Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

The 5 Greatest Generals of World War 2

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Herbert West said:
So, it took the germans all of zero months to learn how to conduct a full-scale war against an entrenched and rather prepared enemy (Poland), while it took the americans almost a year to learn how to conduct a medium invasion against an already beaten and retreating enemy while having almost total local superiority in supplies, navy, and air? And still getting bloodied severely?
Click to expand...

Teh Reichweer from the very start was trained for future war. As a losing side they had good motivation, plus they had a good start base - note that Kaiser army in WWI most of the time was better than their enemies. Afaik Panzer division structure was worked out for the first time in late 20s while most countries att didn't know what to do with tanks
 
Herbert West said:
So, it took the germans all of zero months to learn how to conduct a full-scale war against an entrenched and rather prepared enemy (Poland), while it took the americans almost a year to learn how to conduct a medium invasion against an already beaten and retreating enemy while having almost total local superiority in supplies, navy, and air? And still getting bloodied severely?
Click to expand...

The Germans already had some experience from the spanish civil war.
 
5. Doolittle

-Doolittle raid and most importantly, destroying the Jagerwaffe. Also of note is he didnt send the 8th into combat in the last days of the war because he knew it was over (this was post a-bomb)

4. Rommel

-his innovative tactics in the battle of france and africa. he also knew the best course to defeat the normandy landings (or rather, the only possible one with slim chances)

3. Ike

-not for tactical brilliance but holding together and making an effective force out of the allies

2. Manstein

-manstein plan, kharkov, and the original plan for kursk

1. Model

-he saved the german line many times in the east and west. his ability to break up units and always find a reserve to plug the hole was masterful. perhaps biggest is saving the german line during bagaration and after that, during Failaise and the retreat west. his idea for a smaller offensive than wacht am rhein was also rather clever and may have worked



on Patton, Zhukov, MacArthur, and many other generals

While certainly good, I dont see how theyre great so to speak. successful perhaps, but what was so outstanding or genius about patton? he kept his advance going against a weaker force. MacArthurs defense of the phillipines was good and Zhukov's defense of Moscow was pretty good but he never did anything exceptional. Kursk was the Russians to win. stacking troops on a likely route of advance is the right move but it doesnt require a genius. Uranus was pretty good too. dont get me wrong, Zhukov was damn good but i dont see where he was exceptional. at khalkin gol he made all the right moves too but i also dont see anything exceptional. MacArthurs defense of the Philippines was good too but he botched his air force and the rest of his career (in ww2) was still unexceptional. Nimitz I would say was excpetional...just not top 5. probably 6. him and Doolittle one can argue about imo.
 
Last edited:
1) Heinz Guderian -- For his, at the time, rich new insights on armored warfare. For his part in Operation Barbarossa. For the fact that he poised to launch the final assault on Moscow when he was ordered to turn south towards Kiev, not his fault.
2) Erich von Manstein -- Invasion of France
3) George S. Patton -- A cult hero. But for me he still was one of the best the Allies had (the German commanders knew this). His image didn't work in his favor, but he was a strategic genius in my eyes. His part of turning the tide at the Battle of the Bulge shows this in my eyes. Had they listened to Patton instead of Montgomery, I believe the war would've ended much earlier than it did. Montgomery's Operation Market Garden was in my eyes a large failure, considering they did not take Arnhem and had massive losses. Patton wanted to push into Germany, but instead they went for Montgomery's bold plan.
4) Gerd von Rundstedt -- Not the one with the genius plans, but he was a very steady commander during the war and deserves far more credit than he got. Always did his best for the Wehrmacht, even though he was not a fan of Hitler. Only until D-Day did he get massive losses, and again, not his fault. The war was already lost for Germany by 1944 in my opinion.
5) Albert Kesselring -- Holding out far longer than expected against all odds in Italy against the Allies in 1945.

Honourable mention: Omar Bradley -- Without Bradley there would be no Patton the way he was and vice versa, I believe they complemented each other very well with their difference in personality and views.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
1. Rokossovski,
2. Guderian,
3. Mannstein,
4. Patton,
5. Malinovsky.

Zhukov should never have made onto such list. He was nothing more than Stalin's favorite and posterboy for victories won by others. At the same time his miserable failures (Rzhev!) were swept under the carpet,
 
Because people are more inclined to believe traditional hype than reality.
 
hyder said:
Indeed! Two of the most overrated generals of all time!
Click to expand...

Don't forget MacArthur. Thinking that battle hardened Australian troops were not of the same caliber of his American farm boys from Ohio. Also for having the single minded view the the Philippines had to be liberated at all costs.
 
Sarmatian said:
Finnish winter war generals weren't that great, they were simply good and the reason for their success was unpreparedness and bad command of Soviet troops.
Click to expand...

I'll have to agree with you. Generally (sic) speaking people tend to give too much credit for individuals, such as generals. The Soviet army performed very badly in the Winter War, but I would also give more credit for the Finnish army, its officers up to battalion commander level, NCO's and rank-and-file. For example the members of Suojeluskunta militias had in many cases had weekly exercises prior to war, with emphasis on skills of individual soldier, such as shooting.

Also, many relatively young officers had already had commanding experience during the 1918-1920 period.

Many of the Finnish generals had been educated either in Germany or in France during the interwar period. However, I don't think the Finnish military education system had enough tradition or skill to have them educated on the same level with greater powers.

All this meant the Finnish Army performed very well in combat, from individual soldier to battalion level. From that level upwards, I don't see that many spectacular achievements, especially in Winter War. But that is only my impression, I'm not an expert of any sorts.
 
Most everyone is forgetting IKE. Maybe not boots on the ground but some damn good decisions made. Also Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim of the Finnish army - man for man perhaps the most effective fighting force in the war.
 
PanzerMan7 said:
rommel actually had innovative tactics though. for example, the 88 screen and feigned retreat. on the division and corps level he was excellent
Click to expand...

that wasn't really rommels idea though. the 8,8-cm-FlaK was already used as anti tank weapon during the spanish civil war. rommel was not really involved in that...
the allies did see von Runstedt as the most dangerous general in the west. they didn't really care about rommel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back