Reading Retribution, Gaming Ukraine '43
As I have posted numerous times previously, I enjoy reading military history and having a wargame on hand to view the campaign or battle through these lenses of narrative and simulation. Earlier this year I was playing the Spring Hill scenario from Embrace An Angry Wind and reading about John Bell Hood's Tennessee Campaign. As usual, I am currently reading a wide variety of books simultaneously, between Kindle and physical copies. Retribution: The Soviet Reconquest of Central Ukraine, 1943 (2019) by Prit Buttar was one I finished earlier this month. This had been on my to-read list since it was published last year. I just got around to it on my Kindle app and thoroughly enjoyed it.
The information presented by Buttar was mostly known to me because of my special interest in the Ukraine in 1943. I have studied the Eastern Front of World War Two all my adult life and have accumulated many sources of information. This variety of other sources, including George Nipe's German-centric Decision In The Ukraine Summer 1943 (1996) and David Glantz's more Soviet-centric From The Don To The Dnepr (1991), does not match Buttar's work in telling the complete story of what happened in Ukraine right after Hitler's Kursk Offensive failed.
The scope of the book closely matches one of my favorite wargames, Ukraine '43. I enjoyed the game when its first edition came out in 2000 and played it many times over a period of years before I started this blog. (I guess my blog time has in part been converted out of former wargaming time. Interesting.) When the game was updated in 2015 I bought the second edition and played one of the shorter scenarios a bunch of times over several years. So this book was a particularly good match for this game I enjoy so much.
From the game's perspective, the book has an extended prologue, two chapters that cover events prior to that start of game play. Retribution contains a superb overview of the intensity at Kursk and its almost immediate failure, followed by a Soviet offensive along the Mius River to the south. German commander Erich von Manstein, confident that he had damaged the Russian armor horrifically at Kursk, shifted two SS panzer divisions to deal with the Mius River situation. He felt that the Soviets could not possibly launch another operation in the Kursk sector until they had time to rebuild their tank units. The Minus operation turned out to be a German victory but Manstein was wrong about how much time he had. The SS panzers were hurried back to their original position around Kharkov as the Soviets attacked en mass, before Manstein thought possible.
Then there is an excellent chapter on the Soviet Operation Polkovodets Rumyantsev. Here the situation at Kursk was reversed. The Soviets slammed into the German fortified line, only the Germans were no longer as strong as the seemingly endless sea of Russian soldiers. Even though the Germans killed and wounded more than 250,000 Russians in fighting during August 1943 alone and destroyed over 1,800 tanks, the Soviets broke through and captured Kharkov. Manstein's confidence (arrogance?) in temporarily subduing the Soviet tank forces at Kursk was unfounded. He was surprised fresh tanks were so quickly available. It is an indication of his strategic blindness despite his operational brilliance.
But the operation was Georgy Zhukov's greatest triumph to date. He had argued vigorously against Joseph Stalin's desire to keep attacking the Germans after the Soviet victory at Stalingrad. Zhukov wanted to go over to the defensive, bleed the Germans when they attacked and then counterattack. This is strategically what happened on the East Front in the summer of 1943. It was Zhukov's masterpiece followed by a tremendous display by the Soviet armies sweeping deep into Ukraine.
Since it was first published in 2000, I have played the short seven-turn scenario of the Ukraine '43 titled “Zhukov's Assault” more than any other game in my collection. It is such a fun situation with swirling tank battles and desperate defenses on both sides. But this was the first time I'd played it since I first bought the second edition five years ago. I made some misplays on both sides but quickly regained my familiarity with the game's system.
Buttar devotes a chapter on the deepest initial penetration of Zhukov's offensive, the bloody fight over two towns. Followed by a chapter of the recapture of Kharkov by the Soviets. Buttar does a wonderful job of explaining how the Soviets were more than just a tank producing juggernaut. They were learning the operational art of war and applying their own spin on it. Meanwhile, the Germans were still incredibly competent, and hard hitting. But they simply did not have enough infantry to defend everywhere. Given time, the Soviets could always probe a weakness then mass their artillery and tanks to execute a breakthrough assault.
