US vs German Squads (Mid-1944) Who was Superior? | Animated History
Protect yourself online by using ExpressVPN. Get 3 extra months free by using this link:
www.expressvpn.com/armchair
(Limited-time offer for The Armchair Historian viewers)
Behind the Scenes: • Video
To begin a new series for the channel, we seek to answer this question: between the United States and Germany, who had the superior infantry in World War 2? Using historical analysis to gather data on their weaponry, tactics, training, and other key factors, we have developed a program to simulate thousands of battles under various conditions and determine an answer. Will the American M1 Garand outclass the German Karabiner 98k? Will the United States be outsmarted by German tactics? Cast your vote, enjoy the video, and contribute your own thoughts in the comments below!
Sign up for Armchair History TV today! armchairhistory.tv
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / armchairhist
Ironside Computers - Click here to customize your own PC:
[ironsidecomputers.com/](ironsidecomputers.com/) USE DISCOUNT CODE "History" FOR 5% OFF!
Bibliography:
www.popularmechanics.com/mili...
www.americanrifleman.org/arti...
archive.org/details/Fm7-10/pa... page 139-142
archive.org/details/Fm7-10/pa... pages 121-126
www.thoughtco.com/karabiner-9...
www.nationalww2museum.org/war...
archive.org/details/TheGerman...
www.armyupress.army.mil/Porta...
Music:
Corner Cube by Christian Andersen
Evening Spies by Sage Oursler
ES_Tension 4 by Fredrik Ekstrom
Conquer the Battle 3 by Fredrik Ekstrom
Awaiting Backup by Magnus Ringblom
This is Not The End 5 by Fredrik Ekstrom
Fire Storm 5 by Fredrik Ekstrom
Thunder Storm 02 by Fredrik Ekstrom
Invasion 4 by Fredrik Ekstrom
This Is Not The End 1 by Fredrik Ekstrom
Protect yourself online by using ExpressVPN. Get 3 extra months free by using this link: www.expressvpn.com/armchair Which two nations do you want to see covered next? If you guys enjoyed this video, we can release our battle simulator on our website! **SPOILERS** --- BEHIND THE SCENES: kzhead.info/sun/ZbqFeLtpcHR_mas/bejne.html An explanation to the American victory: You are taking highly trained, freshly equipped, and battle-hardened (Italy & Africa) American troops, against mid-1944 static German infantry in Normandy. These troops don't even have enough supplies to be maneuvered, hence the name static. They were not the disciplined soldiers you would find on the eastern front. Regular infantry in this region comprised of foreign conscripts and wounded Germans. If we were talking about Grenadiers, Waffen SS, Panzergrenadiers, Volksgrenadiers, Fallschirmjaeger, or even just standard German infantry from 1940-1943 we'd probably see a German victory. Even still, we came to the conclusion these quickly thrown together units would win 46% of the time, which is extremely impressive. In fact, our simulation stated that the Germans would win 55% of the time in rural environments, when the Americans are being engaged at further ranges, negating one of the main advantages of the fast-firing semi-automatic M1 Garand. --- A note about the simulation: The team did not blindly depend on the simulation to write the script. The battles included were completely made up and animated by hand to serve as a narrative for a video. There was no church tower or storming of the tower in the simulation program. The engagements were constructed to reflect our research about how the two country's squads behaved. The simulation does take into account for morale, suppression, intelligence, training, etc., however, it does not have any visuals, it just provides data and numbers and was calibrated by our researchers. You can look at our sources for this video - even if we hadn't designed our battle simulator, we would have presented the video in the exact same manner and arrived at a similar conclusion. There was no actual footage, and I doubt my audience wants to see me present code for 10 minutes. That's something I can show on my side channel if there's interest. At no point did we claim we had scientific information, hence the disclaimer, "this is just our opinion" at the beginning of the video. Lastly, we make these videos to both inform and to entertain. In real life, these types of engagements would have lasted hours, but we've condensed the battles to make them easier and more interesting to watch and understand...
soviets vs americans or chinese vs japanese
Hi
You should ussr squad and american squad
Czechoslovak vs German 1938
WWII France vs. German or WWII Britain vs. German (1940)
So, two things I noticed in all three engagements, which I find curious: One, the Germans are always passive, being satisfied with pinning down the Americans. Meanwhile the Americans always try to gain the initiative via fire and maneuver. Two, all German squads have run out of handgrenades.
The simulation program tests both squads being aggressive, and both being passive. If I could go back and rewrite the script, I definitely would have shown the Germans on the offensive more and using their grenades. I think we ended up making them more passive because these are the type of low-quality static troops you'd find in Normandy, not the active and well equipped Panzergrenadiers, Waffen SS, or even Volksgrenadiers you'd see later on. And yeah the Germans definitely should have been seen using their grenades more, but really all of these problems are just in the narrative of the individual engagements and so the overall statistical results remain the same.
The Armchair Historian how did you write the script? And how could a script possible factor in human emotions etc.
