Combat Phrases

[Marc von Martial]

Originally posted by Tuomas Seijavuori


Army Group Center could have put up a much better fight and remain as a cohesive fighting force, had Hitler allowed the troops to build the main defencive line 12 miles behind the front, or better yet, allowed more mobile, flexible defence. The absolute demand for fully manning the first defencive positions was absurd under those cicrumstances. I don't have the figures with me now, but Soviets had massed more artillery there than in any attack in the history of warfare. Source: Panzer Leader by H.Guderian (the chapter about the collapse of Army Group Center).

An example for our newcomer: ^ Grog reply above ^

[mogami]

Hi there. Hopefully there is another class of Grognard. (I consider myself among these)
This Grognard must have and play any wargame. They tend to latch onto Companies or designers. (not periods or wars).
Where the normal gamer will have 1 PBEM game this type Grognard will have 6 (and another 6 in another game)
This class Grognard when he is introduced to a person can't help thinking about someone from history with the same name.
If he drives through a town like Gettysburg his mind pictures July 1863
I don't view history as a serios of seperate wars or events but as an unbroken chain. Because of this I don't have a specific period I dwell on. I try to see the continued story from one age to the next and recognize the sameness of each.
My kind of Grognard knows every trick to exploit a game system but would never consider using them. (we are not gamers to win a game but play them to more closely eximine the period or topic)
But to put it short, to me a Grognard is the first to possess a game from certain source and is still playing it long after the regular gamer has forgotten it.

[Mojo]

Originally posted by Marc Schwanebeck



An example for our newcomer: ^ Grog reply above ^

ROTFLMAO, Marc.

Did you plan that or was it just a coincidence?

I'm not laughing at you or your response Tuomas. Your timing was impeccable my friend.

[Admiral DadMan]

I envy Mogami's immersion level...

[IMJennifer]

Originally posted by Tuomas Seijavuori


Army Group Center could have put up a much better fight and remain as a cohesive fighting force, had Hitler allowed the troops to build the main defencive line 12 miles behind the front, or better yet, allowed more mobile, flexible defence. The absolute demand for fully manning the first defencive positions was absurd under those cicrumstances. I don't have the figures with me now, but Soviets had massed more artillery there than in any attack in the history of warfare. Source: Panzer Leader by H.Guderian (the chapter about the collapse of Army Group Center).

Without taking issue with Toumas' tactical assessment, I need point out that among the German generals, Guderian was one of the more successful in re-casting his wartime role in post-war writings. For those who read German, the proceedings of a conference sponsored by the Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt on the German Army in the Second World War, Die Wehrmacht: Mythos und Realität, R.D. Müller and H.-E. Volkmann, eds. will prove enlightening.

As I said earlier, there is a tendency in the memoirs of German generals to claim they could have saved Germany had it not been for the interference of Hitler and the OKW. Unfortunately, this is not born out by a now readily available body of documentary evidence.

BTW -- Mogami, I really like your definition of Grognard!

[HARD_SARGE]

Hi Tuomas Seijavuori


ah, do you know anything about combat on the eastern front, or are you just replying based on what is in a book ?, a defence based 12 miles further back, would not of helped AGC much better then the line they held, most GE lines had muli lines of defence, and the trick was to time the attack, leave the front line to go to the 2nd line, leave too soon, and the Art does not fire, and the troops just move forward, leave too late, and get caught by the Arty, a very fine line of timeing was needed

if and as always, a very big if, AGC had been up to full strength, and the Gen's could do as they wished, then maybe it could of done better, but even then, they would of still been overwelmed

Div's that were nothing but Btn's do not last long going against full Div's, even worse Armys with Div's to waste

and as Jennifer points out, it is easy to tell what was wrong and could of been done better, after the fact

and again, lets let this post die and get back to the real point of the fourm, UV

HARD_Sarge

[FAdmiral]

What I really want to know is: How are you posters getting
those little pictures up in the left corner under your names???

JIM BERG, SR.

[HMSWarspite]

I have been thinking up some definitions of Grog. here we go:

- a grog will notice in a division level game of warfare in Russia that the muzzle velocity of the Kar98 rifle is wrong, and claim it ruins the game for him (almost always him - Jennifer not withstanding, I think it's the way our brains work, or don't work if you ask my wife!)

