Why were Wehrmacht divisions on average 20% more combat effective

>>34424720
moar combat experience. also, fighting defensively.

File: 1496119068625.jpg (39KB, 720x539px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 720x539px

Combat experience? Fanatic loyalty? The 88mm gun? Rommel? A judenfrei commanf chain?

Probably combat experience but I question that percentage and would like a source.

>>34424799
T.N. Dupuy's application of the Quantitative Judgement Method to historical data

>>34424766
If combat experience why did US forces show no improvement over time as they gained experience?

>>34424860
their enemy was gaining experience too.

>>34426732

But the Red Army showed consistent improvement throughout 1942-1945. The Wehrmacht was something like 200% as combat effective as the Soviets but this declined consistently as the Soviets gained experience. The Americans demonstrated no improvement.

>>34426761
Can't improve perfection

>>34424720
Methamphetamines

Lol op is a wehraboo faggot

>>34426798
Colonel Dupuy was a combat veteran of the US army in WW2 and he did his studies for the Pentagon. Try again westaboo. It has been MATHEMATICALLY proven that the US and British won purely by brute force without learning a single lesson from their many defeats.

>>34427197
>Muh hordes just overwhelmed the master race.

>>34424720
Source.

File: 1487895369749.png (36KB, 778x512px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 778x512px

>>34427710

Numbers, Predictions and War by Trevor N. Dupuy

A Genius For War: The German Army And General Staff, 1807–1945 by Trevor N. Dupuy

Fighting Power: German and U.S. Army Performance, 1939-1945 by Martin van Creveld

>>34426761
it's easy to show improvement when you start with nothing

Strong jeans

Am*ricans are bad at war.

File: you-just-went-full-potato-man-never-go-full-potato (1).jpg (68KB, 554x376px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 554x376px

>>34424720
>Americans had a 3-1 KD ratio
>Americans did the most damage to Germany
OP is retarded.

>>34427773
Ah, so a think tank shill with a monetary interest in selling a patent algorithm and a Zionist Jew with communist leanings. Well done, OP. You have reached heretofore unexplored levels of autism.

>>34424720
They were fighting for something worthwhile and honorable, whereas Americans knew in the back of their minds that they were being forced to fight against every value that they held dear.

10% luck
20% skill
15% concentrated power of will
5% pleasure
50% pain

File: adolf-hitler-young.jpg (65KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1280x720px

>>34431561
And 100% reason to remember the name
(Adolf)

>>34431622
Literally who

>>34424720
Why did Dupuy say they were more effective? Those numbers are his. Surely he provided justification.

>>34431637
Dupuy devised an equation based on the combat power of the two sides which adjusts for factors like training and terrain and shows the expected outcome compared to the actual outcome. The Germans outperform every time despite having inferior firepower and numbers.

>>34431446
Why would a Jew write favorably about nazis? stop attacking trevor and refute his model ok

>>34432748
American pilots were on average much much better than their German counterparts.

>>34432756
Pilots are only part of the equation. Even with air supremacy the Army failed to make headway against weaker German forces without unreasonably heavy losses.

>>34432748
I'm now going to have to look into his work, but it sounds like mathturbation. Even the Soviet Union, which had a massive focus on the scientific analysis of war, never tried to say something like
>this front is 5% better than the opposing army at doing things
They knew the human factor was too messy for any equations they could make, so it was left to the side. Instead the math was used to facilitate the unquantifiable human element, something officers could fall back on when planning or using their initiative under fire. I mean, every country had some variation of the
>able to attack
>able to defend
>able to surrender
scale Germany employed for rating their units, but that's as granular as it got.

Even war spergs were reluctant to dive into what Dupuy is attempting, which is worrying.

>>34432756
Shame that statistic is pointless because the luftwaffe on average had the most number of aces of any airforce in history.

USAAF FAGS BTFO

>>34426761
>The Americans demonstrated no improvement.

From what time period?

The Red Army showed improvement throughout 1942-1945, and the USA's combat effectiveness was essentially a flatline for 3 years?

What exactly are these numbers and percentages you're drawing from?

>The Wehrmacht was something like 200% as combat effective as the Soviets

What is the basis for 100% of combat effectiveness? What did the Red Army achieve in 1945 in comparison to the Wehrmacht?

Are you simply measuring combat effectiveness as compared to armed forces?

>>34432939
That's explained by the fact that the U.S. Army would return pilots after garnering combat experience to train other pilots.

Meanwhile, the Germans let their pilots fly for the entirety of the war accruing high kill counts, but none of that combat experience was being funneled into new Luftwaffe pilots.

