|
|
Post by 曹操 on Apr 21, 2021 7:41:58 GMT
Alright HangryBird, just had free time (Previously need to type fast since i'm attending class at the moment) So Model is not an incompetent leader same like Chuikov, Mannerheim, Kuribayashi , and Ushijima. Since most defensive operation is a failure, then i think that most defensive general can't really have a leadership skill (Maurice Gamelin (Fall Gelb), Smigly (Polish Campaign), Kliment Voroshilov (Leningrad), Buddyony (Kiev),etc). Unlike Bock, Zhukov, Leeb, Rundstedt, Rokossovsky, Konev, Eisenhower, They have huge chance to get leadership skill since first they command a larger army especially (Army Group, and Soviet Belarusian and Ukrainian Front), meanwhile gen like Guderian only lead a panzer group so he doesn't really need a leadership skill since leadership mean he command a larger army (not just a single panzer units but also infantry and Artillery as well as Air) And also it's not me who say Model is incompetent, some of his unit say it (Probably you didn't see it) |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 21, 2021 8:15:00 GMT
Alright HangryBird , just had free time (Previously need to type fast since i'm attending class at the moment) So Model is not an incompetent leader same like Chuikov, Mannerheim, Kuribayashi , and Ushijima. Since most defensive operation is a failure, then i think that most defensive general can't really have a leadership skill (Maurice Gamelin (Fall Gelb), Smigly (Polish Campaign), Kliment Voroshilov (Leningrad), Buddyony (Kiev),etc). Unlike Bock, Zhukov, Leeb, Rundstedt, Rokossovsky, Konev, Eisenhower, They have huge chance to get leadership skill since first they command a larger army especially (Army Group, and Soviet Belarusian and Ukrainian Front), meanwhile gen like Guderian only lead a panzer group so he doesn't really need a leadership skill since leadership mean he command a larger army (not just a single panzer units but also infantry and Artillery as well as Air) And also it's not me who say Model is incompetent, some of his unit say it (Probably you didn't see it) I know that you said that some of Model's troops said he was incompetent. However, that doesn't change the fact that you have never addressed how in-game skills are evidence that leadership should be judged on supplies and reserves. Your argument is that generals that deserve leadership are generals that have successfully commanded large armies. If you don't explain the connection between reserves and leadership, your argument has no base to stand on. |
|
|
|
Post by 曹操 on Apr 21, 2021 8:29:30 GMT
Alright HangryBird , just had free time (Previously need to type fast since i'm attending class at the moment) So Model is not an incompetent leader same like Chuikov, Mannerheim, Kuribayashi , and Ushijima. Since most defensive operation is a failure, then i think that most defensive general can't really have a leadership skill (Maurice Gamelin (Fall Gelb), Smigly (Polish Campaign), Kliment Voroshilov (Leningrad), Buddyony (Kiev),etc). Unlike Bock, Zhukov, Leeb, Rundstedt, Rokossovsky, Konev, Eisenhower, They have huge chance to get leadership skill since first they command a larger army especially (Army Group, and Soviet Belarusian and Ukrainian Front), meanwhile gen like Guderian only lead a panzer group so he doesn't really need a leadership skill since leadership mean he command a larger army (not just a single panzer units but also infantry and Artillery as well as Air) And also it's not me who say Model is incompetent, some of his unit say it (Probably you didn't see it) I know that you said that some of Model's troops said he was incompetent. However, that doesn't change the fact that you have never addressed how in-game skills are evidence that leadership should be judged on supplies and reserves. Your argument is that generals that deserve leadership are generals that have successfully commanded large armies. If you don't explain the connection between reserves and leadership, your argument has no base to stand on. About reserves (I forgot about leadership in game skill, (what i remember about it is the combination of both reserves and Machinist thinking that it replenish more health as well as cutting 50% price) My apologies for that)so yea just remove it for now. |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on Apr 22, 2021 2:17:48 GMT
