Brit/CW Forces Make My Brain Hurt

[Scott B]

Okay, there's clearly something I'm missing here. I have great difficulty employing British model forces with the same effectiveness that have when I employ American model and German forces on the attack; as a result, what are some tips to help me improve with them?

Typically I've employed CW infantry and tanks at a ratio of 2-3 tanks per company of infantry, and I try to buy universal carriers with Vickers and towed guns (basically stuff out of the Battalion organization), backed up with 3" and 25-pdr artillery and occasionally larger guns, depending on the scenario.

With regards to the infantry, how were they typically employed? I've tried maneuvering platoons independantly, but it seems that anything less than a company mass will just get shredded by even vanilla Heer infantry. The 2" mortars slow me down, and while I've tried centralizing them all under the company commander, etc., I have a hard time getting anything worthwhile out of them.

Far as tanks go, they have the Sherman series and the excellent Fireflies going for them, but the Cromwell is practically a deathtrap even before you take into account its light load of HE ammo, so I feel almost stuck taking Shermans and the occasional Churchill. CW troops practically demand close tank support for effective forward movement, and the Cromwells run out of HE far too early for my tastes in the off chance they survive long enough to use it.

So I'd think that the advantage they'd have would be in the Field Artillery area, and while they have some good guns and ammo loads (I'm particularly fond of the 120 round 25 pounder spotter), they seem slow to respond, and the majority of my effective fire support comes from 3" mortars. Which are fantastic; the best on-table support in the game, but probably the only solid source of fire support in my experience with them so far.

So, what am I doing wrong? Barring buying ahistorical forces (like paras+fireflies, etc), how can I win with the British/Canadians/Polish?

For that matter, what does a historically accurate British force look like? I assume Sherman units have 3-4 Shermans per Firefly, and that Sherman Vs get grouped with Sherman VC Fireflies, Cromwells get Challengers, and Churchills probably don't get 17-pdrs too often in support below troop level, but my area of expertise is the Eastern Front, with the American war effort almost as a sidenote, so I'm clearly disadvantaged as to getting CW forces to work.

Scott B.

[Pak40]

I right there with you Scott. I don't get around to playing the CW forces much so I don't know a lot about them. But I have learned a little playing against them.

The infantry are weak. A normal infantry platoon is comprised of mainly bolt action rifles, not very effective. So, in order to make up for the weak infantry, you'll need to buy some extra infantry or get some more Infantry support like a vanilla Sherman or anything will a lot of HE.

As for tanks, I've learned that the Churchill with the exrta armor can be a real pain to kill. I've had trouble knocking those out with Hetzers and PzIVs. But, this Churchill isn't really a tank killing machine, the gun doesn't have the power. It's better used for infantry killing but you have the extra insurance of thick frontal armor incase enemy tanks try to tangle with it.

I noticed that you didn't mention anything about Tank Destroyers. For me, tank destroyers are a necessity. I always get at least one for the sole purpose of killing tanks. Fireflys and Sherman 76s are good but they're too expensive to lose so I turn to the cheaper Hellcat or M10 or in the Brit's case, the Achilles.

[Redwolf]

The British relied on flamethrowers quite much, more so than Amercians and Germans. Teams, Wasps and Crocodile.

Which Cromwells do you mean for being short of ammo, 75mm or 95mm? I usually run out of HE in Churchill VIII, but not my Cromwells.

I agree that the 2" mortar is not very useful, but occasionally it KOs a gun or helps breaking a squad. Remember than in CMBO, infantry is much more robust from front. Use the number of units you have, including the mortars, so envelop enemy units as much as you can. If you have a tank and run of of HE, give it a manual target command with "use main gun?" -> no!

Late war offers the cheapest VT arty in the game.

People will probably point out the Sexton for having around 100 25 pounder HE shells, which is more than enough ammunition for a typical game, including knocking down house just for fun. But for me, they always blow up early, so I don't buy them often.

[Vanir Ausf B]

My 2 cents:

Always buy Airborne unless using armor with them goes against your (or your opponent's) sense of historical accuracy. They are considerably more effective than rifle troops and cost the same. If you use vanilla rifle troops, don't expect them to be able to go toe to toe with any German troops other than Rifle '44 (which no one uses).