@@DTOStudios actually your argument about german troops being passive/defensive at any point during WW II is not right. German doctrin was always to be aggressive. For reference consult Martin van Crevelds works o the topic. On the topic of grenades, the standard loadout for german riflemen should be somewhere between 1 and 4 grenades.
@@DTOStudios '...would have been much more aggressive. ' Nope. The opposite was the case as veterans have told me and as the US Army concluded when it assessed it's own performance after the war. In very direct language your Army identified it's basic problem as not knowing how to, 'get it's soldiers to fight.' Gung ho? Possibly. Aggressive? No. The Germans would complain the Americans would always refuse to fight and relied on artillery and air power etc.
@@TheArmchairHistorian Thanks for Clearing that up! It was very interesting to watch in any case, I truly appreciate your work.
The Germans made a key mistake, they forgot Hans with the Flammenwerfer.
Flammenwerfer*
It werfs flammen
Correction hans get the big shovel!
as far as I know flamers were only used in bunker type scenarios, clearing out buildings and the like...the propane tank was a huge vulnerability, any stray bullet would take out the squad...but very useful in dealing with gorilla tactics...
@@SuperSpasticNinja lmao xD
I love that everyone here is only mad about the Germans not using grenades, not much else. Just “what about German grenades!!”
@John Fallon yeah, from what ive read its mainly works by concussion effect, not the fragmentation. Thus, its much less effective than mills and pineapple grenade
@@gilangw595 yes, ive read the Germans had the stick blast grenade, and a smaller more round frag, the blast was supposed to be used to disorient the enemy before engaging in close
I went to coments to write something about german granades and straight away found this...😄 And people are right. Tactic of german ww2 squod was to pin down an enemy with mg and destroy it with granades or mortar fire. Or with flanking move. So, GJ presented wrongly germ.sq. tac. here.
They are right. Germans used grenades too.
I like how these people want the nazis to win. Like there complaining how the nazis didn’t win. Smh I thought they were the bad guys. I mean I want things to be accurate just as much as the next but I don’t think a grenade would have really made them win
The M1 rifle was a significant improvement in firepower over the Mauser 98 (itself great for a bolt action). I own both... great guns. On the other hand, the MG42 was a much more modern and effective LMG than the old M1919 the US was using at the time. The BAR was reliable but was pretty poor for its intended role as a lighter more portable LMG than the M1919 as it didn't have a quick change barrel and was very heavy for what it was. It also was limited to a 20 round magazine. The Bren gun was a much better gun in a similar role.... or the FN made BAR variant that the Polish adopted... quick-change barrel and pistol grip....truly the peak of BAR development.
The consumption of ammo for the MG 42 or 34 was too high and with lousy logistics the Germans were at a severe disadvantage to the Allies
Comparing an M1 with a k98 is like comparing a G43 with a Springfield. Stupid
I had no idea there was an FN BAR. I just looked it up. It was from 1928. It looks like a hell of a weapon. But the Bren was the best for it's role. Also the standard section load out have room for 150 Lee Enfield rounds and 2 bren clips. That's a lot more mobile and convenient than the belts and huge ammo boxes you'd see the entire German squad lugging around instead of firing their rifle
The MP/StG44 was a major improvement over both the Garand, and the BAR,…but to few in quantity and ammunition.
My name is "User Name", I BAITED so badly by jager that I lose my credibily to anyone sees my comment. I got paraded, tossed and dragged with all total humiliation and embarassment, I played by jagers hands. I spent years policing the comment section and perfectly polish it to look that I am believable, but I lost it all. To my family, friends and fellow workers especially my mother you can't look at me I'm in total shame now 🤡🤡🤡
Fortunately for the Allies, in the later stages of the war, American Sergeants were issued with waterproof matchbooks.
This video is useless because the Germany’s were fighting other European countries and then everybody says the US won the wAR
Well, they did, didn’t they? This video illustrates and explains a few scenarios where Us engaged German troops. It’s point is to show some engagements, not explain the entire war in hearts of iron style
@@PeyYiYong Sorry, I was just making a joke rather than a serious point.
I guess he lost his zippo lighter.
@@euansmith3699 I think he is answering to the other guy that thinks america didn't win the war somehow.
"Sir, I'm hit! I'm bleeding from my head!" "You'll be fine son, just stay down!" "SIR, I GOT HOLES IN MY STOMACH!" "Just a flesh wound! You'll be fine!" *NCO runs out of dry matches for his cigarette "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE"
Haha.. 😀👌
LMAO XD
Mifthahul Fikri the DRY matches give them special powers that let their men not die when shot 10 time in the chest that’s why the us army make special never get wet matches so we can’t die if the NCO is alive and has matches
The fact that the MG3 that Germany uses today as a medium machine gun very effectively, is almost exactly the MG42 speaks for itself.
So this is basically a KZhead version of “The Deadliest Warrior”
yo i was thinking the same thing
@@possumsalad6614 yeah except it’s not complete horseshit
Dope concept
No Hollywood history
Oh man lol I miss that show!
