Infantry Against Tanks 1941

[Mad Russian]

There is no way to get around Molotov Cocktails. If your Soviet infantry have them they throw them first. When they do, almost always to no effect, the Germans then simply shoot your men dead unless you have the equivalent of a human wave going, before they can throw their much more effective AT grenades.

Have them all throw them at once. Get rid of them.

In a designed scenario the designer can simply not supply the men with the MC. That's not completely historical. Especially in 1941. They used them because it was all they had. Don't make your Soviet infantry too deadly in the early war years. They weren't historically. The use, or lack there of, of MC's can give your Soviet infantry some badly needed stiffening at times. As Bear pointed out the Soviets didn't always run away. There were times they fought and fought hard. If you have an action where that happened think about increasing the level of AT grenades, by reducing the number of MC's, in the Soviet infantry units.

In a QB, CMBB will give MC's to your men every time, all the way to Berlin.

[quote='Mad Russian' pid='330119' dateline='1285194639']
They also surrendered in droves. At times without a single shot being fired.

One of the main reasons they considered Russian infantry so dangerous, is they would shoot the Germans in the back, after either having surrendered, or waiting until the Germans had moved past them, before opening fire. Nobody else they had fought did that. The Germans considered that an extremely dangerous situation as you might expect.

This seems to be a paraphrase of an article from SIGNAL magazine, Goebbels propaganda media. The Slavs are inferior, sub humans and do not surrender quietly. The Czechs, Yugoslavs and Greeks fought on with gusto and panache.
I am willing to say many ANZACS shot Axis troops in the back. Are you implying that Sharpshooters and Snipers are unethical violating what...Geneva Convention or just the Nazis Propagand Ministry?

I don't read Signal magazine. I have never seen a single article in that publication. As a serious student of history that work is, almost without exception, pure fiction.

You will find on page 7 of the Department of the Army pamphlet No. 20-230 Russian Combat Methods in World War II Dated: Ca. November 1950 since you seem to prefer those, the statement concerning Soviets feigning surrender only to shoot German soldiers in the back. Check the last paragraph.

You can find it here:

http://www.easy39th.com/files/Pam_20-230...I_1950.pdf


Instead, look at the same authors you mention and some of these others;
"Hitler Moves East 1941-1943" by Paul Carell
"Lost Victories" by Field Marshal Erich von Manstein
"Panzer Leader" by Heinz Guderian
"Panzer Battles" by Maj. Gen. F.W. von Mellenthin
"Barbarossa: The Russian - German Conflict, 1941-1945" by Alan Clark
"Barbarossa to Berlin, A Chronology of the Campaigns on the Eastern Front 1941 to 1945: Volume One The Long Drive East, 22 June to 18 November 1942" by Brian Taylor
"Before Stalingrad: Barbarossa - Hitler's Invasion of Russia 1941" by David M. Glantz
"Stumbling Colossus: The Red Army on the Eve of World War" by David M. Glantz
"Colossus Reborn: The Red Army at War 1941-1945" by David M. Glantz
"The Initial Period of War on the Eastern Front; 22 June – August 1941" by David Glantz
"Operation Barbarossa 1941 (1) Army Group South" by Robert Kirchubel
"Operation Barbarossa 1941 (2) Army Group North" by Robert Kirchubel
"Operation Barbarossa 1941 (3) Army Group Center" by Robert Kirchubel
"Operation Barbarossa: Strategy and Tactics on the Eastern Front, 1941" by Bryan I. Fugate
"Panzer In Russland" by Horst Scheibert and Ulrich Elfrath
"Stalin's Folly: The Tragic First Ten Days of World War II on the Eastern Front" by Constantine Pleshakov "Stalin's Keys to Victory: The Rebirth of the Red Army in WWII" by Walter S. Dunn, Jr.
"The Road to Stalingrad: Stalin's War with Germany Volume 1" by John Erickson
"The Russo-German War 1941-1945" by Albert Seaton
"War on the Eastern Front 1941-1945: The German Soldier in Russia" by James Lucas
"When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler" by David M. Glantz and Jonathan M. House
"Brute Force: Allied Strategy and Tactics in the Second World War" by John Ellis
"Russia's Heroes 1941-1945" by Albert Axell
"Army Group North: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945" by Werner Haupt
"Army Group Center: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945" by Werner Haupt
"Army Group South: The Wehrmacht in Russia 1941-1945" by Werner Haupt
"Why the Allies Won" by Richard Avery