I know that you said that some of Model's troops said he was incompetent. However, that doesn't change the fact that you have never addressed how in-game skills are evidence that leadership should be judged on supplies and reserves. Your argument is that generals that deserve leadership are generals that have successfully commanded large armies. If you don't explain the connection between reserves and leadership, your argument has no base to stand on. About reserves (I forgot about leadership in game skill, (what i remember about it is the combination of both reserves and Machinist thinking that it replenish more health as well as cutting 50% price) My apologies for that)so yea just remove it for now. That's hard to do when the connection between reserves and leadership is the basis of your argument. I'm not any closer to being convinced that offensive-orientated generals deserve leadership more. |
|
|
|
Post by Pietro Badoglio on Apr 22, 2021 2:44:59 GMT
Alright HangryBird, just had free time (Previously need to type fast since i'm attending class at the moment) So Model is not an incompetent leader same like Chuikov, Mannerheim, Kuribayashi , and Ushijima. Since most defensive operation is a failure, then i think that most defensive general can't really have a leadership skill (Maurice Gamelin (Fall Gelb), Smigly (Polish Campaign), Kliment Voroshilov (Leningrad), Buddyony (Kiev),etc). Unlike Bock, Zhukov, Leeb, Rundstedt, Rokossovsky, Konev, Eisenhower, They have huge chance to get leadership skill since first they command a larger army especially (Army Group, and Soviet Belarusian and Ukrainian Front), meanwhile gen like Guderian only lead a panzer group so he doesn't really need a leadership skill since leadership mean he command a larger army (not just a single panzer units but also infantry and Artillery as well as Air) And also it's not me who say Model is incompetent, some of his unit say it (Probably you didn't see it) Slim (Burma-India campaign) and Dowding (Battle of Britain) definitely not failed. Auchinleck defended North Africa and his works there are responsible for Monty getting a better army. |
|
|
|
Post by NotRandom on Apr 22, 2021 5:49:12 GMT
Alright HangryBird , just had free time (Previously need to type fast since i'm attending class at the moment) So Model is not an incompetent leader same like Chuikov, Mannerheim, Kuribayashi , and Ushijima. Since most defensive operation is a failure, then i think that most defensive general can't really have a leadership skill (Maurice Gamelin (Fall Gelb), Smigly (Polish Campaign), Kliment Voroshilov (Leningrad), Buddyony (Kiev),etc). Unlike Bock, Zhukov, Leeb, Rundstedt, Rokossovsky, Konev, Eisenhower, They have huge chance to get leadership skill since first they command a larger army especially (Army Group, and Soviet Belarusian and Ukrainian Front), meanwhile gen like Guderian only lead a panzer group so he doesn't really need a leadership skill since leadership mean he command a larger army (not just a single panzer units but also infantry and Artillery as well as Air) And also it's not me who say Model is incompetent, some of his unit say it (Probably you didn't see it) 1. I'm sorry, but by your logic, Keitel should be an OP general, for he was the chief of OKW, meaning he was in charge of the entire German armed forces instead of say, a pathetic army group, and that he was technically in command of every single Wehrmacht offensive in the war. Therefore by your logic, he is the most competent general ever. However that is not the case, Army commanders will devolve their commands into smaller field commanders and letting them command their troops. As seen with Guderian's blitz in Western Europe in which, he decides the conditions of battles and oversaw his engagements, not Rundstedt or Keitel. Therefore, the amount of units in which a general commands should not directly translate into their leadership skills. 2. Being defensive doesn't mean that a general is incompetent. Sometimes, circumstances requires a general to be on the defensive. As shown, being a good offensive general doesn't mean you can be defensive. Rommel was well known for his offensive maneuvers but he cracked in France when the allies landed. Zhukov made his name for defending Moscow, instead of say Kursk or Stalingrad. Sometimes a good defense is better than a bad offensive, if offensives are always better than defensives, then Robert Nivelle would be a better general than Philippe Petain, seeing how Nivelle was very offensively minded while Petain preferred to play defense most of the time. Nivelle launched offensives that drove the Germans from Verdun, but that is only on the basis that Petain had held Verdun. If Petain had lost Verdun, Nivelle would have not been capable of launching an offensive. 3. Model was actually a competent general. His troops disliked him because of his commanding style, not because of his failures. "He made a habit of being abusive and foul-mouthed, micromanaging his subordinates, changing plans without consultation, and bypassing the chain of command when it suited him. He was oblivious to the niceties of etiquette, often reprimanding or castigating his officers in public" (Wikipedia). Therefore, judging a person's competency based on their popularity is not valid while Model, despite his flaws, managed to secure a retreat of German forces on the East while Manstein failed (As seen with the Stalingrad example). |
