"USMC vs Waffen SS" Topic

An equal size unit of United States Marines, all battle hardened from action such as Guadalcalnal, Peleliu, etc. faces a battle hardened unit of German Waffen SS.
They are in hilly and heavily wooded terrain with just their own units normal support weapons.
No other support such as artillery, armor, aircraft etc ?
Who's advantage ?
Russ Dunaway

In what year of WW2?

I mentioned "battle hardened."

Yeah but the year might change what counts as normal weapons in 44/45 the SS might have quite a few StG 44, panzerfuasts and 8cm mortars where as in 1941 it's probably bolt action rifle, AT rifles and 5cm mortars makes a difference to unit capabilities.

By the point in the war that everybody is battle hardened and with no support besides organic heavy weapons, then advantage defender.

An additional advantage to whichever side is fighting on familiar terrain.

Decisive advantage to whichever side reinforces with fresh troops first.

Semper Fi

Draw. Assuming same levels of competent leadership.

USMC advantage was the massive support they were given compared to what was available to the IJA or probably even the Germans.

Depends whether the Waffen SS are re-animated zombies…

Old Glory,
Give us the TO&E for each side. The Marine Rifle Company went through three different versions with different weapons during the war.

Wolfhag

I don't need any other info except Marines are involved, the Corps wins hands down, causalities of course but a Marine Corp victory in the end, nobody beats Marines.

How about Sven Hassel versus the USMC?

Sven
Porta
Tiny
Heide
The Old Man
Gregor
The Legionnaire
Barcelona
Hugo Stege
Pluto
+ others as required from the 27th Panzer Regiment

…no contest. These guys can throw "potato mashers" 118 metres (130 yards). They'd take out the Marines with grenades before the Marines got into grease gun range. Then they'd run up to their tanks and blow them up with mines. They defeated the USMC repeatedly in Monte Cassino.

It's the diet of schnapps and diced pork with mashed potatoes.

The Corps always wins, my DI said so. Semper Fi

Yep. The USMC didn't fight in Europe, and the SS didn't fight in the Pacific.

Some of them fought as members of the Foreign Legion in Vietnam ("we met the real subhumans in Indochina" – Devil's Guard, 1970), but as both France and the USA were defeated in Vietnam I don't know what this tells us.

Robert, then go somewhere else and argue about conventions.

Russ Dunaway

I don't need any other info except Marines are involved, the Corps wins hands down, causalities of course but a Marine Corp victory in the end.

I don't need any other info except Marines are involved, the Corps wins hands down, causalities of course but a Marine Corp victory in the end, nobody beats Marines

S/F,
Wolfhag

USMC for the win

As noted, unlikely to be bloodless but Marine determination would IMHO carry the day

In the last Marine TO&E in 1945 each Rifle Squad in a platoon had a a dedicated flamethrower and demo engineer attached. In a hilly and heavily wooded terrain I think would give them an advantage. Their assaults would be led by WP grenades to screen, rifle grenades, multiple BAR's and M1 Garand fire for suppression followed by flamethrowers and demo charges for the final assault. Each Marine squad has three maneuver elements/fire teams. The German SS had two?

The German MG-42's would be at a disadvantage because of no open fields of fire and close range. I don't know what close assault weapons they typically had or attached to.

Remember Belleau Wood.

Wolfhag

first things first the japanese were not cream of the crop and performed extremely poorly from excellent defensive positions.

USMC

you picked two decked out infantry companies. I can't remember what the panzergrenadier loudout would be but the USMC might have the upper hand. I would favor the side with more automatic weapons. I know the germans like the mp 40 for fighting in the woods.

3 60mm mortars
6 lmg
6 hmg
27 bar
9 flamethrowers

Also, I like the 3, 4 man fire teams that each usmc squad was able to break into.

My money on the Marines… experience of fighting fanatics in close or rough terrain. 45… but will have a LOT of grief from firepower compared to Japanese..
Not many prisoners taken by either.

'Some of them fought as members of the Foreign Legion in Vietnam ("we met the real subhumans in Indochina" – Devil's Guard, 1970'.
Read a long time ago and was illuminating.

A silly question. Of course the Marines win.

One thing noted after the war was the Marines' willingness to take casualties and keep fighting. The Army considered a unit combat ineffective when it had taken 17% casualties yet the Marines kept units in the line that had taken 80% casualties. I don't know when the Germans/SS considered a unit combat ineffective, but the SS stayed in the line for extended periods.

Don't forget, the marines would have a battleship providing artillery support.

"Don't forget, the marines would have a battleship providing artillery support."