These are books that I have in my library that cover the war in the east in 1941, that I can recommend. I'm absolutely certain there are others. I know that because there are still books I want to add to my library....:cool:

I can quote as many passages to support either side of the argument. Carell is only one author. One from a Soviet perspective would be David Glantz. Or Steven Zaloga. Would you like quotes from them about how often Soviet infantry just folded up and went home? Or did human wave attacks?

Paul Carell is the only secondary source. All others I referred to are primary sources. The U.S. Army stuff comes from years of interviews, interrogations and German and Russian data and statistics. Most notably the large book from the War College.

See the above list for primary authors to look at. The Germans immediately after the war had an agenda. The Soviets were stupid and the Germans only lost because of Hitler and because the Western Allies didn't help them against the Soviets. That Slav mentality you brought up earlier. I look at any information from German sources with a skeptical eye. They have an agenda. So do Soviet sources. Best to get information from both sides and see where the middle ground is. That's closer to where the truth lies.

Your carrying a molotov cocktail all the way to Berlin brings up another point. Would you carry a glass bottle filled with gasoline all over the Ukraine and into Prussia and finally to Berlin? I wouldn't. Glass breaks. If it breaks near fire YOU BURN. No, I think I'll go with the other more effective, less user lethal, weapons developed for killing the tanks I have to assault.

If the bottle breaks I'll get another unless we find something better on the road to Berlin, eh.

Not if you get burned to death by the gasoline in the glass bottle. You want to ride on the back of a T-34 and bounce all around and even jump off with a glass bottle full of gasoline? You're a better man than me Bear, because I don't.

The last six months of 1941 were a tumultuous time. The longer the war went on, the better the Soviets got in both infantry, and armored, combat tactics. They were also holding the line because the Soviets were replacing their losses and the Germans were not. Less attackers, same number or greater number of defenders...hmmm...easier on the defense. No wonder they were holding the line better.

The surveys of the combat starting in September 41 tells us that the Soviet Army had better trained and disciplined men. The delaying actions of July-August paid off, whole corps lost only to buy time. By September, around Vyzma salient the German field commanders found out that Barbarossa was over and done.

The surveys? Read the books from the Soviet perspective of the war. They were sending men straight into combat with, at times, no basic training. The Germans were running out of men. The Soviets weren't. That's quite simplistic but pretty much the case.

Molotov cocktails were at best a stop gap measure. If they were such great weapons why did any nation develop any other means for infantry to attack armor?

Great is relative to the purpose behind the weapon, eh.
The Molotov was an incendiary bomb, it could kill a tank, pill box, bunker, houses, good shyt like that.

Good Hunting.

MR

It was an extremely poor incendiary bomb. Under the right circumstances and a good bit of luck it could kill a tank, pill box, bunker, houses, good shyt like that.

Talk to you later old friend. G'day

It's always good to discuss with you. You make me think and bring up points few others do.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Mad Russian]

Also, I could not find the battle that would honour the division with the "Guards" title, as well it is documented that this divisions early commander's performances bordered on attrocious. It would seem that this title was given when the division was reformed into a mech. division from a rifle division. With the amount of titles given including Proltarian-Minsk, Moscow Proletarian, Moscow-Minsk, Guards Moscow, Guards Mech., it kinda leads me to believe that this division in it's various forms might have been given the Guards title amung others in order to keep up morale, more so then from great battle performances. Now, I did just take a quick look, so I very well could be mistaken. MR, you will for sure have more information at your fingertips then do I.

