• 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.

Jove

Follower of Christ
4 Badges
Jun 9, 2003
1.522
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Rome Gold
  • Rome: Vae Victis
J.J.E. said:
I don't think so. Rommels logistical situations was hopeless and the Allies pretty much controlled the sea and air by that time. Also, Hitler had in fact given up on Africa and wanted to divert ressources to the Russian theater.
Yes it was hopeless, but that had a lot to do with a large allied formation behind Rommel. Without that wouldn't the supply situation change?

And if Hitler had given up on Africa, why did Germany ship in enough men to make up a whole other army in Tunisa?
 

Montemurro

Worker
15 Badges
Mar 23, 2003
1.221
67
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
Jove said:
Yes it was hopeless, but that had a lot to do with a large allied formation behind Rommel. Without that wouldn't the supply situation change?
Doubtful, the Regia Marina's fuel stock by late October 1942 was down to 16,000 tons, with a average monthly consumption of about 58,000 tons that year they were forced to cut down on convoy escorts, that coupled with Malta rebounding in late August (Not enough aircraft and aviation fuel to keep it 'neutralized'.) and an increasingly effective use of Ultra to hit the ships carrying fuel, made the logistical situation steadily worsening.

J.J.E. said:
Beating Rommel at El Alamein was quite an achievement, but he had the help from Rommel's bad supply status and the lousy Italians.
Ah, so only thing holding back the 230,000 Allied troops were 27,000 Germans? The 53,000 Italians had nothing to do with it? If we try to assume that only the Germans were doing anything worthwhile, then isn't it a rather paltry show by the Allies?
October 23-29 1942, 4,500 Italians were the only thing standing between the Allies and the Axis rear in the southern sector at El Alamein. Outnumbered 1 to 13 in men, 1 to 5 in artillery and 1 to 70 in tanks, they still held the Allies at bay for a week, until Rommel ordered them to retreat on November 2.
Even fervent anti-Italian historian Macgregor Knox acknowledges that the Ariete, Folgore and Giovani Fascisti divisions were equals to the Germans. And the Trieste and Littorio weren't far behind the Germans.
 

unmerged(272)

Second Lieutenant
Sep 9, 2000
177
0
go.to
Montgomery also made some terrible mistakes while helping to plan the disasterous Dieppe raid in 1942. he tried to distance himself from these after the war

He won El alamein and beat Rommel who was actually not much of a general. Rommel was more of a brigade commander than an army general.

But no offence but patton has to be one of the worst generals to grace this world. Arrogant and mostly wrong, he even beat up his own soldiers because they were scared.

Macarthur was a very good commander until he lost the plot and wanted to nuke the chinese in the Korean War.

I guess montgomery was the right man at the right time to get the job done.
 

Jove

Follower of Christ
4 Badges
Jun 9, 2003
1.522
0
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Rome Gold
  • Rome: Vae Victis
Captain Anson said:
But no offence but patton has to be one of the worst generals to grace this world. Arrogant and mostly wrong, he even beat up his own soldiers because they were scared.


Or on this?
 

unmerged(272)

Second Lieutenant
Sep 9, 2000
177
0
go.to
its a typical mistake that everyone feels Rommel was a great general. In fact he was often leading some bands of men way in front of his lines. So far in fact that he actually almost got captured on many occasions. He was average in his ablity to command a vast army.

I will elaborate on both subjects tomorrow after i get some sleep!

Till then.............
 
Dec 28, 2002
2.103
0
Visit site
Maybe he wasn't a great field marshal (doubtful) but he was a great division leader, there is no doubt. Look at his panzer division in France, see under: spectacular exploits.
 

Yakman

City of Washington, District of Columbia
26 Badges
Jan 5, 2004
6.315
14.183
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Deus Vult
  • For The Glory
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • 500k Club
madner said:
Maybe he wasn't a great field marshal (doubtful) but he was a great division leader, there is no doubt. Look at his panzer division in France, see under: spectacular exploits.

I agree. He was a master of the armored spear head--arguably, the master.
 
Jul 16, 2003
1.411
0
Visit site
Patton was terrible ? Patton was the most feared Anglo-American general. His relief of Bastogne was spectacular, his exploits in Siciliy were excelent. He was definatly a nut but he was a great army level commander.
 

Yakman

City of Washington, District of Columbia
26 Badges
Jan 5, 2004
6.315
14.183
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Stellaris: Ancient Relics
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Stellaris: Megacorp
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Stellaris: Synthetic Dawn
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Deus Vult
  • For The Glory
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • 500k Club
AlexanderG said:
Patton was terrible ? Patton was the most feared Anglo-American general. His relief of Bastogne was spectacular, his exploits in Siciliy were excelent. He was definatly a nut but he was a great army level commander.

He was also the subject of the best WW2 movie.
 

unmerged(8783)

Uncle Sam's Bitch Boy
Apr 18, 2002
195
0
www.crownandanchor.net
Monty is pretty over-rated.

The Duke of Wellington's shoe-shine boy would have won the
North African Campaign, comsidering Rommel was out of gas
and short on spare parts, and had lost air superiority by El Alamein.

On top of that, Monty and Patton playing games in Sicily allowed
67,000+ Germans to withdraw in good order to the mainland,
and lest we forget, Operation Market Garden was Monty's baby.

He missed his calling, he could have been an accountant, or a law clerk.

---Ank
 

unmerged(11486)

The Ancient Mariner
Oct 31, 2002
2.689
0
Visit site
I agree that he is often over-rated, but I also think there is quite a bit of under-rating going on here. Rommel defeated several Allied commanders, usually while being outnumbered and outgunned. The fact is, Monty succeeded there where no-one else had.

Don't get me wrong, I rate Patton much higher, but give Monty some credit.

Steele
 

King

Part Time Game Designer
11 Badges
Dec 7, 2001
12.504
30
47
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
  • Victoria 2 Beta
I think there were better British Generals out there. Auckenleck and Warvel are two names that spring to mind straight away. However Montey had one thing that those two names lack, the confidence of Churchill. Without support from the political leadership you cannot succeed. Montey excelled as a politcal general, he looked and acted the part and becuase of that the leaders and men trusted him. He also won wich in the end is the all you really want from a general. So Monty might not of been the greatest general of all time, but he was smart enough.
 

unmerged(2539)

Lord of the Links
Mar 31, 2001
2.985
9
Visit site
The purpose of war is to fulfill the wishes of the government, Monty took the surrender of nazi Germany in 45, what more do you want from a general than to achieve by force the political aim he was set.

Rommel looked better and did more with less and lost. Patton looked better did as much with more and won. Could Monty have looked better, sure, but he won and thats all you need to know.

HB
 

unmerged(5459)

Iron-Fisted People's Dictator
Aug 22, 2001
1.744
0
www.geocities.com
And of course, there's the debate over his sexuality... was his interest in younger man just signs of a man who liked good friendships, or something more...?
 
Jul 16, 2003
1.411
0
Visit site
The purpose of war is to fulfill the wishes of the government, Monty took the surrender of nazi Germany in 45, what more do you want from a general than to achieve by force the political aim he was set.
What an odd way of arguing that Monty was a good general. "Sure he fucked up alot, and sure tens of thousands of men died needlessly and sure he allowed vast numbers of Germans to escape encirclment to extend the war but hey he was still there at the end. That makes him great"
 

King

Part Time Game Designer
11 Badges
Dec 7, 2001
12.504
30
47
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
  • Victoria 2 Beta
AlexanderG said:
What an odd way of arguing that Monty was a good general. "Sure he fucked up alot, and sure tens of thousands of men died needlessly and sure he allowed vast numbers of Germans to escape encirclment to extend the war but hey he was still there at the end. That makes him great"

No I think you miss the point. Sucess and failure are defined by doing what you are asked to do, not what else you were asked to do. Monty was charged with winning the war against Germany and well the history books show that little contest was marked down as a home win. So all in all Monty did what he was asked to do and thus succeeded. To say that another General may have done the same thing in less time or with fewer casulties might be true, but that does not make Monty a bad General per say.
 

Aetius

Nitpicker
15 Badges
Jan 11, 2001
9.204
1
Visit site
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Majesty 2 Collection
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sengoku
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • 500k Club
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
The American and UK forces in Torch were hardly brilliant against the Germans in North Africa. They had the men and equipment but got nowhere in Tunisia and failed to beat the French within their schedule.
General Fredenall springs to mind in particular as less than competent general. Monty was at least better than the people on the other side of the Grand Dorsal.
 

unmerged(25421)

Captain
Feb 4, 2004
332
0
Rommel was by far the better general. Just look at their war records. Rommel had done brilliantly in France and with the 20th Light Division in Yugoslavia. Just look at Rommels combat experience in ww1: EXCELLENT. He was a hero in WW1 and what did Monty do in ww1. He didn't even go near the front in his time during 1915-1918! Monty was a classic Englishman and a lucky commander. He was very jealous aswell and tried to take other gernerals glory such as at Normandy and tried to give himself popularity in with 'Oper Market Garden'. And it FAILED!