Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The idea that Nazi attitudes were contained and especially contained outside of the German armed forces aside from the Waffen-SS is a myth stretching back to the beginning of the Allied occupation. (Notably, only Waffen-SS veterans were denied state-sponsored benefits.) Interrogations of German POWs from across the service branches show that racialism, not only anti-Semitism but perhaps just as much a hatred of Slavic peoples, permeated the German military. For more, see here. Now, I'm not saying German soldiers were by large the slavering fanatic brutes of Allied propaganda but neither was the German military composed of millions of men who secretly despised Hitler and the Nazi regime. Quite the contrary, in fact.

 Panzerwerks_Studio wrote:
Basically, it was all fun and games until someone at Battlefront thought it was time for the Germans to pay.

Quite a few posters have noted similar sentiments, which adds up to a rather dismal review of the FoW rules if I'm honest.

 Haight wrote:

While yes, technically true.... didn't they turn it from the Hindu symbol... i.e. the arms are rotating in the opposite direction of the hindu sign ? I was always under the impression that while they ripped off the design, they tweaked it in this way on purpose.

I mean, they totally did steal it, not denying that, but a backwards R and a frontwards R are still relatively different things.

Clockwise and counterclockwise Swastikas, teraskelion, or however each ancient and present culture names them were and always will be present, straight and at angles.

 Swastakowey wrote:
What i mean is yes they had amazing stuff but the common problem is they didn't have much of it or it wasn't practical. Yes they over came a lot of stepping stones but on the battle field a lot of it wasn't useful or there simply was not enough of it to be useful or effective over all. Yet how many video games and models do you see armed with STG (the assault rifle) for example? tonnes they seem to have access to hundreds of them. that's just an example. The over glorification of their achievements should be ever present on the battlefield etc yet because they are cool they are made easily accessible throughout wargames and whatnot it really increases their cool factor.

The above i am finding hard to explain but if you know what i mean maybe you can expand on it. Im not saying it as in you are proud to bear the nazi forces because they did stuff, im merely saying that a lot of the cool toys and tanks etc that make people play the ww2 germans was hardly common yet you see it in huge numbers frequently in wargaming.

They did have hundreds of Stg44`s, almost half a million Stg44 were made, so some units would have many of them. It is natural that people are drawn to the more interesting formations where you get access to different equipment. You don`t really get huge numbers of the big cats etc either, as they are extremely pts-intensive. Seems you are just suffering from equipment-envy of germans. I started FoW with italians, so I know the feeling of having absolutely crap equipment compared to everybody else, but after having played germans too, you will notice that the big cats are actually a liability most of the time.

Also, your argument on what makes it okay to play a faction is pretty silly. Let`s take it from WW2 to 40k and it becomes: People who choose armies because they like the look of the miniatures are childish and not genuine


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
The idea that Nazi attitudes were contained and especially contained outside of the German armed forces aside from the Waffen-SS is a myth stretching back to the beginning of the Allied occupation. (Notably, only Waffen-SS veterans were denied state-sponsored benefits.) Interrogations of German POWs from across the service branches show that racialism, not only anti-Semitism but perhaps just as much a hatred of Slavic peoples, permeated the German military. For more, see here. Now, I'm not saying German soldiers were by large the slavering fanatic brutes of Allied propaganda but neither was the German military composed of millions of men who secretly despised Hitler and the Nazi regime. Quite the contrary, in fact.

 Panzerwerks_Studio wrote:
Basically, it was all fun and games until someone at Battlefront thought it was time for the Germans to pay.

Quite a few posters have noted similar sentiments, which adds up to a rather dismal review of the FoW rules if I'm honest.

The base rules are good, but there has been "codex-creep". They do have a history of actually fixing totally broken lists however (although going a bit far in the other direction again), so seems they are trying for a balanced game.