8 August 1941
Klematina, Russia

The German Army had been advancing for more than a month. They Red Army was in full retreat and the Germans were almost at the gates of Moscow. Soon Moscow would fall.

Then things changed. The Red Army stopped retreating. For the first time in the war the German advance was stopped.

The Germans were stopped around the small town of Yelnia. In this area on 8 August 1941, the 100th Rifle Division attacked the village of Klematina, on the Uzha stream, just to the north and west of Yelnia. The attack caught the Germans in a weak position. The attack hit the seam of the 15th Infantry Division and the SS "Das Reich" Division.

Between July 1940 and July 1941, the 15th Infantry Division had been located in the region of Dijon, France. In July of 1941, it was transferred to the Eastern Front. The 15th Infantry Division arrived at the front and came under the control of Army Group Center. There it advanced to the north of Minsk, and on to the region of Mogilev, where it entered combat against the Red Army. It then took part in both offensive and defensive combat in the Yelnia Bend, at Tokarewo, and between Ustrom and the Dnieper Rivers.

A. N. Yermakov Kombrig, had commanded the 100th Rifle Division during the Winter War. During which, the 100th Rifle Division had taken part in the assault on the Summakyla defense sector.

Assigned to the Western Military District, at the start of the war, the division was in constant combat. The division took part in the heavy fighting for Minsk, from 25 June through 3 July. The division then fell back to the Berezina River, later even further to the east into the Smolensk, and finally in the Yelnia area during July. But then, finally, it would be their turn to attack. No more defending!


Historical Result:

The difficulty of the combat can be measured by the fact that during the period from July 20 - August 9, elements of 20 Soviet divisions attacked the Yelnia Bend. From these, 7 were definitely identified; including 2 tank divisions. During this time the Soviets supported these attacks with approximately 50 artillery batteries supplied with large amounts of ammunition.

Soviet losses during this time period amounted to roughly 35,000 men dead.

The losses of the 46th Panzer Corps for the period from July 22 to August 8 were:
4,252 officers, NCOs, and men. While 15th Infantry Division was not a part of the 46th Panzer Corps, their neighbor, SS "Das Reich" Division was. This report shows the intensity of the combat in the entire Yelnia Bend.

The awarding of medals and citations for valor and distinguished service figured prominently in boosting Red Army morale. A Soviet soldier whose army work consists chiefly of baking pies in an officers' mess may be the proud wearer of a "Distinguished Cook" badge. Another Red Army G.I. (Krachhoapmeeu) may sport the Red Star, a myriad of campaign ribbons, and a "Distinguished Sniper" badge. Pride of military achievement is inherent among all warriors, and one of the most valued designations a Soviet soldier can earn is to be cited as a "Guardsman." Besides wearing the distinctive Guards badge, the soldier enjoys a great amount of prestige and, moreover, receives double pay.

Guards units are picked Red Army troops who have distinguished themselves by their excellent training, discipline, and courage in battle. The Guards title in the Red Army is significant, not only because it was sometimes used during World War II as a means of restoring impaired morale among badly cut up units, but also because the honor combines the traditional Guards of the old Czarist army with the memory of the Soviet Red Guards of 1918.

Under Peter the Great the first Guards regiments (Preobrazhensky and Izmailovsky) were established; others were created in the 18th and 19th centuries. The Czarists Guards were elite units with resplendent uniforms, rigid training, and great traditions. The term "Red Guards" was a designation first applied by Lenin to the groups of armed urban workers who supported the Soviets after the October Revolution. These Red Guards were absorbed into the Red Army early in 1918 and lost their separate identity.

On 18 September 1941, the 100th, 127th, 153d and 161st Rifle Divisions were redesignated 1st through 4th Guards Rifle Divisions. This establishment of Red Army Guards units occurred at a time when the Soviet Government was endeavoring to counteract the effects of initial reverses by associating its defensive war with all the greatest days and traditions of Russia's military past. The war with Germany was termed the Fatherland War; new orders and decorations named for great soldiers of Russia's past were created; and Russian patriotism was drawn upon heavily to furnish the steadfastness and energy necessary to stop and drive back the German invaders.

