Login

russian armor

US Campaign: ARDENNES ASSAULT

15 Aug 2014, 18:35 PM
#61
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Aug 2014, 18:23 PMBurts


You forgot Romania, Bulgaria, Finland, Italy, Hungary.

Thing is, the second front was only opened in 1943, and the "real" second front in 1944. By then Germany had lost pretty much all of it's initiative on the eastern front and was on the retreat.

Sure, lend lease DID help, however, you can argue that swedish metal and romanian oil also helped.

Most of germanys casaulties were on the eastern front.

Germans pretty much focused their entire millitary in 1941 on operation barbarossa, and still didin't win.
It was an example. I didn´t write down the smallest axis nations and Italy, because they don´t really matter. Italy switched sides (and struggled on teh Balkan and in North Africa) and the other nations were simply too small. For the same reason I didn´t list Brazil, Greece etc. for the Allies.

Without the Allied bombings, the German industry would have produced more equipment to fight the Russians. Those bombings started way before 1943. It bound the forces of the Luftwaffe for home protection - which might have had air superiority versus the Russians otherwise.
15 Aug 2014, 18:40 PM
#62
avatar of Affe

Posts: 578

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Aug 2014, 18:23 PMBurts


You forgot Romania, Bulgaria, Finland, Italy, Hungary.

Thing is, the second front was only opened in 1943, and the "real" second front in 1944. By then Germany had lost pretty much all of it's initiative on the eastern front and was on the retreat.

Sure, lend lease DID help, however, you can argue that swedish metal and romanian oil also helped.

Most of germanys casaulties were on the eastern front.

Germans pretty much focused their entire millitary in 1941 on operation barbarossa, and didin't win.

You also Forget other allies such as:

Soviet Union
United States
United Kingdom
France
China
Poland
Canada
Australia
New Zealand
Yugoslavia
Greece
Netherlands
Belgium
South Africa
Norway
Czechoslovakia
Ethiopia
Brazil
Denmark
Luxembourg
Cuba
Mexico

Client states and colonies:
India
Philippines
Mongolia

WW 2 Germany only had 70 Million Population while only the soviet Union alone had 220 Million Population.

Also when i had writen These post here:
jump backJump back to quoted post13 Aug 2014, 17:28 PMAffe

CoH I also had Little german campaigns like the Tiger-ace or the Falaise-pocket Mission where your Goal is to hold on until your man are saved from the frontlines.

Germans lost the war but have won many Little battles even in 1944-1945.German Army started many succesfull operations to save encircled armys or evacuate civillians.

And you talking like the german army were a weak army in the last years of the war and getting steamrolled by the allies. Of course they lost but they inflicted mostly higher looses to the USA and Soviets then they were getting. Even if they were outnumbered on all fronts.

Western Front:

Battle of Monte Cassino(1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Monte_Cassino
German losses: 20000
Allied losses: 55000

Operation Shingle(1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Shingle
German losses: 40000
Allied losses: 43000

Battle of Hürtgen Forest(1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_H%C3%BCrtgen_Forest
German losses: 28000
USA Losses: 33000

Battle of the Bulge(1944-1945):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Bulge
german losses: 67,200 – 100,000 and 600 tanks
USA Losses: 89,500 and 800 tanks

Operation Market Garden(1944):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Market_Garden
german losses: 3,300–13,300 and 30 tanks
Allied losses: 15,326–17,200 and 88 tanks

Operation Nordwind(1944):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Nordwind
German losses: 23000
USA losses: 29000

Operation Overlord(June 6– 25 August 1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Overlord
german losses: 209,875–450,000(mostly of them prisoners) +2,127 planes +2,200 tanks
allied losses: 226,386 +4,101 planes +4,000 tanks

Eastern Front:

Battle of Kursk:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kursk
german losses: 305565 and 760 tanks
soviet losses: 863303 and 6064 tanks

Battle of Narva(1944):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Narva_(1944)
german losses: 68,000 casualties
soviet losses: 480,000 casualties + 300 tanks

Battle of the Korsun–Cherkassy Pocket(1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korsun%E2%80%93Shevchenkovsky_Offensive
german losses: 30000-50000 and 156-249 tanks
soviet losses: 80188 and 728 tanks

Battle of Debrecen(1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Debrecen
german losses: 35,000 and 200 tanks
soviet losses: 117,360 and 500 tanks

Siege of Budapest(1944-1945)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Budapest
German losses: 99000–150000 dead, wounded or captured
Soviet losses: 320082 dead, wounded, missing or sick

Operation Bagration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bagration
german losses: reaching from 300,000-600,000 Overall Casualties(depending on different sources)
soviet losses: 770,888 Overall Casualties +2,957 tanks +822 aircraft

These should be enough examples for a german campign even if its only about "hold the line until civillians or army Units are evacuated". Or "Push Forward and save encircled army unit XY".