- a grog will play a game that is fatally flawed quite happily, because exploiting the flaw to win would be gamey. However, they will campaign for it to be patched until his dying day.

- a grog will actually play a one day per turn game of the Hundred Years War often enough to complain about play balence

- a grog dearly loves his wife/partner/significant other, but this game is important...

- a grog will stop gaming for sex, but tries to sneak back for 'just another turn' afterwards. Or is that an addict? I get confused!

- a grog things this game is good, but it would be better it it included the effect of the Uberwaffenwerfer Mk5 toenail clipper, because it should give Ghurkas +3 in hand to hand at night.

- oh, and the 3rd Foot and Mouth Btn didn't get the Mk5 until late 1943, so could you fix it in the patch please.

- a grog will sometimes enjoy discussing the game so much that that takes over from actually playing it

- a grog always has a really impressive library of military history books

- a grog actually knows something about the destruction of AGC. In fact nows what ACG stands for. (Your average member of the public doesn't. No, really, I am serious. In fact some of them haven't even heard of Guadalcanal!)

And finally, a grog will actually mind that the RAAF squadrons are mis-designated, 100th RAAF sqd should be 100 Sqd, RAAF.
As I agree with whoever asked for that change, I guess that makes me a grog!:)

[IMJennifer]

Originally posted by FAdmiral
What I really want to know is: How are you posters getting
those little pictures up in the left corner under your names???

JIM BERG, SR.

It's a reward given to those who make the most intelligent posts to this board.






Of course, it may also be that you...

...go to your User CP , there hit Edit Options. At the bottom you´ll find Change Avatar. Hit that button and you´ll go to a screen that allows you to upload an avatar from the Web or your HD. Note that the image size is restricted to 50x50 pixels. (Courtesy of Marc)

[HARD_SARGE]

Hi HMSWarspite

LOL

In fact nows what ACG stands for

sort of reminds me of the time I was watching the news, and they had a upcomeing report on the number of ATM's showing up all over the place, and here I am sitting there thinking, what is she talking about, why are anti-tank mines showing up around here ?

by the way, isnt it AGC ?



HARD_Sarge

[HMSWarspite]

Originally posted by HARD_SARGE
Hi HMSWarspite

LOL

In fact nows what ACG stands for

sort of reminds me of the time I was watching the news, and they had a upcomeing report on the number of ATM's showing up all over the place, and here I am sitting there thinking, what is she talking about, why are anti-tank mines showing up around here ?

by the way, isnt it AGC ?



HARD_Sarge

Better add 'a grog knows that ACG is a typo for AGC'!

[mogami]

Hi, If all this is Grognards then I think there are more Grognards hanging out in "Art of War" then any other forum

[Tuomas Seijavuori]

Originally posted by Marc Schwanebeck
An example for our newcomer: ^ Grog reply above ^
[/B]

Thanks Marc. (never been called a Grog before)

Indeed, what we have here is a classic "wargamer fight" over which author is an authority and which is not! I'm replying because I see this as an excellent chance to educate myself further by reading more books and getting to know "the other side of the story" HARD_SARGE is advocating.

Originally posted by HARD_SARGE
ah, do you know anything about combat on the eastern front, or are you just replying based on what is in a book ?and again, lets let this post die and get back to the real point of the fourm, UV

If you mean "do you know by first hand experience", the answer is no, I wasn't even born then. I am replying based on what I have read in books by men who were there at the time (and what I've learnt from my grandfather and granduncles who fought both the Germans and the Soviets). Another account of the collapse of AGC is in F.W.Mellenthin's Panzer Leader, p.338- . Of course he too can be discredited by the same statement: he was a German (general staff) officer. I'm now wondering who's books am I supposed to believe, if the author must 1) posess first hand knowledge and 2) must not be a German commanding officer on the front at that time. Please point me to an English language source providing the other side of the story. I can read German, but it's so much slower for me than I'd rather not.

To Jennifer: Who are R.D. Müller and H.-E. Volkmann and why do they know better? Is their study available in English? I am genuinely interested and would be grateful if you had the ISBN of the English edition at hand.

Note that I'm not saying I believe everything German generals and staff officers say in their memoirs. Mellenthin in particular is doing a lousy job hiding his racist views about the Slavs which puts everything else he writes under some suspicion. It is difficult to deny, however, that he had a great vantage point to the military operations as they took place both in North Africa (he was Rommel's Ia) and in the Eastern front where he was the Ia of the 48th Panzer Korps.