The awarding of Guards titles in the Red Army is rather elastic. Units from entire armies down to independent battalions can receive the honor. Exceptions to the general rule are the rocket-launcher regiments, all of which have the designation Guards Mortar Regiments as distinguished from ordinary mortar regiments armed with mortars, and the 10 Guards airborne divisions whose employment has been primarily as shock infantry and not as airborne troops.

Non-Guards units, upon conversion to Guards status, are renumbered in the Guards series; during the war their old numbers were often reassigned to newly activated units. Tank armies, on the other hand, retain their old numbers upon conversion to Guards tank armies.

This was taken from my scenario HSG B Guards At Klematina. It too can be found at The Scenario Depot II.

I think that if the Russians had been performing so greatly and consistantly across the fronts and that the mighty molotov was indeed so mighty, the Germans would have picked up the weapon and produced it in great numbers instead of investing research into the Pzfaust and other AT weapons. As well, there should be Russian formations that are common knowledge of everyone, that are well know for combat greatness like many German formations such as the GD and several SS divisions, to name a few.

As Bear pointed out the Soviets eometimes fought hard.

Here is a battle description of one of the units Bear pointed out.


3 July, 1941
Lipki, Russia


The German Army had been advancing for less than two weeks. The Red Army was in full retreat and the Germans would soon be at the gates of Moscow. Soon Moscow will fall. That was the OKW assessment of the situation in early July 1941.

2 July 1941, the 18th Panzer Division forces a bridgehead over the Berezina river at Borisov. On 3 July, Colonel I. G. Kreizer's elite 1st Moscow Motor Rifle Division is ordered down the main Minsk-Smolensk motor road to put a stop to the German advance.

German aerial reconnaissance report Russian heavy tanks of a type never before seen. More than 100 heavy tanks were advancing along the Minsk-Smolensk motor road.

Here, on the 3rd of July, just six miles to the east of Borisov, the 18th Panzer Division is the next to meet the heavy Russian tanks. Each Panzer Division in turn has met the heavy KV tanks along with the new T-34's! These tanks are much heavier than their German counterparts.

The two armored forces come together near the village of Lipki. Here, the 18th Panzer Division, would get it's opportunity to stop the Russian heavy armor.


Historical Result:

The 18th Panzer Division started the invasion of Russia with 6 PzI, 50 PzII, 99 PzIII(37mm gun), 15 PzIII(50mm gun) and 36 PzIV's. The division started Operation Barbarossa with tanks that were originally designed for amphibious operations in England. The division had trained for Operation Sealion and still had the same tanks in it's TO&E. It was interesting to note, that while the 18th Panzer Division was almost exclusively made up of PzIII's with the 37mm gun, it had 50mm Pak38 antitank guns instead of the 37mm Pak36 versions.

By 3 July the 37mm guns on the lighter PzIII's were showing themselves incapable of taking out the heavier Soviet tanks. On this day, Colonel I. G. Kreizer's elite 1st Moscow Motor Rifle Division, would attack the lead elements of the 18th Panzer Division. The German's were able to destroy the lighter tanks and then bring in a platoon of PzIV's.

1st Moscow Motor Rifle Division had over 100 of the new model T-34, KV-1 and KV-2 tanks. As was the practice of the times though, they were divided up and used as infantry support instead of an armored strike force.

The action was lead by a single KV-2, and a single T-34, with supporting T-26 and BT-5 tanks. The Germans soon destroyed the lighter Soviet armor and then took care of the two heavy tanks. The Germans isolated the T-34 and shot the tracks off it, immobilizing it, while the KV had gotten stuck in soft ground and was abandoned.

This was taken from my scenario HSG B Each In Turn. It too can be found at The Scenario Depot II.

As you can see there are early war scenarios available that show the Soviets fighting. They weren't completely paper tigers. Most of the time they had numerical advantage and superior equipment. They had inferior tactics and the German command/control put them at a severe disadvantage.