The British vs Germans and Japanese vs Americans I would like to see
I don’t think there was ever a standard American infantry against a Japanese one. It was just marines Edit: or a modified infantry unit specialized to fight in such terrain. But not a standard unit
Also French vs Italians
also Russians and Germans
@@ryanovski one surrender and the other change side so both lose
I agree
Let's hope it doesn't get privated again.
why what happened
One of the best history channels I have stumbled upon recently, the style of it, the showcase of weapons is all favorable and unique. Keep doing what you do.
The thing terrified me the most is MG42 effective range 1km, ROF 1k2rpm, and " LIGHT MACHINE GUN"
Curious what a German Heavy Machine Gun would be like…
@@ryerial7723 One example of a German HMG is a 13mm that's so heavy it would technically be considered an autocannon instead lol.
It's a GPMG, not a LMG.
Pretty much considered the prototype general purpose machine gun, but I agree it’s terrifying.
@@ryerial7723 MG42 on a tripod. Light and heavy mean the doctrinal use and not the actual weight in the german army.
The armchair historian: Forgets a weapon to give a small documentary *cries in kar98k*
The most produced among the featured and obviously more reliable ...
Or maybe the Gewheir Semi Automatic Rifle
Jonathan Bielawski The Gewehr 43 was not a common sight, especially later in the war, they were expensive to produce and suffered from parts breakage in the field, so german production remained focused on the K98k
watch C&Rsenal. They give 1hr long documentaries and discussions about different guns (so far they are only WW1 weapons)
what about the american M3 Assault rifle?
I think a French 1940 squad v German 1940 squad would be cool Or a Italy v Britain 1941
The French Army’s equipment outclassed the Germans in many ways in 1940. The problem was French military doctrine had not advanced past World War One. They, just like the rest of Europe, were not ready for the blitzkrieg.
Dispite both the British and Italians roughly having the same amount of training. The Italian equipment, especially on terms of reliability was terrible. So the British definitely held a advantage over the Italians.
@@theanglo-lithuanian1768 Some of the Italian equipment was great. The bigger problem was that the Italian supply chain was an absolute nightmare. Virtually no Italian division was well supplied even before they were sent abroad. Then they arrived in the country they would be fighting in for Italy to fail to give them more supplies. Basically Italy was technologically advanced enough but didn't have 1/2 the industrial base they needed to supply their troops and were severely disorganized on top of that.
@@flynnstone3133 not realy
@Rango's old dead chann true
That Staff Sergeant: Oh my god! My lighter is out! This is an EMERGENCY!!!
Great episode I loved this new format. Reminded me of a show where they would act out and demonstrate a fight between different army groups or types of soldiers. I really hope you make more of these!
Summary: Grenade spamming is the superior tactic.
@Jack Guyett and redpilled
based
kzhead.info/sun/ZbqFeLtpcHR_mas/bejne.html
You should be a General
ben jerke based
I can't light my cigarette because the matches are wet, the war is lost
Even when he did win he got diagnosed with cancer after the war ended
yea
"I do not have my code book. What does that mean?" -- René Artois, _'Allo 'Allo!_
xcatrockz the US did have that kind of food in their MRE kits especially during the late war stage.
xcatrockz during the late war stage the US soldiers would have received an early form of the M&M it was made to prevent chocolate from melting in fact the old slogan was “melts in you’re mouth not in you’re hand”.
I loved evrything about this video... The idea behind it, the animations, the top down bird view to follow movements and lines of fire, the original weapon videos... Speaking of which... The american and german guy(s) who wrote the scripts for the weapon introductions deserve a raise :D Short, but informative and even funny(the original videos i mean) All in all an very nice video and well spent 15 min of my life 🙂
Omg....you actually demonstrate understanding of the difference between clips and magazines. Nice.
Fallschirmjäger vs. British Paratroopers next
Good one
I would have picked the American 82nd or 101st vs Fallschrimjagers
I agree that would be great
Would be nice to look at the battle of Ypenburg (Netherlands 1940) there the Dutch decimated the Fallschirmjägers.
Alot of new stuff we can get now with this new type of series
I’d really like to see Soviets versus Germans, around Stalingrad, or Soviets against Cold War Americans
Do you watch Military History Visualized? I HIGHLY RECOMMEND his content for anyone interested in the organizational abilities of both the Soviets and Germans on both a tactical and strategic level on the Eastern Front. He even delves into modern warfare topics.
Everybody knows zis 'information' komrade. Does ze need 're-edukation'?
Would't even be a competition between german and soviet troops but where the germans had skill the Soviets had endless waves of troops and tanks
@@karsten3360 * Sigh * Again with the Cold war Propoganda about the Wermacht being skilled and proffesional soldiers while the Soviet troops just being endless mindless hordes?
Karsten Please read from the Soviet side. Your just getting your information from Cold War German story’s and stuff. It wasn’t just endless...
