 |
|
Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Tiller Operational Campaigns (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=11) +--- Thread: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units (/showthread.php?tid=58603) Pages:
1
2
|
Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Compass Rose - 04-13-2011 In the Eastern Front games of PzC, there are normally two different types of Russian units found. Historically, what was the difference between the Russian Guards and the "regular" Russian troops? Were Guards specially trained units when compared to Russian troops? Or is it like the Waffen SS and the Heer Army or the US Army and the USMC? Thanks RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Dog Soldier - 04-13-2011 Others here at the blitz have more in depth knowledge about this than I to be sure. FWIW, Guards is a battle honor designation. It did not relate to better trained or elite status or equipment though sometimes it did unless you consider survivors in the unit from a particular action had better OJT (on the job training) so to speak. I could be wrong, but my impression is Guard units were created by the chance of being in a tight spot during combat, but coming through and completing / exceeding their mission requirements regardless of losses. The designation was meant to inspire sacrifice and motivate other units to "do their duty" for the Motherland. Since Guard units were going to be intentionally given the tougher assignments, they tended to have higher casualty rates. The Guard status of the units was to inspire the replacements of a rebuilt unit to live up to the standard set by those who were gone. IIRC, a few units lost Guard status during the war when they did not live up to expectations of STAVKA. Dog Soldier RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Philippe - 04-13-2011 My understanding is that Guards units sometimes had better access to supply and new equipment. But overall I suspect the difference between the two was pretty nominal. And that's why I use the same color for Russian Guards and Russian Regular units in my mods. RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Volcano Man - 04-13-2011 Well, Guard units had to first earn the their status. They did this by, as DS mentioned, being effective in a battle. Once they earned that status, you can assume that the unit itself was a little better than a non-Guards unit because of both the fact that the title had to be earned, and because it now had a reputation to uphold (funny how that works). The Soviet Army, AFAICR -- someone correct me if I am wrong, had a habit of letting its ordinary rifle divisions wither and die after constant fighting, very seldom did they do any heavy replacements (although they did receive some). If I am not mistaken, the Guards units were maintained however, and they did receive new equipment if there was any. RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Tide1 - 04-13-2011 Brian and Ed pretty much got it on the nailhead. Just to add another fact. Guard units got the lions share of the Lend Lease equipment. RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Strela - 04-13-2011 All, I have done a fair bit of work in this area and actually working on a project that includes the first upgrading of units to Guards status. Most of the above statements are correct. Guards is a 'honorific' handed out for continual exemplary performance. The 100th Rifle Division was the first division renamed, becoming 1st Guards Rifle Division. Units were normally brigade up to Army level who might earn this title. One exception is the Katuysha units that were formed in late 1941 - these were called Guards Mortar Battalions but this was purely an organisational name - not earned on merit. There was an emphasis to give Guards units better equipment, but in the first year of the war in the east, Soviet units were lucky to get ANY equipment. Some of the first person accounts I am reading emphasize the lack of basic weapons and supplies as well as the complete breakdown in communications and command - something that is hard to model in Panzer Campaigns. Soviet units did tend to be run right down to a minimum level and then either be disbanded or reconstituted in the rear. Many Rifle divisions were recreated two or even three times, being disbanded after heavy losses and then recreated 6 to 12 months later with the original designation. In the above example of the 100th Rifle Division it was renamed as a Guards Division in September 1941 and a replacement 100th Rifle Division was then reformed in July 1942. With so many Soviet Divisions lost in various encirclements in 1941 there were plenty of numbers available for reformation! So in summary, Guards were viewed as elite units that had 'earned' the name. They did receive better grade equipment (if you can call lend lease that!) and tended to get more replacements earlier. David RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Arkan - 04-13-2011 There was two kind of guards rifle division. Some of them earned the guard status by fighting. But some others were already created as guards divisions. This happened is many major battles. Caucasus : russian used as reinforcements X and XI Guards Rifle Corps (both composed of only guards divisions) Stalingrad : 32,33, 34, 35 and 36 GRD then 1 Guards Rifle Army (with 37,38,39,40 and 41th GRD) Kursk : XVIII GRCorps then 4th Guards Rifle Army then 5th Guards Rifle Army Budapest-Balaton : 9 Guards Rifle Army. All this guards rifle divisions and armies never fought before, they were already created as guards units because they were formed of paratroopers. At the begining of the war russians had 5 airborne corps (I, II, III, IV and V) but some other corps were just starting to be created. Then thoose unfinished corps (VI, VII, VIII, IX and X) were transformed into guards rifle divisions RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Glenn Saunders - 04-14-2011 Very intersting discussion all - and note that by the time John Tiller built Fulda Gap, the feeling was Guards was title only and John didn't even use the nation for Soviet Guards units. I believe Ed and others did on ALT OOBs which brought Guards back into the modern era. Not sure but don't think we used it for Danube Front. Glenn RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Al - 04-14-2011 (04-14-2011, 03:47 AM)Glenn Saunders Wrote: Very intersting discussion all - and note that by the time John Tiller built Fulda Gap, the feeling was Guards was title only and John didn't even use the nation for Soviet Guards units. I believe Ed and others did on ALT OOBs which brought Guards back into the modern era. Not sure but don't think we used it for Danube Front. I was looking around last night for an answer to the original poster's question and what Glenn says here is correct. While in WW2 some Soviet units got the "Guards" disignation and with all that goes along with that - by the time of Modern Campaigns (mid-1908's) the Guards title was purely honorific. Guards units were equipped and manned in the same manner as regular units so there were in effect no diffrences. Just an FYI. 
RE: Russian-Guards vs. Russian Units - Compass Rose - 04-15-2011 Thanks guys for all of the good information! |
){kind=link}