RE: German child soldiers

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: German child soldiers

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: German child soldiers

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 2:35:23 AM

mmarquo

Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline

"Several million germans were on the western front and close to another in the Med."

What is the logical connection? The Axis sealed it's death warrant at Kursk. After that, the front simply slowly melted away.

Marquo

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 61

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 2:48:53 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

June 41 Axis 3,767,000 (3,117,000 German.) 900,000 in West. Soviet 2,680,000 in theater 5,500,000 overall.

June 42 Axis 3,720,000 (2,690,000 German.) 80% in the East. Soviet 5,313,000.

July 43 Axis 3,993,000 (3,483,000 German.) 63% in the East. Soviet 6,724,000.

June 44 Axis 3.370,000 (2,520,000 German.) 62% in the East. Soviet 6,425,000

Jan 45 Axis 2,330,000 (2,230,000 German.) 60% in the East. Soviet 6,532,000

April 45 German 1,960,000. Soviet 6,410,000

Slaughterhouse: The Handbook of the Eastern Front.

Includes the following: Left to their own devices, the Soviets might of taken 12-18 months longer to defeat the Wehrmacht; the ultimate result would probably have been the same, except the Soviet soldiers could of waded at France's Atlantic beaches.

And what "Stalinist propaganda."? Since a majority of history of the Russian front was based on Western/German records.

Very good, but those numbers were troop totals for troop on the eastern front only and not for troops on the western and Med fronts.

Here is the data for troops strenghts on the eastern front only, PLUS the data is supported by both Russian and German sources. German total troop strenght on all fronts in 1939 was 4.5 million and by 1942 was at 8.4 million.

Table C. Comparative Strengths of Combat Forces, Eastern Front, 1941-1945
Date Soviet Correlation German German Allies
22 June 1941 2,680,000 (Western MDs); 5,500,000 (overall) 12,000,000 (mobilizable) 1:1.4 3,050,000 (eastern Europe) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 3,767,000
11 Sept. 1941 3,463,000 (front); 7,400,000 (overall) 1:1.16 3,315,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 4,022,000
1 Nov. 1941 2,200,000 (front) 1:1.9 2,800,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 3,517,000
1 Dec. 1941 4,197,000 (front) 1.23 : 1 2,700,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 140,000 Rumanians
Total 3,407,000
7 March 1942 4,663,697 (front); 397,978 (hospital); 9,597,802 (total) 1.34:1 2,500,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 450,000 Finns, 140,000 Rumanians, 300,000 Hungarians and Italians Total 3,470,000
5 May 1942 5,449,898 (front); 414,400 (hospital); 8,950,000 (total) 1.52:1 2,550,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 450,000 Finns, 500,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,580,000
7 June 1942 5,313,000 (front); 383,000 (hospital); 9,350,000 (total) 1.42:1 2,600,000 (Eastern Front) 90,000 (northern Norway) 430,000 Finns, 600,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,720,000
5 July 1942 5,647,000 (front); 298,480 (hospital); 9,205,000 (total) 1.50:1 2,600,000 (Eastern Front) 90,000 (northern Norway) 430,000 Finns, 620,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,740,000
6 Aug. 1942 5,772,000 (front); 301,960 (hospital); 9,332,000 (total) 1.58:1 2,500,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 650,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,650,000
7 Oct. 1942 5,912,000 (front); 476,670 (hospital); 9,254,000 (total) 1.62:1
2,490,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 648,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,638,000
1 Nov. 1942 6,124,000 (front); 9, 300, 000 (est total) 1.74 : 1 2,400,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 600,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,500,000
2 Feb. 1943 6,101,000 (front); 659,000 (hospital); 9,455,000 (total) 2.03 : 1 2,200,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 300,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,000,000
3 April 1943 5,792,000 (front); 674,000 (hospital); 9,486,000 (total) 1.68:1 2,732,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 200,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,432,000
9 July 1943 (20 July 1943 for the Germans, but probably pre-Kursk strength) 6,724,000 (front); 446,445 (hospital); 10,300,000 (total) 1.71 : 1 3,403,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,933,000
27 July 1943 6,903,000 (front); 354,500 (hospital); 10,547,000 (total) 1.86:1 3,064,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,694,000
14 Oct. 1943 6,600,000 (est-front); 10,200,000 (est total); (6,165,000 on 1 Jan. 1944) 2:15:1 2,498,000 (Eastern Front) 70,000 (northern Norway) 350,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians
Total 3,068,000

12 March 1944 (1 April 1944 for the Germans)
6,394,000 (front); 727,000 (hospital); 9,980,000 (total) 2.20 : 1 2,336,000 (Eastern Front) 70,000 (northern Norway) 300,000 Finns, 198,000 Rumanian and Hungarians
Total 2,904,000
1 May 1944
6,425,000 (23 June) 1.91 : 1 2,460,000 (Eastern Front) 60,000 (northern Norway) 300,000 Finns, 550,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,370,000
1 July 1944 6,800,000 (est-front) 2.17:1 1,996,000 (Eastern Front) 60,000 (northern Norway) 200,000 Finns, 774,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3, 130,000
1 Sept. 1944 6,600,000 (est-front) 2.64 : 1 2,042,000 (Eastern Front) 50,000 (northern Norway) 180,000 Finns, 271,000 Hungarians
Total 2,542,000
1 Oct. 1944 6,600,000 (est-front) 3.22 : 1 1,790,138 320,000 Hungarians Total 2, 110,000
1 Nov. 1944 6,500,000 (est-front) 3.02 : 1 2,030,000 190,000 Hungarians Total 2,220,000
1 Jan. 1945 6,532,000 2.96 : 1 2,230,000 100,000 Hungarians Total 2,330,000
1 March 1945 6,332,000 3.22 : 1 2,000,000 100,000 Hungarians Total 2,100,000
1 April 1945 6,410,000 3.50 : 1 1,960,000 Total 1,960,000
8 May 1945 5,700,000 4.10:1 1,510,000 Total 1,510,000
German Sources:
Earl F. Ziemke, From Stalingrad to Berlin: The German Defeat in the East (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Army Center of Military History, 1968), 9, 18-19,144, 412-413, 457, 498.
Fremde Heere Ost comparative strength reports for 1.4. 43; 20. 7.43; 14. 10.43; 1.5. 44; 1.6.44; 1. 8.44; 1.9.44; andl. 11.44.
Soviet Sources:
G. F. Krivosheev, Grif sekretnosti sniat: Poteri vooruzhennykh sil SSSR v voinakh, boevykh deistviiahk, i voennykh konfliktakh [Losses of the armed forces of the USSR in wars, combat actions, and military conflicts] (Moscow: Voenizdat, 1993), 152-153.
Voennoe iskusstva vo vtoroi mirovoi voine (Moscow: Voenizdat, 1973), 171. Textbook, for internal use only by the Voroshilov Academy of the General Staff. Soviet strength data is accurate, but German strength is grossly inflated.
TsPA UML (Central Party Archives of the Institute of Marxism and Leninism), which include:
State Committee of Defense (GKO) Decree of 11. 9. 41 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 9).
GKO Decree of 7. 3. 42 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 23,1. 127-129).
GKO Decree of 5. 5. 42 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 33,1. 48-50).
GKO Decree of 7. 6. 42 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 39,1. 74-78, 170).
GKO Decree of 5. 7. 42 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 41,1. 163-165).
GKO Decree of 6. 8. 42 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 50,1. 71-74).
GKO Decree of 7. 10. 42 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 61,1. 88-91).
GKO Decree of 2. 2. 43 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 85,1. 95-95).
GKO Decree of 3. 4.43(f. 644, op. 1, d. 100,1. 117-118).
GKO Decree of 9. 6. 43 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 125,1. 35-36).
GKO Decree of 27. 7. 43 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 138,1. 205-206, 208).
GKO Decree of 12. 3. 44 (f. 644, op. 1, d. 218,1. 1, 49,101-104).

