Battles in WW1 seem much more straight forward to describe: trenches.
But how would you describe land battles in WW2 in Europe? They seemed to be far more fluid than before.
Over what sort of timescales did they take place? How did armies resupply as they pushed forward? What sort of tactics were most common or preferred by each country?
If an army gained ground, how did they hold onto it? When the books describe a ‘counter attack’, what does that actually mean?
What did a soldier actually do during a battle? And for how long would they be expected to stay on the front line before being replaced? How much of a soldier’s time was actually spent in combat?
And I’d love to hear answers to any other interesting sub questions you can think of.
Thank you for any responses.
Its a weird question to answer cause their are so many varying examples of time tables and tactics and what actually happens in combat. So I'll try my best but I may not answer all your questions adequately. First thing, each battle can probably be better described as a collection of skirmishes around a certain area. As they didn't just line up and shoot at each other like during the American Civil War. It was absolutely more fluid, covering a greater area with smaller sized elements. For example you would send a squad or platoon to seize a cross roads vs sending an entire company. The timescale is difficult but you're looking at a month or longer. However you have to remember its not constant shooting every minute of every day. For instance the D Day landings (Operation Neptune) was just the first phase of Operation Overlord ( Battle of Normandy) which lasted from June 6 44 to August 30 44 which also consisted of other smaller battles such as the Battle of Carentan which only lasted several days. On the Eastern Front the Battle of Stalingrad August 23 42 - Feb 2 43. So time frames were sporadic but each "Battle" was a bunch of separate engagements and different moments over a larger time period (if that made any sense) The tactic of the day was probably what is known as the Blitzkrieg or "Lightning War" its exactly what it sounds like, very fast paced and aggressive advancements by armor and infantry supported by close air support and artillery. The major draw back to the blitz which both the Germans and the Allies fell victim to is that its so effective that the front line units advance faster than supply chains can be established. So the combat units literally run out of fuel on the front line during an attack. Which opens them up to counter attacks. Usually its the reserve units that will spear head this. And most likely they will attack the flanks or attempt to interrupt their supply chain even further which could lead to a unit being cut off and surrounded. Front line soldiers were pulled off the line at regular intervals unless they were in the middle of an ongoing enemy offensive. Usually anywhere from a month or a few weeks they'd be pulled off the line and given hot food, new uniforms, equipment. Etc. This varies from military to military of course. Russians did not do this. I'll speak from experience on this combat is 90% boredom and 10% pure terror. So a lot of hurry up and wait is what alot of soldiers likely experienced. The combat they did experience was without a doubt horrifying and terrifying, but before and after was probably a lot of boredom and waiting or just being miserable sitting in a hole in the rain. Hope I answered some of your questions well enough.
Vassily Grossman, Life and Fate, is the closest you can get to the Battle of Stalingrad without actually dying.