Does National Pride Really Play a Part in These Discussions?

[KG Erwin]

We're an international community, so I have no doubt that national pride DOES play a part in our discussions. Everyone knows that I'm an advocate of the United States Marines, BUT I have used my position to scale DOWN the USMC over the years, and to represent the reality of their inexperience in 1941-42. Those of you who have branded me as a pro-Marine fanboy have gauged me incorrectly. Some of the boys that were shipped to Guadalcanal had only five weeks of training. At one time they WERE considered super- Gyrenes. No more.

More -- gaining experience in a long campaign -- the USMC is a perfect example of this. Veterans were routinely transferred out to form the cadres of new units , so national experience levels steadily increased over the years. By 1945, the Corps had six divisions of the toughest combat soldiers that ever existed. This was a model for an elite combat force --stay small and instill experience into the new guys.

[Korpraali V]

I think:

One thing that may seem as a national pride is that many times we just happen to know more about our own nations (or troops under our specific interest), and less about the others. That's natural. And when we don't know about the others, we may easily think that ours is the best one and the others just don't know it. Is it national pride or lack of knowledge? I don't know.

Good question Gunny.

It's natural to speak about what we know. But it's also necessary to get information about the 'others', and even from their point of view if possible.

Personal experience: One excellent document was made some years ago. It was about the Winter War and it was made by Russians from their point of view. It was really good to see how the war is/was seen by the 'other' side.

[Dragoon 45]

Gunny, We are all motivated to some degree by national pride. Some of us realize this and some don't. This is only natural for human beings. Every country had very good to elite troops in the war and at the same time had some bodies of troops who were worthless in a fight. The question is does everybody realize this fact. Most people disparage the Italians in the war, but the Italians had some very good troops in the Breslagari (sp) or some of their armor formations. For all the vaunted combat prowless of the Germans, they had some units that were next to worthless in the war. There are many cases of Germans troops on the Eastern Front retreating just as soon as their armor support left, without any attack from the Russians. Most of the American Infantry Divisions in 42 and 43 were not very good troops. Experience and morale has a lot to do with this subject.

I personally have very little respect for the French Army. My opinion of them is shaded by my experiences with them in an actual combat zone. But on the other hand I do realize that they do have some excellent soldiers among their ranks. My low opinion of them is overall based on the actions of their leaders. This brings me to a quote I have heard many times, "There is no such thing as bad troops, only bad leaders." I know this is kind of a cliche, but it is actually the truth in my experience. The leaders are who will make or break an army. With good leaders you will have good troops, and with bad leaders you get the picture.

Then when you get into the question of combat leaders, that is where the question of National Pride rears its head. Every country has its national hero's. Some of them deserve the accolades they received and some didn't. And it is only natural for someone to become upset when one of their national hero's is disparaged.

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

We're an international community, so I have no doubt that national pride DOES play a part in our discussions. Everyone knows that I'm an advocate of the United States Marines, BUT I have used my position to scale DOWN the USMC over the years, and to represent the reality of their inexperience in 1941-42. Those of you who have branded me as a pro-Marine fanboy have gauged me incorrectly. Some of the boys that were shipped to Guadalcanal had only five weeks of training. At one time they WERE considered super- Gyrenes. No more.

More -- gaining experience in a long campaign -- the USMC is a perfect example of this. Veterans were rountinely transferred out to form the cadres of new units , so national experience levels steadily increased over the years. By 1945, the Corps had six divisions of the toughest combat soldiers that ever existed. This was a model for an elite combat force --stay small and instill experience into the new guys.

[soldier]

I'm Australian with a Finnish mother and am understandably proud of the achievments of these two nations in WW2 (tough SOB's) but i have hardly discussed them here. I spend most of my time wondering why Italy and the rest are ranked 35 in comparison. National pride plays no part in that discussion, only the desire to see a better tactical wargame and a fair representation of soldiers who are now shown as complete dumbasses ?

35... cmon [8|]

[KG Erwin]

Here's a point -- how many German nationals do we have? What's their POV in games like this?

The "German fans" seem to be mostly British or American. Why is that?

[Puukkoo]

We do have few Germans here. Not a long time ago one wanted to censore the 'Hakenkreutz' from the German flag because he wanted no trouble. We must understand modern Germans and their difficult relation with the past. I think it's more just German and not really an international matter.

I have met at the IMDb many Germans who clearly are anti-nazi/anti-war patriots, they have a critical point of view but still they can't escape the fact that they are the Germans. In Germany there is always some kind of holocaust document on TV almost every day and the media is very leftist. That is the athmosphere you have to live in if you were a German.

