But there are three people who command a war zone independently and fight as chief officers: zhukov, MacArthur and Rommel.
But among the three, Zhu is the highest level, and others are all millions of battles. When the last two positions are the highest, they can only be within 50W, and both of them are defeated. In terms of quantity and record, they are not comparable to Lao Zhu. As for the dispute, it is also obvious that in the same period, the status was higher than that of Mai, but Mai was later in charge of the Korean campaign, and everyone knew the result. However, Long's failure is not his fault, because of political and logistical reasons. Although he failed to consider that he is not a good commander in this respect, it is commendable. Compared with Mai's worldwide support, numerous heavy firepower and logistical worries, China didn't know what A-class was until he rushed into Seoul. Don't talk to me about underestimating your enemy. Being commander-in-chief is tantamount to dereliction of duty. It just means that people are not good enough.
Barton, guderian. They are all awesome people in the army, but they have never been a commander-in-chief of the 3 rd Army or commanded the campaign until their death. They can only say that there is no such luck. But in contrast, if they don't have this ability, they can only say that they don't have this experience and can only belong to a relatively weak level. But both represent the essence of armored warfare, and I can't say it's a draw.