-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
Hopefully the Italian contribution to the Static Divisions will be big fat guys who just couldn't resist another piece of gabagool.
Is this like on Ruse were you play as the Germans vs Russians and you get an AT unit equipped with Italian 90mm AT/AA guns?Italy will make a "cameo" in some german divisions ...
Beretta pistols and SMGs were also popular along with the Breda 20mm (sometimes mounted on SAS jeeps oh please) and the aforementioned 90mm gun
MadMat has alluded to the ability of being able to play as some sort of defense or garrison division made up of conscripted foreigners. Apparently there were also Italian soldiers who had been interned (remember, Italy surrendered to the Allies in '43) and chose to continue to serve as combat troops under German command. Having access to some sort of Italian infantry brigade, with Italian equipment, would be kinda cool.
There were sadly for the game no pure Italian units in the Normandy, but there were Italians serving in German units you would not expect and some of the German units had Italian soldiers in the Normandy (no i will not spoil, i dont want to have MM nailing my pelt on his door). I think in some decks will have "italian" units pop up with German equipment, which is very cool.
Germans had a lot of foreigners fighting, Ostlegionen, Osttruppen, foreigners in SS divisions, Italian granatieri and folgore iirc.
I've always found the radically different standards of italian equipment quality interesting. Stuff like the Beretta SMG and aforementioned 90mm AA gun, plus some of the later Italian fighter aircraft were well regarded while stuff like the Breda-SAFAT mg and their tanks seldom (if ever) have earned praise.
If Combat Mission showed me right, their infantry formations were very unwieldy and heavily lacking in proper communications so they couldn't orchestrate the levels of maneuver and tactical flexibility.
Italy was in over it's head, and even Mussolini knew it
If Combat Mission showed me right, their infantry formations were very unwieldy and heavily lacking in proper communications so they couldn't orchestrate the levels of maneuver and tactical flexibility.
Italy was in over it's head, and even Mussolini knew it
Don't forget Yang Kyoungjong.
If Eugen doesn't model him ingame... literally unplayable & pre-order cancelled.
If Eugen doesn't model him ingame... literally unplayable & pre-order cancelled.
Beretta 38 SMG was highly praised by the Germans, whom commandeered it en masse. Many German units, especially Fallschirmjäger, from Italy had brought some with them in Normandy.
Italy wasn't a world leader as tanks were concerned, far from it, but on the other hand had designed some of the best equipment in their category:
- Semovente assault guns were also commandeered by the Germans wherever they could put their hand on it, and they even restarted production for their own use. It was regarded as better than StuGs.
- Autoblinda 41 armored car, with a very effective 20mm, was an excellent reconnaissance vehicle, also pressed into German service.
- 90mm AA gun, quite similar to the German 88mm, it was marginally better in the AT role (although with a very poor HE round). In the desert, Italian 90mm accounted for a good part of the long range tank kills credited to the German 88mm. But either people on the receiving end didn't even know they were targeted by an Italian guns, or they rather claim to have been destroyed by mighty Germans than "minor" Italians, but they always credited their losses to German 88s.
Why I like Normandy, compared to later Western Front operations:
- Germans actually had a chance of total victory, driving the allies into the sea probably nulling the Western Front.
- Germans had a more equal footing in terms of quality men and equipment/fuel.
- Rommel was still kicking.
- No snow.
To be fair, Romania is actually a very viable nation in HoI 4. It has a generic focus tree but I've played it several times and it's a very enjoyable nation when you go communist and have the soviets at your back. Starts with a good military and a relatively decent industrial capacity, plus a weak neighbour to the south. I hope they get a specific focus tree in the future. Potentially in some other games too. But yes, I'd also like to see Romania represented properly in more games. I actually voted for Romania in the Red Dragon DLC poll, but alas, it came close to last. :c
This game isn't based around nations though? It's based around specific divisions that fought.
The Italians who'd be using Italian gear by this point in 1944 would be RSI troops and they'd be even less equipped than the pre-Armistice Italian forces. They certainly wouldn't be in Normandy but like in all the other occupied countries, the Germans pressganged a lot of them into various service.
Also by this point the Allied Italian CIL units were being re-equipped with British equipment.
For reference, the book you claim I haven't read is Zetterling's Normandy 1944. The problem again is that book doesn't look at SS units beyond the "Normandy" area in the year "1944". Zetterling emphasized that his conclusions were based only on studying Wermacht and SS units in France in 1944 (though I would note he ignored the fact that two of the three Panzer units given top marks by Panzertruppen for readiness were SS units - the 2nd and 12th - with Lehr being the only Heer unit given the same rating).
But hey, sure, pretend that it invalidates the fact that the SS Panzer Corps were among the first units to receive Tiger tanks in 1943 for the Third Kharkov offensive. I'm sure it would do wonders for your stay here especially considering you keep pretending that the fanfiction written by the SS in the 1960s to cover up their actual performance during the war is real. This isn't a forum populated by people stuck reading only Franz Kurowski fanfiction.
Right. And the poor performance at Arracourt and Dompaire was no coincidence. You're right whereas all the actual tank experts like Zaloga or Showalter are wrong for pointing out the Germans were foolish for using up their instructors in Normandy so that the next generation of Panertruppen were so incompetent they didn't even know basics like how to read a map.
Except that Arracourt is reflective of what happens when a Panzer Division fights a Us Armored Division in late 1944. The Panzers lose. Very badly. It's no coincidence that another Panzer Brigade was annihilated at Dompaire by a Free French battlegroup in the same time. Heck, some of the trophy Panthers displayed in French museums are from the Dompaire battle.
Indeed, since you're apparently carrying on pointless grudges from other forums, I would note that you still haven't provided the date or location of a Division or even regiment-sized engagement between German and American armor from August 1944 onwards where the Germans actually won. And if you were a real historian, you'd know that none actually exist because losing was all the Panzer troops were good at by this point except in Kurowski fanfiction.
As much as I am still waiting for a game other HoI that shines a spotlight on Nationalist China and/or the British Raj in the Asian theatre, I am not holding my breath. Good gameplay can make a Normandy game fun an infinite number of times, just like it just takes a different angle to make a movie around Normandy interesting regardless of how many others exist.
But seriously, Eugen, consider giving some Raj units a shoutout if you ever do something based in Italy or North Africa. Indian players would eat it up like.......I dunno......dal?
But seriously, Eugen, consider giving some Raj units a shoutout if you ever do something based in Italy or North Africa. Indian players would eat it up like.......I dunno......dal?
The first item had basically no chance of happening. A lot of German Internet Fanboys (and quite a few American and British "historians" more focused on creating drama than retelling things as they really happened) like to claim that the Allies could have been "driven back to the sea", but these people clearly never consulted the actual schedule of arrival of the various Panzer Divisions needed for such a large-scale counter-attack. And quite bluntly, the schedule was hopeless. Only 21st was in action on June 6th. 12th SS got into action about a day later. Everyone else arrived in the next week or two. The story that Hitler "wouldn't release the Panzers" was a fairy tale invented by the Panzer Generals. The reality is that they gravely underestimated the time needed to concentrate and transport their Panzer Divisions through the heavily-bombed French rail network not to mention the greater logistical difficulties of transporting the new 45 ton Panthers instead of the 30 ton Panzer IVs from earlier in the war.
Moreover, several counter-attacks were in fact attempted by the Panzertruppen. Virtually all of them were humiliating failures. 12th SS lost the better part of a company of Panthers in early June launching one such counterattack (which Kurt Meyer, the SS commander, leaves out of his white-washed post-war recollections). Panzer-Lehr tried one in early July and lost a quarter of their tanks. Normandy terrain was quite simply too suited for defense, which was the real reason why Allied progress was slow. But it's apparently less heroic to fight poorly equipped, ill-supplied Germans who were just maximizing the available defensive terrain; and we must instead pretend that the Germans were a fierce and superbly equipped enemy to boost the self-esteem of the average American and British history reader.
WG has reached end of its lifecycle epecially after 3 yeras of release Eugen decidet to release DLCs insted fixing issues which exist since release... Also without coding upgrade adding new content is pontiless to WG because they are not content. The last DLC was about only fantasy and sci-fi units for YUG and FIN.
No offense, I wish to se someting new. And this can be new. If you miss USSR is your problem... Just quick remined, check the nations in EE and check in RD. So you can bet in case game will be a success it will get USSR and another nations.
Firstly i would say you finally should spend the money and buy Zetterlings book instead of talking like you have read it but didnt. Would you look less hilarious.
Zetterling looks at ALL deliveries to ALL German Panzer Divisions of the Wehrmacht and ALL deliveries to ALL Panzer Divisions of the Waffen SS.
So your point is, as always, ridicoulus.
Secondly, Wehrmacht Tiger units started to send personel in spring 1942 with the first deliveries in August 42, the SS later and only in company size as you can for example read it up in Michael Woods Tigers of the Deathhead.
The reason is that the expansion of the SS to mechanized units was undertaken in mid to late 42, hence the withadrawl of the LAH, DR and TTKpf during the year 42 and to form SS mechanized korps. The Tiger as a breakthrough tank was a Korps asset in its own Btl sized formation. So the SS got their own Tigers to form up later its own Abteilungen who stayed low in numbers compared to the Wehrmacht who fielded the Abteilungen 501 to 511 so eleven in total while the Waffen SS fielded 3 and a fourth was planned and but never established, hence the Kompanie of the Totenkopf Division who would most likely would have made the core of the new unit just like it was with the other Tiger coys in the other Divisions. So it was about the so called calfing to create new units and not about a priority which is still nonsense. Period.
Thirdly, lets look at the Ardennes offensive, the XLVII Pz Korps compiled on the 28 December 44 a list of enemy combat vehicles captured or destroyed: 325 tanks and TDs ans 267 other armored vehicles, the to the LVIII. Panzerkorps with the 116. Pz Div as main force reported for the same time 147 tanks and 35 recon vehicles, three tanks immobilized and captured 4 US tanks. Grand total of 472 US Tanks and TD, this numbers according to Bergstrom after crosschecking with the US loss statistics lay in line with the losses the US first and third army. In the same time combat losses of the 2. Pz Div are between ten and fifteen tanks, Pz Lehr lost not more than 6 Panthers between 16 December 44 and 15 January 45, plus further 7 Pz IV. The two divisions lost together in the same time around 15 TDs and STuGs. Makes a combat ration between 8-10:1. Personel losses of the 2. Pz Div until 28 December from the start of the offensive 45 KIA, 37 MIA, 173 WIA. Pz Lehrs losses in the same time on the same level.
The overall losses of the US Army in the Ardennes are around 900 Sherman of all variants, 300 light tanks, 150 TDs, 450 armored cars and 150 SPGs, these numbers are remarkably close to the German kill claims of 1833 AFVs destroyed in combat.
For instance the 7th AD lost 103 Tanks between 17 and 30 December 44 alone. The 11th AD lost 86 Tanks fighting between late December 44 and early january 45. The 3rd AD lost in a month from 16 December to 16 January 45 163 Tanks.
German combat losses mount up in the Ardennes to 324 tanks plus 150 TDs and STuGs.
You want more examples?
2. PzDiv against Task Force Booth + Combat Command Reserve of the 9th AD:
2nd Tank bataillon lost 59 tanks, parts of 52nd Armored Infantry Bataillon lost 697 men, all Battailon leaders lost, 73 Half tracks lost, 35 Trucks and three M8 SPGs against neglible german personel losses and no AFV lost.
Battle of Clervaux maybe? 2. Pz. Divs spear tip attacked the 707th Tank Battailon plus remainders of the 110th RCT backed by the 630th Tank Destroyer Battalion.
Outcome: Germans lost neglible personel and 4 AFV, US losses 30 of 36 ATGs, B Coy 103rd Engineer Combat Battailon 100% losses, 109 Field Artillery Battailon ca 100 men, 110 Inf Reg losses are hard to establish but it lost in the opening days of the offensive a total of 2750 men. 707th Tank Battalion lost 45 tanks, 5 made it out all of them damaged.
More?
2. Pz Div. spear tip against Task Force Harper: Night Fight with Germans as attackers,
German losses: 2 AFV, US losses: 24 tanks knocked out, ten abandoned by the crews captured intact, B company of the 52nd Armored Infantry Battailon destroyed.
Maybe some data from Operation Nordwind in Alsace?
10. SS Pz Div. wiped out two US Battalions the 17. Armored Infantry and 43rd Tank Battalion, knocked out all tanks of the 23rd Tank Battalion and according to US sources captured 42 of the 12th AD tanks.
Maybe the Battle in the same area between 21. Pz Div + 25. Pz Gren against the 14th AD? 75 Tanks total write offs another 150 damaged but repairable, against at max 50 german losses.
Also funnily enough Zaloga never mentions that after Arracourt the depleted 11. Panzer Divison showed up and stoped the 4 AD dead in its tracks that even the soldiers of the 4 AD admitted that they fought against pros. The more you know, but keep on repeating stuff you dont check.
And im low to lazy to write about St. Vith and Manhay etc. etc. You can read it up yourself in Bergstroms Ardennes book.
Fact is the German Panzer units regulary outperformed the US ones by a far margin. Period.
So finaly all you bring is non-knowledge, memes and hot air. If you were an historian you would be a bad one since it seems you have seen some funny documentaries on YT and thats it. That all doesnt stop you from talking about books and history like you have a clue in the end you are only one who brings up fanfiction but we were there also in another forum. All in all still the same....but not unexpected.
Last edited:
You really like to lie about what books other people have actually read.
He makes the claim in Normandy 1944. Not "all" Panzer Divisions of all time. End of story.
What does this have to do with SS Panzer Corps having actual large-scale deployments of Tigers in 1943? You keep blabbing about unrelated details to cover up the fact that the SS had priority in 1943. I already know of the Tiger deployments in 1942 in the Eastern Front. They were embarrassing failures around Leningrad.
Again, you apparently don't understand that "offensives" consist of multiple battles and that attributing all Allied tank losses to Panzer action is faulty to begin with. By late 1944 it's already known that 30%+ of Allied tank losses were to Panzerfaust.
*yawn* Ok, so let's take your first example and look at it.
You just say "2nd Panzer Division wiped out Task Force Booth and 9th AD". German tanks awesome! RAR!
So when and where did this happen?
Oh? You don't know?
http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/da...ored-at-bastogne-and-the-battle-of-the-bulge/
Let's explain what really happened.
"Task Force Booth" - which you list separately from CCR of 9th AD - were in fact the same unit. Task Force Booth was a component of CCR 9th Armored Division. As noted in the dispositions here:
Note that put all of the stuff together, and CCR is no more than one battalion of armor and armored infantry.
They fought an entire Panzer Division around Dec 17-19. Three days against 4-1 odds!
And yet what did they accomplish?
Oh look, one German AFV destroyed (I thought they had zero losses?) and two forced to turn back!
Oh look, the Germans reporting timeline delays. More on this later.
But let's focus more on the action:
Hey, hey, I thought the Germans had no AFV losses. Now they've lost three Mark IVs for one destroyed Sherman and two damaged! Are the numerically superior Germans actually just trading tank-for-tank with the US Army?
More German tanks blowing up! I thought they were supposed to have a 180-1 kill ratio?
Now the Germans are mad and throw a second Panzer Division into the mix. Again, let's remember: One US armor battalion and another of armored infantry, now up against two German Panzer Divisions!
But really, was the tank fight that mattered?
Nope, because here's the secret:
The tank losses? The infantry losses? They were meaningless. The Germans in fact completely lost the entire Ardennes Offensive during the operations where they supposed "wiped out" a US tank battalion for "no losses" (which, as noted above, is a complete lie - there are at least five enemy tanks confirmed to have been knocked out, with many more not recorded in greater detail).
The reality is instead this:
We had two US battalions - a tank battalion and an armored infantry one - fighting a delaying action against two Panzer Divisions.
That means the Americans were outnumbered by a factor of something like 9-1, and yet successfully stopped the Germans from occupying Bastogne until the 101st arrived to secure the town! And in the meantime, they were in some instances trading tanks evenly with the Germans despite being outnumbered!
This again is a stark demonstration of why people who blindly quote loss figures (the German ones in this case being a complete lie - as attested by the US accounts) and pretend it's proof of German tank superiority are not experts on the subject in any way or form.
War is not a bloody spreadsheet. They are not just numbers on a loss tally.
Battles are a sequence of events. And more importantly, they are a sequence of events to achieve specific ends.
It didn't matter than those two battalions couldn't beat two Panzer Divisions. It didn't matter if the final "score" favored the Germans. Two battalions winning against two Divisions is an unrealistic expectation to begin with.
The best they could do therefore was to delay the Panzers and lay the groundwork for future victory.
In this case, we had an outnumbered US force trading tank for tank with the enemy and delayed them long enough to secure Bastogne - at the time the most important piece of real estate in the area because without it the Germans couldn't really supply further advances.
And as a result, 2nd Panzer Division ran out of gas before it reached its objectives. Task Force Peiper also ran out of gas and had to abandon its tanks:
http://www.battleofthebulgememories...-the-trap-that-doomed-kampfgruppe-peiper.html
In short, the Americans in fact won this engagement regardless of the score sheet - they achieved their objectives in the face of daunting odds and secured a bigger overall victory for the rest of the army. Meanwhile you're still trying to pretend 60 years later that the Germans won because they had a higher "score", when in reality the Germans were clearly flubbing their loss reports - they lost multiple tanks and didn't report them.
But yeah, sure, Panzers win because you and a bunch of long-dead Nazis just invent charts out of thin air and then try to posture your way to winning an argument. It's really sad.
Last edited:
- Status