-
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.
Even if they didn't, you honestly can't rely on the Soviets to give accurate numbers on casualties.
you really think? even when faced against an army 5 times larger than they are?
interesting you say that,
when it came to addressing the people of the soviet union regarding the casualties, the number was much smaller which was kind of surprising since every family had lost a member
but when it came to discussing compensation for the war, the soviet deaths sky-rocketed demanding higher compensation
so yeh, i take verything from the SU with a grain of salt
I'm focusing on the Soviet sources for the German casualties. It's slightly strange how the numbers make sense if you combine deaths and wounded.
I'm not so sure. I'd rather read the German reports since they very much more thorough in counting their casualties and Germans after 1945 have had no reason to fake their lists unlike USSR (and Russia).
Please. He said that only every other soviet soldier had a gun, and with only 3 bullets. With this argument, even with 10 times more troops, the soviet should have been smashed. Hence it was not true, as we almost all know it.
It was true (or close enough) in WWI, and it is probably true for local incidents in WWII when they were caught off guard. His point is real, just stretched a bit.
We were talking about ww2. The way it was written, it was way more than just stretched a bit.
I agree, it happened, and even lately during the war (When, for example, disciplinary units were sent like this to their death, deliberately). But doing a generalization of this is wrong.
Yeah, remember that the USSR was a global superpower due to their industry. Enemy at the Gates-style rationing really wasn't the norm in the Red Army.
Remember the PPSh-41, an extremely common Soviet submachinegun, had a 72-round magazine. You wouldn't be issuing those if you had a bullet shortage. Everything I've ever read about the Eastern Front has emphasised the sheer quantity of war materiel the Soviets had, from tanks, to planes, to guns. Why would that be any different for bullets?
Remember the PPSh-41, an extremely common Soviet submachinegun, had a 72-round magazine. You wouldn't be issuing those if you had a bullet shortage. Everything I've ever read about the Eastern Front has emphasised the sheer quantity of war materiel the Soviets had, from tanks, to planes, to guns. Why would that be any different for bullets?
The Theory Maker of this just played to much Call of Duty. After the shock teh Sovjets were equal in Quallity and double in Quantity.
As a knowledgeable and objective observer I can say that it seems to be working well, even with low org the Germans roll on and can't be stopped by SU until they mass huge armies against them. As to history and those arguments it's generally accepted that the Wehrmacht was probably the most professionally skilled army of modern times. SU soldiers were every bit as good as the Germans but not as well led and also led differently. The real key to understanding why the SU scored huge victories in set piece battles like Bagration and Uranus but generally had lower military efficiency than the Wehrmacht comes down to Junior Officer and even non com initiative - the Wehrmacht encouraged it and the Red Army punished it.
I just find it frustrating that it takes so long for my troops to reorganize in low infrastructure provinces. I find that I'm waiting nearly a month for my org to come back up in a 10% infra province
Maybe, but it makes African and Pacific warfare horribly slow, especially when units lose all their org after a simple sea transport.
Org loss indeed needs to be reduced when just walking around 10% infra provinces... org gain might be limited and org loss on bombardment or attack high, but not while walking. That's silly.
Moving a whole division through an area with almost no roads sounds exactly like something that should cause them to end up disorganized.