Barkmann's Corner

[mjkerner]

Yeah, save yourself the bother.

[Rokko]

Could someone give me a quick overview of what was the result of this huge discussion?

Did Barkmann make it all up? Whas he simply wrong about the date/location a bit?

Should maybe check a few German forums, too. I remember reading one where someone (supposedly) had actually talked to Barkmann who was a mayor or something in a small town after the war.

[mjkerner]

Oh God, don't ask....it seems to be right up there with who shot Kennedy and are there aliens visiting us? No wait, it's more like Abortion: pro or con?

[JonS]

Could someone give me a quick overview of what was the result of this huge discussion?

Did Barkmann get involved in a firefight near le Lorey? Probably, yes

Did Barkmann destroy as many vehicles as he claimed Shermans? Maybe.

Did Barkmann fight this action single handedly? Not really.

Did Barkmann's action have any material effect on the course of the larger operation? No, it was barely even noticed.

Did Barkmann make it all up? Whas he simply wrong about the date/location a bit?

I doubt he 'made it all up', and I'm reasonably happy to accept that he believed that the account in his KC was (reasonably) close to what he thought had happened. But he was flat out wrong about a lot more than the date and location.

And, really, the issue isn't really with Barkmann anyway, it's more to do with other folk who have trouble differentiating myth from reality, and can't seem to grasp that own-side claims are worthless.

[Lanzfeld]

Also...the location that we play "Barkmans Corner" in the game is not the correct location. The real location was about 1 km to the east I believe.

So the location in the game is modeled after an actual location...just the wrong location.

[Lee_Vincent]

Well regardless, it is impressive what a single well-crewed Panther with some decent infantry support in the right terrain can do to blunt a heavy armored assault, AI-driven or not.

Just emphasizes how many Panthers were wasted by ad-hoc "cult of the offense" panzer attacks, when if they had been used so as to maximise their strengths they would have been devastating defensive obstacles.

[MengJiaoRedux]

And, really, the issue isn't really with Barkmann anyway, it's more to do with other folk who have trouble differentiating myth from reality, and can't seem to grasp that own-side claims are worthless.

Claims of damage and kills are notoriously inaccurate in many areas. In some cases it is possible to check them very exactly (for example, claims by u-boat captains of sinkings and tonnage -- and Barkmann's claims can be checked pretty well for that matter) and several things come out:

1) There is a lot of motivation to overclaim -- a truck becomes a Sherman and a 2000 ton Lake steamer becomes a 20,000 ton troop ship

2) Every explosion in the general area of the enemy has a good chance of being interpreted as a hit

3) The worse your side is doing overall, the higher the chance that your own side's propaganda machinery is going to take the inflated claims and run with them

But the mystery is why anyone wants to elaborate on and emphasize the inflated claims 70 years later. Especially when the reasons for the original inflation are understandable and the demonstration of their baselessness is not actually problematic in itself. It's as if people not only need heros (which in my book is anyone who rises to the occasion), but heros of a certain kind -- fantasy heros, who not only do what has to be done, but somehow (more or less magically) exceed the possible. So its not enough to face the enemy and hold the field, you have to annihilate them (at least in somebody's imagination) and thwart their plans (somewhat redundant already) and survive to repeat the process. Surely far too high a standard for any heros I have ever known -- who were thoughtful men still clearly marked by what had happened and not interested in any elaborations -- as indeed Barkmann himself might have been under all those layers of narrative and propaganda fo all we know.

[Fūrinkazan]

hi guys,

i was reading this thread and it made me think of a book i've been reading on the battle of Villers Bocage. It was very detailed but the most interresting part was at the end with an assessment of the commitment of schwere ss-panzerabteilung 101 made by Wolfgang Schneider.

I think his point of view is very interresting because he was lieutenant colonel and instructor at the tank school of Munster, he had practical experience and it seems that he met a lot of veterans of WW2.

After an analysis of the combat, his conclusions are :

Wittmann destroyed 7 tanks (Without the observation tank and stuarts)

He was not a competent tank company commander because he made a lot of mistakes in the placement of his tanks and by a counter attack that was not well conceived.

I cannot give all the details but here are a few exemples :

" the hasty, single handed attack on the large and powerfull British force may seem brave but it goes against all the rules.."

"The carefree advance of a single panzer into a town occupied by the ennemy is pure folly"

" the action of the 1st and 2nd companies was everyting but awe-inspiring"

The reasons, according to Schneider, why Wittmann had a Medal were :

- the waffen SS unlike The Wermacht did not have experienced tank arm.

- Sepp Dietrich tried to manufacture a hero

The various grades of the knight's cross were awarded for decisive action in the battle and not for high score and in the Wehrmacht tank arm and tank hunters many soldiers had much higher scores.

in conclusion :

" the legend of the second WW2 tank commander with highest number of kills is completly wrong in terms of score and tactics employed.."

For those who want all the details, the book was called Villers Bocage and was published by Heimdal. It was in English and French.

So, we are far from the legend that was written in other books. I remember when i was a kid that i read articles about the "decisive action of Wittmann and that he destroyed 25 tanks all by himself etc.."

So, has Barkmann was also in the SS, maybe this is the reason of the exageration of the score.

I think that we should be very carefull about scores and after action reports, but that doesn't mean that everything Barkmann said was a lie.

I also think the game is an interresting tool to imagine what happened in real life. I remember how hard it was on CMX 1 to be as efficient as Wittman in the Villers Bocage Scenario.

One thing that i'd like to see sometimes, not to often in the game :

When the 1st company (8 Tigers commanded by Hauptsturmfuhrer Mobius) attacked, 5 Cromwell tanks were abandoned by their fleeing crews.

When one side is surrendering in the game, i think that remaining vehicles and men should be considered as prisoners and be taken in count for victory

conditions.

[Lee_Vincent]

Thankyou, interesting commentary.