Is Romanian/Axis Minor national morale slightly too low?

[loki100]

another use for them is to stack them with infantry otherwise on assault status - they will build up fortifications over the 1+10% barrier and are pretty safe if you say a Rumanian Division stacked with 2 German. They won't really cost you useful cv but can improve your defensive lines

[Stamb]

ORIGINAL: loki100

another use for them is to stack them with infantry otherwise on assault status - they will build up fortifications over the 1+10% barrier and are pretty safe if you say a Rumanian Division stacked with 2 German. They won't really cost you useful cv but can improve your defensive lines

Can not imagine how Axis can afford to have 2 German divisions stacked in addition to Rum/Hun when they are on defense like in a winter. There are no enough divisions to cover a front line.

[panzer51]

I still fail to see any justification for low Romanian morale. People bring up 3rd Army at Stalingrad but it's a known fact that they only had about 30% of their cannon ammo supply available . I don't know, I assume people think Romanians were supposed to stop the Soviet armor rush with bare hands or something. Then of course German 22nd Panzer was right behind the 3rd Army in reserve and Soviets destroyed them with ease. I guess those Germans need to have their morale set to 45 too.

[Denniss]

Please remember this "national morale" is a somewhat misleading name as it consists of multiple factors. Soldier/Officer training and combat tactics/organization also play a certain role.

[panzer51]

ORIGINAL: Denniss

Please remember this "national morale" is a somewhat misleading name as it consists of multiple factors. Soldier/Officer training and combat tactics/organization also play a certain role.

IMHO training should be part of experience not morale.

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: panzer51

ORIGINAL: Denniss

Please remember this "national morale" is a somewhat misleading name as it consists of multiple factors. Soldier/Officer training and combat tactics/organization also play a certain role.

IMHO training should be part of experience not morale.

well 'National Morale' is training etc. Its a title that wouldn't be given to the concept now but its all over the code and impossible to rename.

The key bit is it is quite easy to have Rumanian formations with their unit morale > NM and keep them there. But if they take heavy losses it will tend to dip as the new replacements are relatively poorly trained and probably not all that keen

[AlbertN]

<Post can be deleted>

[Erik Rutins]

I think you posted that in the wrong place?

[AlbertN]

Apologies, yes that was meant for the AAR.

[DesertedFox]

ORIGINAL: panzer51

ORIGINAL: Denniss

Please remember this "national morale" is a somewhat misleading name as it consists of multiple factors. Soldier/Officer training and combat tactics/organization also play a certain role.

IMHO training should be part of experience not morale.

I disagree. I believe training contributes to both experience and morale.

If troops have good training they will feel more confident (morale) when they go into battle.

If troops are pulled from the farm, given an old rifle (the current game doesn't reflect that the reserve Romanian units were issued with old rifles, but I digress) shown how to fire it with 3 or 4 practice rounds and then sent straight to the front, their confidence (morale) in entering a warzone would be quite low.

ORIGINAL: panzer51

I still fail to see any justification for low Romanian morale. People bring up 3rd Army at Stalingrad but it's a known fact that they only had about 30% of their cannon ammo supply available . I don't know, I assume people think Romanians were supposed to stop the Soviet armor rush with bare hands or something. Then of course German 22nd Panzer was right behind the 3rd Army in reserve and Soviets destroyed them with ease. I guess those Germans need to have their morale set to 45 too.

Reference#1

Third Axis Fourth Ally Romanian Armed Forces in the European War, 1941-1945 by Mark Axworthy, Cornel Scafe&#537;, Cristian Cr&#259;ciunoiu (z-lib.org)

With its objectives achieved, AG Antonescu was dissolved. 4th Army temporarily halted on the Dnestr to regroup pending the political decision to invade the Soviet Union proper.

The motivation of its largely reservist infantry had been high during the liberation of Bassarabia, but its operational results in a series of frontal assaults were meager, and its casualties of 4,112 dead, 12,120 wounded and 5,506 missing sinc3e June 22 were heavy.

