Opinion: Are Finns over-modelled?

[Mikimoto]

Hi.

Finns fought an early and succesful war against the sovs. But their later performance in the Leningrad Front was... poor. Not fully engaged, lacked will and enthusiasm. They fought another succesful war in 44, the Continuation war, but another time defending their country. I think they fought well in their country, in the dense wooded lands of Finland, only. And I think they are heavily overmodelled in Spwaw, as are Gerries and Yanks.
What do you think about this?

[peter hellman]

To my knowledge the Finns did not even try to attack Leningrad, but stayed static. Mannerheim knew that Leningrad was a big thing for the Russians, and he did not want to annoy them in case of the war turn against the Germans (and the Finns). So even as the Germans asked multiple times for the Finns for more activity against Leningrad, they did not react. And, as history shows, it was the wise thing to do.

Of course the Finns are not overmodelled, history shows that also.

[Mikimoto]

Nothing to say about wise Finn foreign policy. Your country did what it could, or what it believed was secure, I feel. Perhaps not much enthusiasm out of Finnish borders...
This thread is not against your country or your people. I feel the Finns in Spwaw are almost super-humans, specially the infantry, that is entirely elite compared with every and each other country, including the Germans (well, the US infantry has the same symtoms).

[Auslander]

The Finns fought fanatically against the Russians- it was a personal issue, fought over many years of animosity against the Russians and their desire to take land from Finland. At every turn they outfoxed the Reds and the only way Russia was able to take a victory was through sheer numbers of force. The Finn forces were elite to a man, especially the ski troops(Sissi). John Keegan calls the Finns the "heartiest and the most war-like of all the European peoples"; the Russians sent mostly conscripts and green infantry into the waiting trap of a lot of very angry, very capable Finns. When it was all said and done, Finland had lost some 25,000 men (percentage-wise, a huge blow to their small population) while the Russians lost over 200,000. Being of Finnish descent, I am extremely proud of my heritage, and the valiant fight they brought to the Russians.

Auslander (Chris Lehto)

[JJKettunen]

Originally posted by Auslander
The Finns fought fanatically against the Russians- it was a personal issue, fought over many years of animosity against the Russians and their desire to take land from Finland. At every turn they outfoxed the Reds and the only way Russia was able to take a victory was through sheer numbers of force. The Finn forces were elite to a man, especially the ski troops(Sissi). John Keegan calls the Finns the "heartiest and the most war-like of all the European peoples"; the Russians sent mostly conscripts and green infantry into the waiting trap of a lot of very angry, very capable Finns. When it was all said and done, Finland had lost some 25,000 men (percentage-wise, a huge blow to their small population) while the Russians lost over 200,000. Being of Finnish descent, I am extremely proud of my heritage, and the valiant fight they brought to the Russians.

Auslander (Chris Lehto)

Hear, hear!

[Auslander]

Hehe...

I find that, when given the option, the best course is to NOT mess with the Finns....we stick together. Just ask the Ruskies!

Auslander

[Mojo]

Finn + Mauser + puukko= Russian nightmares

[KG Erwin]

Mikimoto, you rail against the US and Finn nationality characteristics, so I'm wondering, who you think is underrepresented and why? And why, specifically, do you want to underrate the US and Finns? Listen, the argument has been made for years that the Germans have been overrated in wargames. I think that's all a crock. Serious study HAS been done in the relative combat abilities of the Germans vis a vis their opponents. The survey says--the Germans DID have a man-for-man better kill vs loss ratio THROUGHOUT the war, including the defensive phase from 1943-45. As for the Finns, one need only consider the 1939-40 Russian offensive. The Finns were superb, and the Russians had to reconsider their training and tactical methods. This had far-reaching ramifications, not the least of which was Hitler's decision to launch "Barbarossa" when he did. The intelligence gathered by the Finns during the "Winter War" DID have a huge and ultimately baleful effect upon Foreign Armies East, the intel section of OKW, and the overall negative impression the German miltary establishment had for the Red Army and Air Force.

[JJKettunen]

When studying Finnish history, it amazes me how militaristic the nation was during 1930´s. And I mean democratic militarism, where significant part of the population voluntarely joined the para-military organization of Suojeluskunta to develope their combat skills and other related abilities. Fe physical fitness was really appreciated. You can check medal tables from the Olympics of 1920´s and 1930´s and notice that Finland was one of the leading countries, especially in track-and-field sports. Terminology of our national sport, pesäpallo (much alike baseball) was militaristic indeed. Fe a player can have be "wounded" in it.