Not if you read the question :)

In a straight Company v Company comparison, a lot does depend on whether the opponent is a routine Rifle Company or a dismounted Panzer Grenadier model, either motorised or armoured. Either the F or the G Series USMC Rifle Coy is going to be around 240 all ranks at full strength, which is easily a 100+ more than the equivalent early 1944 Rifle Company or a Volks Grenadier model with Stg44. Also there would be no integral mortars for Rifle Companies using the May and Nov 1944 organisations.

Even a dismounted PzGren Company is smaller, especially if you're assuming the transport and drivers/trains are excluded.

If you move up a level to Battalion the Grenadier Battalion has a definite advantage in mortars, with a mix of 8-cm and 12-cm versus Marine 60-mm and 81-mm tubes. There are more MGs in the USMC set-up, though it was meant to be either M1917s or M1919s in the MG Platoons, rather than having a Squad operate both.

USMC T/Os are fun to study, and if I ever get round to it I've got a ton of stuff to write up on them. It's hard to find anything that really equates in other armies or theatres of the time. They remind me somewhat of airborne, though with a hellacious amount of things on tracks in support.

Gary

USMC hands down in a heavily wooded area.

They are battle hardened and have had the experience of fighting fanatical japanese infantry. Germans are a piece of cake in comparison as the woods won't favor any particular weapon system but rather experience.

To paraphrase "Chesty" "You are marines not all the SS in hell can beat you"

Way too many variables to even speculate.

"Either the F or the G Series USMC Rifle Coy is going to be around 240 all ranks at full strength,which is easily a 100+ more than the equivalent early 1944 Rifle Company or a Volks Grenadier model with Stg44.".
I can't give you any exact numbers but if they are "battle hardened" would they actually be at full strength or would there be a lot less of them? Remember fighting the Japanese they took a lot of casualties. So I don't believe you can make the comparison of a full company of Marines against a full company of Waffen SS.

+1 Irish Marine, +1 oldjarhead, Wolfhag… + "they ain't enough numbers". I started to post yesterday that it was
Marines hands down since we had Chesty Puller. Thanks for
the Puller pic. My favorite of all time. Yes, the Marines
of course.

Semper Fi,

Sam Lemonds

I'm going with the USMC. There must be a gaming system where this could be played out.

Hilly and wooded?
No support.
Rather like Huertgen?

Russ – this post absolutely, undeniably convinces me you have forsaken historicals altogether and are completely immersed in fantasy! Bill

Seems like nobody so far has suggested the obvious wargamer solution: set up table and fight it out yourself! However, first you would need to pick the size of the forces, the time of the conflict and rules to be used – not to mention the figures.

My suggestions:

1.) Size of the forces: battalion on each side, as this was usually the smallest regular unit that was expected to operate on its own. This also provides both sides with a good selection of support weapons.

2.) Timing: towards the end of the war, Germans units start going down in quality and size, as losses mounted and the bottom of the barrel was scraped for replacements. Autumn 1943 would allow them to still be a force to be reckoned – and the Marines would have been able to pick up a fair bit of experience from the campaigns thus far.

3.) Rules: I do not have any specific suggestions at the moment, as battalion-to-battalion matches are not really something that I have played much on the tabletop.

4.) Figures: no specific suggestions from me, though if going for a battalion per side might want to avoid the larger scale models (unless you have big enough table). However, since Russ started this thread, perhaps he will be able to provide nice special deal from Old Glory for the two matching forces?

I'd go with battalion sized units, companies are far too variable with all sorts of wierd attachments.

Peering at the Command Decision Army Lists for 1945 G Series USMC and SS Panzergrenadiers, the Germans have a slight firepower advantage at company level (8 shots per turn) whereas the US only get 7 (those attached MGs help a lot) but has a size advantage. Both sides are rated Veteran, Morale 10. So tbh it is a complete crapshoot.

Set it up and game it out.

Legion 4,
I agree that this would be a great "what if" to play out
on the game table. But to make all things fair there
should be two scenarios. One as Bill suggested, nice
european hills and forests. But let's see how the
black uniformed SS would fare in the rain, swamps
and hills of Cape Gloucester, the mountains and 100' heat of Peleliu or slogging through the black sands of Iwo.

And again, one a platoon sized skirmish, another
company sized and the third battalion size. Still say
it's Gung Ho all the way.

This type of discussion may be called "historically inspired fantasy gaming."

Bismarck, the Waffen SS didn't wear black uniforms. You might be confusing them with early war German tank crews.

Thanks Joe. Thought that was an SS trademark. Guess I
was thinking about the old Battle of the Bulge movie.
Now I have to do some research to see what they actually
wore. Even a septuagenarian can learn something new!
Thanks again for the heads up. Had a lot of family
members who served in Europe, so I don't do a lot of
reading or gaming on the Western front.