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Aurelian)

Post #: 62

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 2:58:18 AM

mmarquo

Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline

Your numbers are irrelevant except as a warning to gamers --> Hegel: those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 63

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 3:02:00 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Again based 100% on fact.

The German army in 1939 was 4.5 million men and in 1942 June 1942 numbered 8.4 million men, bigger then the Russian army (5.3 million) by 3 million men.

Hitler only had about 3 million men on the eastern front.

So taking into account:

Russian Population 170 million
German Population 80 million

1942 combat ratio 6 to 1 by many sources, but even using amatteucci source which was the Stalin myth being passed of as fact the combat ratio was 3.4 to 1. Once the wall came down these low ball numbers have been proven wrong.

German army 8.4 million
Russian army 5.4 million

Still using amatteucci numbers Germany was winning the war of atrition.

1+1=2

There was no way possible Russia could have taken on Germany solo, based 100% on facts.

The German army was killing at a min 3 Russians for every 1 German and had more men in the army.

Germany was bleeding Russia white thats why Stalin put out feeler for a peace deal.

Old Stalin myths are myth.

The facts are the facts.

Pelton

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 64

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 3:05:13 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

Table A. Red Army Personnel Losses, 22 June 1941-9 May 1945
RED ARMY PERSONNEL LOSSES
Period Average Strength (monthly) Killed or Missing Wounded and Sick Total
1941, 3d Quarter 3,334,000 2,067,801 676,964 2,744,765
1941, 4th Quarter 2,818,500 926,002 637,327 1,563,329
Yearly Total 3,024,900 2,993,803 1,314,291 4,308,094
1942, 1st Quarter 4,186,000 619,167 1,172,274 1,791,441
1942, 2d Quarter 5,060,300 776,578 702,150 1,478,728
1942, 3d Quarter 5,664,600 1,141,991 1,276,810 2,418,801
1942, 4th Quarter 6,343,600 455,800 936,031 1,391,831
Yearly Total 5,313,600 2,993,536 4,087,265 7,080,801
1943, 1st Quarter 5,892,800 656,403 1,421,140 2,077,543
1943, 2d Quarter 6,459,800 125,172 471,724 596,896
1943, 3d Quarter 6,816,800 694,465 2,053,492 2,747,957
1943, 4th Quarter 6,387,200 501,087 1,560,164 2,061,251
Yearly Total 6,389,200 1,977,127 5,506,520 7,483,647
1944, 1st Quarter 6,268,600 470,392 1,565,431 2,035,823
1944, 2d Quarter 6,447,000 251,745 956,828 1,208,573
1944, 3d Quarter 6,714,300 430,432 1,541,965 1,972,397
1944, 4th Quarter 6,770,100 259,766 1,026,645 1,286,411
Yearly Total 6,550,000 1,412,335 5,090,869 6,503,204
1945, 1st Quarter 6,461,100 468,407 1,582,517 2,050,924
1945, 2d Quarter 6,135,300 163,226 609,231 772,457
Yearly Total 6,330,880 631,633 2,191,748 2,823,381
Wartime Totals 10,008,434 18,190,693 28,199,127

Total Armed Forces Losses by Category
Number (%)
Irrevocable
Killed in battle or died during evacuation 5,187,190 (17.5)
Died of wounds in hospital 1,100,327 (3.7)
Died of illness (nonbattle) 541,920 (1.8)
Missing in action or captured 4,455,620 (15.1)
Total 11,285,057 (38.1)

Sanitary
Wounded 15,205,592 (51.3)
Sick 3,047,675 (10.3)
Frostbitten 90,881 (0.3)
Total 18,344,148 (61.9)
Total armed forces losses 29,629,205
Note: Red Army personnel losses include those of the air force.