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

Popular myth (though there doesn't seem to be *anyone* in this thread who knows any history, but anyway). There is well-documented evidence that normal, non-SS German soldiers committed warcrimes on the Eastern Front on a huge scale. Here is a random example of German paratroopers murdering Greek civilians in 1941...there are countless others.

For me its their tanks, the fact that they managed to produce the massive beasts like the tiger 2 and jagdtiger.

In the dday books at least, their lists seem more flexible, most lists can take panzer ivs or tigers etc, where as only certain brit lists can take churchills and shermans


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xruslanx wrote:

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

Popular myth (though there doesn't seem to be *anyone* in this thread who knows any history, but anyway). There is well-documented evidence that normal, non-SS German soldiers committed warcrimes on the Eastern Front on a huge scale. Here is a random example of German paratroopers murdering Greek civilians in 1941...there are countless others.

But then that could be spun the other way, the Soviets and Americans killed a lot of PoWs and I am sure the commonwealth did the same.

There's got to be a reason why German officers tried to surrender to brittish forces above US and soviet

the wermacht comitted atrocities unparelled in scale, it is offensive to even suggest that it was in any way equivilent to those carried out by the americans.

The germans tried to surrended to the western allies precicely because most of these atrocities were carried out on the eastern front. German warcrimes in western europe were fairly rare, but in the East the average German soldier was conditioned into believing that the Russians (and ukrainians etc) really were sub-human, and acted as such.

Unless you're going to argue that russians really are an inferior species, you cannot deny that the german army comitted warcrimes on a horriffic and unparelled scale.

Another thing that people might find interesting about WWII Germany is the Wunderwaffen. The Americans might have had the atom bomb and Britain had Hobart's Funnies, but the Germans seemed to be coming up with a new and wacky invention every week. Jet fighters, rocket fighters, superheavy tanks, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, mechanised infantry, assault rifles...

Daston wrote:
For me its their tanks, the fact that they managed to produce the massive beasts like the tiger 2 and jagdtiger.

In the dday books at least, their lists seem more flexible, most lists can take panzer ivs or tigers etc, where as only certain brit lists can take churchills and shermans


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xruslanx wrote:

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

Popular myth (though there doesn't seem to be *anyone* in this thread who knows any history, but anyway). There is well-documented evidence that normal, non-SS German soldiers committed warcrimes on the Eastern Front on a huge scale. Here is a random example of German paratroopers murdering Greek civilians in 1941...there are countless others.

But then that could be spun the other way, the Soviets and Americans killed a lot of PoWs and I am sure the commonwealth did the same.

There's got to be a reason why German officers tried to surrender to brittish forces above US and soviet

@ Daston The war against the east was one not of conquest per se but of ethnic cleansing. German officers and troops would rather have surrendered into the tender mercies of the westen allies rather than face whatever retribution the soviets had in store for them. This knowledge of past wrongs is also one of the many reasons that Germany stuck it out to the bitter end.


More On-topic - I like German forces in ww2 based games - It brings a certain amount of what if when playing scenarios and such like, besides, if no one played as the Reich there would be no point in playing.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
More On-topic - I like German forces in ww2 based games - It brings a certain amount of what if when playing scenarios and such like, besides, if no one played as the Reich there would be no point in playing.

Pretty much. If not, people should rip on Battlefront and Warlord etc for selling Germans, not on gamers for playing them.

xruslanx wrote:
the wermacht comitted atrocities unparelled in scale, it is offensive to even suggest that it was in any way equivilent to those carried out by the americans.

The germans tried to surrended to the western allies precicely because most of these atrocities were carried out on the eastern front. German warcrimes in western europe were fairly rare, but in the East the average German soldier was conditioned into believing that the Russians (and ukrainians etc) really were sub-human, and acted as such.

Unless you're going to argue that russians really are an inferior species, you cannot deny that the german army comitted warcrimes on a horriffic and unparelled scale.

That maybe the case however there is a 'but' here...

