Soviet 746th Tank Regiment

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Nice image, James.

Earlier in the war, I think small units made up exclusively of captured vehicles (for relative ease of resupply) are plausible. Later in the war, I see local commanders making use of whatever is at hand- there'd be a lot more mixing than matching. There's historical precedent for this pattern in how the Germans made use of captured war material throughout the course of WWII.

I wouldn't want to use enemy vehicles too early in the War. Too many heavily armed aircraft still flying to be riding around in a "commandeered" AFV (no matter how many US markings you put on it). Later on (when the Exchange is over), I'd love to play "chameleon" with captured enemy equipment. It might just keep you alive long enough to "grab them by the belt and settle things."

Reading this thread, I cannot help but remember in Band of Brothers when the guy wearing a German smock got bayoneted by his squad mate as he woke him up for guard duty. Fratricide is a thing in war.

[Raellus]

+1 to Adm. Lee.

Originally Posted by swaghauler

I wouldn't want to use enemy vehicles too early in the War. Too many heavily armed aircraft still flying to be riding around in a "commandeered" AFV (no matter how many US markings you put on it). Later on (when the Exchange is over), I'd love to play "chameleon" with captured enemy equipment. It might just keep you alive long enough to "grab them by the belt and settle things."

You make a very valid point, but even not using captured AFVs can result in blue-on-blue incidents. Unfortunately, it's simply a side-effect of the inevitable "fog of war". For a recent example, during the 1st Gulf War, at least one Bradley IFV was destroyed by U.S. aircraft. During Barbarosa, and until the Germans lost air superiority on the eastern front, many of their Panzers had Nazi flags spread out on their topside as a recognition symbol to keep their own Stukas from bombing mistakenly bombing them.

Obviously, troops would take every reasonable precaution to avoid becoming the target of friendly-fire, but I see the need for armor outweighing any increased risk. Also, PACT weapons were already an integral part of the reunified German army (in the v.1.0 timeline) so I think improved training would be the solution, instead of avoiding the use of enemy armor.

[James Langham2]

Originally Posted by Raellus

+1 to Adm. Lee.



You make a very valid point, but even not using captured AFVs can result in blue-on-blue incidents. Unfortunately, it's simply a side-effect of the inevitable "fog of war". For a recent example, during the 1st Gulf War, at least one Bradley IFV was destroyed by U.S. aircraft. During Barbarosa, and until the Germans lost air superiority on the eastern front, many of their Panzers had Nazi flags spread out on their topside as a recognition symbol to keep their own Stukas from bombing mistakenly bombing them.

Obviously, troops would take every reasonable precaution to avoid becoming the target of friendly-fire, but I see the need for armor outweighing any increased risk. Also, PACT weapons were already an integral part of the reunified German army (in the v.1.0 timeline) so I think improved training would be the solution, instead of avoiding the use of enemy armor.

There is a good argument that the German Army in later versions would still have some of the kit in storage.

[James Langham2]

Updated with a few extra thoughts on the creation of the unit.