German Squad Tactics

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
User avatar
Zimtstern
Member
Posts: 19
Joined: 15 Feb 2019 20:17
Location: home

Re: German Squad Tactics

Post by Zimtstern » 03 Sep 2019 17:18

No you didnt aswer the question because you are focusing on the overhaul firepower of all arms combines but im only interested in the firepower provided by the infratry conductiong combined arms operations. Its not important for my question how much firepower they have compared to other arms or how much they kill or else. Its about the infantry coming into action to contribute to the combined arms effort and the enemy infantry working agaist them all while all arms of both sides are working togehter.
Duncan_M wrote:
03 Sep 2019 16:54
That is not why one conducts a defense, especially not the Germans.
I didnt mean to say that anyone did defence beause of that. I simply ment to say that defence is a force multipler and in general you could aim to use that. Neverless even if you didnt aim for that it will still boost your strenght.

Duncan_M
Member
Posts: 161
Joined: 11 Oct 2018 15:07
Location: USA

Re: German Squad Tactics

Post by Duncan_M » 03 Sep 2019 17:54

Zimtstern wrote:
03 Sep 2019 17:18
No you didnt aswer the question because you are focusing on the overhaul firepower of all arms combines but im only interested in the firepower provided by the infratry conductiong combined arms operations.
I did answer the question, just not to your liking. Which you seem to take offense to unfortunately.

And the reason is you're entirely focused on one aspect of the infantry fighting power, the infantry rifle gruppe, while utterly ignoring everything else, which is especially worrisome because the German army was notorious for its combined arms doctrine.

Squad vs squad doesn't exist. By WW2, there wasn't even something like infantry vs infantry, since the centuries past cavalry and artillery both played a major role in battle as well. By WW2, an infantry regiment was simply part of an overall unit, full of various soldier types, all meant to work together to accomplish a mission. Any important mission was impossible to accomplish with a series of rifle squads with no platoon, company, battalion, regimental, divisional, corps, army, or air force supporting units. Even at the tactical level, little to nothing could be done without supporting arms, be it on the offense or defense as well.
Its not important for my question how much firepower they have compared to other arms or how much they kill or else.
Never once did I compare the German weapons availability of an infantry division to anyone else, which is immaterial because it was not until well into WW2 that the Germans even began tickering with various KstN to task organize them to actual battlefields and enemies. I simply listed out what they had access to, so when they formed into kampfgruppe, those weapons are what a German infantryman in a infantry division had access to.

And the only mention I made to about combat effectiveness and lethality was to answer your question about which was deadlier (and yes, King of Battle=Artillery is far deadlier than infantry small arms used in a gruppe).
Its about the infantry coming into action to contribute to the combined arms effort and the enemy infantry working agaist them all while all arms of both sides are working togehter.
If you look at all the German soldiers in a standard infantry regiment (who would also be supported by artillerymen, engineers, and cavalrymen), not all of the infantry are in a rifle squad/gruppe.

Depending on unit KstN, there are 5 cm mortarmen of the zug, there are 8 cm mortarmen of the rifle company or heavy company, the heavy machine gunners of the rifle company or the heavy company, there are 12 cm mortarmen and 7.5cm gunners of the regiment's 13th company, panzerjaegar of the regiment's 14th company, and EVERY ONE OF THEM IS AN INFANTRYMAN.

So when you go off about infantryman, make note that while many of them are in the rifle squads, many are not, they are infantrymen in other roles, who as part of a combined arms doctrine, are used in concert with the infantrmen of the rifle squad. Or sometimes not even them (see use of engineers in Stalingrad).
I didnt mean to say that anyone did defence beause of that. I simply ment to say that defence is a force multipler and in general you could aim to use that. Neverless even if you didnt aim for that it will still boost your strenght.
No, defense in of itself is not a force multiplier. Defense is a situation in which one side defends an objective they hold, instead of taking one from someone else.

Being on the defense allows one to sometimes fight in favorable conditions that give advantages, such as picking the ground, holding key terrain, digging in and fortifying positions with protection from direct and indirect fire, having designated and cleared sectors of fire, having registered mortars and artillery and designated target reference points, laying AP and AT mines, building various obstacles to channelize and impede attackers. But not all of them are done on a defensive, and often times weren't done.

There are even plenty of times a unit on the defense, even German, barely even dug in at all and were wiped away with little difficulty, either destroyed, pushed back, or forced to surrender en mass.

User avatar
Zimtstern
Member
Posts: 19
Joined: 15 Feb 2019 20:17
Location: home

Re: German Squad Tactics

Post by Zimtstern » 04 Sep 2019 19:10

Duncan_M wrote:
03 Sep 2019 17:54
Squad vs squad doesn't exist. By WW2, there wasn't even something like infantry vs infantry,...
Ah, now I understand. With that point of view my question is hard to answer. I will value your opinion.


At the same time I want to invite all the other guys who are reading this to make their own thoughts and share their clever ideas. I would love to get more solution proposals.

Duncan_M
Member
Posts: 161
Joined: 11 Oct 2018 15:07
Location: USA

Re: German Squad Tactics

Post by Duncan_M » 05 Sep 2019 17:09

Zimtstern wrote:
04 Sep 2019 19:10

Ah, now I understand. With that point of view my question is hard to answer. I will value your opinion.

At the same time I want to invite all the other guys who are reading this to make their own thoughts and share their clever ideas. I would love to get more solution proposals.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRtwa9MNom0&t=

This is a decent video that shows a series of historical small unit German defensive positions on the Eastern Front. In it, you can see how the combined arms aspect of infantry division actually pans out. The same supporting weapon systems in the defense would be allocated for the offense too.

More so if the objective was important enough to be deemed the division's main effort, its schwerpunkt, which would gain the majority of supporting arms, including more batteries of artillery, more shells allocated, StuG support, engineers, etc.

But it wasn't just the division that had a schwerpunkt, every subunit did as well. Each would take one or more of their elements, designate them the schwerpunkt, having others perform supporting operations (with fewer support weapons allocated), or being in the reserve.

User avatar
Zimtstern
Member
Posts: 19
Joined: 15 Feb 2019 20:17
Location: home

Re: German Squad Tactics

Post by Zimtstern » 05 Sep 2019 21:03

Oh, I know this channel, love it.

User avatar
Zimtstern
Member
Posts: 19
Joined: 15 Feb 2019 20:17
Location: home

Re: German Squad Tactics

Post by Zimtstern » 09 Oct 2019 05:10

Anyone got any good new ideas?

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”