You can also read about the early part of the war in these Department of the Army Pamphlets.

No. 20-230 Russian Combat Methods in WWII.

No. 20-271 The German Northern Theater of Operations 1940-1945 (Part 1/2)

No. 20-271 The German Northern Theater of Operations 1940-1945 (Part 2/2)

No. 20-292 Warfare in the Far North

Here:

http://www.easy39th.com/documents.php

Hope this helps.

Good Hunting.

MR

---

[captainkije]

Critical to understanding the state of the Russian Army in 1941 is the profound effect of the Great Purge of the 1930's. Stalin decapitated his own army. From 1936 through 1941, tens of thousands of officers were shot, sent to labor camps, or simply dismissed. This included generals of great genius and experience like Tukhachevsky and went right down to lieutenants. Too often, these were replaced by incompetent flunkies loyal to the regime.

In my view, the what is amazing about the Russian soldier's performance in 1941 is how well they did in spite of Stalin. If memory serves me, the Axis (or was it just the Germans?) suffered a million casualties (KIA, WIA, MIA) in Russia in 1941 alone. Mass surrenders by encircled Russian troops stand side by side with heroic break-out attempts, stands to the death and suicidal counterattacks.

The German success with Hiwis and the Vlasov army are directly attributable to the practices of the Stalin regime.

When equipped and well-led, the Russian soldier of WWII was a match for the German. The Russian soldier was willing enough.

One final note on Molotovs. The Finns may have invented the expression during the 39-40 Winter War, where they used gasoline bombs with some effect. Molotov was Stalin's foreign minister at the time and these cocktails were a sort of toast to him. They were also used during the Spanish Civil War and the 1956 uprising in Hungary. Read somewhere that after WWII the big nations started improving the protection on their tanks' rear engine decks to make them proof against this weapon, a design change acknowledging it posed some threat. On the other hand, I imagine the Spanish miners' dynamite in their Civil War was much more effective.

Back to CMBB, did the Russians have an AT grenade in 1941?

[Mad Russian]

They do in the game. Any grenade thrown at a vehicle is an AT grenade.

Good Hunting.

MR

[Mr Yormsha]

Hmmm.

Interesting thread.

I think it began with a sort of 'Are Molotov cocktails any good?'

And decended into 'Russian infantry are the worst infantry units ever. Period.'

Via 'I've read loads more books than you have.'

Which slightly disturbs me. Why? Well bacause we seem to slip, without thought, into game world and real world.

So. From the top. (In the world of CMBB,) I've killed tanks with molotov cocktails before. And given them one almighty fright. So by a dictionary definition they are not 'useless'.

Secondly. (Snap my fingers, back in the real world.) The point made about 'carrying a molotov to berlin' and all that rubbish. It completely misses the point. The beauty of a molotov was you could assemble virtually anywhere.

Imagine.

'Quick the enemy are coming, and they have tanks. We could kick in a door of some building. Find some bottles (or other fragile vessel,) a bit of cloth (the arm of your undershirt would do...) and he presto. Quite a potent anti tank weapon if he happened to drive too close.'

That was the real beauty of it. Much better than any anti personel grenade in my book.

Right onwards, with the march of a zealot. the Russians are rubbish infantry.

A statement that borders on racist/childishly naive. (IMHO.)

And again i'm going to ask you to imagine something.

Imagine, you teachers at school had all been shot. on the orders of your government. and members of the local council. and doctors. and pretty much any one else the government considered a 'threat'. maybe a brother, uncle, cousin.

that was your day to day life. (which, before all that was a damn sight harder than anything we're used to today.)

then one day news comes through that a foreign army approaches.

but you're ordered to fight them. but i'm afraid there's one rifle between twenty.

what would you do?

think about it a minute.

which is why, when i hear them dismissed as "fickle" i find deeply disturbing. It really does make my blood boil.

Especially when coupled with that 'when I've commanded the Russians..' stuff. you're mixing up two incomparible things.

On the whole i think they fought like lions. way beyond any 'western' comprehension.

