Matrix Games Forums

Originally posted by Guardsman
I think Hitler succeeded early in the war becasue his delusions turned out to be fairly reflective of reality. However when the reality changed Hitler's delusions did not and he became increasingly out of touch with the conduct of the war.

Like any other bully Hitler had a certain ability to know when his victims could be pushed and how far to push them, at first. Like every other bully, once his victims decided to fight he was totally out of his element. He consisntently believed that his enemies "were on the verge of collapse" when in fact they were not.

His strategic thinking, while sharp in the political arena, was not suited for war, and his tactical thinking was still in the trenches of WWI France.

In short, Hitler has always lived in his own world. As the world changed around him he was completely unable to deal with it and withdrew deeper into his mental illness.

You read that in "Inside the Third Reich" by Albert Speer, dind't you?

I note you are very well-read and have analysed the matter very well indeed. I can't help but agree, to some extent.

Hitler was not mad, in my opinion. He had extravagant and perhaps unrealistic (or horrible if you wish) visions, and also was a bit too soft on his old friends from "the movement".

The German war effort would have lasted longer and more successfully without the bunglers Himmler, Göring, Bormann and so on. The only people really capable and sain enough to hold their offices were, in my opnion, Albert Speer and maybe also Joseph Göbbles.

Don't you agree?


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

Originally posted by Muzrub



Thats why game reality and real life are different.

The Soviets only stopped after smashing Army group centre due to a lack of supplies- the Germans had nothing.

But the game the Germans do- players dont make the same mistakes at Hitler so the reserves are in place and in general fighting troops are in better condition.
As such it very much harder and based on historical events? no.


Maybe an increase in Soviet manpower could do the trick- but a while ago when many of had that discussion people thought the Soviets had enough. I disagreed with too, I also believe Soviet production should be higher, penalty movies (41) should be changed, lower German production (or heavy penalties for factory changes) more Soviet experience for the Air force- and lower rates of experience for the Germans etc etc- the list continues.

It seems to have slipped your mind that it wasn't only the thin Soviet supply lines which halted the Soviet summer offensive in 1944.

The last reinforcements, still capable of putting up a credible defense, were rushed to the front line as soon as possible. One example would be the Hermann Göring Panzer Korps, if my memory serves me well.

Another contributing factor was the Vistula river, running in a north-south direction. It came to act as a natural barrier against the advancing Red Army.

Yes, I know, I'm a know-all...


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

Actually, I've never read that book. I thought I was being original but I guess I must have read it somewhere else.

Originally posted by Rundstedt
It seems to have slipped your mind that it wasn't only the thin Soviet supply lines which halted the Soviet summer offensive in 1944.

The last reinforcements, still capable of putting up a credible defense, were rushed to the front line as soon as possible. One example would be the Hermann Göring Panzer Korps, if my memory serves me well.

Another contributing factor was the Vistula river, running in a north-south direction. It came to act as a natural barrier against the advancing Red Army.

Yes, I know, I'm a know-all...

You know it all, Herr GFM!

Behind army group North Ukraine, where Hitler expected the Soviet summer offensive '44, were 4 PzKps (8 Pzdiv and 2 PzGrendiv). Most of them helped to rebuild a front line in the middle sector.

Originally posted by Rundstedt
OK, I agree to some extent. But the people who met Hitler never thought he was insain, especially early in the war and before. If you are looking for insain people then you should looka at Hitler's henchmen. Himmler, Göring etc. Those people really scare me...

Once again some things have to be told apart.

First did you ever hear of Ted Bundy? (I said Ted, not Al...) He was a handsome, charming guy living in the U.S., I think it was in the seventies or eighties. Many predicted a great political career for him. But in some nights he used to cut women to pieces. And even after he was arrested most people couldn't believe that he was guilty and, now hold your breath, he got many love letters!

Second of course looking at a period when being a fascist was quite normal in Europe and when Amon Goeths were walking throuh their concentration camps and killing people whenever they liked to how could someone who loved his german shephard be insane? But today we know more about it (if we want to) than the people who were trapped by Hitler's charisma.
There's no serious doubt that he at least (if not more) knew about the mass murders. So he knew it and did nothing to stop it! Wouldn't you call such person insane? Is violence already that ordinary that this might not be abnormal? If so then I wouldn't definitely want to be 'normal'!