Always buy your infantry in full companies or battalions, as they don't come with any more "junk" units than you would get buying them by the platoon (unlike American).

Group your 2 in. mortars under one or 2 spare company or battalion commanders. If possible make sure these commanders have a combat (lightning) bonus; a double bonus is even better. It's surprising how effective 2 in. can be with a double combat bonus spotter. The main problem with 2 in. is getting them into range.

76mm on-board mortars can be used as effective anti-tank weapons when commanded by a double combat bonus FO. They are very good against AT guns as well.

I generally group my PIATs. I don't hold up the advance waiting for them. They catch up in time usually.

The Cromwell Mk VI is a very good buy. A very fast tank with lots of HE and MG ammo. The small number of 95mm HEAT rounds they always carry can penetrate all but the heaviest German tanks frontally and it's fairly accurate out to 500m or so. Mk VIs also do not carry any pain-in-the-ass smoke rounds. It costs about the same as a Sherman, but is more effective IMO.

Early war I will usually pair Mk VIs with Wolverines 50/50. Later on when HE for the 17 lber shows up Fireflys and Comets become good choices as they are all-in-one tanks (good against both infantry and armor). They are a bit pricey, but knowing you have an answer for any German uber tank is nice.

For arty, 76mm mortar or 25 lber are fine for smaller games, but in 2000 pt or higher battles bring some 5.5 inch. These are my favorite British arty. These are the only "slow" arty I will buy as any side. When on the attack they are guaranteed to make any enemy strong point into a weak point. And they are surprisingly cheap.

I've never played as Canadians.

[Vanir Ausf B]

A few quick notes I just thought of:

The above advice on tanks assumes no restrictions on purchases. If you are playing under Fionn's Short 75 Rule Shermans are your best bet and all you really need.

2-3 tanks per company is a bit armor heavy for my taste. The exact number of tanks will vary depending upon how expensive the models you buy, but I almost never spend more than 25% of my total points on armor. 20-25% is the norm for me which usually works out to about 1.5 tanks per company. This doesn't mean tank heavy is bad, it's just not my cup of tea.

[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Scott B]

Hmm. Went back and looked, and the Cromwell's HE load is a little better than I thought (just remember playing a recent game where I suddenly and surprisingly found my Cromwell firing AP rounds at enemy infantry). Figure about 35 or so, where the 75mm armed Sherman's load seems to be more around 55? Since 95mm armed Cromwells don't carry many "c" rounds, they're actually fairly well armed for HE.

The 2-3 tanks per company figure is for Commonwealth troops. For Americans I think I tend more toward 1-2 per, and for Germans usually more like 1. Basing on the strength of the infantry, I feel like they need it a little more. I may benefit from some experimentation with CW TDs as well.

Scott B.

[Cpl Carrot]

Something to remember also is that your squads are smaller that the american and german ones (except the mot ones??) Which means less staying power and less firepower, except at range (250m plus).

[Grunto IV]

the commonwealth squads might be subpar, but here are some strengths:

-50mm mortars are good little harassment weapons; and they can move 'fast.'

-PIATs are excellent urban AT weapons... can shoot without conseqence from inside of buildings.... sometimes kill vehicles without themslves being spotted.

-3" mortars are superior to german/american 81mm mortars.

-they generally have a good array of armored vehicles to choose from.

andy

[Michael Dorosh]

To answer the historical question, Shermans were grouped in troops (platoons to the Americans or Germans) of four, with one firefly per troop initially (later some troops had two fireflies), the rest being Sherman III or V. Three troops plus a headquarters troops made a squadron (company) and three squadrons made a regiment (battalion). The recce squadron would be outfitted with Stuarts or other, smaller, vehicles.

British and Canadian infantry divisions did not have tanks of their own, but a number of independent armoured brigades did provide armoured support to the infantry in NW Europe. Armoured Divisions were organized with one brigade of armour (three regiments plus a recce regiment which was sometimes equipped with tanks as per a normal armoured regiment)) and one brigade of infantry.

More information, including orders of battle of the Commonwealth divisions in Europe, is available at the two sites listed below.

