Matrix Games Forums

The defender usually is in the advantage because he is entrenched, has shorter supply lines etc. Therefore any attack is costly in the beginning. In WW2, unlike WW1, the exploitation units can then encircle/disrupt deep in the enemy rear if they have the chance. This strategy can be countered by having strong mobile reserves (like the Panzerdivisionen). When used right, the russians break through somewhere, but the exploitation spearheads get hit or even encircled by German reserves (like Charkov 1942 and 1943) when they have outrun their supply and support. On this way, the frontline moves WW1 like because no mobile warfare-->soviets have to slowly grind their way west, always against fortifications in favourable area. This preserves the defenders strength while the attacker has to pay a high price in ammunition and men. This was as far as i know Guderians proposal.
Had the germans known that the soviets know about Zitadelle, they should have delayed the attack until the soviets do not take the bite anymore and then cancel it to let them wait for an onslaught that never happens so they waste effort in a senseless defence.

Kursk was for sure important but definitely no turning point because even after a victory germans could not have kept the initiative for long.

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

ORIGINAL: wings7

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer
I have a modest sized board game of the Prochorovka battle actually. I've had it since the 80s so it likely has some bias in the details.

Nice, do you have any photos...box, counters, etc.?

That can be arranged.

That wouldn't be this one, would it?

ORIGINAL: E

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

ORIGINAL: wings7

Nice, do you have any photos...box, counters, etc.?

That can be arranged.

That wouldn't be this one, would it?

I wanted to see the pictures of the board game that she mentioned...

Yes, I have some pictures I took, wouldn't have bothered if I had seen someone beat me to it effectively

That's a digital image above, but the physical media is about the same.

I'll pass on the fuss of uploading as my cell phone images suck (I was rushed).

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer
That's a digital image above, but the physical media is about the same.

I would hope so (the counters and map are all scanned from the original for a Vassal module I did many moons ago).

OK, thank you both for sharing! [:)]

Given Germany's strategic situation in 1943 a limited offensive in the east made sense to weaken the Red army before events in the west forced major land and air redeployments away from the Ost front. Limited oil stocks and troop numbers also meant that it would have to be fought on a narrow front.

The problem at Kursk was the lack of surprise and too few German infantry - not insufficient armour or the initial air power gathered by the Luftwaffe, combined with the sheer depth of Soviet defences there.

This was one operation where Hitler deserves much less blame than his generals. In the light of the Stalingrad disaster he left most of the planning and operational details for Citadel to his commanders. Whilst he favoured an offensive as did most of his senior officers, he wasn't that confident telling Guderian that the thought of the operation turned his stomach. A May attack would have caught the Russians much less prepared but the Germans were equally unprepared given the short period which had elapsed since the spring thaw had brought the German counter operations after Stalingrad to a halt and the heavy losses that required replacing.

bump