Depends upon who is attacking, size of the Waffen SS squad, and situational awareness I suppose.

12 men with 3 BARs for the USMC, though the SS guys get TWO MG42s which will be able to provide far more firepower than the BARs, so……..

Of course, the US guys will probably have 1.5X the number of men to soak up casualties, since the average mid/late war German squad was usually about 8 men, most of whom will just be supporting the two LMGs.

Camo smocks, primarily, for the SS chaps, as well as helmet covers.

Squad, and platoon level games are certainly doable, and perhaps even company level ones with some rules.

Not sure any battalion level rules will be "realistic" enough to permit a decent comparison, and while German troops have access to flamethrowere and satchel charges too, my guess is that the US Marines have more, due to their utility in the Pacific vs. Japanese in caves – not sure that is a fair comparison.

On the plus side for the Germans, the SS could have halftracks with twin flamethrowers on them, which the USA can't field.

Normandy bocage, and/or French/German terrain would certainly be interesting for the opponents to fight over.

I think the original OP put it in a scenario to favor the USMC
(Don't take that the wrong way – I had an uncle at Okinawa).
Most SS were not really trained for forest warfare (AFAIK) – they were more trained for open steppes, to cooperate with tanks.
The Marines were excellent at what they were trained for – beach landings and jungles. But put a Marine Division in the open steppe against say the Wiking Division – your asking for trouble.

How will this be any different from Battle of Belleau Wood?

But to make all things fair there
should be two scenarios.

Or more … With & without Tank, etc., support. But I think it should be just Infantry vs. Infantry with weapons organic to the Sqd, Plt, Co, or even Bn.

Most SS were not really trained for forest warfare (AFAIK) – they were more trained for open steppes, to cooperate with tanks.

Well they were trained to fight as Mech or dismounted Infantry. In most forms of terrain in Europe. There are a lot of forests in Europe. In [West] Germany when I was there as a Mech Co. Cdr.

As far as terrain conditions … Infantry is generally trained to operate in almost all types of terrain they may encounter. Albeit Europe-centric in the case of the SS.

Again I see this as an Inf vs Inf "contest" … probably below Bn level.

But put a Marine Division in the open steppe against say the Wiking Division – your asking for trouble.

Well a USMC Div is basically an Infantry Div. with some Tank support, AT guns, and of course FA. The Wiking Div link was basically an Infantry then later a Panzer Div. A Panzer Div is heavier than a USMC Div.

But again this would be a Co. or under game.

By 45, many SS veterans gone, but 'cream' of heavily indoctrinated youth… plus in several SS units, guys / non Germans who had 'burnt their boats' in different ways… surrender… even to US… was not really an option for some…. esp. for Command.
Eastern front was not all open steppe… hills, swamps and lots of forest… and little remaining support for 'combined' ops with armour / arty / air.
Basically, a very nasty opponent for even an experienced Marine unit… however good.
Still think Marines would overcome… but a vicious fight.

To be 'realistic' in a 'What If' scenario… can't see why Marines would be in NWE? 45? Possibly a landing in Baltic? Flat, swamps, forests. Or Balkans… hilly, dry with some woods.
43 / 44, Italy / S France or Normandy… ok, but Marines much less experience / equipment and up against SS with more veterans and much better support… though Allied air / Naval would dominate.

Whatever ! :)

I'm not sure why people don't think the Waffen SS couldn't operate in a forest environment and the Marines were experts? Europe isn't a flat featureless plain people. Plenty of battles in Europe during ww2 took place in wooded terrain. Just look up the battle for Hurtgen forest as an example of the Germans defending a forested area.

Old Glory,
It's an interesting question. Maybe you should write up a scenario and have some people play it out and submit the results. It sounds like it should be a meeting engagement battle. Maybe using CoC?

I think to be "even" the scenario should be a meeting engagement. Defenders always have an advantage against assaults if the strengths are 1:1.

They are in hilly and heavily wooded terrain with just their own units normal support weapons.

The Marine Rifle Squads got their M1919 LMG's, rocket launchers, and 60mm mortars from the Weapons Platoon so they are not integral to the Rifle platoon like the MG42's to the German platoon so that can give them a firepower advantage. The Germans get a load of Panzerfausts too. Did the SS Platoons have Panzershreks? I don't think the SS used the 50mm mortar except maybe early in the war and would not be useful in the woods.