The initial German planning for the invasion of the USSR had discounted any possibility of the weak Romanian Army mounting independent offensive operations. However, on 27 July the already overstretched Germans 'urgently desired' Antonescu to use his unengaged 4th Army to capture the important port and rail center of Odessa.

The recovery of Basarabia had been welcomed by every Romanian, but national consensus began to break down at the prospect of the army continuing into the Soviet Union proper.

Accordingly, on 30 July, Antonescu agreed to Hitler's request, and on 3 August 4th Army began to cross the River Dnestr.

Odessa revealed that the average Romanian infantry division had very little offensive potential because of inadequate training, armament and leadership.

Reference #2

The Romanian Army of World War 2 by Mark Axworthy (z-lib.org)

Although they came close to a decisive victory, Odessa was only a partial and expensive success for the Romanians. Some divisions lost more than their original strength, and total losses of 17, 729 dead, 63, 345 wounded and 11, 471 missing largely negated any sense of triumph and prevented much of the line infantry from ever gaining a moral ascendancy over the soviets.

It also exposed the infantry's POOER LEADERSHIP, TRAINING AND EQUIPMENT, AND MOST OF THE 4TH ARMY WAS WITHDRAWN TO ITS, DEPOTS FOR REORGANISATION OVER THE WINTER.

-------------------------------------------

The devs have been very generous in allowing the Romanians to cross the Dnestr before August 3rd, and not applying the same political yardstick that Finland is shackled with.

Romania was enthusiastic to regain the territories annexed by Russian in 1940 ( Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina) but little else. The continuation of the war into proper was at the behest of Antonescu and not a popular decision with the rest of the Romanian political elite.

Thus there is ample evidence as quoted above of initial high morale for Romanian troops, but after some nasty blood letting and experiencing serious losses, their stomach for continuing wasn't there.

I look forward to references being given to argue that the Romanian National Morale currently in the game is flawed.

[HardLuckYetAgain]

ORIGINAL: DesertedFox

ORIGINAL: panzer51

ORIGINAL: Denniss

Please remember this "national morale" is a somewhat misleading name as it consists of multiple factors. Soldier/Officer training and combat tactics/organization also play a certain role.

IMHO training should be part of experience not morale.

I disagree. I believe training contributes to both experience and morale.

If troops have good training they will feel more confident (morale) when they go into battle.

If troops are pulled from the farm, given an old rifle (the current game doesn't reflect that the reserve Romanian units were issued with old rifles, but I digress) shown how to fire it with 3 or 4 practice rounds and then sent straight to the front, their confidence (morale) in entering a warzone would be quite low.

ORIGINAL: panzer51

I still fail to see any justification for low Romanian morale. People bring up 3rd Army at Stalingrad but it's a known fact that they only had about 30% of their cannon ammo supply available . I don't know, I assume people think Romanians were supposed to stop the Soviet armor rush with bare hands or something. Then of course German 22nd Panzer was right behind the 3rd Army in reserve and Soviets destroyed them with ease. I guess those Germans need to have their morale set to 45 too.

Reference#1

Third Axis Fourth Ally Romanian Armed Forces in the European War, 1941-1945 by Mark Axworthy, Cornel Scafe&#537;, Cristian Cr&#259;ciunoiu (z-lib.org)

With its objectives achieved, AG Antonescu was dissolved. 4th Army temporarily halted on the Dnestr to regroup pending the political decision to invade the Soviet Union proper.

The motivation of its largely reservist infantry had been high during the liberation of Bassarabia, but its operational results in a series of frontal assaults were meager, and its casualties of 4,112 dead, 12,120 wounded and 5,506 missing sinc3e June 22 were heavy.

The initial German planning for the invasion of the USSR had discounted any possibility of the weak Romanian Army mounting independent offensive operations. However, on 27 July the already overstretched Germans 'urgently desired' Antonescu to use his unengaged 4th Army to capture the important port and rail center of Odessa.

The recovery of Basarabia had been welcomed by every Romanian, but national consensus began to break down at the prospect of the army continuing into the Soviet Union proper.

Accordingly, on 30 July, Antonescu agreed to Hitler's request, and on 3 August 4th Army began to cross the River Dnestr.

Odessa revealed that the average Romanian infantry division had very little offensive potential because of inadequate training, armament and leadership.

Reference #2

The Romanian Army of World War 2 by Mark Axworthy (z-lib.org)

Although they came close to a decisive victory, Odessa was only a partial and expensive success for the Romanians. Some divisions lost more than their original strength, and total losses of 17, 729 dead, 63, 345 wounded and 11, 471 missing largely negated any sense of triumph and prevented much of the line infantry from ever gaining a moral ascendancy over the soviets.

It also exposed the infantry's POOER LEADERSHIP, TRAINING AND EQUIPMENT, AND MOST OF THE 4TH ARMY WAS WITHDRAWN TO ITS, DEPOTS FOR REORGANISATION OVER THE WINTER.

-------------------------------------------

The devs have been very generous in allowing the Romanians to cross the Dnestr before August 3rd, and not applying the same political yardstick that Finland is shackled with.

Romania was enthusiastic to regain the territories annexed by Russian in 1940 ( Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina) but little else. The continuation of the war into proper was at the behest of Antonescu and not a popular decision with the rest of the Romanian political elite.

Thus there is ample evidence as quoted above of initial high morale for Romanian troops, but after some nasty blood letting and experiencing serious losses, their stomach for continuing wasn't there.

I look forward to references being given to argue that the Romanian National Morale currently in the game is flawed.

I have to parrot the remarks "The devs have been very generous in allowing the Romanians to cross the Dnestr before August 3rd, and not applying the same political yardstick that Finland is shackled with.".

[AlbertN]

In general other in-depth games of the sector give way more credit to the minors. Talking of tabletop games of the Europa serie or the TSWW serie; or Thunder in the East eventually. The first two games are very similar to WITE admittedly, with units as large as divisions / corps (for Axis / Soviets) and down to battallion level for the specialist units.

[DesertedFox]

ORIGINAL: AlbertN

In general other in-depth games of the sector give way more credit to the minors. Talking of tabletop games of the Europa serie or the TSWW serie; or Thunder in the East eventually. The first two games are very similar to WITE admittedly, with units as large as divisions / corps (for Axis / Soviets) and down to battalion level for the specialist units.

In The Operational Art of War IV there are a number of Russian front scenarios, some have Romanian ratings somewhat in line with wite2 but at least one a higher rating for the Romanians(Feel free to play that scenario).

So what do these different ratings prove? Nothing.

My references provide proof that the Romanians started the war with a decent (but inferior to Germans) morale that quickly dissipated.

Also, all of the board games and most computer games (OPART IV is an exception) have a single fixed value, an attack strength and, if it's a bit more detailed a defence strength.

WITE 2 has a more in-depth set of ratings for units, attack, defence, morale and NM. The other games do not have the "luxury" of a NM rating.

BTW, you may consider a board game as a genuine historical reference, that is your prerogative. I certainly don't and if the Devs don't make any changes to the Romanian's NM, I guess they don't either.

[AlbertN]

The Devs already made clear they're good with the present NMs in this very thread, unless hard evidence is provided to have them change mind.

We're discussing for discussion sake!

And certainly I do agree tabletop games in general have fixed values; fluctuations in time require replacement counters (Europa serie has that but it is still -take that counter off, put new year counter in- pretty much) or in case of complications 'multipliers' (which make a tabletop game unplayable!).

What I am merely said through that is that there are many developers of games that do their own researches. Albeit I do not consider the Europa serie something like a map-maker of TOAW may do!

[GibsonPete]

AlbertN +1