Women were not supposed to learn fighting, but Lotta-Svärd organization offered them training in supply and nursing tasks for the Army. Few western countries utilized their womanpower to war efforts like Finland did.

And when you combine these (and all other not mentioned factors) with the fact, that the traditional enemy was trying to take away nation´s independence, first with conscript units, and later with massed artillery and air bombings, it was no surprise that the Finns fought so well.

BTW, Finland was the only country able to repulse Soviet´s so called strategic offensives (1939-40, -44) and was the only Axis country, whose capital city was not invaded by Allied forces.

[WhiteRook]

Hi Mikimoto,

Though I have only played the Finns a little in SPWAW I do not think that they seem over-rated to me. They were very hearty folks and still are.
I will weigh in on the US however, personaly I think a lot of times the US is under-rated in a lot of games!
Granted we did not start the war with a large professional army like many countries across the pond, but after we got geared up the US Army was a force to be taken seriously....
And the US Marines, heck I'd put them up against anybody!
From my own personal standpoint I have always cried about the Japanese, some times you would all most swear that they have an almost "mystical" quality about them!
I think over-all that most of the countries infantry I have experianced so far in SPWAW are modeled pretty darn nicely.

[Penetrator]

To put my own opinion in here, I don't think the finns are overrated in the human element. What I do have a problem with are the rarity factors of many finnish unit. They are very generous, and sometimes quite ludicrous.

[GUTB]

Originally posted by Auslander
The Finns fought fanatically against the Russians- it was a personal issue, fought over many years of animosity against the Russians and their desire to take land from Finland. At every turn they outfoxed the Reds and the only way Russia was able to take a victory was through sheer numbers of force. The Finn forces were elite to a man, especially the ski troops(Sissi). John Keegan calls the Finns the "heartiest and the most war-like of all the European peoples"; the Russians sent mostly conscripts and green infantry into the waiting trap of a lot of very angry, very capable Finns. When it was all said and done, Finland had lost some 25,000 men (percentage-wise, a huge blow to their small population) while the Russians lost over 200,000.

You know, in every on-line forum that has anything to do with WW2, you will always find at least one Finn or Pole who immediately jumps up with promclomations about how superior Finns/Poles were to the Evil Red Commies. It's without fail.

For the sake of historic accuracy, Soviet losses for the Winter War is around 70,000.

[sven]

Originally posted by GUTB


You know, in every on-line forum that has anything to do with WW2, you will always find at least one Finn or Pole who immediately jumps up with promclomations about how superior Finns/Poles were to the Evil Red Commies. It's without fail.

For the sake of historic accuracy, Soviet losses for the Winter War is around 70,000.

uh-huh...

Magic cite books please...?

regards,
sven-not a "supra genius" but able to read too....

[JJKettunen]

Originally posted by GUTB


You know, in every on-line forum that has anything to do with WW2, you will always find at least one Finn or Pole who immediately jumps up with promclomations about how superior Finns/Poles were to the Evil Red Commies. It's without fail.

For the sake of historic accuracy, Soviet losses for the Winter War is around 70,000.

Poles!?

For the sake of the historic accuracy, Soviet losses for the Winter War was around 200,000 (can´t remember exact numbers right now). When Soviet Union collapsed and their archives were opened for historical research, this has been proven.

Where did you get that number? From the official Soviet historiography published after the war? They sure are accurate and objective...

[Yogi Yohan]

The Soviets themselves rated the Finnish soldier far above the German. I once read of an ex-Soviet officer commenting that if Barbarossa had been launched by three million Finns instead of Germans, there was no way the USSR could have survived.

I think the Finns vastly deserve an almost superhuman rating, they were THAT good.

It only goes to show that old rule is true, regarding the factors determining the effectiveness of a soldier:

These are, in order of importance:

1) Motivation
2) Training
3) Equipment

Which is why the ill-equipped but well trained Finns defending their home land could rout many times their number of lavishly armed Soviet conscripts, or why for that matter, the poorly trained Soviet grunts finally prevailed against the Wehrmacht landsers. It also gives a hint about the reasons for the outcome of some post WW2 conflicts, like the 6-day war, Vietnam or the Soviet war in Afghanistan.

