Infantry Against Tanks 1941

[Mad Russian]

I think it began with a sort of 'Are Molotov cocktails any good?'

And decended into 'Russian infantry are the worst infantry units ever. Period.'

Via 'I've read loads more books than you have.'

Which slightly disturbs me. Why? Well bacause we seem to slip, without thought, into game world and real world.

We went from 'Are Molotov cocktails any good?' to Russian infantry and good Russian leaders make them so, to check out other sources than German ones.

So. From the top. (In the world of CMBB,) I've killed tanks with molotov cocktails before. And given them one almighty fright. So by a dictionary definition they are not 'useless'.

I've killed German tanks with them too. I stated about a 1 in 50 chance of making them work successfully. That of course is my opinion. You seem to have a different opinion than that.

That was the real beauty of it. Much better than any anti personel grenade in my book.

That is absolutely your opinion.

Right onwards, with the march of a zealot. the Russians are rubbish infantry.

A statement that borders on racist/childishly naive. (IMHO.)

That is also an opinion.

And again i'm going to ask you to imagine something.

Imagine, you teachers at school had all been shot. on the orders of your government. and members of the local council. and doctors. and pretty much any one else the government considered a 'threat'. maybe a brother, uncle, cousin.

that was your day to day life. (which, before all that was a damn sight harder than anything we're used to today.)

then one day news comes through that a foreign army approaches.

but you're ordered to fight them. but i'm afraid there's one rifle between twenty.

what would you do?

And the fact that they had 1 rifle for 20 men makes them good infantry? And you call other statements in this discussion rubbish.....hmmm.

What made them poor infantry in 1941 was a lack of training and leadership. They were motivated enough. Although not so much by bullets, and the NKVD, as you seem to portray. Several times the NKVD were placed behind frontline troops to keep units from retreating, wonder why they would do that with infantry that would fight like lions? Most of the time the threat of being shot didn't stop the retreats and, for the most part, the Soviets stopped using that particular tactic to get them to fight. The Germans were the best incentive to fight. Hearing what was going on in the captured areas made them fight harder to protect their families. They at times even fought like lions.

which is why, when i hear them dismissed as "fickle" i find deeply disturbing. It really does make my blood boil.

Especially when coupled with that 'when I've commanded the Russians..' stuff. you're mixing up two incomparible things.

You do understand this is all about playing CMBB right? You do understand that at times they would fight like lions and then the same unit just days later would surrender without a single shot being fired at them? What would you call that if you don't like the term fickle?

On the whole i think they fought like lions. way beyond any 'western' comprehension.

I agree with you as time goes on. 1941 was not a good year for the Red Army. They lost the equivalent of the entire Red Army and had to replace it before their counter attack in December 1941. If they were so good, I ask you, how did that happen?

I think Bear made a few good points but was getting unfairly slaughtered. And i think people should think a little harder before they wade in with their (lets face it they're not facts) opinions.

I'll go now and leave you alone.

Bear did make some exceptionally good points. There, are at times, threads that run through history. One is, 'if the Germans were so good then how did they manage to lose the war?' Another is, 'if the Red Army was so good in 1941 how did they manage to lose in 6 months what it would take them 3 years to recapture?' If you have an answer for that the discussion is wide open to any opinions.

Don't run off now, the discussion is just getting good.

FYI, from the CMAK manual, p. 104:
"but all infantry squads and HQs have hand grenades, which can be used for a close assault against a tank. Hand grenades work best against open-top
vehicles, but can also be used - albeit less effectively - against
buttoned up tanks. This simulates the occasional hero climbing on,
or right up to, an enemy tank and placing the grenade in a
vulnerable spot"

So an infantry grenade attack on armor in the game isn't necessarily simulating an anti-tank grenade - it could also include a grenade used in an improvised anti-tank role (so I suppose you could call that an anti-tank grenade, after all).

That could be. The grenade attacks you watch in the game are usually from about 20 meters away. Hard to do the hero stuff from that far. But these games are abstractions and as such that could be just the assault animations in play.

The grenade attacks I've used vs closed top AFV's are effective most of the time. Far more often than they fail. Maybe around 70%. The more open top they are the better the chance they will succeed.

Good Hunting.

MR