|
|
|
Post by 曹操 on Apr 22, 2021 6:29:24 GMT
Alright HangryBird , just had free time (Previously need to type fast since i'm attending class at the moment) So Model is not an incompetent leader same like Chuikov, Mannerheim, Kuribayashi , and Ushijima. Since most defensive operation is a failure, then i think that most defensive general can't really have a leadership skill (Maurice Gamelin (Fall Gelb), Smigly (Polish Campaign), Kliment Voroshilov (Leningrad), Buddyony (Kiev),etc). Unlike Bock, Zhukov, Leeb, Rundstedt, Rokossovsky, Konev, Eisenhower, They have huge chance to get leadership skill since first they command a larger army especially (Army Group, and Soviet Belarusian and Ukrainian Front), meanwhile gen like Guderian only lead a panzer group so he doesn't really need a leadership skill since leadership mean he command a larger army (not just a single panzer units but also infantry and Artillery as well as Air) And also it's not me who say Model is incompetent, some of his unit say it (Probably you didn't see it) 1. I'm sorry, but by your logic, Keitel should be an OP general, for he was the chief of OKW, meaning he was in charge of the entire German armed forces instead of say, a pathetic army group, and that he was technically in command of every single Wehrmacht offensive in the war. Therefore by your logic, he is the most competent general ever. However that is not the case, Army commanders will devolve their commands into smaller field commanders and letting them command their troops. As seen with Guderian's blitz in Western Europe in which, he decides the conditions of battles and oversaw his engagements, not Rundstedt or Keitel. Therefore, the amount of units in which a general commands should not directly translate into their leadership skills. 2. Being defensive doesn't mean that a general is incompetent. Sometimes, circumstances requires a general to be on the defensive. As shown, being a good offensive general doesn't mean you can be defensive. Rommel was well known for his offensive maneuvers but he cracked in France when the allies landed. Zhukov made his name for defending Moscow, instead of say Kursk or Stalingrad. Sometimes a good defense is better than a bad offensive, if offensives are always better than defensives, then Robert Nivelle would be a better general than Philippe Petain, seeing how Nivelle was very offensively minded while Petain preferred to play defense most of the time. Nivelle launched offensives that drove the Germans from Verdun, but that is only on the basis that Petain had held Verdun. If Petain had lost Verdun, Nivelle would have not been capable of launching an offensive. 3. Model was actually a competent general. His troops disliked him because of his commanding style, not because of his failures. "He made a habit of being abusive and foul-mouthed, micromanaging his subordinates, changing plans without consultation, and bypassing the chain of command when it suited him. He was oblivious to the niceties of etiquette, often reprimanding or castigating his officers in public" (Wikipedia). Therefore, judging a person's competency based on their popularity is not valid while Model, despite his flaws, managed to secure a retreat of German forces on the East while Manstein failed (As seen with the Stalingrad example). 1. Keitel is an incompetent, his OKW Command is possible due to relationship with the Fuhrer (if this game is not based on history then we may see IAP starting from Keitel (Germany), Gamelin (france), Timoshenko (Soviet)). The point of the leadership skill on this game is that the general must not only command a single type of units (Guderian for example only command panzer group, same goes for other gen like Rommel meanwhile gen like von Bock command the Infantry units, and Panzer under his Army Group command, Rundstedt command Panzer and Infantry Group on His AG, Leeb command Artillery, Panzer, Infantry under his AG, Zhukov and Roko Belarusian Front command infantry, Panzer and Artillery same as Konev-Vatutin Ukrainian Front making these gen has the right/May