[sven]

Originally posted by Keke


Poles!?

For the sake of the historic accuracy, Soviet losses for the Winter War was around 200,000 (can´t remember exact numbers right now). When Soviet Union collapsed and their archives were opened for historical research, this has been proven.

Where did you get that number? From the official Soviet historiography published after the war? They sure are accurate and objective...

He is yanking cranks...

regards,
sven-who suggests ignoring him until he cites...

[GUTB]

In fact, Soviet forces in the Winter War were horrbily ill-equiped and poorly orginized. It was this experience that led Stalin to the convinction that the Red Army needed to be re-orginized and better armed.

It wasn't until 1944 could Soviet soldeirs enjoy high levels of training, superior weaponry, mechnizations and their vast artillery and aviation advantage. If the Red Army of 1945 fought the Winter War, Finland would have been smashed completely in a matter of weeks or even less.
And another thing too. Finland got off incredibly easy with the Soviets, who missed the treatment the Red Army gave to the Germans during their trimuphant march to Moscow. Way, way to easy.

[Charles2222]

The Finns were good for the type of warfare they found themselves in, but there's no way they were likely to exceed the GE accomplishments in the USSR, quite a different form of warfare indeed, should they have had the same numbers. Nobody till the USSR in '43, had any concept of using tanks and aircraft to advance in anything resembling rapid fashion, except the Germans (with the "early" tactics in NAfrica being an isolated British exception). If the Finns got all the German training/tactics, and then remembered their own, they would've combined really good defense with really good offense, but that's a fairy tale force.

You don't take an exceptional force, and realistically, with the kind of training they had, be able to make a case that they would've been a better force for another job, at which another force was already exceptional at it. Nobody thinks the Germans were better at beach invasion than the US, do they? Or would the Finns be better at beach invasions? Of course not, though the soldiers may had been very high quality, even high quality will probably be average at best when taking on a completely different mindset.

[Arto]

Originally posted by Keke

For the sake of the historic accuracy, Soviet losses for the Winter War was around 200,000 (can´t remember exact numbers right now).

http://www.winterwar.com/War%27sEnd/casualti.htm

[JJKettunen]

Originally posted by GUTB
It wasn't until 1944 could Soviet soldeirs enjoy high levels of training, superior weaponry, mechnizations and their vast artillery and aviation advantage. If the Red Army of 1945 fought the Winter War, Finland would have been smashed completely in a matter of weeks or even less.
And another thing too. Finland got off incredibly easy with the Soviets, who missed the treatment the Red Army gave to the Germans during their trimuphant march to Moscow. Way, way to easy.

How can one year (1944, 1945) make a such difference? When western allied hit the beaches of Normandy on June 6th 1944, Soviet Union launched it´s "Fourth Strategic Offensive" against Finnish troops at Karelian Isthmus on June 9th, although Stalin had promised to support his western allies against Germany. New world record of artillery amassed /km was made (this was later breaked on the German front) and Guard units of 21st Army (30th Guard Corps) along the other veteran troops hit the Finnish main defensive line with huge air support (Sturmoviks and Petljakovs mainly). Breakthrough was made in three days, and the Finnish Army had to fight retreating battle over ten days and 100km. After the loss of Viipuri (Vyborg) on June 20th Soviets regrouped, and part of it´s breakthrough artillery was sent to the German front, because Operation Bagration was about to begin on June 22nd.

Nevertheless, Soviet´s plans had not been changed: Breakthrough to inner Finland and capture of Helsinki. By this time Finns had brought reinforcements from Syväri front and amassed their artillery against the oncoming assault. Finnish artillery was much smaller in numbers than Russian, but it had one of the most sophisticated sighting and targeting systems (Sven knows something about this), producing accurate and fast responses to any Soviet attacks. When the Soviets started their main assault to the northeast from Viipuri, it created the largest battle of Scandinavian war history. Relentless battle between the villages of Tali and Ihantala raged till 4th of July.

After this, Soviets tried to outflank Finnish forces on every part of the front, but it was hopeless. By mid August 1944 the war changed to trench warfare. After half month of that, Finland got reasonable peace terms.



Well, it became out much more literature than I first thought. Must be this wine I´m drinking. Me likes alcohol...