It was a process that took time to evolve, initially on the Eastern Front the Wermacht did treat the Russians reasonably well. There were more prisoners than they bargained for however, add to this the fact that when the 'state authorities' took control of the rear areas the genocide started. Which began that slippery slope...


on topic:

The Germans had the best tanks, had the best soldiers etc there is no doubting that so people want to play them.

However even though I would like to play WW2 battle in miniature, I'm resistive because of the general feeling that i'm stepping on all of those people who did their duty as well as the fact you could never do it justice really. But that is my opinion...

What also seems to happen is that us brits always get bashed in one way or another, despite the fact we ended up having to 'hang on' until the US got involved. And in Normandy ended up facing the best of the Germans forces at that point, and on that count fought rather well, meanwhile good old Monty caused a lot of trouble, that was a bit silly.

But that is the historian in me talking

of course in the Cold War things were very different, even more fascinating in my view, as you can go 'what if' in many ways- of course eventually someone has to press that Red button

 Mr. Burning wrote:

Daston wrote:
For me its their tanks, the fact that they managed to produce the massive beasts like the tiger 2 and jagdtiger.

In the dday books at least, their lists seem more flexible, most lists can take panzer ivs or tigers etc, where as only certain brit lists can take churchills and shermans


Automatically Appended Next Post:

xruslanx wrote:

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
I find it strange that so many people confuse Nazi's and German Soldier's. They are very different animals indeed. The German Soldier fought for his or her country, taking orders, shooting at the enemy and trying to win. Just like a US, Brit, French, Russian or any other Soldier out there at that time.

Popular myth (though there doesn't seem to be *anyone* in this thread who knows any history, but anyway). There is well-documented evidence that normal, non-SS German soldiers committed warcrimes on the Eastern Front on a huge scale. Here is a random example of German paratroopers murdering Greek civilians in 1941...there are countless others.

But then that could be spun the other way, the Soviets and Americans killed a lot of PoWs and I am sure the commonwealth did the same.

There's got to be a reason why German officers tried to surrender to brittish forces above US and soviet

@ Daston The war against the east was one not of conquest per se but of ethnic cleansing. German officers and troops would rather have surrendered into the tender mercies of the westen allies rather than face whatever retribution the soviets had in store for them. This knowledge of past wrongs is also one of the many reasons that Germany stuck it out to the bitter end.


More On-topic - I like German forces in ww2 based games - It brings a certain amount of what if when playing scenarios and such like, besides, if no one played as the Reich there would be no point in playing.

Oh I am fully aware, sorry my post might not have come across as intended. I was just trying to show that the allies were not the knights in shining armour that they are sometimes made out to be.

Now of course a lot of this will be due to loosing friends and wanting payback. And some could just be a due to them being a crazy person lol.

I am aware that this is nothing compaired to the likes of the ss, and the stuff they did is terrible.

I always thought that part of it was that some people are attracted to the side with fewer victories to see if they could maybe do better commanding that force themselves

 Art_of_war wrote:
It was a process that took time to evolve, initially on the Eastern Front the Wermacht did treat the Russians reasonably well. There were more prisoners than they bargained for however, add to this the fact that when the 'state authorities' took control of the rear areas the genocide started. Which began that slippery slope...

Unfortunately, this was not the case. As mentioned above, the invasion of the USSR was an ethnic cleansing from the start. Read up on the Barbarossa Decree. In the more candid, less self-serving memoirs of German soldiers (such as this one), you can read about the eagerness with which Germany went to war against the USSR.

 Art_of_war wrote:
What also seems to happen is that us brits always get bashed in one way or another, despite the fact we ended up having to 'hang on' until the US got involved. And in Normandy ended up facing the best of the Germans forces at that point, and on that count fought rather well, meanwhile good old Monty caused a lot of trouble, that was a bit silly.

