Battle for the Crimea

[4kEY]

Does anyone else think the Grand Campaign did not sufficently cover the battles for the Crimea, and would like to see someone take another stab at it? I'd really like to see someone take a shot at making a dedicated Crimean Campaign.

[Chris10]

There were some real dramatic battles in the crimean campaign..the german forces were facing some stiff resistance not only around Sevastopol...
so yeah..this could be a nice little campaign with some 6-8 bigger scenarios...small scenarios are really boring..just IMHO,of course

The german commander in the crimean campaign, Erich von Mannstein is the only german Fieldmarshall served in WWII who got burried with all military honors when he died in 1973. Germann Army Inspector General Admiral Zimmerman held a funeral oration and a formation of the german airforce was flying an honor guard.
Before his death high and highest NATO/US/UK generals regularly attended his birthday partys and jubilees.
He is maybe the greatest military genius who served during WWII.

This is a must have for all who want to know what really happend in the east, especially on the southern front.
As well it gives some invaluable insight of how Hitler desempowered the high comand (OKH) and how the war escalated from the initial conflict with Poland into the epic struggle known as WWII.
Considering my 30 years study of WWII, family involvement in the eastern campaign and trying to seperate myth, propaganda and distortion of history from facts little known or even ignored as they dont fit the official version, von Mannsteins memories are coherent and belivable although there are always people second questioning everything...

UK/Europe English Edition
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lost-Victories- ... 174&sr=8-1

US/English Edition
http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Victories-Me ... =8-2-spell

German Edition
http://www.amazon.de/Verlorene-Siege-Er ... 327&sr=8-1

[4kEY]

Thank you for that, Chris. I'm currently reading Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War by Patrick Buchanan. I have to put it down frequently because I get so disgusted.

[deducter]

I've read Manstein's wartime memoirs Lost Victories, translated by Liddell Hart, in English, and also a new, very good biography of Manstein by Melvin Mungo, a British Major General who had access to the Manstein family archives. Manstein was a military genius, arguably the best operational commander of WWII. But I think it's important to acknowledge the flaws of the man along with his genius.

From what I've read, Manstein wartime memoirs are generally accurate. It was said that Manstein's powers of recollection are impressive, that he could remember the most minute details from events that happened years ago. But he is strangely silent about subjects that he doesn't want to discuss, namely, the atrocities committed by the German army. I find it impossible to believe that Manstein didn't know about the war crimes committed by his troops. I don't think he actively encouraged them, like the fervent Nazi supporter Reichenau. I think Manstein was mostly indifferent, but that doesn't excuses what happened. So it's important to note how Manstein's memories mysteriously fail in this subject.

In military matters, Manstein also doesn't given enough credit to the Russians. He is very dismissive of them in his memoirs. In the southern theater, he is always demanding more and more troops to hold off the Russians. Yes, his analysis is probably right, if he had been give more troops he probably could've held off the Russians for longer along the Dnieper. The third Russian attack on Kiev in 1943 also took him by surprise. But the problem was, Germany simply did not have the troops available, period. I really don't think Manstein understood the Russian strategy, which was pure attrition. Boasting about the number of Russians killed and tanks captured is impressive, but so what if the Russians could afford to lose far more men. It's not clear that if Manstein were in charge of the entire Eastern Front, like some German generals wanted, whether he'd be able to stop the Russians. Delay them for longer, probably. Achieve a stalemate, I'm not so sure. Not that Hitler's egomania would even allow this possibility.

History has plenty of examples of wars won by attrition. Just to name some examples of commanders who suffered this fate: Hannibal, Napoleon, and Lee.

[MickMannock]

Does anyone else think the Grand Campaign did not sufficently cover the battles for the Crimea, and would like to see someone take another stab at it? I'd really like to see someone take a shot at making a dedicated Crimean Campaign.

I agree with you and I have created something that might satisfy part of your need. It's not a Crimean campaign but in my map pack I have included the Sevastopol scenario from Panzer General. If you download the map pack you will get that scenario and four others, which are included into the grand campaign of the game.

viewtopic.php?t=26589

Maybe that will keep you happy until someone (or maybe yourself?) will create a Crimean campaign?

[El_Condoro]

I've read Manstein's wartime memoirs Lost Victories, translated by Liddell Hart, in English, and also a new, very good biography of Manstein by Melvin Mungo, a British Major General who had access to the Manstein family archives. Manstein was a military genius, arguably the best operational commander of WWII. But I think it's important to acknowledge the flaws of the man along with his genius.

From what I've read, Manstein wartime memoirs are generally accurate. It was said that Manstein's powers of recollection are impressive, that he could remember the most minute details from events that happened years ago. But he is strangely silent about subjects that he doesn't want to discuss, namely, the atrocities committed by the German army. I find it impossible to believe that Manstein didn't know about the war crimes committed by his troops. I don't think he actively encouraged them, like the fervent Nazi supporter Reichenau. I think Manstein was mostly indifferent, but that doesn't excuses what happened. So it's important to note how Manstein's memories mysteriously fail in this subject.

I read the foreword to Lost Victories by Liddell Hart (on Amazon - I don't have the full text) and he states that a lot of the memoirs were removed to focus on the purely military aspects. I would be interested to know how much attention was given by Manstein to the ongoing atrocities, especially those of the einsatzgruppen, and how much was removed due to the editor's choices. I agree with you that the idea that Manstein did not have some idea of what was occurring seems unlikely.

[Chris10]

I read the foreword to Lost Victories by Liddell Hart (on Amazon - I don't have the full text) and he states that a lot of the memoirs were removed to focus on the purely military aspects.

This sounds very weird as there are not many mere "memory" stories in his book but rather he goes deeply into the military and political structures and why things evolved how they evolved after the Poland campaign

[El_Condoro]

I went back and checked - it wasn't the editor who wrote it, it was Manstein himself. He states his account is from the perspective of a soldier and not a philosopher. He quotes that a soldier ceases to be a soldier when he becomes a philosopher. The real soldiers among us may disagree but I don't buy that line. Anyway, he justifies his side-stepping of those issues. (BTW Amazon must randomly display sections of books - the first two times I looked I got the Author's Preface p.17 with the information above, and the next time, only p. 18)

Their is also a translator's note to explain that a number of personal memoirs were excised for publishing in the UK and US. They were apparently of a reminiscent style and their removal did not detract from the text's historical value. A number of 'specialist' appendices were likewise removed.

Manstein states in his preface that there is always a place for the human even in military matters.

[Lazzie]

Eric Von Manstein knew all about what was going on. The entire German High command knew How the war in Russia was to be fought. It was to be a war of annihilation of an entire race of people. He chose not to talk about it because He did not want it to tarnish his reputation. The German army had it's hands in the killing of Jews, civilians and POW's.
The fact is that the USA need a strong and friendly ally after the war to help defend Europe against the Soviets. So, a great myth was created that the real bad guys were only the Nazis, SS and Waffen SS. They were the ones who did all the bad stuff. The German army and their Generals were noble and innocent of any crimes. The whole thing was swept under the rug and buried as much as possible. Even many of the worst criminals got off with little time in jail. As the US military Governors were more interested in placating the German population and leadership than any real Justice for the victims. Read about the Einsatzgruppen War crimes trial and the aftermath see for yourself. Spending 5 years in jail for killing 50,000 people in cold blood is a small price to pay

[El_Condoro]

This is getting way OT but if you ever get to see the BBC Auschwitz and the Nazis series, check out Episode 6 and what happened to the SS guards at the place - they get feted by the Allies and, in contrast, those Jews who survive get the misery of DP camps and perhaps returning to homes owned by people who despise them still. As I said, very OT...

Now, back to the Crimea...

[VPaulus]

I want to remind before this become too hot, that the original post was:

Does anyone else think the Grand Campaign did not sufficently cover the battles for the Crimea, and would like to see someone take another stab at it? I'd really like to see someone take a shot at making a dedicated Crimean Campaign.

This is not the place to discuss such matters as war criminals or war crimes. I do have also an opinion, but I won't state it here.
This is a forum about a WW2 game, which deals with the operational and strategic parts of the war, and not with the other WW2 related matters. Those matters aren't part of this game and shouldn't be discussed in this forum.
I hope you all understand this.

[airbornemongo101]

Great minds think alike

[Lazzie]

I apologize for my last post. heat of the moment

[VPaulus]

I apologize for my last post. heat of the moment

No need to apologize.
Personally it's something that I even like to discuss, only in face to face and in real time, and of course, when both people aren't interested only in mere defending on their own point of views.

[4kEY]

Does anyone else think the Grand Campaign did not sufficently cover the battles for the Crimea, and would like to see someone take another stab at it? I'd really like to see someone take a shot at making a dedicated Crimean Campaign.

I agree with you and I have created something that might satisfy part of your need. It's not a Crimean campaign but in my map pack I have included the Sevastopol scenario from Panzer General. If you download the map pack you will get that scenario and four others, which are included into the grand campaign of the game.

viewtopic.php?t=26589

Maybe that will keep you happy until someone (or maybe yourself?) will create a Crimean campaign?

Yes, thank you Mick. Your map pack was the first Panzer Corps mod I got to work.

[Uhu]

...small scenarios are really boring..

Sorry, but I have absolutely disagree: extreme big scenarios are boring, because I have too many units, after some times, I loose the focus, the AI cannot use the big battlefield right, I cannot see the whole map in one, a., because of the too many units, my core-elite units have to be used not intensively b., because I have so many core units, I don't have connection to them... The whole scn is more about logistics and not about strategy.
No way.
Sometimes, a bigger scn is nice and of course really small scns can be frustrating, if you have not the chance to react on the situation (objectives) in several ways. So, the medium scns are the best.

Of course it depends always on the point of view: what is defied as big and what is defined as small?

[nikivdd]

...small scenarios are really boring..

Sorry, but I have absolutely disagree: extreme big scenarios are boring, because I have too many units, after some times, I loose the focus, the AI cannot use the big battlefield right, I cannot see the whole map in one, a., because of the too many units, my core-elite units have to be used not intensively b., because I have so many core units, I don't have connection to them... The whole scn is more about logistics and not about strategy.
No way.
Sometimes, a bigger scn is nice and of course really small scns can be frustrating, if you have not the chance to react on the situation (objectives) in several ways. So, the medium scns are the best.

Of course it depends always on the point of view: what is defied as big and what is defined as small?

small: 33cl Sör big: 1l Sör
just kidding

[Uhu]

small: 33cl Sör big: 1l Sör
just kidding

"Egy sör nem sör!"
(One bier is not a bier!)

[Chris10]

small: 33cl Sör big: 1l Sör
just kidding

"Egy sör nem sör!"
(One bier is not a bier!)

uuhhh...ehmmm...
smörebröd,smörebröd,römtöm töm töm......

[4kEY]

"It was to be a war of annihilation of an entire race of people."

Did not NSDAP ideology view Jews and Bolshevism as one and the same?

Also, "If the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the Bolshevization of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe." - Hitler

And, "The fact that Jewry's representatives in England and America are today organizing and sponsoring the war against Germany must be paid for dearly by its representatives in Europe--and that's only right." - Goebbels

Quite the claim, however, research into the Federal Reserve reveals that this corporation was almost single handedly responsible for enabling even the possibility of the first and second world wars. Then there is the deliberate molding of public opinion, which is often done without a mind for the truth. Britain's war guarantee to Poland, a military dictatorship just as authoritarian, just as anti-semitic as Germany, was a major stepping stone, killing any chance of the Poles coming to terms with Germay over Danzig and forming an allliance against Communist Russia. Marshall Foch predicted the next war would be over Danzig.

Back to topic, by 1942, Germany held hostage virtually the entire Jewish population of Europe...annihilation of their hostages was the price the Nazis exacted for their own annihilation.

There is no need for things to get heated. Let us stay with the facts and keep an objective perspective. If we do this, I think a little historical review would not hurt anybody. However, I will respect the moderators if they do not agree that this is possible.