[ 06-12-2001: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[Ron]

I have used the British forces a lot with great success and like them very much. They aren't as flexible as the German make-up but can be deadly effective nonetheless. As an aside, I used German Rifle Platoons in about 75% of my games as the Axis so the switch to Brit infantry isn't much of a leap. This topic has been brought up before so I will quote a previous thread.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Ron wrote:

I understand you are looking for the most cost-effective force for a QB? If that's your preference then IMO you have more flexibility selecting a British force. Some of their strengths:

1 - Cheap Infantry Coys including supporting Piats and 2" mortars.

2 - Cheap MG vehicles with the White Scout Car, Humber, and MMG Carrier.

3 - Reasonably cheap and very effective armor for both AT and Anti-infantry work with the Challenger/Firefly, Daimler and 95mm Cromwell.

4 - An excellent and effective AT gun with the 6pnder.

5 - Cheap and deadly Mortar FOs with the 3" and 4.2".

I have played the Brits a lot and such a combined arms force is very effective against the Germans, whether they are fielding Panthers, JgPzs, VG SMG/Sturmgruppe Coys or what have you. What the Germans have really doesn't matter in the end, you just have to play with your (Brit) stengths and limitations in mind and adjust your style of play accordingly.

The British squad by itself has poor firepower and can't stand toe-to-toe with anyone, supplement them with the MG vehicles and Mortar FOs, think "volume" of firepower instead of "total". The 2" mortar seems superfluous but it will keep up with the platoon and suppress a squad or MG, very handy. I like being mobile so I usually avoid the Vickers MG and stick with MG vehicles. For the same reason I like the 3" and 4.2" FOs, they have lots of ammo and are good for a fluid situation, roughly equivalent to the German 81/120mm.

The 95mm Cromwell VI is an excellent infantry support tank. With weak armor protection you need speed and at 40mph it is the fastest(IIRC) "tank" out there, I avoid the Churchill because when I see German armor outmaneuvering me then... The Cromwell usually has HC as well to deal with enemy tanks though the Challenger/Firefly with the 17pnder gun can and will do the AT work. My preference is the Challenger, even being a larger target and having less ammo than the Firefly, simply because it's a little faster and a little cheaper, YMMV. The Daimler's pop gun can be fun sometimes. The real ace for the Brits though is the 6pnder AT gun, its regular AP can deal with most 'regular' German armor while with tungsten it can perforate the larger cats. Now only if they had a vehicle mounted version...

The Brits have other toys in their kit as well such as the Croc, Wasp, 25pnder/4.5" Arty, Archer, 3" mortars or 40mm Bofors that can all be very effective in certain situations and/or depending on your style of play.

The key, as with playing any side, is to use combined arms tactics, arty/mortars, direct fire and MGs to suppress/kill then the infantry to mop up.

Hope that helps...

Ron

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some notes to your questions:

- 2 to 3 tanks per company of infantry seems like a lot off the top of my head. I think I generally use less armor, spending more points on artillery(mortar FOs) and support.

- as you noted Brit infantry aren't too effective acting alone, they need fire support, for me that usually comes in the form of mortars, MG vehicles and direct fire, in that order.

- just about all Allied tanks are death traps lol Speed can be as good as armor in survivabilty so I prefer the fast Cromwell series over the Shermans.

- yes I agree the Brits have some good cheap artillery, especially the 3" and 4.2" mortar FOs which are very responsive. I like the 25pnder also but more in an attack battle, not in a fluid situation where response times are key.

- IIRC the Cromwells were part of the Recce element and one Firefly was usually grouped with 3 Shermans.

Ron

[Four Stringer]

I love playing the Brits (& Canadians too!); guess I'm just an Anglophile.

Previous posts have covered this topic well, but I'd like to stress the usefulness of MMG carriers and the Wasp FT vehicle. I've had great luck with both of these units. They are very, very fast, and provide good cheap fire support for the somwhat underpowered CW infantry units. Of course, these vehicles are highly vulnerable, so you MUST keep them moving. I find moving the MMG carrier quickly from cover to cover to provide support/suppresion fire for advancing infantry, then dashing in the Wasp forward to torch suppressed enemy units often works well on the attack. Make sure to always use the "fast" move command though. If there are AT guns or tanks present, try to give them a crossing target, as the Carrier/Wasp's high speed will often cause them to shoot behind the rapidly moving vehicle. However, if the Axis have rapid fire AA weapons (20mm etc), you could be toast. These tend to quickly take out any Carrier, regardless of speed.