The BAR wasn't the only light machine gun we had. You're forgetting about the M1919 Browning 30 caliber machine gun. It was also belt fed, and like the M1 Garand and BAR, the M1919 also fired 30-06. It had a slower rate for fire than the MG-42, but that meant it didn't overheat as quickly. The M1919 didn't require a barrel change either, it was also smaller and lighter than the Germans machine gun.
the m1919 was not a standard squad weapon but a platoon weapon. so it makes sense it did not appear in the video
yeah it wasnt standard issue for an american squad
True, but the M1919 wasn't an infantry squad weapon. There were like 4 of them in the rifle company's heavy weapons platoon and they were doled out as needed. They weren't an organic weapon for the squad, so they were probably left out.
"On a man for man basis, German ground soldiers consistently inflicted casualties at about a 50 percent higher rate than they incurred from the opposing British and American troops under all circumstances (emphasis in original). This was true when they were attacking and when they were defending, when they had a local numerical superiority and when, as was usually the case, they were outnumbered, when they had air superiority and when they did not, when they won and when they lost." -Col. Trevor Dupuy
Audie Murphy....'Hold my beer a minute......'🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Question, isn't the attacking force expected to take more casualties than the defenders?
What a great comment! I don't think I'll bother watching the video!
My UK high school history teacher shot down 8 Luftwaffe planes with only 6 weeks flight training.....The RAF Polish squadron shot down Nazi planes at will. On Battle of Britain Day there was a 2 to 1 kill ratio in favor of the Allies. The Brits downed the entire Axis fleet at Cape Matapan. Lies, damned lies and statistics....🤣🤣🤣🤣
You see and no offense, that's not something a colorprole would have accecese too.
Lmfao GI Jesus. That has got to be one of the best things I've heard.
GI Jesus is our savior
Cowboy vibes :D
Don't use the lords name in vain
@@ghost_wolf8472 Exactly, mate.
@@ghost_wolf8472 yes don't use lord chamberlain's name in vain.
The Germans were doomed the moment the sergeant discarded his cigarette.
Nice Band Of Brothers reference.
Lol
He was more pissed that he had to chuck his cig.
Daddy was a paratrooper he said the German soldier was a good soldier.
@@robertbarlow6715 My grandad was a paratrooper too, he said his one regret was he didn't get to kill enough Nazis.
"The squad leaders maches are wet" That one cracked me up pretty good
And don't even get me started on the M1/M2 Carbine, M1903 Springfield, M1941 Johnson. The yanks really had a weapon for EVERY situation.
tbf the Johnson and M2 Carbines weren't really used in WW2 all that much with the Johnson only really seeing use with the Paramarines and the Red Devils for instance. But you are right on weapons like the M1 Garand.
@@crumpetcommandos779 true.
I like the Carbine however from experience of those I've spoke to they hated it because the weapon was sometimes ineffective and crap
@@crumpetcommandos779 The M2 Carbines glory days were in the Korean War. Some of my friends carried it
@@CrossOfBayonne yep they were used a lot in Korea, they had some very limited use near the end of WW2 and were used by ARVN troops in Vietnam also
I love how in the third round the Sergeant is half busy trying to smoke a cigarette the entire time he and his squad is in battle.
Well of course he is. A cigarette is the source of an American Sergeants power, energy, and overall bad*ssery.
Lol yeah. And when the sergeant was looking for dry matches. To relight his cig? Lol.
Its him trying to make himself seem active and useful, as bureucrats tend to do....the german groupleader and assistant were active brave fighters...
Armchair Historian: Deadliest Warrior Edition
The most recent armchair history success known to this National Speleological Society member happened when Google Earth had seated explorer residents of Alberta . To locate any undiscovered cave entrance. It allowed them to locate, explore, and do Grade- 6 Cartography of the deepest limestone cave yet found in North America, I can see today where this Deadliest Warrior Edition needs a pair to explore shallow social topography .
make it happen!!
Make more of these happen! I’d love to see more of these
...miss that show
Even better than Deadliest Warrior
The Germans were very good at defensive withdrawal, which was very common. If an allied squad made contact with a German squad , usually the MG42 nest would remain intact until there were casualties. Then they fall back, reset and do it again. It was demoralizing to the allies . What they learned to do later on was to use at least 3 platoons one in the middle and two on each flank. They would try to use pincers type movement to halt any retreating once the positions were engaged.
Nothing matches the quality of this channel! The narration and animation is done so beautifully well. AH really knows how to put us there and I love it!
This project reminds me of History Channel shows from way back when they were about history.
Woah woah, are you saying Bigfoot’s romance with lizard people isn’t historical?
Katsarelas good point 😂
What about : Monster motor challenge? Tiny house makeover, Shipping wars, And other food tv shows? Aren't they historical enough 4 u?
Tbh i don't blame 'em. They need money, and most people are too fucking stupid to care about history
I don't believe you, so let me call a buddy of mine to examine your comment more thoroughly.
"I fear no German, but wet matchsticks. It scares me."
Passchendaele
Wet matchsticks scare me to
I have constant Nightmares when I have wet matchsticks
Should've brought a zippo
Nice tf2 reference
A genuinely interesting and innovative video. Thanks!