[VikingNo2]

National pride has allot to do with it, but so does having a more fully kounded knowledge of ones country. IMO I relly don't see a problem with raising all the countrys exp and moral . If you are worried about fisrt time kills well lower the accuracy of units instead of moral and exp just my opinion

[Puukkoo]

Don't touch the accuracy values. Exp/mor is more relative out of those two.

[Mike Wood]

Hello...

The code defines average troops as 50. To the base experience value of 35, 1 to 20 points are added. This gives Italy an average score of 45, slightly below the general average. Elite Italian troops run about 55, sligthly above the general average.

Bye...

Michael Wood

ORIGINAL: soldier

I'm Australian with a Finnish mother and am understandably proud of the achievments of these two nations in WW2 (tough SOB's) but i have hardly discussed them here. I spend most of my time wondering why Italy and the rest are ranked 35 in comparison. National pride plays no part in that discussion, only the desire to see a better tactical wargame and a fair representation of soldiers who are now shown as complete dumbasses ?

35... cmon [8|]

[brador]

Growing up in Western Canada in the 40's and 50's, it just wasn't readily acceptable to be German. My father is of Prussian descent, (although part of Germany since the early 20th century)and to avoid literally getting beat up they used to say they were of "Pennsylvanian Dutch" lineage. Anti-German sentiment was very strong during that era. Our last name was almost changed during that period. National pride meant not being German especially during that time.

[soldier]

Hello...

The code defines average troops as 50. To the base experience value of 35, 1 to 20 points are added. This gives Italy an average score of 45, slightly below the general average. Elite Italian troops run about 55, sligthly above the general average.

Bye...

If I play a scenario with Italian base Exp at 40 there is still about a quarter of the force with exp at around 35. lower than the base, considerably lower than the average and this is when the Italian are at their peak. Play them in 44 and troops with 25/20 ratings are not uncommon. Now thats pretty low and Italian elite forces are still below average troop ratings. Is exp also deducted from the base ?

[Puukkoo]

There are now two separate topics: Germans and the exp/mor values (again).

Personally I think that all exp/mor ratings less than 40 should have a damn good explanation. These are: unwillingness to fight for the particular army, sickness, exhaustion, incomplete combat training, little practise time on assigned weapons or vehicles and/or low quality of available manpower (too young or too old).

[Dusan]

ORIGINAL: Puukkoo

We do have few Germans here. Not a long time ago one wanted to censore the 'Hakenkreutz' from the German flag because he wanted no trouble. We must understand modern Germans and their difficult relation with the past. I think it's more just German and not really an international matter.

I have met at the IMDb many Germans who clearly are anti-nazi/anti-war patriots, they have a critical point of view but still they can't escape the fact that they are the Germans. In Germany there is always some kind of holocaust document on TV almost every day and the media is very leftist. That is the athmosphere you have to live in if you were a German.

Yes, I agree. It is very sad to see what have became of the nation that was once one of the greatest. [:(]

[264rifle]

Just ran across an old magazine in the basement that might give some peaple food for thought.

Sept. 1979 issue of "War gamers Digest" There was an article on the Waffen SS.

The author of the article was rating the different SS divisions as to "morale" to fit into a miniatures rule set called "Tractics" which had 4 catagories to rate troops. Elite, Veteran, Regular and Green.

OF the 41 SS divisions (some numbers were used twice) The author of this article rates 7 divisions as Elite, 4 as veteran, 10 as regular and 20 (almost 50%) as Green. Just one mans opinion.

I am not suggesting any changes in the current SS ratings. I am just pointing out that EVERY nation had both good and bad troops and the game designers have to represent them in a way that is also "FUN" for the gamers. SS troops with a morale/exp rating of 30/30 would be no fun.

Scenerio designers can of course (and maybe should[&:]) modify the ratings for a good scenerio.

That said, if a nations ratings are so low as to make the game almost unplayable ( don't know, haven't tried the new ratings yet) then the ratings should be looked at.

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: 264rifle

Just ran across an old magazine in the basement that might give some peaple food for thought.

Sept. 1979 issue of "War gamers Digest" There was an article on the Waffen SS.

The author of the article was rating the different SS divisions as to "morale" to fit into a miniatures rule set called "Tractics" which had 4 catagories to rate troops. Elite, Veteran, Regular and Green.