have leadership skill ("The leadership skill on this game not IRL"), 2. I don't say most defensive general is incompetent, Petain is commander during WW1 so i won't talk much about him. But during WW2 most of defensive general is worse (Ex: Budyonny and Timoshenko at Ukraine, Gamelin at France, Smigly at Poland, Graziani at North Africa and Italy, Freyberg at Crete, Voroshilov at Leningrad, etc (They are too much) The most successful defensive operation is only (Zhukov at Moscow, Govorov-Zhukov on Leningrad, Mannerheim at Finland, Chuikov on Stalingrad, Model on Netherlands, Heinrichi at Poland, McAuliflle on Belgium) Gen like MacArthur is not failed on Bataan since his units are mostly outnumbered same as Mannerheim although i'll say the winter war is a success defense for the Finns. Kuribayashi and Ushijima didn't failed on Iwo Jima and Okinawa they're simply outnumbered. 3. Model is competent i know, it's my fault not write and read something prescisely, My apologies for that. 4. Even if model is competent i prefer if he didn't get "Leadership" Skill on this game since it will be worthless as most of your offensive gen like Guderian, Bock, Manstein, messe (which means that Offensive gen is the one who will have Leadership skill since they are the one with heaviest Casualties)had already wipe most of the enemy making your defensive general rarely need to recruit something to often with half price also your defense point mostly will be city which is better for defensive general to get Reserves skill (Model Skill's Garrison and Elastic defence is great Garrison will be helpful if sudden enemy reinforcement come and attack Model while he is on a city making his morale won't decrease thus his attack won't decrease and enemy won't manage to recaptured keypoint without any casualties, and Elastic defense is great since most fort are nearby city especially on 1942 Pacific where coastal arti will located nearby keypoint city), Kuribayashi should also get same skill as Model, i don't know why they give Kuri's skill as an offensive general since i just know he only command the Japanese on iwo Jima (If i'm wrong about this, sorry since Kuri's wiki just said about iwo jima) Ushi's skill only crowd fighting is great for defensive since you will stacked most of your inf, idk why he got Scout and Desperate since both is great for offensive gen although Desperate may be helpful due to reducing morale of enemy when they are fighting with you while you defending a keypoint. |
|
|
|
Post by Gerd von Rundstedt on May 3, 2021 14:21:44 GMT
Montgomery - 3*s Inf, Tank, Air (Market Garden, Dunkirk, Africa), 1 * Move. Logistics - No matter Where he went, he had impeccable Supply lines. Encouraged - After practically every battle his troops were in High Morale. Leadership - There is No doubt that he was a Leader, but not for one type of force. He wasn't specifically a leader of tanks, or infantry, rather both.
|
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on May 3, 2021 14:25:46 GMT
Montgomery - 3*s Inf, Tank, Air (Market Garden, Dunkirk, Africa), 1 * Move. Logistics - No matter Where he went, he had impeccable Supply lines. Encouraged - After practically every battle his troops were in High Morale. Leadership - There is No doubt that he was a Leader, but not for one type of force. He wasn't specifically a leader of tanks, or infantry, rather both. Ouch. Heavy nerf for Monty. Even leadership doesn't make up for it. What about artillery stars? |
|
|
|
Post by Gerd von Rundstedt on May 3, 2021 14:36:57 GMT
Montgomery - 3*s Inf, Tank, Air (Market Garden, Dunkirk, Africa), 1 * Move. Logistics - No matter Where he went, he had impeccable Supply lines. Encouraged - After practically every battle his troops were in High Morale. Leadership - There is No doubt that he was a Leader, but not for one type of force. He wasn't specifically a leader of tanks, or infantry, rather both. Ouch. Heavy nerf for Monty. Even leadership doesn't make up for it. What about artillery stars? None. I should have thought that he was better like this. No? |
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on May 3, 2021 15:28:16 GMT
Ouch. Heavy nerf for Monty. Even leadership doesn't make up for it. What about artillery stars? None. I should have thought that he was better like this. No? Leadership is his only good skill. Encouraged is okay and Logistic is a bad skill. |
|
|
|
Post by Gerd von Rundstedt on May 3, 2021 17:46:32 GMT
Gerd von Rundstedt - 3*inf, 3* Tank, 2* Arty, 2* Move. Trade Plunder for Blitzkrieg, representing his very successful command with tanks in AG South, AG A, AG South, and AG West.