Table B. Soviet Wartime Strength and Losses
PERSONNEL LOSSES MATERIEL LOSSES
Operation Strength Killed or Missing Wounded Total Tanks and SP Guns Artillery Aircraft
First Period of War (22 June 41-8 Nov. 42)
Baltic Defense (22 June-7 Sept. 41) 498,000 75,202 13,284 88,486 2,523 3,561 990
Defense in Belorussia (22 June-7 Sept. 41) 627,300 341,073 76,717 417,790 4,799 9,427 1,777
Defense in Ukraine (22 June-6 July 41) 864,600 172,323 69,271 241,594 4,381 5,806 1,218
Northern Defense (29 June-10 Oct. 41) 358,390 67,265 68,448 135,713 546 540 64
Kiev Defense (7 July-26 Sept. 41) 627,000 616,304 84,240 700,544 411 28,419 343
Defense in Moldavia (1 July-26 July 41) 364,700 8,519 9,374 17,893
Leningrad Defense (10 July-30 Sept. 41) 517,000 214,078 130,848 344,926 1,492 9,885 1,702
Odessa Defense (5 Aug.-16 Oct. 41) 34,500 16,578 24,690 41,268
Battle of Smolensk (10 July-10 Sept. 41) 581,600 214,078 130,848 344,926 1,348 9,290 903
El'nia Offensive (30Aug.-8 Sept. 41) 103,200 10,701 21,152 31,853
Donbas-Rostov Defense (29 Sept.-16 Nov. 41) 541,600 143,313 17,263 160,576 101 3,646 240
Tikhvin Defense (16 Oct.-18 Nov. 41) 135,700 22,743 17,846 40,589
Crimean Defense (18 Oct.-16 Nov. 41) 235,600 48,438 15,422 63,860
Moscow Defense (30 Sept.-5 Nov. 41) 1,250,000 514,338 143,941 658,279 2,785 3,832 293
Tikhvin Offensive (10 Nov. -30 Dec. 41) 192,950 17,924 30,977 48,901 70 2,293 82
Rostov Offensive (17 Nov.-2 Dec. 41) 349,000 15,264 17,847 33,111 42 1,017 42
Sevastopol Defense (30 Oct. 41-4 July 42) 52,000 156,800 43,601 200,481
Moscow Offensive (5 Dec. 41-7 Jan. 42) 1,021,700 139,586 231,369 370,955 429 13,350 140
Kerch-Feodosiia Offensive (25 Dec. 41-2 Jan. 42) 82,500 32,453 9,482 41,935 35 133 39
Liuban' Offensive (7 Jan. -30 April 42) 325,700 95,064 213,303 308,367
Demiansk Offensive (7 Jan. -20 May 42) 105,700 88,908 156,603 245,511
Rolkhov Offensive (8 Jan. -20 April 42) 317,000 21,319 39,807 61,126
Rzhev-Viaz'ma Offensive (8 Jan.-20 April 42) 1,059,200 272,320 504,569 776,889 957 7,296 550
Toropets-Kholm Offensive (9 Jan. -6 Feb. 42) 122,100 10,400 18,810 29,210
Barvenkovo-Lozovaia Offensive (18 Jan. -31 Jan. 42) 204,000 11,095 29,786 40,881
Kerch Defense (8 May-19 May 42) 249,800 162,282 14,284 176,566
Khar'kov Offensive (12 May-29 May 42) 765,300 170,958 106,232 277,190
Liuban' Relief (13 May-10 July 42) 231,900 54,774 39,977 94,751
Voronezh-Vorosh Defense (28 June-24 July 42) 1,310,800 370,522 197,825 568,347 2,436 13,716 783
Stalingrad Defense (17 July-18 Nov. 42) 547,000 323,856 319,986 643,842 1,426 12,137 2,063
N. Cauc. Defense (25 July-31 Dec. 42) 603,200 192,791 181,120 373,911 990 5,049 644
Rzhev-Sychevka Offensive (30 July-23 Aug. 42) 345,100 51,482 142,201 193,683
Siniavinsk Offensive (19 Aug.-10 Oct. 42) 190,000 40,085 73,589 113,674
Second Period of War (19 Nov. 42-31 Dec. 43)
Stalingrad Offensive (19 Nov. 42-2 Feb. 43) 1,143,500 154,885 330,892 485,777 2,915 3,591 706
Rzhev-Sychevka Offensive (24 Nov.-16 Dec. 42) 1,400,000 260,000 500,000 760,000 1,847 1,100 120
Velikie Luki Offensive (24 Nov. 42-20 Jan. 43) 86,700 31,674 72,348 104,022
N. Cauc. Offensive (1 Jan. -4 Feb. 43) 1,145,300 69,627 84,912 154,539 220 895 236
Leningrad Offensive (Dec. 42-30 Jan. 43) 302,800 33,940 81,142 115,082 41 417 41
Voronezh-Khar'kov Offensive (13 Jan. -3 April 43) 502,400 55,475 98,086 53,561 1,023 2,106 307
Krasnodar Offensive (9 Feb. -24 May 43) 390,000 66,814 173,902 240,176
Demiansk Offensive (15 Feb.-28 Feb. 43) 327,600 10,016 23,647 33,663
Rzhev-Viaz'ma Offensive (Feb.-31 March 43) 876,000 38,862 9,715 138,577
Khar'kov Defensive (April-25 March 43) 345,900 45,219 41,250 86,569 322 3,185 110
Kursk Defensive (May-23 July 43) 1,272,700 70,330 107,517 177,847 1,614 3,929 459
Orel Offensive (12 July-18 Aug. 43) 1,287,600 112,529 317,361 429,890 2,586 892 1,104
Mga Offensive, Leningrad (22 July-22 Aug. 43) 253,300 20,890 59,047 79,937
Belgorod- Khar'kov Offensive (March-23 Aug. 43) 1,144,000 71,611 183,955 255,566 1,864 423 153
Smolensk Offensive (7 Aug. -2 Oct. 43) 1,252,600 107,645 343,821 451,466 863 243 303
Donbas Offensive (13 Aug.-22 Sept. 43) 1,011,900 66,166 207,356 273,522 886 814 327
Chernigov-Poltava Offensive (26 Aug. -30 Sept. 43) 1,581,300 102,957 324,995 427,952 1,140 916 269
Briansk Offensive (1 Sept.-3 Oct. 43) 530,000 13,033 43,624 56,657
Novorossiisk-Taman' Offensive (10 Sept.-9 Oct. 43) 317,400 14,564 50,946 65,510 111 70 240
Lower Dnepr Offensive (26 Sept.-20 Dec. 43) 1,506,400 173,201 581,191 754,392 2,639 3,125 430
Melitopol' Offensive (26 Sept.-5 Nov. 43) 555,300 42,760 155,989 198,749
Nevel'-Gorodok Offensive (6 Oct.-31 Dec. 43) 198,000 43,551 125,351 168,902
Zaporozhe Offensive 150,500 3,443 14,265 17,708
Kerch-Eltigen Offensive (31Oct.-11 Dec. 43) 150,000 6,985 20,412 27,397
Kiev Offensive (March-13 Nov. 43) 671,000 6,491 24,078 30,569 271 104 125
Gomel'-Rechitsa Offensive (10 Nov. -30 Nov. 43) 761,300 21,650 66,556 88,206
Kiev Defensive (13 Nov.-22 Dec. 43) 730,000 26,443 61,030 87,473
Third Period of War (1 Jan. 44-9 May 45)
Right Bank of Ukraine Offensive (24 Dec. 43-17 April 44) 2,406,100 270,198 839,330 1,109,528 4,666 7,532 676
Zhitomir-Berdichev Offensive (24 Dec. 43-14 Jan. 44) 831,000 23,163 76,855 100,018
Kalinkovichi-Mozyr' Offensive (8-30 Jan. 44) 232,600 12,350 43,807 56,157
Korsen'-Shevchenkovskii Offensive (24 Jan. -17 Feb. 44) 336,700 24,286 55,902 80,188
Rogachev-Zhlobin Offensive (21-26 Feb. 44) 232,000 7,164 24,113 31,277
Leningrad-Novgorod Offensive (14 Jan. -1 April 44) 822,100 76,686 237,267 313,953 462 1,832 260
Crimean Offensive (8 April-12 May 44) 462,400 17,754 67,065 84,819 171 521 179
Vyborg-Petrozavodsk Offensive (10 June - 9 Aug. 44) 451,500 23,674 72,701 96,375 294 489 311
Belorussian Offensive (23 June-29 Aug. 44) 2,441,600 180,040 590,848 770,888 2,957 2,447 822
Rezekne-Dvinsk Offensive (10-27 July 44) 391,200 12,880 45,115 57,995
Pskov-Ostrov Offensive (11-31 July 44) 258,400 7,633 25,951 33,584
L'vov-Sandomierz Offensive (13 July-29 Aug. 44) 1,002,200 65,001 224,295 289,296 1,269 1,832 289
Madona Offensive (1-28 Aug. 44) 390,000 14,669 50,737 65,406
Tartu Offensive (10 Aug.-6 Sept. 44) 272,800 16,292 55,514 71,806
Iassy-Kishinev Offensive (20-29 Aug. 44) 1,314,200 13,197 53,933 67,130 75 108 111
East Carpathian Offensive (8 Sept.-28 Oct. 44) 378,000 28,473 103,437 131,910 478 962 192
Baltic Offensive (14 Sept.-24 Nov. 44) 1,546,400 61,468 218,622 280,090 522 2,593 779
Belgrade Offensive (28 Sept.-20 Oct. 44) 300,000 4,350 14,488 12,740 53 184 66
Petsamo-Kirkenes Offensive (7-29 Oct. 44) 133,500 6,084 15,149 21,233 21 40 62
Debrecen Offensive (6-28 Oct. 44) 698,200 19,713 64,297 84,010
Goldap Offensive (16-30 Oct. 44) 377,300 16,819 62,708 79,527
Budapest Offensive (29 Oct. 44-13 Feb. 45) 719,500 80,026 240,056 320,082 1,766 4,127 293
Vistula-Oder Offensive (12 Jan. -3 Feb. 45) 2,203,600 43,476 150,715 194,191 1,267 374 343
West. Carpathian Offensive (12 Jan.-18 Feb. 45) 593,000 19,080 72,852 91,932 359 753 94
East Prussian Offensive (13 Jan.-25 April 45) 1,669,100 126,464 458,314 584,778 3,525 1,644 1,450
Lower Silesian Offensive (8-24 Feb. 45) 980,000 23,577 75,809 99,386
East Pomerania Offensive (10 Feb.-4 April 45) 996,100 55,315 179,045 234,360 1,027 1,005 1,073
Balaton Defensive (6-15 March 45) 465,000 8,492 24,407 32,899
Upper Silesian Offensive (15-31 March 45) 408,400 15,876 50,925 66,801
Morava-Ostrava Offensive (10 March-5 May 45) 317,300 23,964 88,657 112,621
Vienna Offensive (16 March-15 April 45) 745,600 41,359 136,386 177,745 603 764 614
Bratislava-Brno Offensive (25 March-5 May 45) 272,200 16,933 62,663 79,596
Berlin Offensive (16 April - 8 May45) 2,062,100 81,116 280,251 361,367 1,997 2,108 917
Prague Offensive (6-11 May 45) 2,028,100 11,997 40,501 52,498 373 1,006 80
Manchuria Offensive (9 Aug. - 2 Sept. 45) 1,685,500 12,103 24,550 36,653 78 232 62