My opinion is - I don't know if it's new but at least I never read about it - that he had not only a strong inferiority complex tending to be destructive, but he was a potential suicide.
If you want to know why you'll have to wait for another post. I'm too lazy to go on writing now...
Anyway trying to understand someone's mind is like trying to look behind a curtain.

Dave

P.S. Even more off topic: Why Rundstedt, Herr GFM? Why not Rommel, Guderian, Manstein (if a german at all)?

Muzrub!

I wasnt saying that every tropper stayed in place and fought vicious! But for example "General Lascar Group" of the 3:rd army fought for about 4 days and when the supply was all out they tried to break out, unfortunately for them the most was annihilated! But my point is that when digged in and EVEN led properly they where not that bad. The strategy in all times has been to diigg in bad troops, this has many obvious advantages. But one important factor many times overseen is that a troop with bad morale, training, motivation etc is much more keen to stay put and fight beacuse living trenches and bunkers (read safety) isnt an option. Ok surrending could in theese times be an tempting option to.......LOL.

It seems to have slipped your mind that it wasn't only the thin Soviet supply lines which halted the Soviet summer offensive in 1944.

The last reinforcements, still capable of putting up a credible defense, were rushed to the front line as soon as possible. One example would be the Hermann Göring Panzer Korps, if my memory serves me well.

Another contributing factor was the Vistula river, running in a north-south direction. It came to act as a natural barrier against the advancing Red Army.

Nothing has slipped my mind my friend.

Of couse the Soviets were going to have to call a halt to the offensive that drove 450 miles in 5 weeks and yes they reached the Vistula and ground to halt- and static warfare ensued for 6 months ( along the central front ).

But in Lithuania great gains were also enjoyed by the Russians though the central front finally stabalised after the loss of over 200,000 men. But by the 20th of August Soviet troops also advanced 250 miles in 12 days takiing Bucharest and the Ploesti by the 27th.

The point is it was the supply problem that ground the Soviets to a halt- if not for supply problems they could have continued on all fronts- German troops were either sweeped away or surrounded.
Only supply issues gave them the time to mount any type of defense.
You must remember everytime a panzer unit comes to eastern front it is removed from another. The SS Panzer units who arrived on the 29th of july? were sorely needed elsewhere- German defensive capabilites were pushed to the limit- under sized divisions, routed divisions, under strength panzer divisions held thinly defened natural barriers against an "exhausted enemy".

Not mention German troops during 44 had to be removed from Greece and the Balkans- a 600 mile retreat battling partisans all the way- the battles that surrounded Budepest the Hugarian capital etc etc etc.

Supply was the Soviet problem, though German battle groups and a had hoc defence showed brilliance at times the Soviets lack of transport and crippling supply issues stabalised the front. If supply and transport were not an issue then german troops would have been sweeped aside.

Lascar Group

Lascar is but a drop in the ocean- he basically disbanded his group- many who marched east and joined Wencks (Holldite? something like that cant remember) battlegroup to defend the southern approachs to Rostov.

Never the less the Rumainans on a whole performed badly.
Yeremenko believed his Southern (the southern pincer of the stalingrad offensive- Uranus) was not strong enough to push by Rumanian troops, but he was shocked when he found out how fast the surrendered or abandond positions.
Until the 29th Motorised counter attack- th Soviets faced very few problems on the Southern pincer.

Originally posted by davewolf


Once again some things have to be told apart.

First did you ever hear of Ted Bundy? (I said Ted, not Al...) He was a handsome, charming guy living in the U.S., I think it was in the seventies or eighties. Many predicted a great political career for him. But in some nights he used to cut women to pieces. And even after he was arrested most people couldn't believe that he was guilty and, now hold your breath, he got many love letters!

Second of course looking at a period when being a fascist was quite normal in Europe and when Amon Goeths were walking throuh their concentration camps and killing people whenever they liked to how could someone who loved his german shephard be insane? But today we know more about it (if we want to) than the people who were trapped by Hitler's charisma.
There's no serious doubt that he at least (if not more) knew about the mass murders. So he knew it and did nothing to stop it! Wouldn't you call such person insane? Is violence already that ordinary that this might not be abnormal? If so then I wouldn't definitely want to be 'normal'!

My opinion is - I don't know if it's new but at least I never read about it - that he had not only a strong inferiority complex tending to be destructive, but he was a potential suicide.
If you want to know why you'll have to wait for another post. I'm too lazy to go on writing now...
Anyway trying to understand someone's mind is like trying to look behind a curtain.