|
|
|
|
Post by HangryBird on May 3, 2021 18:02:27 GMT
Gerd von Rundstedt - 3*inf, 3* Tank, 2* Arty, 2* Move. Trade Plunder for Blitzkrieg, representing his very successful command with tanks in AG South, AG A, AG South, and AG West. Blitzkreig and Infantry Leader won't work together though. |
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Stalin on May 3, 2021 18:10:33 GMT
Guderian: Absolutely perfect. Tide of Iron for Army Group Center and Fall Gelb and Blitzkrieg for France (as well as inventing Blitzkrieg). Anti-Armor is for all the encirclements of AG Center when they absolutely rekked those T-34s. Rommel: Trade ToI for Armored Assault. "Tide of Iron" implies that there were a lot of units, when Rommel, not having those, preferred to go on a huge thrust through the battlefield, an "Armored Assault." Patton: Trade Accuracy Strike for Passion. I will assume Accuracy Strike refers to the raid on the POW camp in Germany. However, I believe "Passion" embodies both that and his relentless drive. MacArthur: Take out the two Arty stars and give him two Navy stars. Trade his Raider for Reserve, and he is perfect, symbolizing the huge reserves the US had in the S. Pacific Campaign, and Navy Stars for his Amphibious landings. guderian rekked T-34’s ?? There were very few KV-1 and T-34-57 tanks available in the year of 1941 but still it caused a massive shock against the poor panzer divisions.( If you read guderian’s or manstein’s memoirs you can easily notice. Im telling this since their sources does not contain much bias imo.)Sloped armor was a miracle that halted german advance. Sometimes a t-34 was getting surrounded by 30 panzer II or |||’ s but still they couldnt penetrate T-34.( Contrary to the popular opinion soviets NEVER had a numerical advantage before 1943 stalingrad and thats one of the reasons hitlers crusade advanced.) T34 were generally destroyed by heavy pak guns of germans. Panzers destroying T-34 was Extremely Rare |
|
|
|
Post by Gerd von Rundstedt on May 3, 2021 18:18:02 GMT
Guderian: Absolutely perfect. Tide of Iron for Army Group Center and Fall Gelb and Blitzkrieg for France (as well as inventing Blitzkrieg). Anti-Armor is for all the encirclements of AG Center when they absolutely rekked those T-34s. Rommel: Trade ToI for Armored Assault. "Tide of Iron" implies that there were a lot of units, when Rommel, not having those, preferred to go on a huge thrust through the battlefield, an "Armored Assault." Patton: Trade Accuracy Strike for Passion. I will assume Accuracy Strike refers to the raid on the POW camp in Germany. However, I believe "Passion" embodies both that and his relentless drive. MacArthur: Take out the two Arty stars and give him two Navy stars. Trade his Raider for Reserve, and he is perfect, symbolizing the huge reserves the US had in the S. Pacific Campaign, and Navy Stars for his Amphibious landings. guderian rekked T-34’s ?? There were very few KV-1 and T-34-57 tanks available in the year of 1941 but still it caused a massive shock against the poor panzer divisions.( If you read guderian’s or manstein’s memoirs you can easily notice. Im telling this since their sources does not contain much bias imo.)Sloped armor was a miracle that halted german advance. Sometimes a t-34 was getting surrounded by 30 panzer II or |||’ s but still they couldnt penetrate T-34.( Contrary to the popular opinion soviets NEVER had a numerical advantage before 1943 stalingrad and thats one of the reasons hitlers crusade advanced.) T34 were generally destroyed by heavy pak guns of germans. Panzers destroying T-34 was Extremely Rare Tactically, no Guderian's tanks did not destroy soviet tanks. Strategically, Guderian's forces destroyed Soviet and French Tanks left and right. |
|
