grenadiers. Would it be possible to build in the lack of cooperation into CM, or would it have to be through a set of house rules? Tank / infantry cooperation is the tactical level we play in CMBN, so it´s up to your own "playstyle" basically. Historically, germans in 1944/45 had few units left that were properly "trained" on regular basis, even the Panzergrenadiers. Most german units of that time period only had sufficient to good cooperation tactics, if they fought together in infantry/armor teams long enough in front line combat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 True, most German units, by 44 were pale shadows, both in terms of numbers and capability, but if X unit had a historical reputation for good inter-arms cooperation and unit Y did not, surely X would have an advantage. I've heard quite a bit about CM rivaling traditional wargaming, but in some rule sets I've read there are advantages and penalties for this. CM quite rightly penalises poor quality troops, but gives them no penalties for infantry armour cooperation. IF CM ventures Eastward how will tanks racing ahead of their infantry support be modelled, sure it might take a little longer to get everyone singing from the same battleplan but eventually poor quality troops will be pulling off close coop with armour like pros. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 IF CM ventures Eastward how will tanks racing ahead of their infantry support be modelled,... I can't see a way that CM can be altered to reflect bad commanders or bad cooperation between units, I mean that is what we do ! I guess you could drop unit quality to reflect the level of indecision in the troop unfamiliar with the operating environment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xian Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 IF CM ventures Eastward how will tanks racing ahead of their infantry support be modelled, How about... Start a mission with tanks only. Have infantry enter as reinforcements 20 minutes later. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 How about... Start a mission with tanks only. Have infantry enter as reinforcements 20 minutes later. If it were me my tanks would spend 20minutes idling at the board edge. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Good one Xian, but how do you then model the tanks having to return each time they outstrip their infantry? Which would be within the first 5 minutes after the reorganised advance! Will there ever be a time when a game engine can take a set of players orders and filter them, so that the end result depended on the various competencies of the different levels of command the original orders had to filter through. Maybe CM4 or 5, one can only dream. Though I do remember board games penalising over ambitious orders to poor units, though it was often at a far higher level of command than CM. 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.