German Sources:
Earl F. Ziemke, From Stalingrad to Berlin: The German Defeat in the East (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Army Center of Military History, 1968), 9, 18-19,144, 412-413, 457, 498.
Fremde Heere Ost comparative strength reports for 1.4. 43; 20. 7.43; 14. 10.43; 1.5. 44; 1.6.44; 1. 8.44; 1.9.44; andl. 11.44.
Soviet Sources:
G. F. Krivosheev, Grif sekretnosti sniat: Poteri vooruzhennykh sil SSSR v voinakh, boevykh deistviiahk, i voennykh konfliktakh [Losses of the armed forces of the USSR in wars, combat actions, and military conflicts] (Moscow: Voenizdat, 1993), 152-153.
Voennoe iskusstva vo vtoroi mirovoi voine (Moscow: Voenizdat, 1973), 171. Textbook, for internal use only by the Voroshilov Academy of the General Staff. Soviet strength data is accurate, but German strength is grossly inflated.
TsPA UML (Central Party Archives of the Institute of Marxism and Leninism), which include:

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 65

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 3:13:23 AM

Peltonx

Posts: 7250
Joined: 4/9/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

Your numbers are irrelevant except as a warning to gamers --> Hegel: those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Now you should be taking your own advise.

You are ignoring history.

You can't rewrite history the fact is:

That the Russian population was 170 million.
That the German population was 80 million.

This is historical fact.

Now you should be taking your own advise.

You are ignoring history.

You can't rewrite history the fact is:

That the German army had 8.4 million men in 1942, with only 3.3 million serving on the eastern front.
That the Russian army had 5.4 million men in 1942.

This is historical fact.

Now you should be taking your own advise.

You are ignoring history.

You can't rewrite history the fact is:

That the combat ratio was at a min 3.4 to 1, with most putting it above 4 to 1

This is historical fact.

I love history an never ignore it you should do the same.

It was not possible, based on history and very basic math that Russia could have gone 1v1 vs Germany

History can't be refuted only ignored.

Pelton

_____________________________

Beta Tester WitW & WitE

(in reply to mmarquo)

Post #: 66

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 3:16:57 AM

mmarquo

Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline

You are missing the point: Germany was fighting a multifront war - that's the way it was; the Soviets outnumbered the Axis on the Eastern Front. Stop trying to twist the facts to match your view that if the Axis player (you) does not win, then the game is broken.

Cheers,

Marquo

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 67

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 4:19:15 AM

randallw

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

If the Germans had over 5 million men in the army not serving in the East, in 1942, and under 3 1/2 million actually in the East, how was it that a huge majority of army divisions were in the East?

I can believe the whole armed forces had 8.4 million, but not the army alone. This insistence of the existence of a massive German force, mostly sitting around while their comrades are locked in a death struggle in 1942, is laughable.

And if they did exist, why were they not wiping out the Allied incursions into Europe, when they came, with this giant deadly German monster that spent 1942 getting ready?

(in reply to mmarquo)

Post #: 68

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 4:42:52 AM

mmarquo

Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline

Here are figures from Feldgrau:

Total in Wehrmacht Service, 6.01.39-5.31.40: 4,894,200+
Total in Wehrmacht Service, 6.01.40-5.31.41: 2,493,300+
Total in Wehrmacht Service, 6.01.41-5.31.42: 3,098,400+
Total in Wehrmacht Service, 6.01.42-5.31.43: 3,470,200+
Total in Wehrmacht Service, 6.01.43-5.31.44: 2,645,500+

Pelton's figures Includes Wehrmachgefolge.

Marquo

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 69

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 7:24:32 AM

barbarrossa

Posts: 359
Joined: 3/25/2004
From: Shangri-La
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

Operation Bagration was launched on June, 22 1944, just 16 days after D-Day. Army Group Centre was very virtually annhilated, with ~ 400,000 overall casualties. The Soviets did not need the West to win, and had essentially won before the Allied Armies landed in France.

The proAxis numbers and manipulations of data posted here are but vain, wistful attempts by a minority of disgruntled Axis players to deflect attention from poor playing and inability to as of yet find tactics/stratregies to win. This is the mark of a great game: the key to winning is not easily determined.The psychic energy spent bashing this game in frustration could be put to better use: solve the puzzle instead of arguing for changes so one can win without thinking anymore.

BTW, playing many games poorly is not as good as playing a few well.

Happy Holidays,

Marquo

Several million germans were on the western front and close to another in the Med.

quote:

Pelton --Several million germans were on the western front

I assume these "millions" were in France smashing the D-Day landings, er, no?....or the Anvil landings in the south of France or...body-surfing off Calais, or perhaps taking coffee in a Parisian bistro?

Laughable, truly laughable. There is always one of these guys in every wargame forum.

Stalinist propaganda....

_____________________________

"It take a brave soldier to be a coward in the Red Army" -- Uncle Joe

"Is it you or I that commands 9th Army, My Fuhrer?" -- Model

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 70

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 7:38:04 AM

alfonso

Posts: 470
Joined: 10/22/2001
From: Palma de Mallorca
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

Your numbers are irrelevant except as a warning to gamers --> Hegel: those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Now you should be taking your own advise.

You are ignoring history.

You can't rewrite history the fact is:

That the Russian population was 170 million.
That the German population was 80 million.

This is historical fact.

Now you should be taking your own advise.

You are ignoring history.

You can't rewrite history the fact is:

That the German army had 8.4 million men in 1942, with only 3.3 million serving on the eastern front.
That the Russian army had 5.4 million men in 1942.

This is historical fact.

Now you should be taking your own advise.

You are ignoring history.

You can't rewrite history the fact is:

That the combat ratio was at a min 3.4 to 1, with most putting it above 4 to 1

This is historical fact.

I love history an never ignore it you should do the same.

It was not possible, based on history and very basic math that Russia could have gone 1v1 vs Germany

History can't be refuted only ignored.

Pelton

Pelton, where can I find the figure of 8.4 millions in the German Army (Heer)? Are you including the mobilizable? (and then comparing them to Soviet FRONT strength?). Are you including the whole Wehrmacht (even the submarine tripulations?)

The numbers you cite make clear the difference between Soviet June 42 FRONT Strength (5.3 millions) and TOTAL Strength (9.35 millions)

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 71

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 8:18:27 AM

delatbabel

Posts: 1252
Joined: 7/30/2006
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

Gentlemen,
Please stop feeding the troll. I'm sure you all have better things to do with your time.
I'm sure that everyone is aware that Germany did not win World War II.

_____________________________

--
Del

(in reply to alfonso)

Post #: 72

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 8:45:35 AM

KenchiSulla

Posts: 2948
Joined: 10/22/2008
From: the Netherlands
Status: offline

They didn't ?

_____________________________

AKA Cannonfodder

"It happened, therefore it can happen again: this is the core of what we have to say. It can happen, and it can happen everywhere.�
� Primo Levi, writer, holocaust survivor

(in reply to delatbabel)

Post #: 73

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 9:55:24 AM

amatteucci

Posts: 389
Joined: 5/14/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
1942 combat ratio 6 to 1 by many sources, but even using amatteucci source which was the Stalin myth being passed of as fact the combat ratio was 3.4 to 1. Once the wall came down these low ball numbers have been proven wrong.

I'd like to point out that, as you know, both Krivosheev's and Overmans' works were published after the Wall came down. Of course they shouldn't be taken as the ultimate and undisputable truth regarding the topic at hand but they are the only recent comprehensive works about Soviet and German military losses in World War II, therefore they are the natural starting point for any serious discussion of the Soviet/German casualty ration on the Eastern Front.

Anyway, I didn't recalculate the loss rations including only deaths (and excluding WIAs, MIAs, POWs) to artificially lower the numbers, I did this because I think that focusing on the KIA rates is useful to investigate and, eventually, solve the problem at hand (if there's one).
The amounts of casualties that we players experience in the game are due to two causes: 1) the game engine routines, 2) our strategies. My undestanding is that KIAs are mainly due to #1 while MIA/POWs are mainly due to #2. Of course, it's pointless to expect that the game engine should compensate for the irrevocable losses that are absent because a player avoided to be pocketed at Kiev (or at Stalingrad).
So, I think it's better to focus mainly on the "Men Killed" figures on the casualty report and compare the ratio obtained to the historical ones. If we find a discrepancy then we can start to guess the causes (national morale levels, casualties due to retreats, combat model, etc.).

For what concernes the attrition war... yes, the Germans could have won an attrition war against the USSR, but they didn't. Why? Because they didn't set their strategy accordingly. In 1941 they tried to win by "instant collapse", they were not preparing for a long war of attrition. When they realized they failed their original goal, they didn't switch to the attritional mindset but tried again to kick down the door in 1942. Perhaps, after Stalingrad, German leaders realized that they should gear the nation for total war, but it was too late. Anyway, since the game doesn't allow players to control production nor replacement rates, all this discussion is moot (at least for WitE, maybe in a future War in Europe the Axis player could try to play the attrition card).

(in reply to KenchiSulla)

Post #: 74

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 10:37:23 AM

janh

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: amatteucci
I'd like to point out that, as you know, both Krivosheev's and Overmans' works were published after the Wall came down. Of course they shouldn't be taken as the ultimate and undisputable truth regarding the topic at hand but they are the only recent comprehensive works about Soviet and German military losses in World War II, therefore they are the natural starting point for any serious discussion of the Soviet/German casualty ration on the Eastern Front.

Anyway, I didn't recalculate the loss rations including only deaths (and excluding WIAs, MIAs, POWs) to artificially lower the numbers, I did this because I think that focusing on the KIA rates is useful to investigate and, eventually, solve the problem at hand (if there's one).
The amounts of casualties that we players experience in the game are due to two causes: 1) the game engine routines, 2) our strategies. My undestanding is that KIAs are mainly due to #1 while MIA/POWs are mainly due to #2. Of course, it's pointless to expect that the game engine should compensate for the irrevocable losses that are absent because a player avoided to be pocketed at Kiev (or at Stalingrad).
So, I think it's better to focus mainly on the "Men Killed" figures on the casualty report and compare the ratio obtained to the historical ones. If we find a discrepancy then we can start to guess the causes (national morale levels, casualties due to retreats, combat model, etc.).

For what concernes the attrition war... yes, the Germans could have won an attrition war against the USSR, but they didn't. Why? Because they didn't set their strategy accordingly. In 1941 they tried to win by "instant collapse", they were not preparing for a long war of attrition. When they realized they failed their original goal, they didn't switch to the attritional mindset but tried again to kick down the door in 1942. Perhaps, after Stalingrad, German leaders realized that they should gear the nation for total war, but it was too late. Anyway, since the game doesn't allow players to control production nor replacement rates, all this discussion is moot (at least for WitE, maybe in a future War in Europe the Axis player could try to play the attrition card).

No question about that... Wasn't Overman a co-editor on for the public release of one of the "Kriegstagebuch der Wehrmacht" books? I might mistake him, though. But again, caution is advised with pure numbers games: many German records after the war, those for example based on the Wehrmachtsberichte that are largely complete, or returns from the Wehrmacht medical services have been found after the war to be significantly too low.
The German "DRK Suchdienst", which supported by German Federal Institutions such as the "Deutsche Dienststelle" (formerly "Wehrmachtauskunftstelle", Army information office) keeps investigating the fate of German soldiers gone missing, or just dropped off the official records, has suggested the German casualties (KIA+MIA) might have been in excess of 5M, rather than the typical 3.7M to 4.1M you usually read about. So official German losses (likely also Soviet) might be considered an infinimum. I would guess part of the confusion on this numbers-game over the years might also stem from the way different offices tended to categorize losses, which could have led to double-counts.

For those amongst you who can read a little German, I'll post a link to short Wiki article, section "Verluste", which gives some more sources and links to records of the German Federal Statistical Institute that did some studies in the 50s or 60s to establish a better casualty estimate, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrmacht

(in reply to amatteucci)

Post #: 75

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 10:44:28 AM

janh

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton
Russian Population 170 million
German Population 80 million

German army 8.4 million
Russian army 5.4 million

So the Russians fought with one hand on their band and yet still handily whipped us? Especially given your idea that the Western Allies would not have contributed significantly in a myriad of ways to this defeat, from the bombing campaigns of industry, infrastructure and population that practically wiped out the experienced part of the Luftwaffe to tying down resources to build a U-Bootwaffe?

Suppose the numbers up there clearly show that Russia was winning the war so easily that you really don't need to talk about attrition.

I recall my Grandfather who served in the Wehrmacht talk about these times, and he would surely not agree with your thoughts. When childern and old men were drafted to man the Flak in the Reich to protect cities from the bomber swarms, form the Volkssturm or serve elsewhere to free young, still able-bodied men for front service in an Army that they had already realized had bitten more than it could chew...

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 76

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 11:37:02 AM

janh

Posts: 1216
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

June 41 Axis 3,767,000 (3,117,000 German.) 900,000 in West. Soviet 2,680,000 in theater 5,500,000 overall.
June 42 Axis 3,720,000 (2,690,000 German.) 80% in the East. Soviet 5,313,000.
July 43 Axis 3,993,000 (3,483,000 German.) 63% in the East. Soviet 6,724,000.
June 44 Axis 3.370,000 (2,520,000 German.) 62% in the East. Soviet 6,425,000
Jan 45 Axis 2,330,000 (2,230,000 German.) 60% in the East. Soviet 6,532,000
Apr 45 German 1,960,000. Soviet 6,410,000

Slaughterhouse: The Handbook of the Eastern Front.