Just another one of many reasons why Germany stood no chance in that war

>>34432883
http://www.dupuyinstitute.org/ubb/Forum4/HTML/000010.html
>His basic approach to measuring human factors was to design a model of combat that he had confidence in, and then look for consistent performance differences between armed forces (and even among different divisions) to measure human factors. As such, the model is used to factor out other influences on the battle, like terrain, posture, weapons, etc....leaving one with the only unexplained difference being human factors, modeling error, and random variations. This approach, of course, assumes that the model is doing a reasonable job overall in measuring historical engagements.
>To vaidate or test his model, Trevor used 149 engagements, most from WWII. For each of these engagements, he calculated a "Combat Effectiveness Value". This is a catch all value that measures morale, training, leadership, etc. A number below 1.00 means that Allies were less effective than the Germans. A value greater than 1.00 means that the Allies were more effective than the Germans. For this discussion, I used average values, but they do vary by situation, unit and combat. See pages 235-237 in NPW for more detail.

>>34432966
Sorry, which airforce had the most number of aces and the most aces with over 100 victories???

>>34432966
A similar phenomenon is one of the reasons US Army Ground Forces had highly uneven performance in WW2. The US Army personnel replacement system was absolute dogshit, we had only 89 relatively small combat divisions so none could be rotated out of the line for rest and retraining and instead the Army just funneled in green replacements directly from depots to the front. All the talent went to other arms and all the experience stayed in divisions and didn't have a chance to get passed on.

>>34424720
I would say many of the reasons already listed before I would subscribe to any eggheads mathematical 'reasons' to describe human nature or performance in adverse conditions.
One reputable historian attributes that only ~20% of American soldiers would even fire their weapons during battles in WW2.
https://archive.fo/BZHyY

>>34424720
>>34424860
>muh combat effectiveness

Do you have anything to back this up?

>>34432985
>trying to make things that are inherently subjective such as morale and leadership into objective qualities

What nonsense is this?

>>34432966
Also, German pilots spent a lot of time intercepting bombers over controlled territory. Being able to keep flying instead ending up in a pow camp after getting shot down helps.

>>34433147
>combat effectiveness should be measured on muh feelings and not objective statistics
The US forces had overwhelmingly superior firepower yet were regularly outperformed by inferior forces. Therefore the German tactical and leadership qualities were clearly superior.

>>34426761
Really? The guys getting mauled at the Kasserine Pass were the same guys rolling into Rome or stomping Germans from D-day to the Rhine?

>>34424720
Superior Aryan genetics.

>>34432748
and thats why we all speak German, oh wait...

>>34433978
We don't speak German because we had enough tanks and men to make up for it without fighting smarter. The war could have ended sooner had we fought smarter.

>>34432939
Many of them gained "ace" status and high kill numbers early in the war against old outdated aircraft and poor tactics.

>>34433949
I believe Dupuy's study only started with Italy 43 so probably they did improve from Kasserine pass. Fredendall's performance there was so abysmal it would have been hard not to improve. You know the Brits started calling the Americans "our Italians" after Kasserine Pass?

>>34434011
hindsight is always 20-20

>>34432939
Didn't the Luftwaffe have relatively permissive standards for confirming a kill compared to other AFs? They did get wildly lopsided results against the VVS in barbarossa but there's good reason to doubt the exceptionally high tallies claimed late war. Especially those from established aces whose units happily reported "probables" as confirmed for good boy points from Goering.

>>34434020
So, they did improve their performance ? That settles that then.

>>34434027
We didn't even use hindsight though. If we had looked at past battles in 43 and learned from them the ones in 44 and 45 would have gotten progressively easier, especially since the Wehrmacht was constantly weakening. Instead we never got better.

File: The Einsatzgruppen was an anti-terrorist organization..jpg (113KB, 720x616px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 720x616px

>>34424720
>>34424766
>>34424776
>>34424799
>>34424820

>>34434050
Only from 42-43. They never improved on the Western Front or in Italy.

File: how jude are you.png (56KB, 536x160px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 536x160px

>>34434117
:^)

File: 1745924902.jpg (75KB, 1024x962px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1024x962px

>>34434271
Please dont turn this into a /pol/ thread i just wanna talk about Trevor's army math

>>34434117

pretty accurate progression

>>34434063
>We didn't even use hindsight though

What hindsight could the US Army in Europe possibly have in 1944?

They lied about pretty much everything and even when Hamburg was getting booty blasted they spent most of their time in the bunker telling each other lies about how a rocket powered plane with no wings would win the war