I think Bear made a few good points but was getting unfairly slaughtered. And i think people should think a little harder before they wade in with their (lets face it they're not facts) opinions.

I'll go now and leave you alone.

[British Tommy]

Hmmm.

Interesting thread.

I think it began with a sort of 'Are Molotov cocktails any good?'

And decended into 'Russian infantry are the worst infantry units ever. Period.'

Via 'I've read loads more books than you have.'

Which slightly disturbs me. Why? Well bacause we seem to slip, without thought, into game world and real world.

So. From the top. (In the world of CMBB,) I've killed tanks with molotov cocktails before. And given them one almighty fright. So by a dictionary definition they are not 'useless'.

Secondly. (Snap my fingers, back in the real world.) The point made about 'carrying a molotov to berlin' and all that rubbish. It completely misses the point. The beauty of a molotov was you could assemble virtually anywhere.

Imagine.

'Quick the enemy are coming, and they have tanks. We could kick in a door of some building. Find some bottles (or other fragile vessel,) a bit of cloth (the arm of your undershirt would do...) and he presto. Quite a potent anti tank weapon if he happened to drive too close.'

That was the real beauty of it. Much better than any anti personel grenade in my book.

Right onwards, with the march of a zealot. the Russians are rubbish infantry.

A statement that borders on racist/childishly naive. (IMHO.)

And again i'm going to ask you to imagine something.

Imagine, you teachers at school had all been shot. on the orders of your government. and members of the local council. and doctors. and pretty much any one else the government considered a 'threat'. maybe a brother, uncle, cousin.

that was your day to day life. (which, before all that was a damn sight harder than anything we're used to today.)

then one day news comes through that a foreign army approaches.

but you're ordered to fight them. but i'm afraid there's one rifle between twenty.

what would you do?

think about it a minute.

which is why, when i hear them dismissed as "fickle" i find deeply disturbing. It really does make my blood boil.

Especially when coupled with that 'when I've commanded the Russians..' stuff. you're mixing up two incomparible things.

On the whole i think they fought like lions. way beyond any 'western' comprehension.

I think Bear made a few good points but was getting unfairly slaughtered. And i think people should think a little harder before they wade in with their (lets face it they're not facts) opinions.

I'll go now and leave you alone.

So you stir the pot then say I will leave you alone now????
Why don't you read again what has been said on this thread instead of ranting on and insulting the people who have posted on this thread?
Makes my blood boil springs to mind here!!

[Splork]

FYI, from the CMAK manual, p. 104:
"but all infantry squads and HQs have hand grenades, which can be used for a close assault against a tank. Hand grenades work best against open-top
vehicles, but can also be used - albeit less effectively - against
buttoned up tanks. This simulates the occasional hero climbing on,
or right up to, an enemy tank and placing the grenade in a
vulnerable spot"

So an infantry grenade attack on armor in the game isn't necessarily simulating an anti-tank grenade - it could also include a grenade used in an improvised anti-tank role (so I suppose you could call that an anti-tank grenade, after all).

[Mad Russian]

I think it began with a sort of 'Are Molotov cocktails any good?'

And decended into 'Russian infantry are the worst infantry units ever. Period.'

Via 'I've read loads more books than you have.'

Which slightly disturbs me. Why? Well bacause we seem to slip, without thought, into game world and real world.

We went from 'Are Molotov cocktails any good?' to Russian infantry and good Russian leaders make them so, to check out other sources than German ones.

So. From the top. (In the world of CMBB,) I've killed tanks with molotov cocktails before. And given them one almighty fright. So by a dictionary definition they are not 'useless'.

I've killed German tanks with them too. I stated about a 1 in 50 chance of making them work successfully. That of course is my opinion. You seem to have a different opinion than that.

That was the real beauty of it. Much better than any anti personel grenade in my book.

That is absolutely your opinion.

Right onwards, with the march of a zealot. the Russians are rubbish infantry.

A statement that borders on racist/childishly naive. (IMHO.)

That is also an opinion.

And again i'm going to ask you to imagine something.