The next chapter covers what would be considered the middle turns in the game. The whole front moves the Germans back across Ukraine. Hitler held on to the region desperately because it was rich in war-making resources and it was central to his philosophy of German colonization, the concept of lebensraum. Ukraine was to be transformed by German resettlement (the Master Race) into the cultured envy of the world, at the horrific cost marginalizing and wiping out the indigenous population. (As an aside, the Chinese are doing this today in Tibet and other regions of China.)
Hitler starts dismissing generals as the front withdraws toward the Dnieper River. Buttar uses these opportunities to discuss their military careers, often with connections to atrocities committed in the East by the Germans. Many German commanders served prison time after the war for their roles in Hitler's mad genocidal culture.
The Dnieper is a large river, very wide and impassable along large stretches through Ukraine, in other parts wide and shallow, fordable if the water isn't too high, though it is still no easy task. Nevertheless, the Soviets excelled at reaching the river as fast as they could so that they could secure known fordable terrain. Meanwhile, the Germans sought the river's natural defensive advantages. They believed that once they got to the west bank of the great river the Soviet tide would cease and they could catch their breath. They were wrong.
The Germans had made little effort to fortify the western side of the river. Hitler felt that the retreat would be more likely if the troops knew there were pre-constructed defenses. So, the Germans had to fight for their lives. They were burning crops, cities, and infrastructure across the region in a horrific “scorched earth” strategy and yet they had to be quick about it. The Soviet armies were driving into the them as much as possible. Where the Germans could not cover the front, the Soviets raced the Germans westward, only slowed by their tenuous supply lines.
This is a wild style of grand warfare that has fascinated me most of my life. There is little to compare it with. The situation makes for exciting, epic history and fluid wargaming. The Germans are still strong but becoming brittle, especially in terms of their infantry. The Soviets are better than ever, having learned hard lessons through fighting the Wehrmacht for two years. Buttar does a good job of explaining how the Soviet armies developed during this time of the war. Their leadership has improved at all levels. While many of their troops are still poorly trained, there are large numbers of veterans who are smart about how the Germans fight. Soviet Guards divisions are made up of such men, who fight on par with most of the Germans lined up against them.
Notice the arrival of the German GrossDeutschland division as a reinforcement railed in to Kharkov. It is the most powerful single unit in the game. It has attack and defense strengths of 15 and 12, respectively. Additionally, it has an inherent Tiger tank ability and superior troop quality, which almost always makes it more effective. Supply rules are of fundamental importance in the game, as in real life. Supply is usually pretty easy for the retreating German player moving back toward his supply line. But the advancing Soviet player is bound by the railheads which the Soviets control. As the game progresses, these railheads advance slowly across the map, extending the ability for Soviet units to be in "full supply" and avoid certain penalties during combat. So the immediate Soviet objective is to clear the railways of German influence, string them together, and advance all the railhead markers. You can only see two such markers in this screenshot but the game contains six. The Soviets can't just breakthrough and run deep into the rear of the Germans. If they can't trace supply to such wide-ranging moves, it is unwise to move your units out of supply. They are weak when counterattacked. Better to clear the railways. Notice the German infantry division in Belegorod is cut-off by the Soviets and is out of supply. It will die a slow death but it will hold up the railway for a few turns in the process. |
In game terms these Guard divisions are red counters (regular army is tan) and have better attack and defense capabilities. The German infantry divisions are fairly strong at the beginning of Ukraine '43. Their “7” defense factor is formidable against the plentiful Soviet infantry. However, the Soviet mechanized and tank forces can easily concentrate and attack them at high odds, especially with artillery thrown in. As the game goes along these German infantry divisions flip to their weaker side due to combat losses. Ultimately they start to be eliminated. Like Soviet units, they can return from the eliminate pile but the replacement capacity enabling this shrinks through the later turns of the game while that of the Russians reflects more resilience.
For the German player, controlling the length of the front with infantry is impossible. The Germans have to commit some of their precious panzer divisions to front line duty. They are strong in this position, especially since they often receive a bonus for better troop quality. But every panzer used on the front line means that that one cannot be held back and concentrated with others into counterattacks against the Soviet breakthroughs. This fantastic strategic problem plays our before your eyes in Ukraine '43 and in Buttar's account as well.
