However, it is not just the author's career that lends itself to this book. Along with his late brother (a Territorial infantry officer), he fought over 200 battles on the table over a period of many years, refining and honing tactics, rules and procedures to determine how events could unfold in the real world. Alongside that, he has also self-translated two German-language texts by Erik Middeldorf, who served in the Wehrmacht and published his work in 1957. Combined with a wide range of other sources, personal communication and experience, the author has tried to tackle the question of what could have happened if the balloon had gone up in the 1980's.
The book is divided into four parts: Setting the Scene, Land Forces, Tactics, and Lessons. Setting the Scene prepares the reader in the geography and the location of the forces that would face each other there, a guide to the individual armies, total deployment numbers and the like, and details the approach the author has taken in reaching his conclusions - here we get an explanation as to how the two hundred plus games were used to generate the supporting evidence to the author's line of thought. It must be noted here that the primary goal of each game was NOT to win. Instead, it was to achieve a set aim or goal. The author reinforces this difference a number of times, highlighting the difference between what we games players do and what he and his brother were trying to achieve.
The largest single section of the book is Land Forces, and it is here that the author's knowledge, background and experiences come to the fore. In turn, he discusses the various branches of the land forces in central Europe. The use of reconnaissance, armour, infantry and anti-tank forces, engineers and artillery, the medical/supply and transport services, and finally, the use of battlegroups, brigades and divisions. Not really a spoiler, but it is in this section that you will find the author's most contentious views. The idea of what makes an effective tank, the effectiveness of well sited anti-tank forces and just what is the point of an IFV are just some of the topics well covered and whilst there will be dissenting games players out there (either with a points-based army that has served them well or a doctrinally/TOE correct force), it should again be noted that the arguments are put forward logically and are something that I for one would like to see trialled on a table with the rest of our particular group.
Tactics takes up most of the back half of the book and looks at defensive and offensive operations, along with air support and the issue of fighting in woods, built up areas and at night. Again, some of the arguments may not be to your liking but they are discussed persuasively and with great clarity.
Lessons brings everything together, with a hypothetical September 1987 conflict and some observations and conclusions. I'll not detail these here because you'll need to follow the author's line of argument. To do that, you'll need to buy this book.
And buy it, you should. This is an essential look at the latter years of the Cold War in Europe and provides a level of insight that I have yet to see bettered. Throughout there are diagrams and tables to illustrate and inform, and I defy any historical wargamer of this period not to gain something from a perusal of this work. True, not everyone will agree with the author but that is to miss the point. This is a carefully argued and evidenced volume on what might have happened if the Cold War had kicked off. It makes damning reading for those with pre-conceived notions but it does (and this is the key point) make you think. Rather than just blindly following abstract rules, this invaluable book pushes the reader to question their own approach to wargaming of that period as well as the accepted historical views of the forces, tactics and strategies concerned. It really is that much of an essential purchase.
Battlegroup! can be purchased directly from the Helion & Co website here.
I liked the read. I just mildly disagree on the German side of things he presents. He overuses Middeldorf and tries to explain the 80s by using sources from 56. He doesn't contextualize, which leads to overconfidence with alacking basis. Same for snarky comments, that people should have listened to speidel and v manstein, without knowing their roles. Again, drawing conclusions on the 80s from 50s literiture.
ReplyDeleteBut I liked the scenario at the end and appreciate challenging seemingly fixed concepts.
Thanks for the review
No problem at all. Thank you for the kind comment. You raise good points and I think that proves the comment I made in the review, that it makes the reader think about the subject. Certainly, the wargaming group I belong to will be looking to see how this book can be applied to our modern games, though that won't be until next year.
DeleteKeep us posted. Thank you for your time.
DeleteI shall do :-)
Delete