The_Enigma

Intresting read But going off the last paragragh i was under the impression there was some tank commanders who were more successful then Witmann? :confused:

The Tiger looks good man

My game was PBEM. I drove quite a few of mine onto the ridge, got sound contacts, regrouped and went over en mass with a few platoons while the rest swung around the flank of the ridge. The fighting on the top of the ridge was close and brutal, the force swinging around the side was also brutal. But with that over i was able to deal with all other opposition from long range and only the HT with75mm guns were able to harm me then.

I played 'The Dead Salute the Gods' a while ago, M3 Stuarts get there rear end handed to them when they mix it up with MK IVs and MK IV "Specials". But its not all clean sailing by the end of fighting there was a mass tank graveyard along some ridge with a massive bunch of MK IVs and Stuarts which had shot crap out of one another at close range. It was great

The MK IIIs and IVs can go toe to toe with M3 and Shermans alright as well. I like the Crusaders but depending on what part of the desert war were talking about there too outdated imo ( )unless you have the MKIII. Same with the Matilda, the 2 pounder just doesnt cut it after a certain point. Edit: You may not like the MK II but that and other light tanks i love in the recon and raiding role. Use them to find the enemy so you know where to get your big guns, and there usally fast enough and armed heavily enough to deal with trucks, half tracks and guns etc so if you can slip them through the back door to where they are they prove themselves - while not diverting your main force. I do it all the time, its great! [ July 18, 2007, 02:07 PM: Message edited by: the_enigma ]

Yep they and myself were very happy! Although i wouldnt be too keen to be buying loads to face off agaisnt Panzers. I had one once take a direct hit before he could return fire on a Mark IV. He brewed up with the loss of the entire crew ... all from the one shot!

QTF! I fought a desert match once with Stuarts vs MK IVs iirc which was based off some historical meet up between the 7th Armour and the DAK. My stuarts shot crap out of the panzers unlike real life. I was pretty surprised! Although i like my little Valentines driving around shooting up tanks and supporting my infantry

Left a few comments on TPG for Somme8

So it doesnt make them act better in any way then?

I had noticed that too when playing Somme1 (havnt been able to get around to playing numero8 yet ) so just kept my HQ units well behind the squads so the SMG wouldnt be as effective unless the AI counterattacked and got up close and personel. Prehaps that should be wrote into the breifings as a House Rule?

Intresting ideas Will try and play through the scenario you sent me over the weekend and will leave feedback on TPG for you once am done

Cheers After seeing the first scenario and seeing what a job you did creating a the trench systems i realy wanted to see how you incorparated tanks into them as well. Cheers for the email! Is it representing a Mark I?

Do you have tanks taking part in any of the Somme series?

Check out this Google map, you can easly find the Sealion scenarios lol ok so theres only one of there but well its more then none 1st Panzer Division France June 1940 campaign

Just out of intrested but why do they need to all have LOS with each other? Its WW2 am sure they would have had some sort of radio contact (or other form of commuication) with one another, then just waving at one another?

I bet no one asked them to hand over there little knives though did they As for the London but Highlander, i didnt think troops on leave took there weapons with them did they? Nope, am not insulted at all. Whenever i have researched or talked about WW2 when it has came down to talking about the troops i have only ever used nationailty as a divider as i have seen race (in most respects) illrelevant. I guess am starting to understand a little of what you talk about in regards to the peoples of Africa etc As you have said, am not racist (although am not going to be standing on any corner anytime soon bashing people who are) so its probably that, i just cant really comprehend the attitute of that time (i have family born in the 40s and have worked with people who were born then and there attitute is just like that and it boggles my mind). In the Battle of Britain there were at least two blacks flying with the RAF, according to the website one from Rhodesia and one from Jamaica (who died). Yes i know thats a very small percentage of the force. However i know from some documentries ive watched, which interviewed at least one Jamaican RAF pilot so more must have came since the guy they interviewed ended up there (ive seen sources which have stated the number in the thousands, as pilots and ground crew). What i also remember from his intreview was that he stated when he was outside of the base in the local town people use to look at and kids run up to him to see if his skin was real. Which he said at the time they all thought it was funny but when he thinks about it isnt as quite lol. As for the British Army, there was at least one black guy with the Ox and Bucks on D-Day landing with the Coup De Main party. I believe this was mentioned in Pegasus Bridge by Stephen E Ambrose and am sure he mentioned there was more then one dude as well. (i will try to find the quote). I have also seen mention of simlar with other units elsewhere but cannot currently find any sources. But it would appear they did serve in front line positions as well as behind the lines. An example of the latter would be the Caribbean Regiment which ive just seen talk of on the net and looked it up on the wiki, which states it guarded POWs, provided other rear area duties in Italy and then went off to do mine clearnace around Suez. The reason it states it didnt do front line duty was because of the "political impact in the British West Indies if it had incurred heavy casualties." So it isnt really much but it appears to be a case of they were deffiently there. As just pointed out by John, if we count the Indian Divisions, who were made up of many different cultures and relgions they fought agaisnt all foes of Britain and we had no problem giving them a rifle. For WW1 there seems to much more examples of black troops fighting in the trenches mixed in with white troops. For the Indochina French army it seems you may have missed out the Legionnaires, which if i recall was packed full of ex Wehrmacht and Waffen SS soldiers, or so ive read somewhere. [ June 30, 2007, 04:24 AM: Message edited by: the_enigma ]

