Text | Editor: Chestnut
Foreword: On the screen, crowd tactics are often regarded as an inferior tactical means and are despised by the audience. However, in real warfare, this tactic has its own peculiarities.
On the Soviet battlefield in 1943, when the Germans tried to take advantage of the geographical advantage of the Kursk region to launch a decisive battle, in which the Soviet army's man-to-sea tactics played a huge role and became a key factor in their victory.
So, how powerful was the Soviet army's "crowd tactics"?
Battle of Kursk
The Battle of Kursk was a strategically significant battle of World War II, in which the Germans and the Soviets engaged in a fierce game, with each trying to achieve a breakthrough victory on the battlefield.
However, the development of this campaign also highlights the characteristics of crowd tactics as a double-edged sword.
Germany's strategic objective in the Battle of Kursk was to encircle and destroy Soviet forces, and Hitler saw the battle as a turning point in the German counteroffensive and hoped to consolidate the German army's position on the Eastern Front through the victory in the Battle of Kursk.
Soviet intelligence learned of the plans of the German army and made adequate preparations in advance, and they amassed a large number of forces in the Kursk region in preparation for the German attack.
At the beginning of the campaign, the German Army No. 9 did not perform well in the face of resolute Soviet resistance from the front, and the Soviet commander Rokossovsky successfully delayed the German advance by adopting flexible tactical counterattacks.
The Soviet Union's reliance on the crowd tactics made limited tactical breakthroughs in the offensive, and was pressed by the strong firepower of the German army, which led to the attacker's weaker mobility and the defender's ability to adjust its defensive strategy more quickly according to the situation.
The limits of the crowd tactics began to be revealed, and in the later development of the Battle of Kursk, the commander of the German Army No. 9, Moder, withdrew from the battlefield, inflicting a major setback on the Germans.
But it is worth noting that both sides of this battle paid huge losses in manpower and material.
The Soviets won the battle with their vast human resources, but at the tactical level, the Germans were even better, making the most of their regional combat opportunities to launch precise and fierce attacks that kept the Soviets on the back foot.
The Battle of Kursk not only had a significant impact on the course of World War II, but also had implications for future forms of warfare.
This battle highlights the limitations of crowd tactics, especially in modern warfare, with the development of technology and the upgrading of weapons, the effect of crowd tactics is no longer obvious.
Although the individual soldiers suffered considerable sacrifices, the German defense line was not broken down due to the strong firepower, and the victory of the battle required the comprehensive use of various strategic and tactical means, rather than relying only on the tactics of crowds.
Crowd tactics
The crowd tactic, as an ancient military strategy, has long been controversial, and many believe that it relies only on large numbers and senseless sacrifices to achieve victory, ignoring its practical value under certain conditions.
To put it simply, crowd tactics is a method of warfare that achieves tactical objectives through the collective action of a large number of soldiers, and its origins can be traced back to the Russo-Japanese War in the early 20th century, in which Japanese and Russian soldiers were known for their strong combat effectiveness and courage not to fear death.
During World War II, crowd tactics were further developed, and the Russian army clearly defined the spacing between infantry in its combat doctrine and classified battle formations.
Despite its limitations in the face of strong defensive firepower, it still had unexpected results in some cases, and in World War II, the Soviet tactics not only succeeded in driving out the Germans, but also fought all the way to Berlin.
Although the US military has mechanized forces and air superiority, these advantages are limited due to the mountainous terrain, in addition to the fact that the US military faces mobility and supply problems.
On the other hand, the Chinese fighters in the war relied on their rich combat experience and adopted the three-three system and the light infantry offensive strategy, effectively making use of the terrain and tactical advantages.
However, there are some common misconceptions about crowd tactics that should not be confused with the concentration of superior forces, and although both involve the use of a large number of soldiers, crowd tactics focus more on quantity than quality.
It is true that there was a gap in the quantity and quality of weapons in the early stages of the Chinese army's participation in the war, but this does not mean that they completely rely on crowd tactics, in fact, the combination of effective tactics and crowd tactics is the key to the victory of the Chinese army.
The Battle of Normenheim, the first large-scale mechanized war in Asian history, demonstrated the blind self-confidence of the Japanese army and the determination of the Soviet Union, in which the combined use of heavy armored forces and infantry proved the effectiveness of the tactics of the sea of people in specific situations.
Although crowd tactics may be seen as a simple and primitive strategy in some cases, it still has a non-negligible effectiveness in intimidating the enemy and quickly defeating the enemy.
At the same time, we should also recognize the horrors of the sacrifice of a large number of soldiers and the needless waste of lives.
The superiority of the Soviet army
The Soviet Union's man-to-sea tactics during World War II was a unique military strategy that embodied Soviet determination and courage in the war effort, which relied on massive troop investment to defeat the enemy through close coordination and sustained pressure.
The crowd tactic was applied not only in the Russian Civil War, but also played a key role in World War II.
However, this tactic has also been criticized by Western countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom, who believe that this method relies too much on human life rather than technology and efficiency.
One of the great advantages of the crowd tactic was that it was able to make the most of human resources, and the Soviet Union had a large population base, which allowed the country to mobilize large numbers of soldiers in the event of a war.
Crowd tactics are also able to boost morale and break through the enemy's psychological defenses, and when thousands of soldiers charge together, their determination and courage can shock enemy forces and plunge them into disarray.
However, there are also certain limitations to the crowd tactic, which relies too much on the size of the number of people, and once the superiority in strength disappears, its effectiveness will be greatly reduced.
Crowd tactics can lead to heavy losses, especially in the face of strong enemy firepower, and finally, crowd tactics require a large amount of material reserves to support them, including food, ammunition, and medical supplies.
Despite this, the Soviets succeeded in developing and perfecting crowd tactics, and they formed an offensive by amassing large numbers of troops, making it difficult for the enemy to resist.
The Soviet Union also rationalized the coordination between the various branches of the armed forces, so that the infantry, artillery, and tank units could work together.
In addition, the Soviets used weather conditions to enhance the effectiveness of their attacks, such as launching offensives in the winter and taking advantage of the bitter cold to weaken the enemy's combat effectiveness.
Finally, the Soviet Union innovatively used auxiliary means such as smoke grenades to improve combat effectiveness and reduce casualties.
In the Battle of Moscow, the Soviets succeeded in keeping the Germans out of the city, and the battle became a prime example of Soviet tactics of crowds.
Similarly, in the Battle of Stalingrad, the Soviet army finally drove the Germans out of the city through stubborn resistance, and this battle became a model for Soviet military operations.
In other important battles, such as the Battle of Kursk and the Battle of Berlin, the crowd tactics also played an important role, demonstrating the determination and courage of the Soviet troops.
The success factors of the Soviet manship tactics included abundant resources, firm determination, and excellent organizational skills, however, in the context of modern warfare, the prospects for the development of manship tactics are uncertain.
As technology evolves, precision-guided weapons and long-range strike capabilities become increasingly important, making traditional tactics that rely on massive human inputs obsolete.
As a result, future wars may need to rely more on technology and innovation than on manpower.
The author thinks
Whether in ancient times or in modern times, military struggles are decisions full of wisdom and strategy, and these lessons tell us that every battle has its own peculiarities, and there is no fixed tactic that can be applied to all situations.
At the same time, we cannot ignore the impact of casualties, because this is a major issue that has a bearing on the survival of the entire nation.
Information sources:
Battle of Kursk: Soviet Red Army Loses Hundreds of Thousands of Troops--History--People's Daily People's Daily Online
Research materials on the Battle of Kursk at the U.S. Army Academy
Battle of Kursk World War II military base