I never talked about that Germany could still win in 1944 or 45. I only talked about that the allies had numerical Advantages, total air control, artillery superiority, endlesss ressources while german army was low on everything but still inflict high losses to the allies on the eastern and western front. Thats all. I never talked about that they could beat the allies in the end.
15 Aug 2014, 19:07 PM
#63
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

It was an example. I didn´t write down the smallest axis nations and Italy, because they don´t really matter. Italy switched sides (and struggled on teh Balkan and in North Africa) and the other nations were simply too small. For the same reason I didn´t list Brazil, Greece etc. for the Allies.

Without the Allied bombings, the German industry would have produced more equipment to fight the Russians. Those bombings started way before 1943. It bound the forces of the Luftwaffe for home protection - which might have had air superiority versus the Russians otherwise.


Well, alied bombings were not exactly the main reason for the low german production, in 1944, german production peaked and in 1944 germany started producing more tanks and aircraft than ever.

Even tho in 1944 germanys indrustial bases were getting bombed alot.

15 Aug 2014, 19:29 PM
#64
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Aug 2014, 19:07 PMBurts


Well, alied bombings were not exactly the main reason for the low german production, in 1944, german production peaked and in 1944 germany started producing more tanks and aircraft than ever.

Even tho in 1944 germanys indrustial bases were getting bombed alot.



Thats is because germany held to a peacetime economy all the way to 1943. after that the hitler orderd speer to maximize german industrial output and every single asset was to be used for warfare. it came way to late however.

The numbers you see in 1944 and 45 could easily have been tripeld or quadrupled if those bombings didnt happen.
15 Aug 2014, 19:48 PM
#65
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702




Hmm. Well yes, germany was never known for very good economy management.


However, you can't really say that if those bombings never happened, germanys production would of had been quadrupled. It's hard to predict such things.

However, a quick search at wikipedia says that tank production fell by 35% due to allied bombings.
15 Aug 2014, 20:39 PM
#66
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665



... 1939-1942 the germans kicked everyones ass. allied fanboys will complain about anything...


And that's reflected in Theather of War. In a 1944 campaign, they can't do much else than hold the allies back until they lose.

Plus, most of the Soviet campaign was 1943 on, and pretty much all the multiplayer units reflect that with a couple of exceptions. A 1939-1942 campaign means that, what, your endgame units are un-upgraded P4s fighting T-34s? With wonderful Panzer 2s as mainline tanks? No MP44s, not sure if shrecks/fausts were used either? Bleh. Much of the German's flavor comes from their late war arsenal. An early campaign would pretty boring without all the silly wunderwaffen.
15 Aug 2014, 22:36 PM
#67
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

Dunno which of my History teacher told me that actually Mussolini was one of the main factor for the Eastern German campaing disaster. He decided unilaterally to attack Lybia and has been kicked severely by UK forces around so Hitler delayed his Barbarossa plan by 2 months in order to save his ass with the Afrika Korps.
If Hitler had attacked Russia in time, in the early spring instead of waiting 22 of June, he would probably had taken Stalingrad before Winter and gaz fields behind...

Not sure if it would have change a lot at the end, maybe yes... maybe not.
16 Aug 2014, 04:24 AM
#68
avatar of flyingtiger

Posts: 142

"If"? Seriously, why only the German can "if"?

How about if the Soviet army didn't go through the Great Purge and had the time to prepare their army and industry for the war instead of being suprised by a sneaky, undeclared attack?




WW 2 Germany only had 70 Million Population while only the soviet Union alone had 220 Million Population.

They fought a stronger opponent and lost, a pretty common thing if you ask me.




Western Front:

Battle of Monte Cassino(1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Monte_Cassino
German losses: 20000
Allied losses: 55000

Operation Shingle(1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Shingle
German losses: 40000
Allied losses: 43000

Battle of Hürtgen Forest(1944)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_H%C3%BCrtgen_Forest
German losses: 28000
USA Losses: 33000
...