I'll be completely honest here, I always found the Brits a bit boring for some reason, not really sure why. It doesn't really make sense, because the British army pulled off some incredible feats and fought hard, but that's just how I am. Maybe it's the tanks, they always were a bit boxy and bland looking.

Also, Americans have a huge bias against Monty because he and Patton always seemed to be at odds with each other, and as Americans we're going to side with Patton

On Bolt Action, it's a fun, if a bit simple in places. It was designed to be a quick, easy to pick up skirmish game focusing on infantry platoon combat, and I think it captures that perfectly. If you're looking for a super accurate historical simulation you may wish to look elsewhere, but if you just want to reenact Saving Private Ryan and get the feel of being a platoon commander in the middle of a swirling battle, it's a ton of fun. There are some iffy areas of the rules since it's in its first edition, but the designers have been working with the community quite a bit lately to suss out problems and figure out how to best improve the rules.

It's also fairly cheap to get into. A couple of infantry boxes, a support blister or two, and a tank if you feel so inclined gives you a lot of models to choose from and can make a very solid army.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Maybe it's the tanks, they always were a bit boxy and bland looking.

What's wrong with you man!



Kicks the gak out of a T34 anyday

I don't think that there is a fascination with Germans in wargaming. Quite a lot of people play Germans in WW2 games, but then most people have multiple armies (I have 2 german armies for FoW but thats less than half of my total collection). At the end of the day German forces are iconic, virtually everyone in the western world will recognise a Stahlhelm.

 Palindrome wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Maybe it's the tanks, they always were a bit boxy and bland looking.

What's wrong with you man!



Kicks the gak out of a T34 anyday

I don't think that there is a fascination with Germans in wargaming. Quite a lot of people play Germans in WW2 games, but then most people have multiple armies (I have 2 german armies for FoW but thats less than half of my total collection). At the end of the day German forces are iconic, virtually everyone in the western world will recognise a Stahlhelm.

*Tries to disprove British tanks don't look boxy by posting one of the boxiest tanks the British had*

And I agree on the *almost everyone has Germans* thing.

A critical thing you have to remember for FoW is that the Open Fire! Starter box (think Dark Vengeance, except everything is useable and it's a good value) comes with a Grenadierkompanie, and comes with an HQ, two Grenadier Platoons, 2 PaK 40's, and a StuG III Platoon. Those models can be made into a Late War (and even some Mid war lists) for almost every theater the Germans fought in. And since the box is so cheap and comes with so much stuff, a ton of people have a Grenadier army just laying around that they got for dirt cheap.

For Bolt Action, Germans are also included in the starter set, but that's not quite as insane a deal as the FoW Open Fire box.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:


For Bolt Action, Germans are also included in the starter set, but that's not quite as insane a deal as the FoW Open Fire box.

To be fair:

1. BA operates at a reinforced platoon level, where FoW works with a company and regimental/battalion support, so you'd expect less to work with.
2. The BA starter gives you plastic terrain, where the FoW starter has (very nice) flat cardboard terrain
3. The BA starter gives you the hardcover, full sized rulebook, where the FoW starter gives you the paperback, small rulebook that falls apart at the touch of the lightest of breezes.

But, yeah - the FoW starter is a great set - apart from the tanks, which can be a complete pain in the the rear to put together if you don't know they're misshapen.

 infinite_array wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:


For Bolt Action, Germans are also included in the starter set, but that's not quite as insane a deal as the FoW Open Fire box.

To be fair:

1. BA operates at a reinforced platoon level, where FoW works with a company and regimental/battalion support, so you'd expect less to work with.
2. The BA starter gives you plastic terrain, where the FoW starter has (very nice) flat cardboard terrain
3. The BA starter gives you the hardcover, full sized rulebook, where the FoW starter gives you the paperback, small rulebook that falls apart at the touch of the lightest of breezes.

But, yeah - the FoW starter is a great set - apart from the tanks, which can be a complete pain in the the rear to put together if you don't know they're misshapen.