I’m already loving this new series!
Don't forget - Hans with Flamethrower Germans had also Handgranades Germans was not always sitting down and waiting for enemy's attack... And...many of German soldiers at this time was 5 years in action - battle experience is more important then training. 🤷♂️ This is also the reason of kill ratio. Check the numbers.
@@KarsonNow Mate, that was 9 months ago, I get people are pissed due to some inconsistencies but we should just let go fo it.
Desert Rats vs Rommel's Ghost Division Allied vs Axis Paratroopers (I just love the Fg 42) WWI stormtroopers compared Stormtroopers vs clone troopers
"Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOOK!!" -General Patton
The fg-42 is sooo sexy
@@michaeltheundeadmariachi4494 O! look at that, the cowboy can read!
I can see it now, germany vs soviet union. "As the 12 german soldiers round the corner one takes a shot at the closest russian seconds before the 340 russians notice him"
"The only problem for the Russians? Theres only 50 rifles to go around."
Sean Person Aye i saw that in a movie
People really need to stop getting all their history from enemy at the gates
The rest have submachine guns
Why tf would Germans fire at Germans?
i like this video format, you should do more of these, like 5 of these narrated battle simulations every video in that mini series
I enjoyed watching these simulations and listening to your analysis.
It seems like the germans forgot how to use their grenades in these scenarios...
well... it for historical accuracy... USF need to won period. imagine germans have their stielhangranate ready... those pesky flanking manuver would be done for.. but USF would lose and that is unacceptable and historically inaccurate
A lot of Germans weren’t equipped that well at this point so they relied on the MGs, most of their resources got spent fighting the Russians.
@@brojangles8816 Hello? Hand grenades were readily available and standard issue for every regular German infantryman, even in the later stages of the war. Your argument is nonsense.
darkawakening01 Obviously not my man.
@@brojangles8816 The German war industry did face major shortages in raw materials when it came to Tungsten, Oil, Rubber and various exotic metals. But there was never a shortage on explosives, as they can be produced with domestic resources. Just saying that your argument is not supported by facts.
When schultz forgets the grenades in paris
😂😂😂
Mein Gott Schultz! You had von job!
* sad hitler noises *
Dammit Schultz
Guess they did NAZI that coming?
Awesome animation. Thank you for the update..!!
Wish we watched this in high school. Your channel is full of historical information and I love it all!
2:14 this guy casually shoots backwards over his head Pretty gangster
What does the US infantry have in common with the US mafia...…? lol That was a funny comparison.
That's Random Bullet McGee from Chicago's Southside. The guy was a maverick at cold meat making.
AOT refference?
I see everyone asking for the next comparison but u just gotta appreciate how much effort they put in this video, the animations, the research and how it all ties together. Thank you prob best ww2 I have seen!
I mean the recommendations are because at the end of the video he literally asks for recommendations for the next one they are gonna do
@@seanperson2032 I think both of y'all can be right. I agree with Tree Man that we should appreciate how much effort Armchair History puts into their videos. And Sean you're right that he asked for suggestions/recommendations. We're all on the same page :)
Great video, I really loved the instructional video parts where the main guns were reviewed
3:23 to skip ad
IM HIT IN THE HEAD IM HIT IN THE STOMACH MY MATCHES ARE WET
Should've brought some extras..*GODDAMMIT!*
Mom's spaghetti
I would like to see a weird comparison: The Avarage Union Soldier Vs The Avarage Confederate soldier in the American Civil war
It would be a 2-1 union victory. The one win for the confederacy comes at the start of the war where the union troops were overly confident and had less effective commanders but by around 1862/63 the union overcomes those obstacles
I'd give early to Confederates but late to the Union
Union was highly industrialized compared to Confederate. No question there. Result will be the same.
@@Spongebrain97 Nah by 1862 the Confederates were still superior. 1863 is when the Union became their equals and better
@Netluxe TV I think we can count the Texans as “ professional” units lol
Best video! Love this format!!!
I LOVE these types of videos!!
That environment looks surprisingly similar to the Carentan map from Men of War: Assault Squad 2...................I should know because I have nearly 4000hrs played on the damn thing haha! I recognise the assets
Carentan is a really good map. Love that thing. Have you tried playing Cerubolon's defense missions or Sir Hinkel's campaigns about the Eastern Front?
That's my favorite game. We used the editor to get screenshot references for our artists.
@@TheArmchairHistorian there's a difference between referencing and tracing. I also have 2000+ hours on Men of war and the imagery used is near exact outlines with some changes in the foreground. I get that it's expensive and takes time for your animators to make unique visuals. But, it seems lazy and unconvincing when you use Men of War in simulated combat situation that's supposed to show how a real life squad would perform.