Gary posted yesterday he was changing the software which runs the chatroom. Maybe there was some changes still being made when you tried? Although its working fine now because i have just been able to log into it

Meh it was late, you know what i meant

I'd expect their ability to access their own archives (primary sources) to be superior to those that don't speak the language. Not to say that they actually do, or that English speakers can't pay German-speaking researchers, naturally. </font>

Wouldnt one also be wary of any wartime conclusions by German speakers too?

Prehaps i have then taken what ive read in the wrong light then? Although this: Seems a tad harsh now doesnt it, was there really any need for such a comment? I must say that i didnt mean to imply, as it seems you have taken it, that the Auk got booted out because of which Army he came from. It would appear these big wigs didnt: Ironside and Brooke Gort, Gott, Dempsey, O'Connor, Ritchie, Bucknall, Dorman Smith, Horrocks, Crocker, Cunningham, Harding to name a few Corp and higher up commanders and staff. hmm what about De Guingand? It would appear these chaps didnt move into India until during the war: Alexander, Lesse and Wavell [ June 27, 2007, 05:41 PM: Message edited by: the_enigma ]

I have no idea where you get that notion from. </font>

I dont know where they all ended up but i do know that were not all demobed and yes, the West Africans Divisions ended up in India and Burma iirc along with (if they were not included in those divisions, the Kings African Rifles). The other battalions and defence forces listed as far as i know operated in East Africa, fighting the Italians (a force which was at least two thirds iirc native). The British troops (including the above named units and Indian forces) once in places such Eithopia then ended up in roles to protect the Italian colonists (that being white Italians who had moved there), but am unsure for how long. A chunk of the above listed units ended up fighting the Vichy French and also fought in the Middle East. The Caribbean dudes am thinking of where part of the RAF and fought over the skies of Europe. There was also "blacks" in the British Army who fought the German Army. I dont really see why if they didnt fight the Germans it appears not to count. Is fighting the Vichy French, the Italians or the Japanese not as worthy as fighting the German? At any rate there was enough "white" civillians around in India, Burma, Egypt, East Africa and the Middle East... [ June 27, 2007, 04:23 PM: Message edited by: the_enigma ]

Yes when discussing the "desert" i have been referring to the Western Desert as i have assumed others have too (Tunis is a whole other place and campaign ). I only brought East Africa into it when referance to race was brought up to highlight Africans also fought along side our men and to try and get a better understanding of the policy regarding them, which you have gone over and appears to be very intresting stuff (if only from a slightly warped point of view). Strange how it would appear that Indian forces (even though it appears there was some comtempt for "Indian Officers" such as the Auk because he came from the 'Indian Army' and not the British) were more readily accepted and race or relgion was not problem. But still, it would appear that the East African Campaign and the fighting in the Middle East is more forgotten then the forgotten army!

That post made me giggle, quite strangley espeically this comment: :confused: When reading up on the almost forgotten East African Campaign, i found that British forces ended up iirc moving after the Italian forces had been defeated to protect the Italian colonists and to police the area ... bet the boys where a tad upset at no raping and pillaging? On a serious note, with all the talk of race brought up. The British fielded (aided, funded, raised, trained, fought along side etc): Quite a few West African Brigades and two Divisions (81st and 82nd), Several East African Brigades, The 1st African Division (later the 11th), The King's African Rifles (i believe they may have made up part of one of the West Afican Briagdes and divisions) Rifle battalions raised in each of the colonies as well iirc, The Sudan Defence Force, The Royal Rhodesia Regiment, Funded and armed the Ethiopian rebels, There was "blacks" in the British army, iirc several of whom were part of the famous Coup De Main party on the 6th June, There was also members of the Caribbean countires who fought and who under are flag. So doesnt really seem like they had a problem with giving "blacks" guns etc [ June 27, 2007, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: the_enigma ]