OtherGround Forums The Red Army of WW2? How terrifying were they?

5 days ago
7/27/11
Posts: 25287

My knowledge of WW2 is pretty limited compared to some of the guys on the OG, but exactly how good were they by war's end compared to the Americans or Brits? 

 

OG military history fans, help me out.

5 days ago
3/10/11
Posts: 1046

Their strength was in sheer numbers. Not superior technology or methods. 

5 days ago
11/7/07
Posts: 19743
Adonis RNA - 

Their strength was in sheer numbers. Not superior technology or methods. 


true about numbers, but their tank, the T-34, was a game changer against the panzers
5 days ago
5/14/09
Posts: 10202
The Great Red Rape Machine
5 days ago
11/5/03
Posts: 11573
It wasn't that great Stalin killing most of the competent ones before the war; they got their asses kicked until Stalingrad and simply had more manpower and resources.
5 days ago
3/10/11
Posts: 1047
Ramon Maroni -
Adonis RNA - 

Their strength was in sheer numbers. Not superior technology or methods. 


true about numbers, but their tank, the T-34, was a game changer against the panzers

Only because of the sheer numbers.

 

They were able to produce so many, so fast, and the people were expendable. One on one, the t34 is fucked. But when you have 3 tanks for every one of theirs...

5 days ago
11/7/07
Posts: 19744
Adonis RNA - 
Ramon Maroni -
Adonis RNA - 

Their strength was in sheer numbers. Not superior technology or methods. 


true about numbers, but their tank, the T-34, was a game changer against the panzers

Only because of the sheer numbers.

 

They were able to produce so many, so fast, and the people were expendable. One on one, the t34 is fucked. But when you have 3 tanks for every one of theirs...


well this is true as well, but historically the T-34 is a highly regarded combat tank
5 days ago
3/10/11
Posts: 1048
Cutty McButts - The Great Red Rape Machine

Very true. Warfare was hell. Raping the woman of a German village after you roll in there was basically a right in their eyes. 

5 days ago
3/10/11
Posts: 1049

Hey op, if your knowledge of WWII is limited and you want to expand it greatly, but don't want to read a fuckton.....

 

Watch "The World at War". It's a 1974 documentary series that is the most comprehensive video source on WWII. It is 26 hours long. But Every episode is amaizing, and you will come out of it with a solid grasp on the entire subject, 

5 days ago
4/2/10
Posts: 6501
One death is a tragedy. A million deaths is a statistic- uncle Stalin

They perfected the frontal assault and dieing for the motherland. Around 43 and the battle of Kursk, they figured out defense in depth but still relied on the massed assault on the offensive.
Why use a schae when a hammer will work too. They got shit done.
5 days ago
11/7/07
Posts: 19746
Adonis RNA - 

Hey op, if your knowledge of WWII is limited and you want to expand it greatly, but don't want to read a fuckton.....

 

Watch "The World at War". It's a 1974 documentary series that is the most comprehensive video source on WWII. It is 26 hours long. But Every episode is amaizing, and you will come out of it with a solid grasp on the entire subject, 


yep, another great one is "World War II in Color"
5 days ago
7/27/11
Posts: 25289
Adonis RNA -

Hey op, if your knowledge of WWII is limited and you want to expand it greatly, but don't want to read a fuckton.....

 

Watch "The World at War". It's a 1974 documentary series that is the most comprehensive video source on WWII. It is 26 hours long. But Every episode is amaizing, and you will come out of it with a solid grasp on the entire subject, 

I'm totally into reading more about it. Most of my knowledge is only related to WW2 era SOF units like the SAS/LRDG/Jedburghs. 

5 days ago
8/19/12
Posts: 6853
Well, they lost 12 million russian troops. So i can imagine their sheer numbers being pretty scary.
5 days ago
3/10/11
Posts: 1050
toelocku - It wasn't that great Stalin killing most of the competent ones before the war; they got their asses kicked until Stalingrad and simply had more manpower and resources.

Stalingrad was a complete game changer for Russian morale. 

 

They killed 70,000 Germans and captured another 100,000. The entire 6th army basically.

 

Before that, the German army was seen as invincible. 

5 days ago
1/1/01
Posts: 8126
Adonis RNA - 

Their strength was in sheer numbers. Not superior technology or methods. 


Their late-war tanks were beasts.
5 days ago
3/10/11
Posts: 1051
TheHaunted2 - Well, they lost 12 million russian troops. So i can imagine their sheer numbers being pretty scary.

This.

 

Between 8.5 & 14 million depending on the source. Stalin didn't give 2 shits about his people. "Not one step back", all who retreat are killed. Sheer numbers to overwhelm the enemy.

 

The one abundant resource Stalin had at his disposal was human life. So be it man or woman, it's off to the front line with you. 

5 days ago
7/14/08
Posts: 22720

They had immense numbers and gave nary a fuck about casualties.

 

Their kit was provided mostly by Americans and the British. Without those supplies (especially rubber and manufacturing. The US sent an entire factory to Russia in parts, assembled it and taught Russians how to manufacture replacement parts for the shit they gave them), The soviets were fucked. And Stalin was a retard.

4 days ago
11/12/16
Posts: 457

Edited: 4 days ago
7/10/02
Posts: 17087
They were also very primitive in their offense because it was far from only Russians, but tons of different groups from the Soviet Union. Communication was a very significant roadblock for finesse as most were illiterates that didn't speak Russian

From many accounts "front line" 1st quality Russian troops behaved hum, normally, as far as pillaging and raping went, until entering German land. While the more primitive easterners were as bad as advertised, as you'd expect Genghis Khans's hordes... or Muslim primitives to behave.

4 days ago
7/27/11
Posts: 25292

For the real history buffs, how battle hardened were the government/spetsnaz troops by 1945 compared to the SAS/SRS? 

Edited: 4 days ago
5/22/05
Posts: 16904
Varies a lot depending on the period of the war. By the end of the war they were probably on par with the Americans and British (they were still much more comfortable with high casualties than the Americans and British). German army was the best army of the war (and that century) by a fair margin.
4 days ago
7/27/11
Posts: 25293
banco - Varies a lot depending on the period of the war. By the end of the war they were probably on par with the Americans and British (they were still much more comfortable with high casualties than the Americans and British). German army was the best army of the war (and that century) by a fair margin.

What was the most effective unit in the SS?

 

I remember some guys posting some crazy statistics about the SS Wiking division and how much area they cleared on their own. 

4 days ago
4/22/07
Posts: 51658
Is it true they had more people than rifles, and would tell the ones without to grab the rifles off of dead russians?
4 days ago
5/22/05
Posts: 16905
ShanTheMan - Is it true they had more people than rifles, and would tell the ones without to grab the rifles off of dead russians?

In certain periods of the war yep.
4 days ago
5/10/04
Posts: 11284
Adonis RNA - 

Hey op, if your knowledge of WWII is limited and you want to expand it greatly, but don't want to read a fuckton.....

 

Watch "The World at War". It's a 1974 documentary series that is the most comprehensive video source on WWII. It is 26 hours long. But Every episode is amaizing, and you will come out of it with a solid grasp on the entire subject, 


This.

Probably the best one I have seen.