Oh, I also love playing the Brits because you get to hear the great "stuff that in your pipe" wav.

[Scott B]

Wow, some good answers, and stuff I need to try. But I have more questions now.

Were Churchills employed in a similar formation to that mentioned above? That is, 4 tanks in a troop, 3 troops in a squadron, etc.? I'd assume these would be part of the armored brigades tasked with supporting the infantry.

From the links provided, it appears that in order of rarity from most common to most rare with regards to artillery support should be 2" mortars, 3" mortars (battalion mortars), 4.2" mortars (regimental mortars), 25-pdr (division artillery - direct support), 5.5" artillery (divison artillery - general support). That sound right?

The 25 pounder is a field gun; was it commonly employed in direct fire as late as '44-45?

How were Tank Destroyers organized within CW forces? Divisional AT battalion within Armoured Divisions?

The links mentioned for Canuck and Tommy have some really interesting information. Michael, maybe you can help me with a couple questions from there.

On the

Warriors of the North page of the Canuck site, there is a description of a Canadian Motor Battalion; I have a few questions about this formation:

1) Is the Motor Battalion the infantry battalion used within the infantry brigade of an Armoured Division?

2) Do platoons still have 1 Piat and 1 2" Mortar? (or is this basically a formation usable only in custom scenarios?)

3) Is it safe to assume this is a formation in use within Polish and British units as well?

4) In the "carrier-mounted" platoon of each company, how many universal carriers would be present? Since Combat Mission allows only one rifle team per carrier, the game-requirement for a mounted platoon would be 7 vehicles without Piat or 2" mortar, or 9 if those platoon weapons are included; since I don't intend to fight these platoons mounted anyway, how many should be present if correctly represented in a scenario?

Thanks again for the replies; I'm learning a lot here, and working out new methods for employing CW forces in-game.

Scott B.

[Four Stringer]

Since Mr. Dorosh is active in this thread, I'd like to say THANK YOU! Your websites are fantastic, and have greatly enhanced my CM experience and are an excellent historical resource.

Your hard work is greatly appreciated!

[Gen. Sosaboski]

I have had great success with Polish/Brit Airborne, epescially defending.

If I am attacking with regular troops, I usually equip myself with a 4.2 in mortar FO (good response time, good punch as well), a platoon or two, and some vehicles (all depends on the price range). 2 in. mortars CAN ko guns and small inf. units (had a platoon hq get taken out once).

[Michael Dorosh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott B:

1) Is the Motor Battalion the infantry battalion used within the infantry brigade of an Armoured Division?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No - it is an infantry brigade attached to the ARMOURED brigade of an armoured division.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

2) Do platoons still have 1 Piat and 1 2" Mortar? (or is this basically a formation usable only in custom scenarios?)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, as far as I can tell, the infantry platoons in motor battalions were the same as for infantry battalions, but I am open to correction on this.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

3) Is it safe to assume this is a formation in use within Polish and British units as well? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Never safe to assume! But you are reasonably certain of being correct in this case. FROM D DAY TO VE DAY by Bouchery show that motor rifle platoons don't have PIATs but I think this may be an error (the text and plates seem to be riddled with them, unfortunately).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

4) In the "carrier-mounted" platoon of each company, how many universal carriers would be present? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to Bouchery, this too is different, and all three companies in a British motor rifle battalion were mounted in halftracks. Don't know if this applies to Canadians or not - more research required!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Since Combat Mission allows only one rifle team per carrier, the game-requirement for a mounted platoon would be 7 vehicles without Piat or 2" mortar, or 9 if those platoon weapons are included; since I don't intend to fight these platoons mounted anyway, how many should be present if correctly represented in a scenario? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I suspect you are safe leaving the carriers out altogether. I presume they always fought dismounted and left the vehicles in safety. Again, I'm open to correction.

To Four Stringer - thanks!

Looking forward to anyone else with better answers than I am able to provide.