The Soviets succeeded in crossing the Dnieper in multiple points up and down the length of it. They quickly reinforced these crossings and formed solid bridgeheads. The Germans were able to counterattack and destroy some of them. Elsewhere these bridgeheads became jump-off points for the continued Soviet onslaught.
The rest of the book deals with (in separate chapters) the Soviet victories at Krivoy Rog, Kiev, and the final large-scale German counterattack at Zhitomir, which failed as is referenced below. Those last two operations are beyond the purview of the game which ends 5-6 weeks before the book does. Hitler ended up losing all the Ukraine anyway. Stalin was rewarded for waiting until after Kursk to attack, his armies were met by a weakened German army which, though still capable of harming the Soviets, was no longer capable of defeating them.
Buttar summarizes the unparalleled fighting along the Eastern Front, particularly in Ukraine, in 1943 as follows: “...despite suffering severe losses, the Red Army defeated the last major German offensive operation on the Eastern Front [Zhitomir]. Thereafter, the speed with which Soviet units recovered from their losses and the huge resources of the Soviet Union allowed the Red Army to sustain a high tempo of operations. The additional help received from the United States and Britain was substantial; by mid-1943, the United States had sent 183,000 trucks to the Soviet Union, a figure that exceeded the entire production of trucks by Germany during the same period. Although it avoided any major defeats on the scale of Stalingrad, the Wehrmacht could do little to stop the Red Army and was steadily driven west. Even more importantly, its strength hemorrhaged away at an irreplaceable rate, both in terms of men and the experienced cadres that had held it together in earlier campaigns...
“Total losses for the German armed forces on the Eastern Front in 1943 came to about 1,889,000 killed, wounded or missing –with wounded in this context being men who were unable to return to the front. Soviet losses were far higher, at about 8,145,000 –a ratio of about 4.3 Soviet soldiers for every German soldier.” (pp. 531-532, Kindle edition)
I have followed Buttar's work for years. I have read and own Battleground Prussia (2010), Between Two Giants (2013), and On A Knife's Edge (2018). All are top-notch accounts of these particular campaigns during the War in the East. Retribution maintains his high standards. I also have wargames covering each of the other campaigns he has written about, which adds tremendously to the pleasure of the history. In some cases I have multiple games on the topic.
For me, none of these other games strike the balance of being playable, realistic, and fun as Ukraine '43. In addition to an accurate depiction of the two forces involved and rules written to accentuate the strengths and weaknesses of both sides, Ukraine '43 offers a lot of wargame “chrome” which adds to its entertainment value and the insights it affords.
The Soviet artillery support units, numerous tank corps, and air power can greatly accentuate the punch of their large armies. The Germans are faster and have greater flexibility. They too have air power but 1943 would see their ability to control the air in the East gradually disappear. In addition, the Germans have some units with superior troop quality and a couple of Tiger tank battalions, which make for more successful combat.
Strategically, the Soviets receive more reinforcements and more replacements for their units than the Germans. This gap between the two sides becomes more significant as the game progresses so that more Soviets recover to full combat readiness then do the Germans, who are often forced to hold a fragile line with weakened infantry divisions.
Back in 2000, I played Ukraine '43 a bunch and tackled the lengthy campaign game (an enterprise requiring several hours of playtime) twice, as I recall. Unlike most other wargames that only get played once or twice (or not at all!) before they are shelved, Ukraine '43 kept popping back up as the game I wanted to play. It was a no-brainer to acquire the upgraded edition in 2015. I played that version several times but never the campaign game, only the short but fierce “Zhukov's Assault” scenario.
I have enjoyed playing the game throughout August, especially knowing that these incredible battles were taking place right now, 77 years ago in Ukraine. I have played through the Zhukov scenario a couple of times and, thanks in part of reading Retribution, now I want to set up the game's third scenario, which takes up the situation in October 1943. I have never set that scenario up and it has been a long time since I played that deep into the game. I am grateful to receive so much entertainment value out of this wargame. The older I get, the less attracted I am to new gaming systems. Ukraine '43 is familiar but different every time I play it. That's the joy of wargaming...and reading along with it.
Comments