Dave

P.S. Even more off topic: Why Rundstedt, Herr GFM? Why not Rommel, Guderian, Manstein (if a german at all)?

Well, I like von Rundstedt and he differed from the rest, or at least several, of the other personalities in the German Wehrmacht. Rommel for instance can be described as a social climber, a "career gold-digger". In the beginning of the war he, along with many other officers of the German army, greeted and joined Hitler and his expansionistic visions. Then, later on when the German war fortune was gone, he suddenly suddenly turned against the nazis. Furthermore, I believe Rommel was and is an overestimated superior commander. He was a good tactician and knew how to motivate his men to perform their best at all times, but he lacked some strategical abilities. Of course he anticipated that Allied air power would disrupt German counter-attacks at Normandy if the armored support was placed too far away from the beaches. In short, I think he was an exceptional corps commander but not suited for higher commands. But that's only my personal opinion and i do not expect you to agree.

v. Manstein on the other was in many ways the opposite character of Rommel. He excelled in strategy, but lacked Rommel's seductive charisma. v. Manstein was somewhat short of character, if I may say so. Knew about the Einsatzgruppen, but refused to act. At the same time he didn't follow Hitler's orders and fell from grace. Perhaps foolish orders, but orders are orders... Most of the time anyways...

Guderian was a bulldog, and a successful one too, and he, not Rommel, was in my opinion Germany's answer to Patton. A very competent commander and co-inventor of the German blitzkrieg doctrine. He even had the balls to oppose Hitler at several staff meetings, when he served as CoS at OKH. My choice was between v. Rundstedt and Generaloberst Guderian, but it's more fun to be v. Rundstedt because he outranked "alte Heinz".

v. Rundstedt was respected by both German nazis/officers, especially Hitler himself, which was very important in those days, and the Allies. He was an organizer, not a warrior; a staff officer, not a grunt. He did his job well and even managed to live through the entire war, without being killed by American bombs or the Gestapo.

I hope this answers your question?



Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

Originally posted by Muzrub


Nothing has slipped my mind my friend.

Dear me, my Aussie friend, aren't we feeling very self-confident today??

Yes, the Red Army did suffer a little from strained supply lines and, as usual, poor logistics. But you didn't mention my previous arguments earlier, and I thought you missed out on some facts.


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

I like the fact that von Rundstedt spent the final phase of the war reading spy novels. Maybe all that "high court" intrigue in the German General Staff gave him a greater sense of humor than we could credit within that sordid lot.

As far as Rommel goes, I think he was, like so many, a primmadonna when it mattered least and when it could hurt him the most. He still was better than dear old Monty, though. How many sensless deaths were there in "Operation" Market Garden??

Hube and Guderian were the bull dogs in my opinion.

Montenegro

Originally posted by Montenegro
I like the fact that von Rundstedt spent the final phase of the war reading spy novels. Maybe all that "high court" intrigue in the German General Staff gave him a greater sense of humor than we could credit within that sordid lot.

As far as Rommel goes, I think he was, like so many, a primmadonna when it mattered least and when it could hurt him the most. He still was better than dear old Monty, though. How many sensless deaths were there in "Operation" Market Garden??

Hube and Guderian were the bull dogs in my opinion.

Montenegro

Thanks!

Could you explain that "primadonna thing" again? I didn't get it...

And yes, Monty was not as skillful as his German counterparts. But he was smart, most of the time! He never attacked unless he knew he could win and with that strategy he gained many "political points". I don't know if his men liked him (I wouldn't), but he was treated as a hero at home I think.


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

I think Rommel, like Patton at times, fell into the trap of too much war worship at the expense of their men. However, I do believe both were fearless when it counted. It goes without saying that they also had tremendous egos.

Montenegro

But you didn't mention my previous arguments earlier, and I thought you missed out on some facts.

I am aware of the facts but I cant be bothered typing most of the time- busy doing stuff mate.

Originally posted by Muzrub


I am aware of the facts but I cant be bothered typing most of the time- busy doing stuff mate.

Bah, "important stuff"... What in the world could be more important than WIR or military history/strategy??


Regards, von Rundtstedt (OB WEST)

Entrenchments, hum. How about pressing the attack and not allowing them the time to entrench? Guderian, Patton, Manstien. Be where the enemy is, and be there with everything you got.