[Cybeq]

Somebody mentioned the 2in. mortar's chief weakness being it's short range. Yea, that sucks but I think it's small ammo loadout is another weakness. Despite these weaknesses I find myself loving the little guys. I don't attach them to a company CO. I prefer to leave them with the platoon. They are fast enough to advance with the platoon and will be there to provide supression when you need it. They can also throw smoke to cover your movements (very handy!)

[Chris Cline]

Just thought I'd interject. I only read the last post, but I found a workable tactic with the 2-inchers just today. From the begining, I seperated all of the mortars from their respective platoons. I formed them into their own unit all within command radius of the company leader. I found to my dismay, at the beggining of the battle, that they were all far out of range in their starting position. Under cover from other various elements of my force, I moved them up into a forward, tree-line position. Using the company HQ unit as a spotter, I had them all fire into a concentrated infantry position. I felt this grouped fire far more effective than the meager support that they would give to their respective platoons. Additionally, while the rest of their rifle platoon can run from position to position, the mortar can only walk, slowing the whole platoon down. Just my two, probably very useless cents...

[ 06-13-2001: Message edited by: Chris Cline ]

[Four Stringer]

Quite the contrary Chris, well said.

As far as the 2in mortar goes, I try to approach its use based on what it "is:" basically, a grenade launcher. That being said, I usually leave it w/the platoon to supply suppresive fire. Outiside of the lucky hit, they usually don't cause casualties, but they can keep enemy heads down, allowing the rest of the pltn to advance into position to fire and/or assault. However, they aren't really useful vs enemy units in building or bunkers.

I will occasinally group 2in mortars together under a command unit. This is the only way I've found them useful in laying a smokescreen; singly, they just don't make effective smoke.

Just last night while playing a large scenario w/Brits, I noticed sniper units really like to take out 2in mortars, even when there is a command unit advancing next to them. This happened several times in this scenario. Odd, eh?

[Moriarty]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott B:

Were Churchills employed in a similar formation to that mentioned above? That is, 4 tanks in a troop, 3 troops in a squadron, etc.? I'd assume these would be part of the armored brigades tasked with supporting the infantry.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In general, the British model Armoured Platoon (includes Canadians & Poles) would have 3-4 tanks per platoon (companies with platoons of 3 would have 5 platoons... Otherwise 4)..

One Firefly per platoon, even in Cromwell armed platoons.

Never mix Shermans and Cromwells as a division was either Cromwell or Sherman armed.

Armored recce Regts were armed with Cromwells for the Brits and Shermans for the Canadians and Poles. Company HQ would include a CS tank (95 or 105 armed).

Churchills are resticted to independent Tank Regts. They are armed with Churchills only -- no Fireflies.

Hope that helps.

[PiggDogg]

First to get the nice part of the Brit/Can/Pole Infantry. Their paratroops are tough as nail and can stand with any German infantry. Now the bad part, B/C/P line infantry just doesn't have the firepower to stand with most German infantry (of course, excluding the German security troops which is as bad as the B/C/P infantry.

B/C/P tanks/armor are marginally better than the American's and we know of the general problem of Allied tanks versus German tanks.

The assorted B/C/P 'funny' vehicles help redress the inferiority of B/C/P infantry.

B/C/P off board arty is excellent.

The surprising unit is the two inch mortars. They kill German AT & infantry guns like no one's business. Otherwise, they are of marginal value, because they do not kill German infantry. I tend to use at least one 2 incher per platoon and spread the rest out to spot & kill enemy guns.

I almost only play random most everything quick battles. These somewhat replicate the vagaries of war. I just live with what the computer gives me & my opponent. I do groan when I am dealt the B/C/P, but I live with it and make do. The Fates speak and I do what they utter. Hope that this helps.

Richard Cuccia, richardcuccia@home.com, ICQ# 116577632

[boy_Recon]

I used to shy away from the Brits, but now I'm beginning to work out a decent (if slightly gamey) strategy. 2" mortars are quite handy if massed up with the Co. Commander and fired indirectly. Churchill 8's and Wasps are well handy vs Inf. Achilles do ok against most German tanks, and use Stuarts to try and get flank shots. Use Humbers as expendable recon (NOT gamey, this is how they were used), and MMG carriers as inf support. Brits are best on the defense, but with a bit of luck luck you can make a decent fist of it on the attack.