[Huskalator]

WOT: Tuomas this is like the third forum I have seen you on. Small internet .

[Tuomas Seijavuori]

I'm the Starbase Delta forums moderator and I've posted here a few times, but what is the third forum? I don't consider myself very active poster.

[Huskalator]

I think I saw you on Gone Gold a couple times.

[Tuomas Seijavuori]

Originally posted by Deep Breakfast
I think I saw you on Gone Gold a couple times.

Nope, sorry, I didn't even know they had forums.

Err... sorry about this private exchange everyone... moderator, feel free to delete it.

[HARD_SARGE]

Hi Tuomas
sorry, my writing does not come across the way I mean at times

was asking more along the lines of which books and types of books are you reading to get your info, if it is just the Memours of high staff officers, or if you also have read the lower ranks and the tec manuals(the two you mention are both sort of old, which does not take anything away from them)

plus there is also some from the SU side, which those are getting better

the part that got me, was the statement that just by pulling back 12 miles, AGC could of stopped the assullt that destroyed it, I respect Snell Heinz, I think that is a over simple statement, AGC had to cover 1/3 of the entire eastern front (it would shorten his front, and there by releaseing more troops for reserve)

HARD_Sarge

[IMJennifer]

Originally posted by Tuomas Seijavuori


If you mean "do you know by first hand experience", the answer is no, I wasn't even born then. I am replying based on what I have read in books by men who were there at the time (and what I've learnt from my grandfather and granduncles who fought both the Germans and the Soviets). Another account of the collapse of AGC is in F.W.Mellenthin's Panzer Leader, p.338- . Of course he too can be discredited by the same statement: he was a German (general staff) officer. I'm now wondering who's books am I supposed to believe, if the author must 1) posess first hand knowledge and 2) must not be a German commanding officer on the front at that time. Please point me to an English language source providing the other side of the story. I can read German, but it's so much slower for me than I'd rather not.

To Jennifer: Who are R.D. Müller and H.-E. Volkmann and why do they know better? Is their study available in English? I am genuinely interested and would be grateful if you had the ISBN of the English edition at hand.

Note that I'm not saying I believe everything German generals and staff officers say in their memoirs. Mellenthin in particular is doing a lousy job hiding his racist views about the Slavs which puts everything else he writes under some suspicion. It is difficult to deny, however, that he had a great vantage point to the military operations as they took place both in North Africa (he was Rommel's Ia) and in the Eastern front where he was the Ia of the 48th Panzer Korps.

Tuomas -- Müller and Volkman edited the proceedings of a symposium, it's actually a collection of presentations on the Wehrmacht by a group of historians. Unfortunately, it's only available in German -- not easy German either . The work is valuable because they analyze bodies of evidence. For example, the weaknesses of the German command structure. The German High Command was very strong in the area of operations, but was also characterized by a certain myopia regarding personnel management, materiel and intelligence. The structure itself was flawed in that the supreme command of the armed forces was actually a parallel command structure to the supreme command of the army and had little authority over other branches (navy and air force). If you are looking for a better understanding of what actually happened, you should be happy with the operational studies you mention, just bear in mind that these were written post-war for a wider audience and all contain self-serving elements. I believe you are correct in your assessment of von Mellenthin, nevertheless he is an excellent primary source for the campaigns in which he participated. By reading a combination of primary and secondary sources, you will develop a feel for what to trust and when you uncover contradictions, you will often be able to draw the correct conclusion as to which to believe. Probably the best work on the subject is the Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Intitute for Military History) Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg (Germany and the Second World War), more or less the German official history of the war. It is a work of outstanding scholarship in methodology, documentation and interpretation. Oxford University Press is translating it and has published 6 of the 10 volumes thus far. Vol. IV, The Attack on the Soviet Union covers the Russo-German War through 1941. Unfortunately, this 1364 page book costs USD 250 -- making it one of the more expensive books I own.

Since Hard_Sarge will no doubt (and quite justifiably) take me to task for once again wandering so far from UV -- you can PM me for more information. Hope this helped.

Jennifer

[dd371]

Just in case you are interested, one website is www.oup-usa.org and search on "germany and the second world war".