Jon

Originally posted by Die Kriegerin
Entrenchments, hum. How about pressing the attack and not allowing them the time to entrench? Guderian, Patton, Manstien. Be where the enemy is, and be there with everything you got.

Jon

If it only was that easy...


Regards, von Rundstedt (OB WEST)

Originally posted by Rundstedt
Well, I like von Rundstedt and he differed from the rest, or at least several, of the other personalities in the German Wehrmacht. Rommel for instance can be described as a social climber, a "career gold-digger". In the beginning of the war he, along with many other officers of the German army, greeted and joined Hitler and his expansionistic visions. Then, later on when the German war fortune was gone, he suddenly suddenly turned against the nazis. Furthermore, I believe Rommel was and is an overestimated superior commander. He was a good tactician and knew how to motivate his men to perform their best at all times, but he lacked some strategical abilities. Of course he anticipated that Allied air power would disrupt German counter-attacks at Normandy if the armored support was placed too far away from the beaches. In short, I think he was an exceptional corps commander but not suited for higher commands. But that's only my personal opinion and i do not expect you to agree.

v. Manstein on the other was in many ways the opposite character of Rommel. He excelled in strategy, but lacked Rommel's seductive charisma. v. Manstein was somewhat short of character, if I may say so. Knew about the Einsatzgruppen, but refused to act. At the same time he didn't follow Hitler's orders and fell from grace. Perhaps foolish orders, but orders are orders... Most of the time anyways...

Guderian was a bulldog, and a successful one too, and he, not Rommel, was in my opinion Germany's answer to Patton. A very competent commander and co-inventor of the German blitzkrieg doctrine. He even had the balls to oppose Hitler at several staff meetings, when he served as CoS at OKH. My choice was between v. Rundstedt and Generaloberst Guderian, but it's more fun to be v. Rundstedt because he outranked "alte Heinz".

v. Rundstedt was respected by both German nazis/officers, especially Hitler himself, which was very important in those days, and the Allies. He was an organizer, not a warrior; a staff officer, not a grunt. He did his job well and even managed to live through the entire war, without being killed by American bombs or the Gestapo.

I hope this answers your question?

Yes it does. I just didn't know enough about Rundstedt to know if he is interesting enough to steal, ... ahem copy his name.

BTW I think that most of german officers only opposed in a political sense after the war was obviously lost. That's one reason why I don't like the 20th July '44 to be commemorated.
The main reason why some parts of the Wehrmacht revolted against Hitler was loosing the war and not the war crimes or the dictatorship IMO. So Germany should remember the White Rose students i.e. much more than those officers.

Dave

Originally posted by davewolf


Yes it does. I just didn't know enough about Rundstedt to know if he is interesting enough to steal, ... ahem copy his name.

BTW I think that most of german officers only opposed in a political sense after the war was obviously lost. That's one reason why I don't like the 20th July '44 to be commemorated.
The main reason why some parts of the Wehrmacht revolted against Hitler was loosing the war and not the war crimes or the dictatorship IMO. So Germany should remember the White Rose students i.e. much more than those officers.

Dave

Most German officers were happy to see that Hitler rose to power and began rebuidling the weak and disorganized Reichswehr into a credible fighting force.

v. Stauffenberg and many others didn't act before it was obvious, as you say, that Germany was going to end the war conquered by the enemy. Still, they became aware of what was needed to finish off Hitler and tried to eliminiate him. The "conspirators" didn't want to end the war completely; they only wanted to make seperate peace with the UK and USA.

And by the way, I'm not stealing or copying, I'm "using" his name...

People can be too hard on the German officers. Some but not all were opportunists. Von Stauffenberg was a key officer in organising the Caucasian and Russian troops to fight for the germans demanding that they be humanely treated as equals to German recruits in terms of pay, conditions etc. More than that he campaigned, with Rosenberg and others, for the end of the reign of terror in the SS controlled areas of the USSR, and for people in the occupied areas to be treated decently as potential allies - not untermensch - with proper treatment and the allies gained being Germany's only hope of winning the Russian war. These arguments were tried out in the Caucasus under Von Kleist's command where the German troops behaved totally differently to elsewhere on the Eastern front.
The ideas gained a large following and were put in writing with the argument going as high as the Nazi leadership where Hitler personally rejected them. Racist idiot as he was.
It was only then that Stauffenberg joined the resistence leading to the 1944 plot at which he gave up his life.
He is someone I think who should be honoured and not regarded as an opportunist.