@@bridgehater5101 Oh comon give the guy a break. This is still quality free content so don't complain. Now regarding the video I would be interested to see how early US troops would fair against German squads. The outcome would likely be much different. I do feel they also missed a solid point on the fact the Germans were fighting a defensive battle at this point. Which cost the US some horrendous losses in men. Also the battles portrayed here made it seem like everything can be solved with a grenade? Umm the Germans had grenades too, did they forget how to use them in all 3 of the battles? What about the STG44? This late in the war the Germans would have some of these in their arsenal. Which is a amazing gun for it's time. They also had the G43 which is on par with the M1.
@@bridgehater5101 you really gonna complain free content ? Wtf bro
“And the squad leaders matches were wet, which made the predicament far worse. ~Griffin Johnsen 14:25
The wet matches increases the predicament 10 fold
@@zealousdoggo Wet Matches: A negative effect By -15 Of the Searge Leadership to Command. "Give em some dry ones to increase Squad Stats and Effects"
Really cool video. Would love to see more like this
how did u add the "old timey" audio to the regular audio for the weapon interviews
I’d like to see a French vs Germans in 1940 or a Japanese vs Americans in 1941-45
Full Tilt Boogie well yes but actually yes
Full Tilt Boogie they had a good reason to surrender.
@Full Tilt Boogie America never fought a 100 year war you clown
I think German troops easily Win against French and Japan probably loses against us troops because of equipment
@@Manomanali Hellllll NAHH by pure equipment the Germans had by far the better weapons and vehicles. If the Americans win, its probably cause of their creativity and better moral.
"...he throws away his cigarette...", "...the squad leaders matches are wet..." -- You guys did a damn good job!
Yeah a damn good job in doing some Hollywood version of a Fighting situation
The video was great.....waiting for more❤️
When you eliminate the outside advantages the allies squads had you ignore the realities of ground warfare as it was.
A squad of Emus vs a squad of the Australian army 😂
Someone knows his history here 😁
The emus would win. No competition.
Emu is too OP
The Aussies have never being able to live that one down.
I won't sleep until I get to see this!
i interviewed a German Lieutenant of the Fallschirmjägers who fought in Italy till wars end. he said that American organization was catastrophic. in one instance they were defending a valley near a forest edge and a US mixed patrol of infantry and armour was heading past the valley entrance. their Mg opened up on the US infantry causing some casualties as the rest took cover at a rocky section to the right of the valley entrance. the stuarts with them began charging towards the german lines, leaving the pinned down US infantry behind them. the Lt. said this was a perfect situation for them as tanks of that era were as close to being totally blind as it could get. without infantry suppourt the stuarts were destroyed with a mix of light AT and a panzerschrek they had. With the tanks gone, the remaning US infantry patrol retreated. other things he mentioned was that US patrols were loud, either hearing them talking at a distance or simply the heavy treading of them walking at night. this actually fits what Australian accounts had to say about US troops in Vietnam, that compared to Australian patrols, US ones caused a lot of noise. The other thing interestingly was the Camo nets issued to M1 helmets. for some reason the netting actually made the helmets stand out more in the forests and it was easier to spot US troops. This guy eventually took shrapnell to the throat and spent the last two months of the war in a field hospital. as a POW after the war he was part of a POW crew whose task was to find allied soldiers remains at older battlefields and bury them, they were only allowed by the British guards to bury German dead on their day off, sunday
i have the same experience with my grandfather, his friend and others i know from my family when they talked about war. The US, were never 'good' in what they are doing in the war. Only the elite-formations like rangers or paratroopers doe something good. But the regular infantry units werent a match.
All the soldiers I have spoken to agree that the Americans were very noisy. Soldiers from both sides of the war. As for the Vietnam war, the vets I have spoken to say that you could smell the Americans before you heard them and you could hear them a long way off. The smell of Tobacco and Weed that is.
Anecdotes are useful but you can’t completely rely on them
Hello World umm the Chinese Indians British Australians and nukes helped Japan empire and America one on one America would lose the pacific war
Hello World also ussr joined in too
Honestly, this reminds me of Deadliest Warrior, and I can't wait to see more.
Company of Heroes Germans with kar98: keeps distance while firing. Germans upgraded with mp40: BANZAI!!!
Volksgrenadiers*
@@nahyeahwhatsahandle he didn’t mention coh2
The way he is standing at 1:15 makes it look like a character select screen
I like the idea of this video, but without showing actual footage, outcomes or the code from the simulator you used, it feels very artificial to act as if you've got scientific information on exactly what squad would be better. I'm aware the simulator likely just lists kills back and forth after the code is done running, and so I highly doubt it actually features things like cover, stealth, and the garrisoning of buildings and the like. I get that you want to make the raw data actually interesting for a video, but at the same time it's hard to believe the outcomes when you get into things like garrisoning a church, storming it, being chased up the church and then causing a retreat by the destruction of an enemy position. The main thing is that depending on the code, the simulator could be as useful as wet bread. I love playing some Men of War, but I'd never use it to actually simulate real world battles because of the lack of a proper suppression system in that game resulting in men able to sprint about under fire without a care in the world, and the way that machine guns behave like hyper accurate instant death machines as opposed to suppression weapons as they should. I don't think there can truly be a system that anyone fully agrees realistically simulates combat. The existence of wildly different World War 2 tabletop war games is evidence enough for that, no one can quite agree how to actually game it out.