Table C. Comparative Strengths of Combat Forces, Eastern Front, 1941-1945
Date Soviet Correlation German German Allies
22 June 1941 2,680,000 (Western MDs); 5,500,000 (overall) 12,000,000 (mobilizable) 1:1.4 3,050,000 (eastern Europe) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 3,767,000
11 Sept. 1941 3,463,000 (front); 7,400,000 (overall) 1:1.16 3,315,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 4,022,000
1 Nov. 1941 2,200,000 (front) 1:1.9 2,800,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 3,517,000
1 Dec. 1941 4,197,000 (front) 1.23 : 1 2,700,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 140,000 Rumanians
Total 3,407,000
7 March 1942 4,663,697 (front); 397,978 (hospital); 9,597,802 (total) 1.34:1 2,500,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 450,000 Finns, 140,000 Rumanians, 300,000 Hungarians and Italians Total 3,470,000
5 May 1942 5,449,898 (front); 414,400 (hospital); 8,950,000 (total) 1.52:1 2,550,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 450,000 Finns, 500,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,580,000
7 June 1942 5,313,000 (front); 383,000 (hospital); 9,350,000 (total) 1.42:1 2,600,000 (Eastern Front) 90,000 (northern Norway) 430,000 Finns, 600,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,720,000
5 July 1942 5,647,000 (front); 298,480 (hospital); 9,205,000 (total) 1.50:1 2,600,000 (Eastern Front) 90,000 (northern Norway) 430,000 Finns, 620,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,740,000
6 Aug. 1942 5,772,000 (front); 301,960 (hospital); 9,332,000 (total) 1.58:1 2,500,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 650,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,650,000
7 Oct. 1942 5,912,000 (front); 476,670 (hospital); 9,254,000 (total) 1.62:1
2,490,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 648,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,638,000
1 Nov. 1942 6,124,000 (front); 9, 300, 000 (est total) 1.74 : 1 2,400,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 600,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,500,000
2 Feb. 1943 6,101,000 (front); 659,000 (hospital); 9,455,000 (total) 2.03 : 1 2,200,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 300,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,000,000
3 April 1943 5,792,000 (front); 674,000 (hospital); 9,486,000 (total) 1.68:1 2,732,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 200,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,432,000
9 July 1943 (20 July 1943 for the Germans, but probably pre-Kursk strength) 6,724,000 (front); 446,445 (hospital); 10,300,000 (total) 1.71 : 1 3,403,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,933,000
27 July 1943 6,903,000 (front); 354,500 (hospital); 10,547,000 (total) 1.86:1 3,064,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,694,000
14 Oct. 1943 6,600,000 (est-front); 10,200,000 (est total); (6,165,000 on 1 Jan. 1944) 2:15:1 2,498,000 (Eastern Front) 70,000 (northern Norway) 350,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians
Total 3,068,000
...

Very interesting numbers, but this is a great example how important it is to have the details... I have seen these numbers before, but not in the context of fighting front-line troops:
While Aurelian's numbers seem to be Soviet and Wehrmacht/Axis minor ground force totals (air forces not included I believe), the "overall" category you keep citing does included several categories other than "Heer", which is what you should actually be comparing here if you want to make a point about ground combat casualty ratios.

Let's see whether we can get any smarter from the numbers you keep repeating. The overall numbers must be the ones that include also non-frontline but Wehrmacht branches. My numbers in parenthesis (are just ball-park numbers I found in a quick search for the development of these services; other people are surely more knowledgeable on accurate ones, but these will already give a very rough idea of the relative importance of the branches). Not sure the branches are complete, though:

frontline (combat elements = "Kampfverb�nde")
-Heer (2-3.5M)
-Luftwaffe (non-homeland defense) (0.7-1.5M)
-Marine (150k-250k)
-Waffen-SS (only combat formations) (20k to ~500k)

non-frontline elements:
-Heer: home, border and defense formations ("Grenz- und Festungstruppen") (~400-500k)
-Luftwaffe: incl. air and AAA for home defense ("Reichsverteidigung") (~200k to >400k)
Training and replacement units:
-Ersatzheer and Waffen-SS: (Ersatz und Ausbildungseinheiten) (peaked at >2M, dwindling towards the end)
-Luftwaffe (Ersatz und Ausbildungseinheiten) (grew to ~400k)
-Kriegsmarine (Ersatz und Ausbildungseinheiten) (to 600k)
-Waffen-SS (camp guards and such; grew to some 300k)
-Wehrmacht, all branches: Command and administration offices ("Kommando- und Verwaltungsbeh�rden") (no clue, but could have been in excess of 100k)
-Bautruppen/Reichsarbeitsdienst (RAD, which grew from some 350k in 39 to more than 500k members)

I am not sure about "Bautruppen", since they were formally part of Wehrmacht, but recruited from RAD. In game we have RAD elements serving and adding to the totals, though. I assume that they have to count in. That gives a maximum of 10.5M in my estimate, assuming all services peaked simultaneously. A few numbers must be off then, but the order is correct.
Aurelian's Soviet numbers surely would also swell if non-frontline services would be added. If one would spent the time looking at the original sources for Pelton's numbers and their methodology, you probably will find that they included a lot more than combat troops. Thus, the overall numbers are probably quite meaningless in this context as they include a lot of personnel other than those fit for frontline duty.

(in reply to Peltonx)

Post #: 77

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 2:55:01 PM

mmarquo

Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline

Correct; the discussion on Feldgrau.com clearly points out that the number is grossly inflated by those serving in the Wehrmachgefolge. Every soldier on the front requires a huge logistical structure; from the published figures it seems like 1:4 is a rough number.

Marquo

(in reply to janh)

Post #: 78

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 3:32:14 PM

Aurelian

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

Operation Bagration was launched on June, 22 1944, just 16 days after D-Day. Army Group Centre was very virtually annhilated, with ~ 400,000 overall casualties. The Soviets did not need the West to win, and had essentially won before the Allied Armies landed in France.

The proAxis numbers and manipulations of data posted here are but vain, wistful attempts by a minority of disgruntled Axis players to deflect attention from poor playing and inability to as of yet find tactics/stratregies to win. This is the mark of a great game: the key to winning is not easily determined.The psychic energy spent bashing this game in frustration could be put to better use: solve the puzzle instead of arguing for changes so one can win without thinking anymore.

BTW, playing many games poorly is not as good as playing a few well.

Happy Holidays,

Marquo

QFT

(in reply to mmarquo)

Post #: 79

RE: German child soldiers - 12/25/2011 3:34:52 PM

Aurelian

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: janh

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pelton

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

June 41 Axis 3,767,000 (3,117,000 German.) 900,000 in West. Soviet 2,680,000 in theater 5,500,000 overall.
June 42 Axis 3,720,000 (2,690,000 German.) 80% in the East. Soviet 5,313,000.
July 43 Axis 3,993,000 (3,483,000 German.) 63% in the East. Soviet 6,724,000.
June 44 Axis 3.370,000 (2,520,000 German.) 62% in the East. Soviet 6,425,000
Jan 45 Axis 2,330,000 (2,230,000 German.) 60% in the East. Soviet 6,532,000
Apr 45 German 1,960,000. Soviet 6,410,000

Slaughterhouse: The Handbook of the Eastern Front.

Table C. Comparative Strengths of Combat Forces, Eastern Front, 1941-1945
Date Soviet Correlation German German Allies
22 June 1941 2,680,000 (Western MDs); 5,500,000 (overall) 12,000,000 (mobilizable) 1:1.4 3,050,000 (eastern Europe) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 3,767,000
11 Sept. 1941 3,463,000 (front); 7,400,000 (overall) 1:1.16 3,315,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 4,022,000
1 Nov. 1941 2,200,000 (front) 1:1.9 2,800,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians
Total 3,517,000
1 Dec. 1941 4,197,000 (front) 1.23 : 1 2,700,000 (Eastern Front) 67,000 (northern Norway) 500,000 Finns, 140,000 Rumanians
Total 3,407,000
7 March 1942 4,663,697 (front); 397,978 (hospital); 9,597,802 (total) 1.34:1 2,500,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 450,000 Finns, 140,000 Rumanians, 300,000 Hungarians and Italians Total 3,470,000
5 May 1942 5,449,898 (front); 414,400 (hospital); 8,950,000 (total) 1.52:1 2,550,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 450,000 Finns, 500,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,580,000
7 June 1942 5,313,000 (front); 383,000 (hospital); 9,350,000 (total) 1.42:1 2,600,000 (Eastern Front) 90,000 (northern Norway) 430,000 Finns, 600,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,720,000
5 July 1942 5,647,000 (front); 298,480 (hospital); 9,205,000 (total) 1.50:1 2,600,000 (Eastern Front) 90,000 (northern Norway) 430,000 Finns, 620,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,740,000
6 Aug. 1942 5,772,000 (front); 301,960 (hospital); 9,332,000 (total) 1.58:1 2,500,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 650,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,650,000
7 Oct. 1942 5,912,000 (front); 476,670 (hospital); 9,254,000 (total) 1.62:1
2,490,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 648,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,638,000
1 Nov. 1942 6,124,000 (front); 9, 300, 000 (est total) 1.74 : 1 2,400,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 600,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,500,000
2 Feb. 1943 6,101,000 (front); 659,000 (hospital); 9,455,000 (total) 2.03 : 1 2,200,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 300,000 Rumanians, Hungarians, and Italians Total 3,000,000
3 April 1943 5,792,000 (front); 674,000 (hospital); 9,486,000 (total) 1.68:1 2,732,000 (Eastern Front) 100,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 200,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,432,000
9 July 1943 (20 July 1943 for the Germans, but probably pre-Kursk strength) 6,724,000 (front); 446,445 (hospital); 10,300,000 (total) 1.71 : 1 3,403,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,933,000
27 July 1943 6,903,000 (front); 354,500 (hospital); 10,547,000 (total) 1.86:1 3,064,000 (Eastern Front) 80,000 (northern Norway) 400,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians Total 3,694,000
14 Oct. 1943 6,600,000 (est-front); 10,200,000 (est total); (6,165,000 on 1 Jan. 1944) 2:15:1 2,498,000 (Eastern Front) 70,000 (northern Norway) 350,000 Finns, 150,000 Rumanians and Hungarians
Total 3,068,000
...

Very interesting numbers, but this is a great example how important it is to have the details... I have seen these numbers before, but not in the context of fighting front-line troops:
While Aurelian's numbers seem to be Soviet and Wehrmacht/Axis minor ground force totals (air forces not included I believe), the "overall" category you keep citing does included several categories other than "Heer", which is what you should actually be comparing here if you want to make a point about ground combat casualty ratios.

The numbers I presented are from one of his cited sources.

They're the total of the Wehrmacht forces plus allies.

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 12/25/2011 3:40:43 PM >

(in reply to janh)

Post #: 80

RE: German child soldiers - 12/26/2011 5:11:26 PM

Klydon

Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

Operation Bagration was launched on June, 22 1944, just 16 days after D-Day. Army Group Centre was very virtually annhilated, with ~ 400,000 overall casualties. The Soviets did not need the West to win, and had essentially won before the Allied Armies landed in France.

The proAxis numbers and manipulations of data posted here are but vain, wistful attempts by a minority of disgruntled Axis players to deflect attention from poor playing and inability to as of yet find tactics/stratregies to win. This is the mark of a great game: the key to winning is not easily determined.The psychic energy spent bashing this game in frustration could be put to better use: solve the puzzle instead of arguing for changes so one can win without thinking anymore.

BTW, playing many games poorly is not as good as playing a few well.

Happy Holidays,

Marquo

I had to laugh out loud at this series of statements because they are so wrong on so many levels.

Remember, I am not a fanboy of either side: I just want a game that works and has somewhat of a historical feel to it before you go launching about how I am a Axis fanboy.

First up, check the threads in the war room. Most of them revolve around German strategy. The fact is the Russian community here has done very little to work on their strats collectively but seem to call for nerfs on the Germans at every turn despite the huge advantages they have built into the game as it currently is (The Red Airforce able to smash the Luftwaffe in 1941 with ease, the ability to customize your army exactly the way you want it, almost absolutely no negatives to just running as far east as you want in 1941 and even in 1942, yet still be in the game, I could go on, but you get the point). The fact is the Russian players have had it far too easy and have not had to work at all in most of these games for a win, especially before 1.05.

The German side has solved several puzzles early in the game and it has led to repeated screams of nerfing from many in the Russian community. HQ Buildup being one example and the Lvov opening another. The HQ buildup as released was too strong and has been tweaked, but despite this, there still have been calls for further nerfing. I won't go into the screaming over the Lvov opening.

What puzzles have the Russians had to solve to make a game of it?

Next, a veiled shot at Pelton no doubt about playing many AAR's, yet I don't see anyone close to him in either experience or success as a Axis player that posts what he does and is active in the community. He was the only one winning as the Germans under 1.04 that was posting. There are some other excellent Axis players (Q-Ball, Jam, Emir, etc) but they either don't play the Axis full time or have not posted a ton. The other thing with Pelton is that while he speaks frankly and probably grates a lot of people the wrong way, he has also made suggestions to help the Russians to "get the game" right. Right away, he has said he thought the armaments multipler needed to be bumped a bit. He has made some other suggestions as well, but gets hammered as a Axis fanboy interested only in the "I win" button. Many of Pelton's suggestions fall in line with the Russian playtesters that have made suggestions to help the Germans in the past. All involved are interested in the betterment of the game, not the "one side wins" button.

Marquo, you and anyone else who think that the Western Allies did not have a heavy impact on the war in the east (either through lend lease or direct military action) are the ones living the pipe dream. The Russians would have starved in 1944/45 without help. As far as Stalingrad goes, more troops surrendered in Tunisa and while there were two German divisions in Sicily, there were more in mainland Italy. If you don't think the Allied Air campaign didn't have an effect on things, look up how much of Germany's resources were going to flak gun production by 1944.

I don't know if there are any resources on this or not, but many may wonder why if the Red army was so good and so huge by 1945 why they just didn't roll over the rest of Europe and be done with it. I know one reason was likely the Atom Bomb (although the bombs were dropped in August while the war was over in May). Oh, I know.. that biting the hand that is feeding you thing.

(in reply to mmarquo)

Post #: 81

RE: German child soldiers - 12/26/2011 6:09:00 PM

TulliusDetritus

Posts: 5521
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: The Zone�
Status: offline

I agree that there are two sides of the coin here. On one hand we have the ones who falsely minimized the Eastern Front (the Cold War thing aka propaganda) and then the ones who say the USSR would have defeated alone the Germans (in Berlin in may 1945: they would have gotten to the Reich perhaps in 1946, ok). Both are extremists, I guess.

Anyway, people always end up mentioning the famous American trucks. I am not an engineer but I would say that IF you can produce tanks (a sophisticated machine) you CAN produce trucks

In other words, the Soviets could have perfectly produced them. But if the Americans were sending them they could concentrate on tanks. A help? Yes, indeed. But don't make it sound as if these trucks are everything.

Because with that same logic the US could not have won the war er... without the many raw materiels, food, they were importing especially from the Western Hemisphere... ergo, the US would not have won WW2 without the help of let's say Peru

Not to mention the British without the many colonies.

If you are trying to say that NO country is self-sufficient, ok, big deal, as this is evident. And true, the two almost self-sufficient states in WW2 were the US and USSR. But they still needed *something from ABROAD*

So if you're going to mention the American help (and British too), mention as well the tiny irrelevant states (colonies or semi-colonies) which HELPED the western allies. The problem is... the latter is almost never mentioned... So again, we minimize the Eastern Front...

_____________________________

a nu cheeki breeki iv damke

(in reply to Klydon)

Post #: 82

RE: German child soldiers - 12/26/2011 8:34:01 PM

Krec

Posts: 548
Joined: 3/9/2001
From: SF Bay Area
Status: offline

http://rethinkinghistory.blogspot.com/2011/02/statistical-confusion-whose-troops.html

food for thought

Krec

_____________________________

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." Patton

(in reply to mmarquo)

Post #: 83

RE: German child soldiers - 12/26/2011 8:54:34 PM

Aurelian

Posts: 3916
Joined: 2/26/2007
Status: offline

Ahhhh, nvrm

< Message edited by Aurelian -- 12/26/2011 10:09:09 PM >

(in reply to Krec)

Post #: 84

RE: German child soldiers - 12/26/2011 11:12:21 PM

randallw

Posts: 2057
Joined: 9/2/2010
Status: offline

Behind a good man is always a good broad.

(in reply to Aurelian)

Post #: 85

RE: German child soldiers - 12/27/2011 4:51:30 AM

mmarquo

Posts: 1376
Joined: 9/26/2000
Status: offline

"The fact is the Russian players have had it far too easy and have not had to work at all in most of these games for a win, especially before 1.05"

Klydon,

This is as yet the great unknown; for all of the passionate discussions we have yet to see an AAR fought to the bitter end. Who knows whether the Soviets can get to Berlin in time to win, or not. BTW, if you want a challenge as the Soviet, play MichaelT. He has solved the Axis puzzle; I have no doubt that the game is more than winnable as the Axis. Currently I am playing TD as the Axis and every move I find my insights and abilities improve; there is a very steep learning curve for many like me. Others, albeit a blessed few, have seeminlg great insight and in their hands nothing is safe. Interestingly they do not post much.

Marquo

(in reply to randallw)

Post #: 86

RE: German child soldiers - 12/27/2011 7:12:53 AM

RCHarmon

Posts: 322
Joined: 1/19/2011
Status: offline

The Soviets won the war. ��

< Message edited by RCH -- 12/27/2011 6:28:24 PM >

(in reply to mmarquo)

Post #: 87

RE: German child soldiers - 12/27/2011 2:11:58 PM

Rasputitsa

Posts: 2903
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krec
http://rethinkinghistory.blogspot.com/2011/02/statistical-confusion-whose-troops.html

food for thought
Krec

You can prove anything with statistics, but there has to be a difference with 'months in combat' losing and 'months in combat' winning.

I am proud of my country's contribution to WW2, but US involvement was critical to winning, rather than just holding out, and I think that the same applies to the USSR (500,000 lend-lease trucks and jeeps mobilised the Red Army).

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 12/27/2011 8:17:38 PM >

_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

�A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything� - Napoleon

�Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Krec)

Post #: 88

RE: German child soldiers - 12/27/2011 3:12:36 PM

Klydon

Posts: 2251
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krec

http://rethinkinghistory.blogspot.com/2011/02/statistical-confusion-whose-troops.html

food for thought

Krec

Lovely, a Ausse bashing the US. Thanks bud. No one questions the hardship faced by the Commonwealth. They were in the war from the start and were the only ones to go the distance from start to finish. Obviously you are going to take your lumps over nearly 6 years of war.

I particuarly love the idea that the German army in the west had all this high tech equipment and was full of crack formations. Nothing could have been further from the truth with much of the troop strength in the west made up of men that were not suited for the rigors of the East. (stomach divisions, requiring special diets as one example). Some of the units in the west were non German troops equipped with captured French equipment and some Russian equipment. Ammunition was limited to captured stocks. Some of the panzer divisions used rebuilt/converted tanks from the French arsenal and while useful, were not going to get much in the way of material replacements and certainly could not compare to Panthers or even Mk IV's.

While the US Navy was better prepared for war with many ships on the slips when Pearl Harbor happen and while the USAAF also had some good designs (particularly bombers) on the boards and in early production, the US Army was nowhere close to being ready for a war. The largest tank turret mounted gun on a US tank was a 37MM. Many of the components were there for a good tank (suspension, good ideas on tank engines, etc) but the design didn't exist yet and production wasn't set up either. When compared to other countries, the US Army was a joke with even the smallest country having more troops under arms than the US had. (This was the same situation in WW1 when the US had the worlds 21st ranked army and the Germans were trying figure out why they were worried about the US declaring war over submarine warefare). All this took time to fix as far as US forces go.

In many of the Allied formations the author cites, Commonwealth included, the equipment they were using was made in the US. The Sherman equipped far more than the US Army simply because no one else could produce enough tanks to fill the need.

I also have to laugh at the authors comparison of independent UK tank brigades to other countries armored divisions. Umm, if I remember rightly a British tank brigade was roughly equivalent to a US/German regiment. In the US/German army, they generally used a regiment of armor along with a regiment of infantry and the rest of the supporting arms (artillery, AT, AA, etc) to form a armor/panzer division for much of the war. For the UK, they kepted their armored brigades as independent units in many cases and attached them to infantry divisions as needed. The armored brigade had no attached infantry/supporting units, so yeah, while the brigade had as many tanks as a US/German armored/panzer division, it had nothing else.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marquo

"The fact is the Russian players have had it far too easy and have not had to work at all in most of these games for a win, especially before 1.05"

Klydon,

This is as yet the great unknown; for all of the passionate discussions we have yet to see an AAR fought to the bitter end. Who knows whether the Soviets can get to Berlin in time to win, or not. BTW, if you want a challenge as the Soviet, play MichaelT. He has solved the Axis puzzle; I have no doubt that the game is more than winnable as the Axis. Currently I am playing TD as the Axis and every move I find my insights and abilities improve; there is a very steep learning curve for many like me. Others, albeit a blessed few, have seeminlg great insight and in their hands nothing is safe. Interestingly they do not post much.

Marquo

No game between players has been run to public conclusion for either side as far as I know simply because the outcome is already known to both parties and one side or the other doesn't care to waste the amount of time to confirm their feeling. To run one of these games to conclusion would require a ton of time investment; something players seem to be more willing to invest in a new game. It would take a close game where both sides feel they have a chance to "win" all the way through and that will be tough considering how little is known about 1944 at this point and for many Germans, they are not interested in playing a game to "win" by holding Berlin past a certain date. I don't like that myself, but I see too many games end after it becomes clear the Germans can't win outright. The other part of this mix is the steady stream of patches that fix this issue or change things to the point that players want to start over, etc.

I also did not say there are not good Russian players out there; in fact, there are several good/excellent Russians, but by and large, the community of players that make up the Russian side spend more time screaming for nerfs when the Germans come up with something instead of working on counter strategies.

(in reply to Krec)

Post #: 89

RE: German child soldiers - 12/27/2011 4:20:56 PM

Flaviusx