Yeah part of my dislike for Brits might be tied to the horrendous Shermans that came in that box

 Manchu wrote:

 Art_of_war wrote:
It was a process that took time to evolve, initially on the Eastern Front the Wermacht did treat the Russians reasonably well. There were more prisoners than they bargained for however, add to this the fact that when the 'state authorities' took control of the rear areas the genocide started. Which began that slippery slope...

Unfortunately, this was not the case. As mentioned above, the invasion of the USSR was an ethnic cleansing from the start. Read up on the Barbarossa Decree. In the more candid, less self-serving memoirs of German soldiers (such as this one), you can read about the eagerness with which Germany went to war against the USSR.

So we don't go too far down that path...

it is a constant source of debate whichever way you look at it, the decree may have been issued by Hitler, as he wanted the ethinc cleansing to begin, but the question of whether it was actually carried out in full by all concerned is a matter of conjecture, as sure some soldiers and commanders did carry it out, but some also just passed it down the line and left those on the battlefield to deal with it or didn't send it at all... All quite contrary to the orders issued i will stress at that particular time. There were the killing sqauds going aorund with 'assitance to begin with and then it developed into general genocide

That is how i see it personally you must understand, nothing happened instantly on that front it all 'built up' to the picture we all know....


On topic:

Yeah British tanks do look a little 'boring' but the crews make the tanks what they are- the early Cromwell variants could gass the crews if they were not careful

And we developed the tiger killer extraordinare the Firefly it only took a bright spark to realsie what would happen if you stuck a 17-pounder gun onto a sherman tank... as one report sad rather understatedly after the 8th August 1944 'three Tigres in in twelve minutes is not bad business'

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Maybe it's the tanks, they always were a bit boxy and bland looking.

Hm, calling a tank boxy is a bit redundant. Regarding the bland part, I personally think the Valentine is a pretty little tank:

 Art_of_war wrote:
the question of whether it was actually carried out in full by all concerned is a matter of conjecture

Phrases like "carried out in full by all concerned" seem meant to set an impossibly high burden of proof of 100% compliance while the historical fact remains that the German armed forces eagerly committed atrocities. I think this kind of apologetic view of the Wehrmacht (especially characterizing German soldiers as simple patriots) is part of the allure of playing German armies. The romantic idea of the "good German" has appealed to the imaginations in the US, UK, and Commonwealth since the war was still going on (e.g., Rommel).

 Art_of_war wrote:
'three Tigres in in twelve minutes is not bad business'

That's another great thing about playing British WW2 armies -- what a heroic people and all the time with such a droll sense of humor.

In miniature wargaming you are limited to mostly land based units as they are a manageable scale.

WW2 Germans has some of the most visually appealing equipment and it just so happened to be that it also performed extremely well. German armour is quite elegant and meant to be used in small elite units against larger forces with lesser equipment.

If you look at the main forced in WW2, any of them lack a generic appeal:

USA - Many wargamers are Americans who are looking to play a more "exotic" army. Then there is the armour, not particularly great looking - the sherman is a love it or hate it kind of tank.
Russia - For the most part the Russians used crude yet effective equipment and vehicles. The infantry aren't particularly striking, with bland helmets, colours, clothing. They have some cool tanks, but they were known for using massed infantry.
Britain - They played a large role earlier in the war (where the equipment and armour wasn't very exciting). Unfortunately they are often overshadowed due to Russia and the USA dominating the late war period.
Japan - The Japanese ground war was a slow brutal grind that is difficult to portray in wargaming. There wasn't much armour conflict. Japan is better suited for game systems that focus on naval conflicts as that is where they were most impressive (IMO).

There are other armies as well, but it is no surprise that they aren't too popular as they played lesser roles or blended in with the forced mentioned above. Germany just has more cool stuff to show off at the scale used by the popular WW2 game systems - that is why they are overrepresented.

