Particularly as it gives great reference to US learning experience and their adaptation in confronting challenges - on the fly changes and inventing doctrine that worked (like pulling a M12 155mm SP howitzer into a street fight to emphasise a point to some defending Germans and positioning artillery perpendicular [aka already flanking the position to be attacked] to teh axis of attack on a village, so that there is no longer a problem of short rounds [blue-on-blue] and the attacking infantry can "pounce" on still stunned defenders).
4 comments:
Sounds good!
I can honestly recommend it - I am even taking the dog out more often and on longer walks to get through it quicker ;) win .. win
It is interesting that you like it. It got panned when it was originally published so I never bought a copy.
That is interesting .. was it panned in just the academic press or across the hobby? it is making reference to Field Regulations and highlighting the difference between "yes in theory" but "this is what we have to do here and now". It is highlighting US "mistakes" and combat evolution. It stresses Combined Arms over single arm advantages .. seems balanced to me. Some good wargaming scenarios coming out of it. It highlighted that you knew when something was going wrong .. as you started losing US Officers! It does give a scale of the US commitment in the ETO (European Theatre of Operations). Respect is due!
Post a Comment