Login

russian armor

why are penals better than cons objectively

25 Jun 2021, 14:23 PM
#21
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518



Which cavity collapses if you look at the skin. The conscripts skin is a 1943 uniform. And this means the conscripts are much better prepared and there is no hint of the mythical one rifle for three.


Uniforms in this game are a joke anyways. Osttruppen have a sign on their uniform that wasn't introduced until late 44' iirc. and Grenadiers have some kind of made up skin as far as I know also there are G43s, Panzerschrecks and even one Tiger in 1942 in the Single Player Mode.

And the "one rifle for two (or three)" is btw. not 100% mythical. There are instances in 1941 and 1942 where this happened

25 Jun 2021, 14:26 PM
#22
avatar of donofsandiego

Posts: 1379

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2021, 12:29 PMVipper

You probably need to open a dictionary and look up the phrase "original design".

I any case I am not really interested in your line of arguing.


Yes. You're right. "Original design" is not "original implementation." Design being the idea, and implementation being how the gameplay actually was. So you saying that the original design was so and so is clearly supported by the design drawings.
25 Jun 2021, 14:27 PM
#23
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



Uniforms in this game are a joke anyways. Osttruppen have a sign on their uniform that wasn't introduced until late 44' iirc. and Grenadiers have some kind of made up skin as far as I know also there are G43s, Panzerschrecks and even one Tiger in 1942 in the Single Player Mode.

And the "one rifle for two (or three)" is btw. not 100% mythical. There are instances in 1941 and 1942 where this happened



No, it didn’t happen. Soviet soldiers never attacked without weapons. Neither Soviet nor German documents and reports confirm this. The only thing that could happen was the capture of construction divisions, they had no weapons for a simple logical reason - they built fortifications deep in the rear, but after large encirclements over a large territory with hundreds of thousands of prisoners, such divisions could be captured without weapons.
25 Jun 2021, 14:31 PM
#24
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2021, 14:15 PMPip


Which sources are you using for this information? People keep saying this, but I've been unable to find any information that supports the idea that Penal Battalions were made up exclusively of officers, and were better equipped than regular, non-penal infantry.

I'd be interested to read about this, though I'm not entirely sure what the logic behind organising Penal infantry like this would be.


Pip
25 Jun 2021, 14:53 PM
#26
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594





Interesting, but where is this from? There's still no mention of these Battalions being "better equipped" even here, though.
25 Jun 2021, 15:00 PM
#27
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518



No, it didn’t happen. Soviet soldiers never attacked without weapons. Neither Soviet nor German documents and reports confirm this. The only thing that could happen was the capture of construction divisions, they had no weapons for a simple logical reason - they built fortifications deep in the rear, but after large encirclements over a large territory with hundreds of thousands of prisoners, such divisions could be captured without weapons.


There were Soviet Divisions that lacked rifles that is for sure and it is confirmed by reports:





And there are also sources that state that poorly armed soldiers were sent into battle:






25 Jun 2021, 15:05 PM
#28
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Jun 2021, 14:53 PMPip


Interesting, but where is this from? There's still no mention of these Battalions being "better equipped" even here, though.



25 Jun 2021, 15:15 PM
#29
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



There were Soviet Divisions that lacked rifles that is for sure and it is confirmed by reports:





And there are also sources that state that poorly armed soldiers were sent into battle:









In which it is not said that these soldiers went into battle without weapons, and they say about the difficulty of the offensive, because these soldiers could not immediately go into the attack. This often happened when the soldiers arrived at the front line before the weapon.

In the second link there is a lack of guns but not rifles

And in the third, you talk about a hastily created militia. The militia, depending on the situation, received an old weapon, or was armed with SVT-40 (Tula militia), even in your example it says badly armed but not unarmed.
25 Jun 2021, 16:15 PM
#30
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 658

From a thematic and realistic standpoint I always felt Guards should be swapped with Penals even if it was just the name only as it would make sense.

While Penal Battalions were used in WW2 by the Soviets, they were small in number which fits more with being a call in Unit rather than a Core Soviet Army Unit in which Guards would fit that better.
25 Jun 2021, 16:21 PM
#31
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2

From a thematic and realistic standpoint I always felt Guards should be swapped with Penals even if it was just the name only as it would make sense.

While Penal Battalions were used in WW2 by the Soviets, they were small in number which fits more with being a call in Unit rather than a Core Soviet Army Unit in which Guards would fit that better.


Absolutely. The many millionth Guard as a doctrinal opportunity and 1% which is the main infantry. This should have been done for a long time.
25 Jun 2021, 18:45 PM
#32
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518




In which it is not said that these soldiers went into battle without weapons, and they say about the difficulty of the offensive, because these soldiers could not immediately go into the attack. This often happened when the soldiers arrived at the front line before the weapon.



But it shows that not only rear construction units could / did lack rifles

And in this case (the 284th rifle division) it actually was a lack of weapons that remained for months. On July 20th the quoted report was written. On then next day the unit was ordered to counterattack and on September 17th it was assigned to the defense of Stalingrad while still lacking weapons. On wikipedia is it written (sadly don't have the book that they quote for this passage)that it was involved in "difficult fighting" on September 22nd.



In the second link there is a lack of guns but not rifles


It says "including" but yea it is not 100% certain in this case



And in the third, you talk about a hastily created militia. The militia, depending on the situation, received an old weapon, or was armed with SVT-40 (Tula militia), even in your example it says badly armed but not unarmed.


Badly armed can again be interpreted in variing ways so here is another quote from one of Beevors Books.

25 Jun 2021, 18:55 PM
#33
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2





Badly armed can again be interpreted in variing ways so here is another quote from one of Beevors Books.




And here is complete nonsense - confirmation of this, the instructor sergeant submissive ran over to the Germans and during interrogation clearly said that each militia had a rifle, a gas mask, and each was dressed with the same uniform. Moreover, the Leningrad militia turned out to be very stubborn and staunch in defense, the reason for the double staff of mortars, mortars were produced in Leningrad and the militia received a double staff of mortars.

in the Central Archives of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation there are documents on the degree of staffing with weapons of all twelve divisions of the people's militia on September 3, 1941.

The provision of rifles, machine guns, light and heavy machine guns, 50-mm mortars, 76-mm divisional guns, 122-mm howitzers is 100% in them. Among the total number of heavy machine guns, there are 412 Colt heavy machine guns model 1915.
25 Jun 2021, 19:05 PM
#34
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518




And here is complete nonsense - confirmation of this, the instructor sergeant submissive ran over to the Germans and during interrogation clearly said that each militia had a rifle, a gas mask, and each was dressed with the same uniform. Moreover, the Leningrad militia turned out to be very stubborn and staunch in defense, the reason for the double staff of mortars, mortars were produced in Leningrad and the militia received a double staff of mortars.

in the Central Archives of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation there are documents on the degree of staffing with weapons of all twelve divisions of the people's militia on September 3, 1941.

The provision of rifles, machine guns, light and heavy machine guns, 50-mm mortars, 76-mm divisional guns, 122-mm howitzers is 100% in them. Among the total number of heavy machine guns, there are 412 Colt heavy machine guns model 1915.


Source for any of this?

25 Jun 2021, 19:12 PM
#35
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



Source for any of this?



Kolesnik Alexander. "Militia formations of the Russian Federation during the Great Patriotic War"
Lectures by one of the best and authoritative modern historians Alexey Isaev.This person practically lives in the archives.

The real problem for the Leningrad militia is the width of the defended front. The 1939 field manual of the Red Army indicates that a rifle division can successfully defend a front with a width of 8-12 kilometers. The Leningrad Militia Divisions had to defend a front 40 (!) Kilometers wide.
25 Jun 2021, 19:43 PM
#36
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518



Kolesnik Alexander. "Militia formations of the Russian Federation during the Great Patriotic War"



Literally find neither the Autor nor this Book on the internet and to be honest it seems a bit odd that he would write about Militia formations of the Russian Federation ... wouldn't Militia formations of the Soviet Union be more fitting. Are you sure this is the correct title?(but then again there are lots of strange translations out there so maybe bad book-translator?)?

Could you please provide a link, screenshot ... anything? All the sources I quoted are freely available on the internet



Lectures by one of the best and authoritative modern historians Alexey Isaev.This person practically lives in the archives.


Which lecture? Is it avaible on the internet? Do you have a timestamp?

Don't get me wrong but this all is a big "Trust me bro"



25 Jun 2021, 19:53 PM
#37
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515



Literally find neither the Autor nor this Book on the internet and to be honest it seems a bit odd that he would write about Militia formations of the Russian Federation ... wouldn't Militia formations of the Soviet Union be more fitting. Are you sure this is the correct title?(but then again there are lots of strange translations out there so maybe bad book-translator?)?

Could you please provide a link, screenshot ... anything? All the sources I quoted are freely available on the internet




Which lecture? Is it avaible on the internet? Do you have a timestamp?

Don't get me wrong but this all is a big "Trust me bro"





Using Google is too hard nowadays it seems. Need to contact Google and let them know that the search engine is not user friendly and too difficult to understand. Literally the first result

https://www.prlib.ru/en/node/434827

Would you mind me asking what you do for a living?
25 Jun 2021, 20:30 PM
#39
avatar of mr.matrix300

Posts: 518



Using Google is too hard nowadays it seems. Need to contact Google and let them know that the search engine is not user friendly and too difficult to understand. Literally the first result


Thank you. I think I missed a ". Honestly could not find it
26 Jun 2021, 04:39 AM
#40
avatar of Crecer13

Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2



Literally find neither the Autor nor this Book on the internet and to be honest it seems a bit odd that he would write about Militia formations of the Russian Federation ... wouldn't Militia formations of the Soviet Union be more fitting. Are you sure this is the correct title?(but then again there are lots of strange translations out there so maybe bad book-translator?)?

Could you please provide a link, screenshot ... anything? All the sources I quoted are freely available on the internet




Which lecture? Is it avaible on the internet? Do you have a timestamp?

Don't get me wrong but this all is a big "Trust me bro"





If you understand Russian:
here is a generalized lecture on the defense of Leningrad in 1941. Isaev also has a book: from the border to Leningrad.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

751 users are online: 751 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49090
Welcome our newest member, BrubeckDeclarkBurche
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM