Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 11:35:47 AM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
You are mixing your drinks. I was reacting to several broad generalisations, and in addition, I think we are all not clear what we are arguing about. What does this 'morale' thing in the game actually represent? Someone suggested proficiency, and that aligns with my view. It is not true morale, but rather an assembly of all training, national characteristics and (low level, NOT high level - that is accounted separately) leadership - squad, section, company, not div/corp/army. But it is also sub unit supply distribution effectiveness (i.e. given identical supply conditions at Army/Corp, do my squads get ammo, regular hot food, etc), medical facilities (are my squads confident that were they to be wounded they would be evacuated to the best of the army's ability and probably a whole host of other factors that influence how well a unit fights. Even stuff like 'is my loved one being bombed/starved/3000 plus miles away living in almost peacetime conditions?'

Now, all of the above is literally impossibly to quantify, so the game rating is IMHO, the factor that determines who will usually win, and how often, between 2 hypothetical identical combat effectiveness units, with equivalent supply at army/corp, terrain, weather/equipment etc etc, and can only be assessed subjectively as a whole, trying to exclude those factors covered elsewhere by other ratings.

Back to the debate, I cited the battles I did NOT because I rate them all British victories, far from it. But I used them to ask where the evidence was that the British Army performed in a league with 1940 French/Belgian/Dutch performance?

At Dunkirk the defence was tenacious in the most adverse of circumstances... 2 weeks of contiuous outflanked retreat, orders to destroy heavy kit, etc. Find me a better example of a fighting evacuation. It was NOT A VICTORY and I never said I thought it was. At best it was the mitigation of a disaster.

Arnhem - elite forces, as I said at the outset. Described by some German sources with experience of the eastern front as the equal to the most vicious built up area fighting of the war. How does a 'minor nation equivalent' performing army produce the best elite performance...? (and no 1 AB was NOT all Welsh and Scottish!:))

You missed the slam dunk argument for your case I would have thought.. Malaya and Singapore probably with a dose of the retreat through Burma... Wasn't this one of the best examples of 'poor morale'? Or was it an abberation by under trained and equipped second line troops used as a dumping ground for all misfits and failures from the active units, lead by a set of Donkeys, and starved of modern kit?

As for 'could the British army have marched to Stalingrad?' No, or course not. For too many reasons to name, but for instance, the field army in Europe being smaller than a German Army Group, probably being one of them. Is it due to this 'morale' factor. I suggest not.

And, whilst I was seriously tempted to leave this bit out... Kasserine was neatly glossed over as under German air superiority... a little bit glib for a performance well equal to 1940 France I would have thought. Indicating US should be equal in morale to France 1940? Actually I dont think so. A bit higher but with truly questionable training I think... Kasserine shows 2 things: how poor the initial performance of the US was, and how fast it improved afterwards!

< Message edited by HMSWarspite -- 3/26/2011 11:38:30 AM >


_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 31
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 2:02:02 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

...

US Army Artillery in WWII was second to none, and that's not just because my Gramps was a WWII Artilleryman.

The US Army had first-rate communications equipment and doctrine (easily the best), superior mobility for it's artillery, and more shells. The Artillery attracted many of the brightest officers (My Gramps was #2 in his ROTC class at Illinois), and the training was quite good. There was a strong Espirit d' Corps in the Artillery, as least from what I can tell.


You ought to read up about the British artillery. I think there is a efficient vs effective thing going on here. US art was undoubtably effective, and made up for a lot of the infantry issues cited earlier. I think the German art was efficient, but not always effective, usually by being too rigidly parcelled out, and (in terms of what was avialable to the average sub unit) too small calibre... although their late war learning from the Russians (Nebelwerfer etc) did make up for some of that.

The British system was (I think) the most efficient of all (i.e. the most 'applied nastiness per lb of available shell'), and effective. Its flexibility was second to none.

See the following for more detail, http://nigelef.tripod.com/maindoc.htm#FIRE%20PLANNING but for a flavour:

"In his book 'Gunners at War' Shelford Bidwell wrote as follows:

"According to Marshal Zhukov, it was only in 1945 that the Russians, who consider themselves the most accomplished of artillerymen, even thought of attempting to coordinate movement with fire: their techniques were roughly equivalent to the British methods of 1915-6. The American artillery was admirable, well-organized and with the best equipment on the whole of any; but it was slow, prone to indulge in 'artillery preparation' of the type the British gave up after the Somme and Third Ypres, and all decisions to engage even at battery level were referred back to command posts far in the rear and out of sight of the battle. The British system, so simple, so obvious, so flexible and which had taken so long to be accepted rested on (1) reserve of control at a high level, like the Americans; but (2) off-setting this with intimate trust and liaison at each level of command: no one was ever denied fire when he wanted it as a result of centralization; (3) concentration of fire; (4) giving the right to take decisions to the man at the front; (5) an obsession with speed in reply to calls for fire; and above all (6), on maintaining an elaborate system of radio communications linking every user, every agency, and every battery together.'"

quote:


The US Army is kind of a unique WWII animal in many ways

No debate there from me (and not meant in a bad way... kind of 'when it was good it was very, very good, but when it was bad it was horrid' kind of thing :)

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 32
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 3:34:01 PM   
Klydon


Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline
Artillery could be its own sub subject:

Russian artillery depended on mass, mass and more mass along with overwhelming amounts of ammunition that had to be built up. It was very inflexible however for the most part. Germans that were allowed to pull back (or did it anyway) used to evacuate their forward positions when they thought a barrage was coming, watch said barrage, then go back in. Germans that stayed through the barrage generally got pulverized.

US Artillery had excellent communications and ammo was available in plentiful supplies. One of its finest moments is considered the Battle of the Bulge where it was credited as one of the factors in slowing down the German attack, especially in the north.

German artillery was fairly efficient, but generally suffered from supply issues after the initial invasion of Russia. Hitler used to apply WW1 artillery concepts to the eastern front to help stop the Russian attacks (mass artillery barrages to stop the Russian attacks in their tracks) when the truth was the troops at the front did not have even close to the amount of shells to employ such tactics. Lack of overall artillery didn't help matters either, but when it was massed (as in the Crimea), it was very effective. 

Italian artillery was probably the best branch of their army as well, which isn't saying much, but it was respected by the English in the desert.

British artillery was highly respected by the Germans and as the war went along, was probably the best of any army across the board in terms of availability, ammo, etc (Warspite hit it best on "applied nastiness per lb of available shell). As the war went along, the British depended more and more on artillery to soften the enemy up to help reduce casualties when they did attack.

As far as Dunkirk goes, credit should also be given to the French forces in the area who also fought very hard to give time for the evacuation to be as successful as it was.

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 33
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 4:37:40 PM   
Montbrun


Posts: 1498
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: offline
I've been researching the ToEs for the Allied units in the West, 1943 to 1945.

Here’s a very brief summary of what I’m finding:

I'm not as concerned about Morale as I am about Experience. There were masses of inexperienced troops seeing combat for the first time in Italy as well as NWE. Experience for most units in NWE should initially be below-average, but rise rapidly. Also, during the Winter of 1944, the British ordered that all men with five or more years of service overseas, were to be returned to England, and assigned other duties. This stripped the 21st Army Group of many of it’s senior NCOs, and alot of the desert veterans. This would reduce WitW unit “Experience.”

Replacement problems for all of the Allied units were severe, excepting the Poles, who eventually set up a system for integrating ex-Heer personnel into their units, actually being able to expand their units in Italy.

In late-1944, the British and Canadians reduced their Rifle Battalions from four to three Rifle Companies, and converted two of their divisonal Antiaircraft and Antitank Regiments batteries (each) to Rifle Companies. These Reserve Rifle Companies were not just disbanded, and the troops sent to the Rifle Battalions as needed, but maintained intact. In the Royal Artillery, lineage lies at battery-level, so this arrangement would keep the battery itself intact.

In late 1944, to alleviate some of the manpower shortages, the British decided to "disband" two of the standing Infantry Divisions in NWE. The 59th Infantry Division was the junior formation in the 21st Army Group, and was “stood down” on 10/18/44, with the divisional HQ going into “suspended animation,” and it’s units being distributed as various GHQ units. The 50th Infantry Division was "stood down" on 12/16/44, and returned to England as a "Reserve Division." The British unit and replacement system was region-based. Recruitment for a specific unit could only take place in that region. The 50th was recruited from the northeast of the UK, and replacements were becoming scarce in this region. Most of the infantry of the 59th Infantry Division went to the general replacement pool, but the units and troops of the 50th Infantry Division, which was an experienced unit, were distributed more carefully. This division was “stood down” more because of catastophic losses, and the remote possibility of obtaining replacements, than to benefit the rest of the army by distributing it’s assets. Keep in mind that the expedient of “disbanding“ these two divisions was to keep from having to feed them with future replacements, rather than being able to distribute their existing personnel and assets to other divisions.

During 1945, several Royal Artillery AA Brigades serving in England were converted to Infantry for line of communications and garrison duties, in order to relieve “regular” units from these duties, and to occupy Germany. Again, these units were not just “disbanded” and sent to the general pool. The British Regimental Tradition system was a definate deterrent to aquiring replacements.

Once initial contact was made, British infantry-type units were reduced to the 50-65% of ToE range. Arms and equipment were not a problem. Because of the efficiency of the equipment-replacement system, there seemd to be an almost infinite supply of these items. The Armoured units had delivery units that maintained at least operational strength, even in combat, with tanks and crews ready to replace damaged or destroyed tanks, and wounded crew members, almost immediately. Infantry-type and artillery equipment was plentiful. The only issue was personnel. All of the “ground-pounder” types suffered from chronic personnel shortages, throughout the war.

US forces also suffered from chronic personnel shortages. The average Infantry Division rifle personnel strength was about two-thirds of ToE. This persisted until the end of the war in Europe. As an example, in October, 1944, the 3rd Army was short the equivalent of 55 Rifle Companies in combat personnel. The US started to disband superfluous AA units to provide rifle company replacements, with very mixed results. The replacements were only given scant rifleman training in-theater, and the results were heavy casualties among these replacements. There were not enough replacements passing through the training organization in the US to meet demand.

The other major shortage that occurred was fuel. By early September, 1944, the Allied armies in northwest Europe were, essentially, “dry.” There were several reasons for this – the lack of ports, damage to the ports that were captured, lack of transport, the inability to use rail, etc. Over 90% of fuel delivered to the continent was still coming over the Normandy beaches. This problem was not truly alleviated until several ports could be repaired, and a more organized system of delivery could be created. The period from June, 1944 to September, 1944 was termed the time of “Frantic Supply” by the US Logistics folks. The fuel shortage needs to be modelled in some way in WitW.

Artillery

In action reports after the war, the Germans considered the British to be superior to any other Western army in their employment of artillery. The British had perfected their system of use of artillery during the First World War. Also, British FOs were given much more lattitude in ordering fire missions than in other armies. These FOs were able to call in fire missions, including hundreds of tubes at once, from many diverse formations, including divisional artillery, and the AGRAs – all at once.

There was a temporary shortage of ammo in late 1944, and several US Artillery Battalions were equipped with captured German guns and ammo until this shortage was alleviated.

Brad


< Message edited by Brad Hunter -- 3/26/2011 4:38:47 PM >


_____________________________

WitE Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE Research Team
WitE2.0 Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE2.0 Research Team
WitW Alpha/Beta Tester
WitW Research Team
Piercing Fortress Europa Research Team
Desert War 1940-1942 Alpha/Beta Tester

(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 34
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 4:58:12 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter

...
The other major shortage that occurred was fuel. By early September, 1944, the Allied armies in northwest Europe were, essentially, “dry.” There were several reasons for this – the lack of ports, damage to the ports that were captured, lack of transport, the inability to use rail, etc. Over 90% of fuel delivered to the continent was still coming over the Normandy beaches. This problem was not truly alleviated until several ports could be repaired, and a more organized system of delivery could be created. The period from June, 1944 to September, 1944 was termed the time of “Frantic Supply” by the US Logistics folks. The fuel shortage needs to be modelled in some way in WitW.

[...



I agree with almost everything you write. However you have missed something. The fuel (and other supplies) shortage in Sept 1944 was not 'special'. The beach capacity was fixed, and no major port was both captured and functioning. Cherbourg was largely destroyed by the Germans, and Antwerp was captured largely intact, but the access to the sea was still controlled by Germany (one of the biggest blunders of the war btw - not clearing the Scheldt instead of doing Market Garden). The allies broke out from Normandy and got to more or less the German border in about a month. A distance of over 300 miles. The rail lines are not converted, and there is no effective supply source. The situation will model it self with any half decent supply rules. One reason for the huge 'debate' between Montgomery and Bradley was the lack of supply to enable two thrusts in mid sept/early Oct.

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to Montbrun)
Post #: 35
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 6:30:59 PM   
Montbrun


Posts: 1498
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter

...
The other major shortage that occurred was fuel. By early September, 1944, the Allied armies in northwest Europe were, essentially, “dry.” There were several reasons for this – the lack of ports, damage to the ports that were captured, lack of transport, the inability to use rail, etc. Over 90% of fuel delivered to the continent was still coming over the Normandy beaches. This problem was not truly alleviated until several ports could be repaired, and a more organized system of delivery could be created. The period from June, 1944 to September, 1944 was termed the time of “Frantic Supply” by the US Logistics folks. The fuel shortage needs to be modelled in some way in WitW.

[...



I agree with almost everything you write. However you have missed something. The fuel (and other supplies) shortage in Sept 1944 was not 'special'. The beach capacity was fixed, and no major port was both captured and functioning. Cherbourg was largely destroyed by the Germans, and Antwerp was captured largely intact, but the access to the sea was still controlled by Germany (one of the biggest blunders of the war btw - not clearing the Scheldt instead of doing Market Garden). The allies broke out from Normandy and got to more or less the German border in about a month. A distance of over 300 miles. The rail lines are not converted, and there is no effective supply source. The situation will model it self with any half decent supply rules. One reason for the huge 'debate' between Montgomery and Bradley was the lack of supply to enable two thrusts in mid sept/early Oct.


I had been reading the British Official Histories, and these made many references to the US "Green Books."

Actually, the Cherbourg fuel docking and storage facilities were captured intact. The Allies were very surprised. The rest of the port facilities were a mess. They had the fuel facilities up-and-running in a matter of days. The holdup was the laying of pipelines to supply the trucks carrying the fuel to the front (in "Jerry Cans"). Also, a sufficient stockpile of fuel had not been created prior to the invasion.

See "Logistical Support of the Armies - Volume I - May 1941-September 1944," pp. 649-671 and pp. 674-679, and "The Quartermaster Corps: Operations in the War Against Germany," pp. 489-543 (the "Green Books").





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

WitE Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE Research Team
WitE2.0 Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE2.0 Research Team
WitW Alpha/Beta Tester
WitW Research Team
Piercing Fortress Europa Research Team
Desert War 1940-1942 Alpha/Beta Tester

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 36
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 7:21:01 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
Interesting read... but doesn't invalidate my basic point above...

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to Montbrun)
Post #: 37
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 7:52:29 PM   
Montbrun


Posts: 1498
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Raleigh, NC, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

Interesting read... but doesn't invalidate my basic point above...


I wasn't trying to invalidate your point - we agree that the lack of fuel, for whatever reason, should be a limiting factor.

_____________________________

WitE Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE Research Team
WitE2.0 Alpha/Beta Tester
WitE2.0 Research Team
WitW Alpha/Beta Tester
WitW Research Team
Piercing Fortress Europa Research Team
Desert War 1940-1942 Alpha/Beta Tester

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 38
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 8:46:51 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
I won't chime in too much here being a Brit myself but what I would say on the various quoted battles above I don't think (other than Far East 1941/early 42 debacles) you could call any of the 'poor' performances of the British due to low morale. Maybe poor strategic planning, low experience, poor leadership etc but not low morale. The Brit's were and are one of the most stubborn resolute people as a whole so morale was not the problem in the majority of cases IMO.

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Montbrun)
Post #: 39
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 9:42:42 PM   
Helpless


Posts: 15793
Joined: 8/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Maybe poor strategic planning, low experience, poor leadership etc but not low morale


This is what morale is in WITE.

_____________________________

Pavel Zagzin
WITE/WITW/WITE-2 Development

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 40
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 9:43:33 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

I won't chime in too much here being a Brit myself but what I would say on the various quoted battles above I don't think (other than Far East 1941/early 42 debacles) you could call any of the 'poor' performances of the British due to low morale. Maybe poor strategic planning, low experience, poor leadership etc but not low morale. The Brit's were and are one of the most stubborn resolute people as a whole so morale was not the problem in the majority of cases IMO.


My point exactly. Trouble is, Brits have been the standard issue Hollywood baddy for some time now:)


_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 41
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 10:46:18 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
Lol Pav. If that's the case then why have individual exp levels of elements and leader skills....?

< Message edited by Speedy -- 3/26/2011 10:48:12 PM >


_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Helpless)
Post #: 42
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 11:00:01 PM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline
I think Pavel is referencing issues of doctrine which are a big part of what morale covers in WitE.

_____________________________

All understanding comes after the fact.
-- Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 43
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 11:10:12 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
Ah. Doctrine I can understand how that would factor in National Morale. I would still say British National morale should be higher than stated above. The battle examples above can be attributed to poor leadership, exp, strategy more so than doctrine IMO (except east Asia)

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 44
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/26/2011 11:53:19 PM   
Helpless


Posts: 15793
Joined: 8/27/2004
Status: offline
quote:

if that's the case then why have individual exp levels of elements and leader skills


We speak about the lower tactical levels (including doctrinal things), which are mostly represented by the unit's morale.

Edit: I'm not saying that is should be set to any particular value, I'm just saying that you are using wrong arguments to convince that it should be set higher.

< Message edited by Helpless -- 3/26/2011 11:57:52 PM >


_____________________________

Pavel Zagzin
WITE/WITW/WITE-2 Development

(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 45
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 1:31:58 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
Note that much of this volume and the subsequent volumes are available online here:

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-E-Logistics1/index.html

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-E-Logistics2/index.html

< Message edited by pompack -- 3/27/2011 1:33:52 AM >

(in reply to Montbrun)
Post #: 46
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 1:59:35 AM   
pompack


Posts: 2582
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: University Park, Texas
Status: offline
And for what it's worth, I have now found the book as a free download for Kindle (or any other reader)

http://www.archive.org/details/logisticalsuppor11rupp

http://www.archive.org/details/logisticalsuppor02rupp

< Message edited by pompack -- 3/27/2011 2:01:58 AM >

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 47
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 11:30:47 AM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
Ah... the WitP AE porn page:)

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to pompack)
Post #: 48
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 12:57:44 PM   
Smirfy

 

Posts: 1057
Joined: 7/16/2004
Status: offline


I think the thing to remember here is despite despite several disasters brought on by a whole host of differing reasons the British system did not collapse on the contary it improved as the war went on. An army that retreated across Belguim and left its equipment became an Army again, The Army that managed the longest retreat in British military history through Burma became an army again. An army that suffered a huge defeat in the desert became an army again. No Commisars, No Chain Dogs lynchings required the system worked in WWI it works today. People talk nonsense about Alemain, tell me when did these other super men breakthrough a front that could not be outflanked, that was mined and defended in depth. If it was so easy why did Tobruk not fall in 1941?

(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 49
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 2:30:47 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
Seconded. Also, while I do concur that anyone looks rather good against WW2 Italian troops (and I am NOT concluding anything about Italy or the Italian army due to this - when properly equipped and lead they fought as well as anybody), the doubters should read about the 1940 desert offensive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ww2peopleswar/timeline/factfiles/nonflash/a1126469.shtml

Look it up on a map... a truely major achievement in anyones book... Sidi Barrani to Benghazi is hundreds of miles, in desert conditions.

I am not trying to be nationalistic, rather to attempt to get some evidence into what became a rather judgemental (and cliched) discussion. BTW, for what it's worth, I pretty much agree with where we started (Q-Ball's first post on this thread...)

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to Smirfy)
Post #: 50
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 3:14:43 PM   
Farfarer61

 

Posts: 713
Joined: 7/21/2004
Status: offline
Canadian Army: Suffered 100 percent casualties from Juno beach to the Netherlands. Since not everyone who started was a casualty, you can imagine the casualty rate amongst replacements. Whittaker's books cover it nicely. Little known logistics facts like forward deploying one million units of blood (and fridge units) in support of the Normandy breakout.


(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 51
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 3:17:18 PM   
PeeDeeAitch


Posts: 1276
Joined: 1/1/2007
From: Laramie, Wyoming
Status: offline
I predict whatever the final decision there will be people who know the National Morale Rules determined is broken, unfair, or ruins the game.

_____________________________

"The torment of precautions often exceeds the dangers to be avoided. It is sometimes better to abandon one's self to destiny."

- Call me PDH

- WitE noob tester

(in reply to Farfarer61)
Post #: 52
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 6:08:35 PM   
Tarhunnas


Posts: 3152
Joined: 1/27/2011
From: Hex X37, Y15
Status: offline
Interesting discussion!

I would pitch in to say I think the Finns are somewhat overrated in the game. They were good and well motivated, no doubt about that, but they weren't all super troops comparable to other nations elites. 70 would be good enough I think.

As for the Greeks I think 50 is good. They need to be better than the Italians but sufficiently worse than the Germans to reflect the outcome of the balkan campaign.

(in reply to randallw)
Post #: 53
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 7:59:04 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

Seconded. Also, while I do concur that anyone looks rather good against WW2 Italian troops (and I am NOT concluding anything about Italy or the Italian army due to this - when properly equipped and lead they fought as well as anybody), the doubters should read about the 1940 desert offensive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ww2peopleswar/timeline/factfiles/nonflash/a1126469.shtml

Look it up on a map... a truely major achievement in anyones book... Sidi Barrani to Benghazi is hundreds of miles, in desert conditions.

I am not trying to be nationalistic, rather to attempt to get some evidence into what became a rather judgemental (and cliched) discussion. BTW, for what it's worth, I pretty much agree with where we started (Q-Ball's first post on this thread...)

Warspite1

+1. One of history's great what-if's. What would have happened if Churchill ignored Greece and made a concerted effort to kick the Italians back to Tripoli and out of Libya altogether. Could Britain have succeeded? What would the Italians have done in response? Interesting stuff....

Interesting topic for discussion Q-Ball. My conclusion is that every country would have a stock morale number, and this would go up or down depending on a number of factors. E.g. look at the generally great Aussie performance during the war, and then look at Malaya/Singapore. One size cannot fit all.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 54
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 8:43:17 PM   
HMSWarspite

 

Posts: 1401
Joined: 4/13/2002
From: Bristol, UK
Status: offline
And while we are discussing national characteristcs and performance: the last successful cavalry charge was by the Italians... http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3724/is_199810/ai_n8817479/?tag=content;col1

Stopping to put on white gloves is worth 10 pts of 'morale' any day :)

_____________________________

I have a cunning plan, My Lord

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 55
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 8:50:41 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HMSWarspite

And while we are discussing national characteristcs and performance: the last successful cavalry charge was by the Italians... http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3724/is_199810/ai_n8817479/?tag=content;col1

Stopping to put on white gloves is worth 10 pts of 'morale' any day :)

Warspite1



_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to HMSWarspite)
Post #: 56
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 8:54:22 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
Guys with nicks HMSWarspite and warspite1 discussing English morale, and - what a surprise - agreeing that it should be set pretty high: priceless

I am sorry, I know this post is not a meaningful contribution to the discussion, it was meant as comic break, please continue.

On topic, I still think that rating Brit morale higher than Soviet is just plain wrong.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 57
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 8:57:16 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Guys with nicks HMSWarspite and warspite1 discussing English morale, and - what a surprise - agreeing that it should be set pretty high: priceless

I am sorry, I know this post is not a meaningful contribution to the discussion, it was meant as comic break, please continue.

On topic, I still think that rating Brit morale higher than Soviet is just plain wrong.

Warspite1

Oleg - one slight problem with your comic break - it was not funny.....

Where in my post did I say English(?) Morale should be pretty high or indeed comment upon British morale?

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 58
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 9:12:13 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Oleg - one slight problem with your comic break - it was not funny.....


It was to me

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 59
RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies - 3/27/2011 9:33:46 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Oleg - one slight problem with your comic break - it was not funny.....


It was to me

Warspite1

Fair enough

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series >> RE: Sort of OT: National Morale of Western Allies Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.734