Then do you know why they had to press their attack knowing that they have to suffer high losses? Because Hitler is not a man of honor, many more civilians would be killed if they didn't. While the Nazis didn't have to worry about that at all.

If the Allied didn't concern about civilian's lives, they would have all the time to bomb and arty the German defense to ashed before every attack.
16 Aug 2014, 04:29 AM
#69
avatar of Affe

Posts: 578



If the Allied didn't concern about civilian's lives, they would have all the time to bomb and arty the German defense to ashed before every attack.


we have seen how well that worked out in WW I..........Years Long arty duels........

And also the allies bombed civilians directly day and night.........All sides did that.
16 Aug 2014, 06:58 AM
#70
avatar of flyingtiger

Posts: 142

Just how old are you Affe?

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Aug 2014, 04:29 AMAffe


we have seen how well that worked out in WW I..........Years Long arty duels........

It worked much better in WW II with more modern fighters, bombers and reconnassance planes. Not only that the Allied would have more time to prepare. Axis side simply can't win a prolong war: the more they wait, the more their enemies become stronger.

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Aug 2014, 04:29 AMAffe

And also the allies bombed civilians directly day and night.........All sides did that.

They had no choice, and they weren't the ones who started the war.

The Axis could have chosen to not go to war (or stop it) and cause misery for their own people and others, but no they chose war. That's the least price they have to pay.
16 Aug 2014, 17:58 PM
#71
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Aug 2014, 19:48 PMBurts



Hmm. Well yes, germany was never known for very good economy management.


However, you can't really say that if those bombings never happened, germanys production would of had been quadrupled. It's hard to predict such things.

However, a quick search at wikipedia says that tank production fell by 35% due to allied bombings.


What you are saying is correct but it doesnt take in account of the german industrial assets already destroyed before Germany switched to wartime economics. According to Speer nearly 80% of all germany's industrial assets where wiped out by 1944. the majority of these assets never ever produced anything related to the war but they could have if they where not destroyed.

Your first statement is a bit weird because germany is the beating industrial and economic heart of Europe. it is now and back then.
16 Aug 2014, 18:02 PM
#72
avatar of Jaigen

Posts: 1130


They had no choice, and they weren't the ones who started the war.

The Axis could have chosen to not go to war (or stop it) and cause misery for their own people and others, but no they chose war. That's the least price they have to pay.


Dont fucking underplay these actions. it had to be done but that doesnt mean it was the right to do. I was just a lesser evil vs the greater evil situation.
16 Aug 2014, 22:52 PM
#73
avatar of Orkfaeller

Posts: 99

They had no choice, and they weren't the ones who started the war.

Your enemy beeing the aggressor doesnt give you the excuse to get away with what ever you want.
You dont bomb half a million or so zivilians in self defense.

The Nazi (war)crimes are inexcuseable but "warcriming" someone back just takes away your moral highground you other whise had.
16 Aug 2014, 22:55 PM
#74
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

Im still waiting for Kursk...
16 Aug 2014, 23:00 PM
#75
avatar of BartonPL

Posts: 2807 | Subs: 6

it was so damn obvious that USA campaign will be in Ardennes (you just had to look at the rear echelon uniforms...)
16 Aug 2014, 23:28 PM
#76
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

it was so damn obvious that USA campaign will be in Ardennes (you just had to look at the rear echelon uniforms...)


90% of the WFA multiplayer maps take place in the Ardennes and both the OkW and USF are designed around the Battle of the Bulge.

17 Aug 2014, 13:12 PM
#77
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Aug 2014, 17:58 PMJaigen


What you are saying is correct but it doesnt take in account of the german industrial assets already destroyed before Germany switched to wartime economics. According to Speer nearly 80% of all germany's industrial assets where wiped out by 1944. the majority of these assets never ever produced anything related to the war but they could have if they where not destroyed.

Your first statement is a bit weird because germany is the beating industrial and economic heart of Europe. it is now and back then.



A 35% percent decrease in tank production means a 35% percent in tank production, nothing more.

Allied strategic bombing only really ramped up in 1943 and 1944, before then it was rather meagre.
So it only really got going after the most desicive battles - Moscow and Stalingrad, ended.

The most significant allied contribution to the war (aside from the landings in Normandy) was by far the lend lease act to the soviet union.

And yeah, sorry for that brainfart about "germany not being good at economy management" , no idea what happened to me there.
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

788 users are online: 788 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49106
Welcome our newest member, nohuvin
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM