• Von Manstein and Rommel


  • @Imperious:

    Von Manstein with Heinz Guderian

    This.

    Von Manstein was the best general of WWII. A very disciplined thinker and an excellent strategist. Adding Heinz Guderian as his assistant gives you a guy with a supreme understanding of tank warfare and a daring risk taker.


  • @KurtGodel7:

    @Imperious:

    Von Manstein with Heinz Guderian

    This.

    Von Manstein was the best general of WWII. A very disciplined thinker and an excellent strategist. Adding Heinz Guderian as his assistant gives you a guy with a supreme understanding of tank warfare and a daring risk taker.

    You lost me at best general of WW2. I would have to say that honor goes to Zhukov. And to me it comes down to a simple question. What was the name of the battle Zhukov lost or his failed mission? Manstein as great as he was didn’t reach Stalingrad. There’s a reason why the Russian used to say where ever Zhukov goes victory follows.


  • Zhukov was not a German. Soviet generals always won battles with quantity. If both sides switched equipment and numbers, Germany would have won.


  • @Imperious:

    Zhukov was not a German. Soviet generals always won battles with quantity. If both sides switched equipment and numbers, Germany would have won.

    Excellent point. In the key year of 1942, the Soviet Union produced three to four times as much as Germany in nearly every major category of land weapons; and almost twice as many military aircraft as Germany. Germany’s pre-war population was 69 million, compared to 169 million for the Soviet Union. A much larger portion of German strength was tied down in the west, to deal with potential British or American threats, than the Soviets had tied down in the east to counter the threat of Japan.

    In 1940, von Manstein, working together with Guderian, developed the plan which would allow Germany to take France. In 1941 von Mannstein was given only minor commands by his jealous superiors; who resented the fact that his bold, successful plan to take France had been chosen over their own uncreative plans–plans which offered no real hope of victory on Germany’s western front. Von Manstein did well in the commands he was given. In the summer of 1942, he was the mastermind behind a German attack which captured 170,000 Soviet soldiers for a loss of fewer than 10,000 Germans.

    After the Battle of Stalingrad, von Manstein launched a series of counter attacks in which he achieved a favorable exchange ratio; and in which he prevented the entire German southern front from collapsing. He successfully took advantage of Soviet clumsiness in exploiting the advantages their Stalingrad victory had given them.

    In July and August 1943, forces under von Mannstein’s command inflicted 1.6 million casualties on the Soviets; with only one tenth as many Germans becoming casualties. (Earlier in ‘43 von Manstein advised against attacking the Soviets’ prepared positions at Kursk.) In early 1944 he was dismissed from command due to disagreements with Hitler. Von Manstein insisted that encircled German forces should attempt to break out to the west. Hitler demanded that no one retreat.

    Overall, von Manstein was right about just about everything; and very skillful in putting his plans into action. A great general to have on your side; and a very intimidating opponent for those unlucky enough to face him.


  • @KurtGodel7:

    @Imperious:

    Von Manstein with Heinz Guderian

    This.

    Von Manstein was the best general of WWII. A very disciplined thinker and an excellent strategist. Adding Heinz Guderian as his assistant gives you a guy with a supreme understanding of tank warfare and a daring risk taker.

    He said best general of WW2. I make no argument that Manstein was the best GERMAN general. My argument is he is not the best of all the war.


  • @Yavid:

    Von Manstein and Rommel

    If you look I even called him the best german general


  • @aequitas:

    And who do you think would be fit best as his counterpart?

    Do you mean his counterpart in another country beside Germany?


  • @CWO:

    @aequitas:

    And who do you think would be fit best as his counterpart?

    Do you mean his counterpart in another country beside Germany?Â

    Honestly?! Yes ,I realized after IL’s comment that counterpart also includes the meaning of a sidekick.
    I do apologize but I’m willing to keep it the way it is running right now and open another Topic later.


  • I was not sure if I had to put two Germans or not.
    My counterpart to Model(love his choice of suicide in the Ruhr Pocket over surrender) was Von Vietinghoff. He started as a Divisional Panzer commander through the to glory years of German offensive action, then, like Model became a master of defence and improvisation(in Italy). He ended up commanding an AG(like Model).


  • Gonna mix things up and go with Fleet Admiral Nimitz. Handled the post-Pearl situation with calmness and determination, and above all else, took every opportunity to strike back against a numerical superior force. For his counterpart: Jisaburō Ozawa. Japans best tactical admiral in my opinion.


  • I think the Von Manstein Gudarian combo is almost impossible to defeat.

    Germany- the previously mentioned
    Soviet Union- Zhukov and Rokossovsky
    Britain- Wavell and Montgomery
    Japan- Yamashita and Kuribayashi
    USA- Bradly and Patton


  • @poloplayer15:

    I think the Von Manstein Gudarian combo is almost impossible to defeat.

    Germany- the previously mentioned
    Soviet Union- Zhukov and Rokossovsky
    Britain- Wavell and Montgomery
    Japan- Yamashita and Kuribayashi
    USA- Bradly and Patton

    Good list.

    It’s hard thinking of a good American general to pair with Patton. Ideally, you’d want Patton + the other general to come up with something better than Patton would have on his own. Or, if you’re adding someone else to the mix, that someone else should either be Patton’s subordinate, or else should be every bit as bold and innovative as Patton. Most of the time when Patton was overruled by a cautious, uncreative superior, Patton was right and the superior was wrong. Patton is the only British or American general who I’d put in the same category as Germany’s best generals.


  • The only reason I paired Patton and Bradley together is because they served together. They were a very successful duo.


  • I also think you could pair Von Manstein with Rommel. Or Gudarian with Rommel. I think these three would probably be nearly unstoppable

  • Customizer

    I’m going with most everyone else and saying Manstein and Guderian.  Hands down.


  • The late Russian war veteran Viktor Astafjev was on the Soviet-German front all the war long, 1941-1945:

    “The Germans fought much, much better in all respects! The Communists chose to shed rivers of the Russian blood literally in order to win the War. The Soviets won over Germany only by their extreme brutality and inhumanity!”

    The best WW2 Commander? “Field-Marshall Erich von Manstein, of course!”, tells the great Russian national writer:

    “He managed to push three Bolshevik armies into the Azov and Black Seas with the help of two German corps only! He was the great military genius”

    And Zhukov?

    “Honest Russian patriot? Ha! This bastard covered half Europe by the millions of the Russian guys` corpses by his extremely sadistic personal kind of war waging! He deserves neither honor, nor respect, never!”

    Taken from here: http://justice4germans.com/2012/11/12/russian-wwii-vets-say-germans-were-the-best-soldiers-in-the-world/


  • @Der:

    The late Russian war veteran Viktor Astafjev was on the Soviet-German front all the war long, 1941-1945:

    “The Germans fought much, much better in all respects! The Communists chose to shed rivers of the Russian blood literally in order to win the War. The Soviets won over Germany only by their extreme brutality and inhumanity!”

    The best WW2 Commander? “Field-Marshall Erich von Manstein, of course!”, tells the great Russian national writer:

    “He managed to push three Bolshevik armies into the Azov and Black Seas with the help of two German corps only! He was the great military genius”

    And Zhukov?

    “Honest Russian patriot? Ha! This b��t��d covered half Europe by the millions of the Russian guys` corpses by his extremely sadistic personal kind of war waging! He deserves neither honor, nor respect, never!”

    Taken from here: http://justice4germans.com/2012/11/12/russian-wwii-vets-say-germans-were-the-best-soldiers-in-the-world/

    Good post. Obviously von Mannstein was a much better general than Zhukov. That’s not a knock against Zhukov; who was a solid general in his own right. But generals like von Mannstein don’t come around very often.

    To add to what you’ve written: Germany’s prewar population was 69 million, compared to 169 million for the Soviet Union. On the other hand, a study conducted by the U.S. military indicated that German soldiers normally achieved a 3:1 exchange ratio when fighting the Soviets. However, the Soviet Union achieved a 1:1 ratio at Stalingrad; killing or capturing a million German soldiers in the process. (Over 1% of Germany’s entire prewar population!) The Soviet Union lost a million men in that battle also. But for several years the Red Army added 500,000 new men a month–a replacement rate Germany could not possibly hope to match. By the summer of '41, 80% of German men between the ages of 20 and 30 were in the military; with the remaining 20% considered too valuable to industry to release for military service.

    The role of the Western democracies in hindering the German Army should not be underestimated. 500,000 Greman soldiers were uselessly tied down in Norway, against the threat of a British or American landing. Several hundred thousand were taken prisoner in North Africa. Others were tied down in Italy or France. As early as 1942, the distraction effect of the Western democracies had become considerable.

    While Germany had the best generals of the war, von Mannstein rose above the level even of the other German generals. (Of course there were exceptions to the above rule. Some German generals weren’t much more creative than their Allied counterparts. Patton, on the other hand, would have been one of Germany’s five best generals had he been German.)


  • @KurtGodel7:

    The role of the Western democracies in hindering the German Army should not be underestimated.

    IMO the Western powers should have left Germany alone. Hitler did not want to fight England or the USA. His quarrel was with communism in the East and international jewry. But it was all about economics. England saw Germany as the “upstart kid” in Europe getting too successful and competing against their long established world trade empire.  Once England had a pretense to declare war, they were determined to destroy Germany and bring the USA in to help. Churchill rejected all of Hitler’s offers of peace. This is why the allies were still smashing German cities and starting firestorms long after it was thought necessary- they wanted to kill as many citizens as possible to eliminate their competition in the world market. In doing so Germany was completely crushed and communism was allowed to dominate much of Europe.


  • @Der:

    @KurtGodel7:

    The role of the Western democracies in hindering the German Army should not be underestimated.

    IMO the Western powers should have left Germany alone. Hitler did not want to fight England or the USA. His quarrel was with communism in the East and international jewry. But it was all about economics. England saw Germany as the “upstart kid” in Europe getting too successful and competing against their long established world trade empire.  Once England had a pretense to declare war, they were determined to destroy Germany and bring the USA in to help. Churchill rejected all of Hitler’s offers of peace. This is why the allies were still smashing German cities and starting firestorms long after it was thought necessary- they wanted to kill as many citizens as possible to eliminate their competition in the world market. In doing so Germany was completely crushed and communism was allowed to dominate much of Europe.

    So, your implication is that the western allies should have foregone entering the war because supposedly hitler didn’t want war with Britain or the US? (Mein Kamph makes it abundantly clear his plans for Britain and the US)If he didn’t want to fight the USA then why did he declare war on it? What was the US supposed to do after Germany declared war…sit on their hands? Hitler and his cronies were bad dudes no matter which way you cut it. They needed to be taken out. Furthermore, the western allies had every right to prosecute a war on Germany not even counting the atrocities that were committed. Once the atrocities became known, how could anyone consciously think there was not complicity at the very highest levels?

    The most affected areas of the allied bomber campaign was western Germany…the area NOT occupied by the communists…and also the area that received massive influxes of aid, money, and infrastructure repair from the Marshall plan. Your logic is “the allies were trying to keep the Germans down so they could spend billions on them later eventually becoming one of the worlds strongest economies?” I’m not sure that’s sound logic.

    Let’s not get into revisionist history too much and stick with the facts. The nazi ideology was not only anti Semitic, but anti anything but german essentially. Remember, 5 million of the 11 million killed in the holocaust were NOT Jews but " undesirables". He didn’t just hate communism and Jews but Slavs as well. This was quite evident by SS treatment of the Slav civilians when they were doing the “noble” duty of murdering them once the fighting had moved ahead. The war in the east became a war of annihilation BECAUSE of the brutality of the occupying Germans. Fluff it up all you want, they needed to go.

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 51
  • 1
  • 1
  • 16
  • 31
  • 5
  • 84
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

65

Online

17.5k

Users

40.0k

Topics

1.7m

Posts