Unity of Command Forums

Hi everyone! A question for the historically inclined.

Not being myself a specialist of the eastern front, I couldn't help being taken aback by the absolute weakness of the italian and romanian units. They're not only weaker : they're absolutely, totally ridiculous feeble mockeries of a military force.

I read in some history books that in the beginning of the eastern front campaign, soviet troops were bady led and ill-equiped and thus, were no match for the tactically superior Wehrmacht. Then how come they are so superior to the italian and romanian?

Were these two nations really so inferior in real life? Cause in this game it seems these are divisions of gnomes instead of soldiers.

In the time-span of the game (1942-1943), the Romanians and Italians were operating with obsolete equipment that couldn't withstand the climate, lacked any effective anti-armor whatsoever, lacked winter clothing, were logistically neglected by the Germans, and were operating with inferior tactics. As such, they couldn't coordinate offensive or defensive operations like the Germans or Russians. In game, they should really only be used on the defensive, in an anti-partisan role, or to mop up weakened Soviet forces.

My response may come a bit late since i registered just recently but you are correct and wrong at the same time.
It is Mythbusting time again and as a historian i can tell you that we generally get a distorted view on the Germans allies of WW2.
Many try to depict them as incompetent and additionally used them as scape goats.
Some of the Romanian and Hungarian troops lacked modern equipment and communication, their mechanized units often being light (czech tanks, Turan and TACAM I-II in the early phase of the war not speaking of the later Panzer 4 formations).
However, quality is a relative term and should always be compared to its adversary and by doing this i do not see them having any significant shortcomings - if compared to the Red Army (their deficit is the same the germans had, capacity).
In fact the Romanians did most of the outflanking maneuvers in Fall Blau.
What people also do not realize is that they were able to inflict disproportionate losses to the Red Army (not 1:4-5 like Germany but at least 1:2 as you can see from the "ist Stärke"and casualties KIA/WIA/MIA reports). In one of the best memoirs about Stalingrad "bis zur letzten Patrone" you can see that they speak rather highly of them. I can also recommend reading this http://www.amazon.com/Third-Axis-Fourth ... ans+in+ww2

Conclusions: UoC made a mistake.

Best regards

One Axis minor unit I really appreciate is the plucky Hungarian Panzer in the Voronezh scenario. Obviously it's not nearly as powerful as the German units to the north but it has been responsible for a BV many times, whether by wiping out Soviet stragglers who would have cut my supply lines, closing pockets or simply plugging the line.

I doubt it would be possible to win Edelweiss without the Romanians on the eastern half of the map to hold bridges and engulf fleeing Reds, either.

That's about it. They suck at everything else.

I think that the axis minors could at least have 1 attack 1 defense or 2 attack 2 defense.

They should be equal to the Soviet infantry... but you can mod it in easily. I wouldn't recommend messing with python tough, because the game is written in spaghetti code.

Yeah i know i have an absolute fear of modding anything in any game

Romanians were brave but badly equipped on the eastern front. Italians weren't equipped for fighting in open plains against the Soviets, especially their T-34s vs feeble tankettes. Hungarians, well... losses speak for themselves during the Ostrogozhsk-Rossoh offensive. Against 7,000 soviet casualties, 96,000 to 135,000 Hungarian and italian casualties. I think they're well represented.

losses speak for themselves during the Ostrogozhsk-Rossoh offensive. Against 7,000 soviet casualties, 96,000 to 135,000 Hungarian and italian casualties.

You cannot use Soviet reports on Axis casualties, they are notoriously exaggerated.
You are also making the mistake of thinking that all they had were tankettes and the Soviets exclusively T-34s, well most of the RKKA's tank stock in 42 and early 43 still consisted of lighter tanks or SPGs.

I think they're well represented.

After checking all documents on the Axis allies, I have to disagree, they are poorly represented.

90% casualties were prisoners, the problems were in the command line. For example the full Italian Alpine Corp (61.155 men) was surrounded and lost without a valid military reason as for Stalingrad or for the german divisions surrounded during Bagration. It could be another story with a timely retreat. The Italian Alpine Corp was considered by the soviet a too strong enemy to attack frontally, and so helped by the blind german HQ they surrounded it, but 50% of the men on foot and after 100 km (26 days of combat) on the snow and with -35/-40° C smashing at least 8 soviet strongpoints and 24 tanks (in reality helped by the 4 stug III of general Eibl, killed on 21 gen 1943, and some timely ammunition (75mm shot) airdrop ). It is a very interesting story, the Alpini and the stugIII opened the way to at least other 70/80.000 Hungarian, Romanian and Germans. At Achtirka on 11 feb 1943 the Alpine Corp count some 29.000 men (11.000 wounded or frostbites). The german 385th division (with less than 300 men and all the stugIII lost) was disbanded on 17 feb 1943.