Thresher,
Any LMG or HMG will be hard to handle in the woods, especially on a tripod unless they are in a prepared position with cleared fields of fire. If they are able to pull off a prepared ambush it would be deadly. If it is a meeting engagement where they both bump into each other the BAR's will go into action much quicker than LMG's unless they can fire them from the hip which I think you could with the MG34 and 60 round drum. I'd have two BAR's backing up the point man and one towards the rear.

Unless you've located the enemy you'd be moving in a column through the woods and not a skirmish formation.

I spent 6 months playing squad level tactical war games in the northern Virginia woods (Quantico area). Visibility was normally 50-60 yards with many small rises or gullies which could block your LOS and no trails. It was not unusual to hear someone before you saw them as it was impossible to be stealthy with all of the leaves and twigs on the ground.

When patrols or small units encountered each other it would normally result in a close hasty ambush against the defender. Our patrol leader would designate a rally point about every 100 yards that we'd fall back to if surprised. You don't stick around in a fight when you are outnumbered or out gunned. Also, flamethrowers and heavy weapons don't normally go on patrols.

If our point man sensed the enemy first he'd signal the direction and to wait and see or deploy for a hasty ambush and designate a left or right flanking action that the squad leader would lead. Yes, even a lowly PFC gave the orders. Marine PFC's don't need to be "activated" to do something.

If done right the umpires would blow their whistle to quit in about 30 seconds. We normally had some southern boy with deer hunting experience at point. That gave us a big advantage over the mostly "city slicker" 2LT's out of OCS.

Wolfhag

1.) Size of the forces: battalion on each side, as this was usually the smallest regular unit that was expected to operate on its own. This also provides both sides with a good selection of support weapons.

To add to this previous comment from me, also going for a platoon per side could be a valid choice, if you are really interested in matching the two sides at the low level. With this size of a force, there would not be any heavy support weapons scooting around, just the squad level small arms (rifles, SMGs and BAR or MG-34/42).

Company per side gets trickier, because depending on the specific time the German company may or may not have mortars or tripod-mounted MGs as integral assets, as these were variously shifted from battalion level to company level and back. Of course for game balance, one could either drop the company level support weapons (mortars and tripod-mounted MGs) from both sides – left behind due to difficult terrain – or provide each side with 1/3 of the support weapons held at battalion level (though these may not always divide nicely by three).

Did the SS Platoons have Panzershreks?

Panzerschrecks could be variously found either at the company level (in a section of 4 or so) or at the regimental anti-tank company (a couple of platoons with a lot of them). That said, I think at some point they were also intended to be distributed to individual panzergrenadier squads, though I am not sure to what level that was actually implemented.

That said, I would not count on it being the handiest weapon when facing infantry in a meeting encounter in a forest.

If the BAR was that great NATO wouldn't have adopted the MG42 postwar.

I thought the original discussion was what if a platoon or company of Waffen SS and US Marines slugged it out. But now we are talking Divisions. US Marine Div had about 20,000 Marines, by 1944-1945 the Marines had 37mm AT guns, 75mm pack howitzers, 105mm, rocket trucks, 60mm, 81mm, 4.2 inch mortars, 90mm anti-aircraft guns, numerous .50cal machine guns for multiple purposes, not counting small arms, flamethrowers and .30cal machine guns, and most importantly the Corp has it own air support that specializes in close air support. The Corps also has Amtraks, half tracks and tanks. As I said nobody beats Marines. I doubt very much the Waffen SS had Divs with 20,000 men.

I find it somewhat sad that some just cannot follow the OP ?
1."Equal" size units
2.All battle hardened veterans
3, No outside support --Battle ships, aircraft, armor …
4. No year specified on purpose --use your imagination and pick a year ??

Indeed I should have said Platoon --now we have whole divisions --my bad.

My understanding of Battlefront tournaments is that any force can be used ??

Russ Dunaway

I'm not sure why people don't think the Waffen SS couldn't operate in a forest environment and the Marines were experts? Europe isn't a flat featureless plain people.

Yes, made that point. As I said, when I was in (West) Germany. There were a lot of woods & forests. Being Infantry, we found ourselves in that type of terrain, a number of times. As for jungles, in the 101 we deployed to Panama 3 times for training/security. Forests or jungles … jungles have more streams & swamps, a lot more bugs and critters. Plus primates that throw their 💩 at you.

Nothing a well trained Infantry unit can't handle. And it is a given both the USMC and SS are considered "well trained" and in this case battle hardened.

Plt vs. Plt … And again, there must be some gaming systems that could handle this "exercise".

I remember decades ago e.g. SPI's board game "Sniper", IIRC. You could easily design a scenario with an SS Plt vs. USMC Plt within the parameters Russ described. There must be a better game system now. Board or mini.