Hi Rimmy, The team did not blindly depend on the simulation to write the script. The battles included were completely made up and animated by hand to serve as a narrative for a video. There was no church tower or storming of the tower in the simulation. The engagements were constructed to reflect our research about how the two country's squads behaved. The simulation does take into account for morale, suppression, intelligence, training, etc., however, it does not have any visuals, it just provides data and numbers and was calibrated by our researchers. You can look at our sources for this video - even if we hadn't designed our battle simulator, we would have presented the video in the exact same manner and arrived at a similar conclusion. There was no actual footage, and I doubt my audience wants to see me present code for 10 minutes. That's something I can show on my side channel if there's interest. At no point did we claim we had scientific information, hence the disclaimer, "this is just our opinion" at the beginning of the video. Thanks for the feedback, Griff
@@TheArmchairHistorian I would definitely be interested in the way this simulator works.
@@TheArmchairHistorian Would it be possible if the code was open sourced? I am curious to see what it looks like.
bruh rimmy really pulling up he said its an opinion at the start it was just a simulation they did not a scientific report.
Sausymayo We’re planning one turning it into a video game so I don’t want to give away all my code or even release the program yet.
More of these videos, better than most movies these days
I think there is a typo at 5:30 20rpm is slower than a bolt action. Cyclic rate is close to 700rpm. Not that anyone pulls it that fast.
I would love to see US Vs USSR squads in period of Cuba missile crisis
i want 1962 cuba and 1985 heartland america
Yes
Us relied on air support and helies. Soviets were still using more numerous men
amani Just call in Air Support and bomb most of the Soviets into oblivion and then take out the rest.
Sasongko Productions precisely
As much as I agree with the conclusion there’s some huge problems here. The effective range of an M1 is far beyond 450 meters. No competent soldier wastes his automatic weapons by placing them high up in bell towers. Machine guns need to stay low to sweep across multiple axis of fire. Put your best riflemen in the tower and have him act as a designated marksman and spotter for the others.
Is that inline with german doctrine at the time? And is there any modern doctrine that would support this idea?
I guess it would depend on the situation, there are tactics for having a machine gun rain down on the opposition, if they are stupid enough to be in the open and close together.
The rifle is capable the average infantry man is not. In which environment do you have a bell tower?
exactly what I was taught in the Army :) And never ever put your machine gun team in a position where it gets no cover left and right by a two man squad
Will there be more of these videos? They are pretty amusing.
interesting to see the influence of the MG42 being very common in just about all forms of WW2 media, the visual of german soldiers in a defensive position using MG42s is iconic
imagine how amazing would a strategy game made by these guys, especially with that art style
The MS game Close Combat would be your best bet. Give it a shot!
I had an uncle who served in the British 6th Airborne (Gliders) and was made a POW during the Ardennes Offensive, a.k.a. “The battle of the Bulge”. He related the incident to me and it transpired that his unit was attacked by a unit from the Waffen SS. He said they were the most professional soldiers he had ever seen. He did not like them but acknowledged their efficiency. The last he saw of his jeep in that incident was it being dismantled by a 20mm flak cannon. He also said that the only thing that truly scared him was the Mg42 and saw his friend torn apart by one. There is little question that the German soldier was a formidable foe and it was only the strength in numbers and the unavoidable attrition that eventually beat them.
Good video, yet again. FYI, the fist means "FREEZE!". Halt is indicated using the hand with fingers extended and touching each other, kind of like a traffic officer or like raising your hand in class.
"Feuerunterdrückungsleistung" I love how long german words can get.
8:54 Ah a classic manouvre; one that brothers in arms players will remember fondly. The three F's folks. Find, fix, flank
people rememer ^_^
These polygons look like maps from men of war assault squad 2.
They are! :)
@@TheArmchairHistorian The whole episode was taken off of Deadliest Warrior
@@TheArmchairHistorian someone said MoWAS2
@@theShermanator Wow
@@theShermanator I love your CoH plays
wow, I thought I was the only one who did this when I was playing my strategy games. This is so cool!
Dope stuff bro
My grandpa really never told my family about the war other than this; the Germans didn’t miss like they were portrayed to in movies and pop culture, they hit just as often as anyone else.
The German squad of 1944, had 2 MP40's, and did not always have the MG42. MG34's were still in wide use by 1945 within German rifle companies. These squads also had more than one NCO.
The typical German squad would use bolt action Kar98k's, Schmisser Submachine guns, STG44s, and most importantly MG support or Panzerfaust or sherk launchers for taking on armor.
@@CrossOfBayonne The Stg was not in wide use as it was expensive to produce so not every squad and most certainly not your run of the mill squad would have one
@@ringwraithdestroyer Pretty sure only the Waffen SS divisions used them kinda wide spread.
@@kimjongun1348 Volksgrenadier squads also used STG44s, but on an infantry level they were a mixed bag.
@@IHateKZheadHandlesVeryMuch Gotcha.
13:21 Thats actually a 1928 Thompson. You can tell because the bolt is on top while the M1A1 Thompson has its bolt on the side.
The sargent shouldn't have a Thompson anyway in Normandy no Thompson were available in the official TOE of the American infantry units
Love your videos, I subscribed also!!!!
Germans lost the war because they had no grenades. Now we know
Yes! That’s correct 👏
@@chucknormalaid I think it was a joke, mate...
@@chucknormalaid You dumb? grenades didnt exist till last year
@@theparadigm8149 It couldn't have been more obvious either
@@iamyourmom2 True!
I like both styles of the US Army and Wehrmacht weapon descriptions. The Wehrmacht sounded like your typical propaganda. While for the US Army, I was just waiting for him to say "Get yours today for only $49.99"
The direct translation of "spray and pray" sounds a bit cringey in German, though.
Man it’s nice seeing a reference to men of war series, such an underrated game series but it’s one of the best wwii simulations
I recognized the map in an instant. I miss the old mow multiplayer days
Although i like the squad v squad videos, I think videos on the overall superiority of entire armies and their doctrines would be cool.
The quality of this production is absolutely impeccable
It keeps getting better and better
No German would ever - never ever - say "Beten und Sprühen" - the direct translation of pray and spray. That just doesn't exist. No complaint. Just a footnote. Cool video. As always.
Whoever wrote this must have been playing csgo with an ak
Wouldn't it be something like "Draufhalten (und Beten)"?
Joseph Stalin gave us a footnote about his Nazi Germany history. Saying, '..respect comes when their boot is crushing your throat or your boot is crushing their throat.' No, he did not ask to learn which boot you'd prefer.
@@danilovega2029 If you are talking about suppressive fire than it would be Unterstützungsfeuer
@@def3ndr887 you are probably a silver noob
Sehr tolles Video!👍
Love this channel
What about the Soviets? Next video idea?
I think the soviets were just superior terms of quantity. They mainly focused on overpowering the enemy by steamrolling into battle in huge numbers. Crazy. Brave and strong, but still crazy.
@@kuratr This is incorrect. Soviets had tricky and efficient tactics.
@@user-rq6bg1gz6o agreed, especially if you've seen the corners they cut in mass producing T-34s, they came up with some pretty ingenious cheap solutions to compete with german armor (floating track pins and slanted front armor plating comes to mind)
@@kuratr You'd think that, but Russia is by far superior in winter offensive.
@@kuratr nope. WW1 prooved that machineguns and artillerry can deal with any manpower You can put on a field. Russian|Soveit meatwaves is just another myth. So soviet offensives were based on concentrated manpower heavy supported by concentrated artillery and mortars, with attaks on fake directions. I think concentration of Soviet artillery in big operations are not surpassed to a day. Also there were used such taktics as this - artillery fired non stopping moving fire from front into a deep and infantry followed this fire DURING fire, capturing front positions. This takes some skill in coordination. Germans base their tacktics around MGs 34\42. Soviets around 82mm mortar.
you guys know, that the germans also hat little things called grenades? xD
The germans literally call their infantrymen grenadiers.. Also, when he said the American soldiers get more training, you have to keep in mind that Germans had some veterans who fought for years. There are some rookies in the German army especially in 1944, but not all of them. This is a little biased.
@@oven5997 Yes and no, while the german army had a lot of veterans, most of them often were engaged on the eastern front while the lower ranking officers normally would stay on the western front, up until 1945 in most scenarios. At least that´s when it comes to soldiers on foot, the Panzer divisions on the west were the strong suit of the germans alongside the Luffwaffe
didn’t the krauts have Gewehr 43 and STG 44’s as well?
@@Munibahmad241 Not commonly.
Hm yes throw grenades and risk standing up. Grenades are limited and throwing them isn't easy and if dosen't kill them well then they know exactly where you are
Good video guys! 👍
We need more of these kinda videos. Do a vietnamese vs french.
“And the squad’s commanders matches were wet making the situation even more dire”
German Panzer units against British tank units [no infantry] map: Africa
Ded
Yeah, i think the answer is quite obvious) Our British tanks were utter crap.
@@wellardme The Desert Queen though
@@wellardme They made some pretty solid ones towards the end of the war, The MkVII Churchill for example or the Comet/Firefly, in fact it is thought that the firefly was one of the few tanks capable of penetrating the frontal armour of the king tiger (citing the curator of the tank museum) but there were some more questionable ones towards the beginning of the war for sure. The main reason for such high casualties in Africa was due to a lack of coordination with the infantry.
Tacticalsquad 5 early during the war British tanks were on a par with the vast majority of German armour and superior in many ways, it was just the British doctrine which was flawed. The majority of German tanks used in the Battle of France were Panzer I and II which even at the time were considered obsolete. It was testament to Blitzkrieg tactics that the German offensive was so successful despite the poor quality of their armoured force.
More of these simulations please!!