[Andreas]

Regarding the correct number of tanks for a Coy of infantry in the Commonwealth, I have seen it all in the accounts I read.

1 Sqdr (16-19 tanks) per Battalion, sometimes 1 Sqdr per Company, really depending on the task, and whether it was an infantry or an armoured division (the latter being tank heavy).

Moriarty made a slight mistake - the Polish 1st AD Recce Rgt was equipped with Cromwells. Only the Canadians had all Sherman ADs.

The following from my readings, my well have mistakes in it.

7th AD - all Cromwell, except for 36 Fireflies (or thereabouts)

11th AD - Cromwell (Recce) Shermans (main), converted to Cromwell (Recce) and Comets (main) in March 1945 (conversion planned for Dec 1944, but the Bulge got in the way)

Guards AD - Cromwell Recce, Shermans (main)

Polish 1st AD- Cromwell Recce, Shermans (main) with IC or VC Fireflies (I think)

Canadian 4th AD - all Sherman, with Sherman IC or VC Fireflies

79th AD - various specialist armour, Crocodiles, Flails, bridgelayers, Kangaroo APCs etc.

4th AB - all Sherman

8th AB - all Sherman

6th Guards TB - all Churchill

31st TB - all Churchill

33rd TB - all Churchill

These were 21st Army Group level assets, assigned to operations by 2nd British and 1st Canadian Army as needed.

The recce troops (as opposed to Recce Rgts) in the battalions had a lot of Stuarts, but these were not really used offensively, but for patrolling, scouting and other non-combat duties, if this could be avoided (of course they fought when they had to, but they were not really thought of as tanks anymore). the Tank Brigades had 33 Stuarts each, and about 60 Churchills.

It is unclear who had the Challengers. It is probably not correct to make a blanket statement like 1 Challenger to 3 Cromwells from August (when they were introduced). It is certain that they were in 11th AD, but the other ADs may have had none at all.

In a Churchill Squadron, you would have two CS 95mm tanks, in Sqdr. HQ. The same organisation in Cromwell and presumably Sherman Sqdrs.

It is really important to understand the basic flaw in the OOB of the Commonwealth AD. It had 256 medium tanks on the establishment, but very little infantry compared to this large number of tanks. With the losses in infantry once the campaign wore on this problem was exacerbated.

The tank destroyer units in all divisions (armoured and infantry) were manned by the Royal Artillery. Armoured divisions had M-10 Wolverine and Achilles (once these became available), while the infantry had towed 17pdrs and later Archers.

Fireflies were usually grouped in the 1 per troop scheme, but 8th AB grouped them in one Firefly Troop per squadron. I think (but am not certain and too lazy to go upstairs and look it up) that either 8th or 4th AB actually had Diesel Shermans.

I realise this is not very helpful for your original question, but it may help people wanting to design scenarios or to buy units for a QB.

[Scott B]

Actually, that's very helpful. Thanks.

Were the Wolverines/Achilles TD squadrons organized in the same manner as tank squadrons?

[Andreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott B:

Actually, that's very helpful. Thanks.

Were the Wolverines/Achilles TD squadrons organized in the same manner as tank squadrons?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, since they were Royal Artillery they were organised in batteries. Within a regiment two batteries would have three troops of four (towed) AT Guns each and the other two batteries would have three troops of four (SP) AT Guns each. These would be either Archer or M-10 (the Commonwealth nomenclature was to call the M-10 an AT Gun (SP)). So I would expect them to be employed in troops of four, or half-troops of two.

So the total number of AT and AT (SP) guns in a battery is much lower than the number of tanks in a squadron, and I am quite uncertain on whether they would have organic ARVs etc.

[ 06-24-2001: Message edited by: Germanboy ]

[Michael Dorosh]

The only thing I could add to Germanboy's excellent description is that there was also a Canadian independent armoured brigade - the 2nd - which was equipped with Shermans as well.

There was also a recent discussion where I gave figures for the number of 3 inch and 18 pounder M10 SPs; the Canadians seem to have used a lot for the assault, but moved back to towed 17 pdr AT guns. As Germanboy pointed out, these were artillery units that manned them (Royal Canadian Artillery in the case of the Canucks).