OF the 41 SS divisions (some numbers were used twice) The author of this article rates 7 divisions as Elite, 4 as veteran, 10 as regular and 20 (almost 50%) as Green. Just one mans opinion.

I am not suggesting any changes in the current SS ratings. I am just pointing out that EVERY nation had both good and bad troops and the game designers have to represent them in a way that is also "FUN" for the gamers. SS troops with a morale/exp rating of 30/30 would be no fun.

Scenerio designers can of course (and maybe should[&:]) modify the ratings for a good scenerio.

That said, if a nations ratings are so low as to make the game almost unplayable ( don't know, haven't tried the new ratings yet) then the ratings should be looked at.

The "national ratings" are an average, which can result in a wide variance in the quality of the troops within a given core force with the national-ratings preference set "on" . For example, a 1942 Marine core force can have a few units with experience levels as high as 80-85 (a few Raiders/Parachute troops/engineers) , with others as low as 45-49 (the grunts given basic training and then immediately shipped overseas to fill out the TOEs of the combat units).

It averages out to about 58-59 exp points for the whole force. Given the fact that the previous Marine experience in WWII (until August 1942) was defeat after defeat, this represents the USMC as it was at Guadalcanal.

The only thing that even made them "average" was the number of officers and NCOs who had served either in WWI or the so-called "banana wars" of the 30s. A hardcore of combat-experienced personnel DID exist, and this helped the overall quality of the units entering combat for the first time.

This is just one example of how the ratings work. Other factors came into play in the ratings we now have. Quality of training, the health care system of the countries, national morale, trust in their government, standard of living etc. Taking all of this into consideration, do you really think that the average Soviet conscript of 1939-41 was better equipped and motivated to die for his country than the average American volunteer of 1941-42? Think about it. Put yourself in their place.

Now, after all that, the game code overlays all of the myriad factors of weapons quality, fire control procedures, radio communications, supply procedures, etc etc, and we have a reasonable facsimile of the fighting potential of a given country during the 1939-45 period, with qualities that change over time.

We can quibble over details, but the bottom line is, with all design factors in synch with the code, we get historical results, and that's what was intended.

[Korpraali V]

Did the writer tell which divisions he meaned?

That's because many of the SS divisions were built either late 44 or early 45 in a hurry. You can see somthing about it for ex: http://www.militaria-net.co.uk/Waffen%2 ... isions.htm
And when you compare the general ratings of Germans in SPWAW you can see that they'll drop significantly in 45. But as you said, in every nation there were 'good' and 'bad' troops. Somehow it just have to be presented generally. And the rest is up to designers... [;)]

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: Korpraali V

Did the writer tell which divisions he meaned?

That's because many of the SS divisions were built either late 44 or early 45 in a hurry. You can see somthing about it for ex: http://www.militaria-net.co.uk/Waffen%2 ... isions.htm
And when you compare the general ratings of Germans in SPWAW you can see that they'll drop significantly in 45. But as you said, in every nation there were 'good' and 'bad' troops. Somehow it just have to be presented generally. And the rest is up to designers... [;)]

Let me put it this way: The SS Das Reich of 1942 can't be compared to the SSDR of 1945, after so many casualties and the lowered-quality of new conscripts. This tendency was plainly apparent in the SS Panzer and Heer Parachute Divisions that fought in the 1944 Ardennes Offensive. The Reich was already scraping the bottom of the barrel.

We keep going around in circles, but the end result is always the same -- The Germans will ALWAYS lose, no matter what you do. The best you can hope for is a well-fought campaign or scenario.

"The battle is the thing", isn't it?

[Afrika Korps]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin


"The battle is the thing", isn't it?

I say the same thing as I send my Imperial Troops into the USMC grinder. BANZAI! [:'(]

[Korpraali V]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Let me put it this way: The SS Das Reich of 1942 can't be compared to the SSDR of 1945, after so many casualties and the lowered-quality of new conscripts. This tendency was plainly apparent in the SS Panzer and Heer Parachute Divisions that fought in the 1944 Ardennes Offensive. The Reich was already scraping the bottom of the barrel.

True. Also German division's strength was something different in practice than it ought to be in theory at 45. Not enough any kind of reinforcements.

[Puukkoo]

German "division" in 1944-45 could also refer to a mere battalion. Germans losing the war even if they win all the battles in the Long Campaign is probably only question of survival for your troops.

As for the SS troops with exp/mor 30, there were some troops in the SS Police forces who were mostly motivated with the political ideology and their leaders too were nazi political activists and not proper soldiers. Such troops deserve considerably lower ratings anyway.