Battle of the Bulge
- Thread starter ilovepotatos
- Start date
"...Gen Patton's 82 Airborne troops..." 4th Armoured Div. led G. S'. attack from the South. The 82nd Airborne was busy around St. Vith. They weren't attached to 3rd Army.
"...notoriously bad on gas..." All tanks are and were fuel guzzlers. Mileage is measured in gallons per mile.
In any case, computer games have very little to do with reality.
"...notoriously bad on gas..." All tanks are and were fuel guzzlers. Mileage is measured in gallons per mile.
In any case, computer games have very little to do with reality.
- Location
- Surrey, BC
I think the Bulge was a great move/gamble for the Germans. You have to know by then even if you leave not a single German on the west and send all Wehrmacht east, there was still no chance to push back the Soviets, period. Instead many were sent to the Ardennes to cut the Allies in half, which the OKW hoped will knock the western allies (US, Canada Britain) out of the war to buy time to fight the Russians. I think it's smarter than sending men to the eastern front, even though the Bulge failed it was a nice try.
Hitler didnt send his 30 newly formed and reduced divsions to the east because hew knew they would be gone like a fart in the wind. He lost the war when he turned on Russia. It has been suggested that he felt he could buy more time fighting in the west to gain time for weapon development. Also he was still able to churn out Tigers at an impressive rate and the longer he could do that the better. Of course in the end he nuts and who the hell knows what was the major motivation for most of the things he did for the next 6 months.
OK.. I'm going to ask the one question no one here has asked yet..
WHAT is this simulation game you are playing???
I am going to guess Close Combat 4: Battle of the Bulge.
Great game. Not as good as 3 tho!
- Location
- Downtown Vancouver, BC
OK.. I'm going to ask the one question no one here has asked yet..
WHAT is this simulation game you are playing???
I've been beaten to the punch, but Close Combat 4: Battle of the Bulge. If you know how to use Torrents, you can find the old game very easily.
I've played the most popular Close Combat games: Normandy, Bridge Too Far (My favourite), and the Ostfront.
However, this one has been a lot tougher to beat than the defense of Normandy for example.
Sunray, while it's not reality you're still moving and using different units and tactics. It's a very dynamic game. It does all this with the worst graphics you've ever seen!
- Location
- Tucson, Arizona
WW2Guru
Hitler was NOT able to turn out tigers at an impressive rate.
It is a complicated tank and suffered from parts breakages and engine problems.
"Like the little girl with the little curl, when it was good, it was very good, but when it was bad, it was horrid"
Not helped by design changes on the assembly line, so the part you ordered may not fit the tank you are in.
Not to mention, no matter how good the tiger was, an aircraft rocket whould make spare parts out of it. We had the aircraft.
Hitler was NOT able to turn out tigers at an impressive rate.
It is a complicated tank and suffered from parts breakages and engine problems.
"Like the little girl with the little curl, when it was good, it was very good, but when it was bad, it was horrid"
Not helped by design changes on the assembly line, so the part you ordered may not fit the tank you are in.
Not to mention, no matter how good the tiger was, an aircraft rocket whould make spare parts out of it. We had the aircraft.
- Location
- Downtown Vancouver, BC
Sukey, I believe I posted a picture above of just that!
Tigers were slow and they got picked off very easily in a strafing mission.
As for Hitler making tanks at an impressive rate, I think that should be said with consideration to the fact they were being bombed day and night during production.
The Americans had the truly "impressive rate".
Tigers were slow and they got picked off very easily in a strafing mission.
As for Hitler making tanks at an impressive rate, I think that should be said with consideration to the fact they were being bombed day and night during production.
The Americans had the truly "impressive rate".
The scary thing is, they came close with this last, desperate move (and yes, it was a desperation play).
Per above, there is not that much "lessening" of the victory...it was a tough slog, and a considerable Allied win. Sue me for saying this, but I rather liked Patton over Montgomery in this battle (but then again, I've always been pissed at the way Montgomery raced to Rome, bypassing Ortona and leaving it for the Canucks to fight cornered germans, who effectively had nowhere to retreat, thanks to the "glory boy" Montgomery. I don't mind a leapfrog strategy per se - the Americans used it against Japan - but Montgomery's reasons were purely based on ego: the race to liberate Rome).
As the war on the Russian front proved, the german tanks were dreadfully screwed by the lack of fuel-supply. Oh, yes, the T-34's did something, too
.I seem to recall instances where the 88 flak/anti-tank guns were shelling (and killing, from an ambush position) Shermans until they ran out of ammo...and then the gunners had to abandon their positions in the face of the sheer quantity of American tanks. And, not sure if this is a comment on quality, but it was the "Comet Shermans" that had the guns that could kill the german tanks head-on, and they were only produced on a 1-in-4 ratio.
I dunno, maybe things were really rattled with that Canadian flier who ran him off the road...
I believe the Germans should have opted for a less thirsty, more fuel efficient tank, or the "Green Panther", perhaps even an electric version (Bosch) of the Panther (EVP) without the Maybach engine, until cheap Saudi Oil became available.
Umm...is this your way of saying that, had Dion be in charge, the Allies would have lost? If so, I've got no problem with that..hey, I'd blame him for $TD's amidst Allied troops, too, without worry.
Last edited:
- Location
- Downtown Vancouver, BC
Cyclone, I would recheck your ratio numbers. 1 in 4 Fireflies would have been a great ratio for the Allies, they had less than 150 Fireflies in Western Europe during 1944. And the Germans didn't come very close at all. Their goal was the Meuse River, which they never managed. They never took Bastogne from the American airborne, their tanks were slowed down in the heavy winter of the Ardennes and the infantry support for the Germans was lackluster at best. You simply can't support an armour advance without infantry. The Germans probably needed more infantry than anything else for the whole damn war.
Last edited:
Might want to dig a little deeper on the production numbers and take into consideration how devastated Germanys infrastructure and raw material supplies were. I went and checked to be sure. 1944 has the highest numbers of tank production including the Tiger. The Panzer II was pretty close to being end of line. The tiger also holds a reputation of being one of the toughest tanks during the war. Landing a rocket (sans guidance) on a Tiger in the Ardennes would have been pretty tough with a 100 foot tree canopy. Out in open where it does more of its work, a lot more likely but still a tough go. Weather was constant problem for air support and supply drops in the bulge. Artillery shells were improvised to get supplies in.
Last edited:
Yes, but he was right for the most part which is why the Allies were caught with their pants down. If it hadn't been for two truly tactical talents (Montgomery seizing command of US troops in the North and Patton using his down low) the battle likely would have had a drastically different outcome. Ike was rather shell shocked throughout the whole affair to be quite honest.
Firefly VC, not Comet-Sherman
104 Tiggers per month was max output.
Mea culpa...I was tired at the time?
I always confuse the names, even though I really ought to know better. The Comet replaced the Firefly, of course. No excuse for the mistake, I suppose - thanks for the catch!Cyclone, I would recheck your ratio numbers. 1 in 4 Fireflies would have been a great ratio for the Allies, they had less than 150 Fireflies in Western Europe during 1944.
Again, my bad, but I really did think something about the numbers rang true, so I re-checked my facts. The stat I was quoting - or misquoting, as I readily and shamefacedly now admit
And the Germans didn't come very close at all.
Depends on what objective we're discussing, I s'pose.
Their goal was the Meuse River, which they never managed. They never took Bastogne from the American airborne, their tanks were slowed down in the heavy winter of the Ardennes and the infantry support for the Germans was lackluster at best.
Understood, and noted. In terms of encirclement, deception (intentional & otherwise - look at Greif and Stosser for the former and latter, respectively) and penetration-thrusts, the Battle of the Bulge was full of mini-victories and frightening possibilities. However, as other here have noted, in terms of the capture of strongholds, the Axis fell short here. I think my point - if there was one - was that the Battle of the Bulge could have had a huge, shattering morale-impact, and that perhaps was the victory the Axis came closest to achieving.
You simply can't support an armour advance without infantry. The Germans probably needed more infantry than anything else for the whole damn war.
Also noted.
Allied airpower, in addition, was something that was not to be trifled with.
According to Jochaim Pieper (tank commander) the reason they lost the battle of the Bulge was two fold: lack of co-ordinated armour and infantry and the lack of fuel. An acquaintance interviewed him during the late 50's (or early 60's..the mind grows dim) and this was always his hypothesis...and he stuck to it until his death.
Ive never played CC3 or 4 but I have finished 1 and 2 way back when. Still ranks among the best ww2 strategy games ever made.
I love when you zoom into a trooper gone berserk and he goes into a house screaming at teh top of his lungs and takes outa squad in hand to hand combat...hillarious.
I love when you zoom into a trooper gone berserk and he goes into a house screaming at teh top of his lungs and takes outa squad in hand to hand combat...hillarious.
you might also want to dig a little deeper- the panzer II was a 7.92/20mm affair, supposedly an improvement on the panzer I, which was 2 -7.92 machine guns- now if you mean panther 2 or tiger 2, that's a different story