I'm a little late to this thread, but I'll throw in my 2 cents. My group got into FOW last year, and there was never any chance I wasn't going to be my group's German player.

The reason for this? I have a TREMENDOUS respect for the military achievements of the Wehrmacht in WW2. They pioneered combined arms, overran France in 6 weeks, kicked the British off the continent, and reigned as masters of Europe for years.

My admiration of the Wehrmacht does not translate to admiration for Nazism, but I suspect that Nazism is also a huge draw for a lot of people not because they're closet Nazis but because everything about the Nazis sounds like it came out of a movie. 70 years later it's still incredibly difficult to wrap our heads around a regime that made it state policy to commit genocide, overtly segregate people, and encroached upon every aspect of life for the common civilian.

It is my belief that war brings out the worse of everyone and to my eyes both sides committed war crimes and atrocities as it happened in every war in the past, happens to every war happening now and will happen to every war that will happen in the future.

And while the whole discussion of what really happened, from whose point of view one sees it and who was the worse of them all is quite intriguing, I feel it is a discussion for another thread and another topic.

I doubt a significant percentage of players ever play WW2 German forces in any game because they love and aspire the bad and worse parts of the Nazi regime, the vast majority do either because the design was build from ground up to be impressive and catch the eye and/ or because they are military history enthusiasts and Germans of that era are indeed a nice subject to study if nothing else because of the "impressive design" the entire army had.

These things need to be considered together. One shouldn't just admire the Nazi uniforms without considering what the men who wore them got up to. And I think doing so is basically impossible for anyone with even very superficial historical awareness. Therefore, this too must play some part in explaining why people chose Germans, including the matter of apologetics. Your post is only the latest in a long line ITT relativizing German atrocities despite no other belligerents explicitly setting out to accomplish genocide with their armies.

Snappy uniforms designed by Hugo boss aside. I am 2nd generation born in the USA, German American. My great grandfather was a Kriegsmarine serving on a Uboat and my great Uncle served in the SS during WW2. I play Germans cuz it kind of makes me feel like I am playing my forefathers, if this makes any sense. I don’t like the idea of being Nazi armies. My grandfather wasn’t one for sure and till the day he died he cursed Hitler for ruining the father land and taking our family with it. I do like to think that men fight and should be remembered for it regardless of being right or wrong.

I do believe we love a villain and that fact could push many to play the baddies of games.

Side not I play DKoK in 40k. those uniforms are very snappy.

 Manchu wrote:
These things need to be considered together. One shouldn't just admire the Nazi uniforms without considering what the men who wore them got up to. And I think doing so is basically impossible for anyone with even very superficial historical awareness. Therefore, this too must play some part in explaining why people chose Germans, including the matter of apologetics. Your post is only the latest in a long line ITT relativizing German atrocities despite no other belligerents explicitly setting out to accomplish genocide with their armies.

I disagree, if people can say love the product and not the company and it can be acceptable, then love the design, not the regime is equally valid.

WW2 German design on uniforms, tanks, aircraft, was designed, usually consciously, to leave a strong impression and that is what draws most people in and to be frank this is why the design has persisted till modern times in all modern armies and paramilitary organisations.

That's a false analogy. We aren't just talking about uniform style (for example, in the scifi context). We're talking about the WW2-era German military.

Actually we were and then the usual stuff about warcrimes ectr creeped in.

Um, take a look at the thread title: this is a discussion about playing WW2-era German armies ... not whether WW2-era German design removed from its historical context can ever be free of Nazi ideology.

And the response was "with the design effort involved in such an army, from the uniforms to vehicles and tanks, to the overall feel, its hardly surprising, people are attracted to such a strong visual theme."

WW2 era German army was created from a propaganda machine of great skill and the continuation of their work adapted to other armies or the fascination the forms they created inspires even now, is a testament to their skill in this field.

One can really ignore and separate what the regime did and be captivated by a form that is designed to do exactly that.