Imagine, you teachers at school had all been shot. on the orders of your government. and members of the local council. and doctors. and pretty much any one else the government considered a 'threat'. maybe a brother, uncle, cousin.

that was your day to day life. (which, before all that was a damn sight harder than anything we're used to today.)

then one day news comes through that a foreign army approaches.

but you're ordered to fight them. but i'm afraid there's one rifle between twenty.

what would you do?

And the fact that they had 1 rifle for 20 men makes them good infantry? And you call other statements in this discussion rubbish.....hmmm.

What made them poor infantry in 1941 was a lack of training and leadership. They were motivated enough. Although not so much by bullets, and the NKVD, as you seem to portray. Several times the NKVD were placed behind frontline troops to keep units from retreating, wonder why they would do that with infantry that would fight like lions? Most of the time the threat of being shot didn't stop the retreats and, for the most part, the Soviets stopped using that particular tactic to get them to fight. The Germans were the best incentive to fight. Hearing what was going on in the captured areas made them fight harder to protect their families. They at times even fought like lions.

which is why, when i hear them dismissed as "fickle" i find deeply disturbing. It really does make my blood boil.

Especially when coupled with that 'when I've commanded the Russians..' stuff. you're mixing up two incomparible things.

You do understand this is all about playing CMBB right? You do understand that at times they would fight like lions and then the same unit just days later would surrender without a single shot being fired at them? What would you call that if you don't like the term fickle?

On the whole i think they fought like lions. way beyond any 'western' comprehension.

I agree with you as time goes on. 1941 was not a good year for the Red Army. They lost the equivalent of the entire Red Army and had to replace it before their counter attack in December 1941. If they were so good, I ask you, how did that happen?

I think Bear made a few good points but was getting unfairly slaughtered. And i think people should think a little harder before they wade in with their (lets face it they're not facts) opinions.

I'll go now and leave you alone.

Bear did make some exceptionally good points. There, are at times, threads that run through history. One is, 'if the Germans were so good then how did they manage to lose the war?' Another is, 'if the Red Army was so good in 1941 how did they manage to lose in 6 months what it would take them 3 years to recapture?' If you have an answer for that the discussion is wide open to any opinions.

Don't run off now, the discussion is just getting good.

FYI, from the CMAK manual, p. 104:
"but all infantry squads and HQs have hand grenades, which can be used for a close assault against a tank. Hand grenades work best against open-top
vehicles, but can also be used - albeit less effectively - against
buttoned up tanks. This simulates the occasional hero climbing on,
or right up to, an enemy tank and placing the grenade in a
vulnerable spot"

So an infantry grenade attack on armor in the game isn't necessarily simulating an anti-tank grenade - it could also include a grenade used in an improvised anti-tank role (so I suppose you could call that an anti-tank grenade, after all).

That could be. The grenade attacks you watch in the game are usually from about 20 meters away. Hard to do the hero stuff from that far. But these games are abstractions and as such that could be just the assault animations in play.

The grenade attacks I've used vs closed top AFV's are effective most of the time. Far more often than they fail. Maybe around 70%. The more open top they are the better the chance they will succeed.

Good Hunting.

MR

[captainkije]

Just learned that Glantz is about to release a two volume work called "Barbarossa Derailed: the Battle for Smolensk 1941 10 JUL -10 SEPT." This may have a lot of detail concerning the fighting qualities of the Red Army in 1941 that have not yet come to light. The title contrasts with a common view that Smolensk was a German victory, if incomplete. Plan to get after my local library to order this despite the budget cuts.

Anyone remember Carrell's description of Russian "mine dogs?" Trained to feed under tanks with engines running, the Russians would strap high explosives to them and the poor dogs would try to run under German tanks expecting to be fed. No, this wasn't very effective.

[Ratzki]

Well stated MR and British Tommy, you can't jump into the conversation with accusations and then back out. It's just not fair Mr Yormsha .;)
Now, no one has been insulting and each person's views have been read and respected by others, we just happen to disagree on a couple of points.