User blog comment:El Alamein/Viet Cong vs. Waffen SS/@comment-4661256-20180820174700

El Alamein's Edges:

 Assault Rifles: Type 56 vs. StG 44:  Obviously the two weapons are very similar, considering they were designed to fulfill similar roles on the battlefield as an intermediate-cartridge, fully-automatic rifle. Their rounds are comparable and they have comparable effective ranges. The Type 56 has a slightly higher rate of fire, which is, on the one hand, less controllable at longer ranges, but on the other hand allows for better suppressive fire, which is rather important in a firefight of this type. Now, you might say that the Waffen SS will be better marksmen because of their training, but I don't think this is necessarily the case. Plenty of Viet Cong operated as snipers or in similar marksman-type roles, so while the skill is user dependent, the weapons themselves are more or less tied.

Edge: Even

 Machine Gun: RPD vs. MG-42:  Yes, the RPD will be more effective in the jungle because of its more robust design and the fact that it's a light machine gun rather than a general-purpose machine gun, but I still have to side with the MG-42. It might require a crew to operate effectively, but that thing is a beast and will be very dangerous in the city. 1,200 rounds per minute is an insane rate of fire and something that the Viet Cong will be hard-pressed to counter. (After all, it was US air support that spit out similar overwhelming firepower from above onto the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War to great effect.) Is the RPD bad? Of course not. The Viet Cong still have a viable option with their machine gun. It's just that the Waffen SS have a superior tool at their disposal in this comparison.

Edge: Waffen SS

 Mid Range: MAT-49 vs. MP40  :  Both submachine guns possess folding stocks to make the weapon more maneuverable in close-quarters combat. Both of them, interestingly enough, have 32-round magazine capacities, and both of them have similar rates of fire. The MP40 has a little bit of a range advantage, so I'll give it a nominal edge, though it's worth noting that I wouldn't put much stock in the SS making effective use of the MP40 at 250 meters out when they have other firearms better suited for those ranges.

Edge: Waffen SS

 Close Range: Tokarev vs. Walther:  The Tokarev gets the edge. It's more robust, it's going to hit harder with a faster muzzle velocity, and I think the Viet Cong would have had more experience using their pistol in combat than the Waffen SS. It's a small edge, obviously not one that will win the entire battle for the Viet Cong, but it will give them a leg up if things get to extreme close quarters.

Edge: Viet Cong

 Explosives: RPG-2 and F-1 vs. Panzerschreck and Stick Grenade:  I'm definitely giving the Viet Cong the edge here. First of all, the Panzerschreck is bigger and heavier (it's 24 lbs. unloaded compared to the RPG-2's 10 lbs. when loaded), and it will take longer to set up and prepare to fire. Both of them do require a two-man crew to fire optimally, but the RPG-2 would be easier to operate with just one individual than the Panzerschreck. The F-1 grenade beats the stick grenade thanks to its fragmentation, which I think offers it more lethality in the type of fighting taking place in this battle. More importantly, the Viet Cong were masters of using such grenades in booby traps, both in urban combat and in the jungle, whereas this wasn't really the Waffen SS' M.O. in battle. For these reasons, I think the Viet Cong will make more effective use of their explosives in this fight.

Edge: Viet Cong

 X-Factors:  The Viet Cong take the more important edges here. For everyone saying that the SS were better trained, while that is a nominally true statement, the Viet Cong obviously have plenty of combat experience in both low-intensity and large-scale battles. I think it would be pretty pointless to argue that either one of these teams will be functionally incapable of responding to the other in an armed conflict. The Viet Cong, however, are better suited to this type of small squad-level engagement, and critically, they have a huge mental health advantage over the Waffen SS. The SS participated in a wide range of war crimes that seriously impacted their ability to function effectively in combat. We see high rates of alcoholism in the Waffen SS, and we see cathartic releases of stress and frustration in the form of random violence against civilians. The Viet Cong did commit war crimes as well, but these were politically-motivated and not part of a larger campaign of genocide. What this means is that the type of guerrilla warfare that the Viet Cong practice will really trigger the Waffen SS, who themselves struggled against partisans in Eastern Europe. It's precisely the type of combat that will upset the Waffen SS, and precisely the type of combat that makes it difficult for them to lash out immediately like they are used to doing.

Edge: Viet Cong

WINNER: VIET CONG

Now you may look at the weapons edges and say, "EA, these weapons are so similar that most of them are even or almost even." Well, that's partially the point of the rematch. The Deadliest Warrior episode had some very poor weapons choices on both sides, but the loadouts given to each team definitely favored the Waffen SS (such as the Flammenwerfer and the fully-automatic Mauser, despite the fact that such a pistol would actually not be effective in battle as it would empty its magazine in the span of a few seconds). So the fact that both teams have similar weapons may complicate an ultimate analysis of who would win, but it is historically accurate and therefore important.

The Viet Cong win because first of all, they are fighting in their home turf. You might say, "EA, this battle setting favors the Viet Cong and is unfair," but again, with historical accuracy in mind, I feel like this is the only realistic way that the two teams would ever fight. The Viet Cong would not invade Germany or Europe. They fought a defensive war. The Waffen SS, however, would invade another country, so it follows to present a battle with the SS as an occupying force and the VC as the defenders. But this isn't enough to give the Viet Cong the win. What matters here is the fact that the Waffen SS are so incredibly messed up in the head, as I've already detailed at length in the X-Factor section. We're talking about guys who conducted mass shootings after mass shootings, guys who razed villages to the ground and hanged partisans from trees, guys who were driven to their human limit when it came to killing behavior. This represents such an extreme departure from what is considered normal and healthy for the human brain (even for wartime standards, mind you) that I feel confident in asserting it will affect their ability to successfully fight against an unfamiliar and elusive opponent.

The Viet Cong may have struggled to hold their own in a pitched battle like the Tet Offensive, but 1) they were ordered to do that by North Vietnamese commanders, so it's not like they came up with the idea themselves, and 2) this fight isn't a massive campaign launched across the entirety of South Vietnam. Plus, they were able to have localized successes, like at Hue, where the held off US Marines for 3 weeks after taking the city. The Waffen SS might be a standing army, but they're no more professional than the Viet Cong. Their track record of war crimes shows as much. For that reason, the Viet Cong win.