Preview or how to kill 17 Shermans with one Panther

[JonS]

And here it is' date=' all about how Barkmann took out 17 Shermans - all in an afternoons work (or maybe it was 14).[/quote']

Or, more likely, it was none.

Engaging writing it may well be. SS fanboi-ism it certainly is. Worthwhile research it ain't.

[Praetori]

At least we have that What would we do without premium danish beer, norwegian oil money or swedish pessimism!

Possibly raid the seas and burn an abbey here and there, and party like it's 999.

[Battlefront.com]

Can we, please, drop this business of the Commonwealth. It is inaccurate, the Commonwealth was not involved on the ground Western Europe in 1944-45, just the Brits and the Canadians.

So what you're saying is... the Canadians weren't a part of the Commonwealth? I learn something new every day.

Steve

[JonS]

Speaking as a member of the Commonwealth (although my country was not part of the Commonwealth in 1944, although it is commonly and incorrectly assumed to have been so), "Commonwealth" is a perfectly valid verbal and written shorthand to replace "those English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Newfoundland, Canadian, some French, Polish, Czechoslovakian, Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian, Greek, Australian, New Zealand, and Luxembourgian (but not US or some other French) forces that were trained and equipped exactly like the purely British forces, and commanded by British commanders in North West Europe during Op OVERLORD, the Battle of Normandy, and the subsequent decisive military campaign in North-West Europe."

As a hayseed, I will continue to use "Commonwealth," but I must insist that the likes of Barkhorn, Blackcat and Magpie use "those English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Newfoundland, Canadian, some French, Polish, Czechoslovakian, Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian, Greek, Australian, New Zealand, and Luxembourgian (but not US or some other French) forces that were trained and equipped exactly like the purely British forces, and commanded by British commanders in North West Europe during Op OVERLORD, the Battle of Normandy, and the subsequent decisive military campaign in North-West Europe" whenever they refer to those English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Newfoundland, Canadian, some French, Polish, Czechoslovakian, Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian, Greek, Australian, New Zealand, and Luxembourgian (but not US or some other French) forces that were trained and equipped exactly like the purely British forces, and commanded by British commanders in North West Europe during Op OVERLORD, the Battle of Normandy, and the subsequent decisive military campaign in North-West Europe.

Thank you for your attention

JonS

[MikeyD]

I'm out of the loop on the upcoming modules but I would suspect anyone who breathed British air and crossed the channel in 1944 (besides the Americans) might get lumped together generically with "Commonwealth". You know, they're obliged to name the module something catchier than "Everyone else". I'd be genuinely shocked if the Free French don't show up, which would basically be American equipment & clothing with British Berets and tanker helmets. After all, somebody's going to have to liberate Paris at some point!

[JonS]

I'd be genuinely shocked if the Free French don't show up, which would basically be American equipment & clothing with British Berets and tanker helmets. After all, somebody's going to have to liberate Paris at some point!

The 2nd French Armoured Division (2e Division Blindée) was organised and equipped exactly like a US Armored Division. Well .. almost exactly. I have a sneakling suspicion their A-Tk Bn may have been a little different. Actually, that they even had an AT Bn was organisationally different ... but still, almost exactly. The other French divisional sized units that ended up in 6th Army Group were equipped and organised like US units.

On the other hand, there were French Commandos who landed on D-Day on SWORD beach who were exactly like British Commandos, and French SAS units that were like any other SAS unit.

[Praetori]

Whats wrong with "Tommies", "krauts", "ivans" and "yanks" or "amis"?

[hoolaman]

So what you're saying is... the Canadians weren't a part of the Commonwealth? I learn something new every day.

Steve

Wouldn't it be more correct to call them British Empire or Imperial forces?

[JonS]

No.

In 1944 Canada was one of a very few members of the formal, legal entity known as the Commonwealth (technically: British Commonwealth of Nations)

[gunnersman]

So there's a Barkmann's Corner scenario although there's no Waffen-SS in the base game?

No no no...Bark MANN. There's the problem!

[Barkhorn1x]

...and another thread goes off the rails. WOOOT!!

[Peregrine]

We have half been through this Commonwealth thing before in another thread. Why don't we wait and see what's in the second module and what it is called and argue about it properly then.

[finalcut]

Would that make the National Guard in Virginia or Pennsylvania Commonwealth troops as well.

[Fetchez la Vache]

God fornøjelse :-)

Thanks, I'll remember that now! But I can see the pronunciation is going to be tricky. And I'm going to need a new keyboard. :-/

[GSX]

So what you're saying is... the Canadians weren't a part of the Commonwealth? I learn something new every day.

Steve

Not wanting to be too picky, but at the time it was referred to as the 'British Commonwealth'. The British bit in the title wasn't dropped until 1949.

So in 1944...........

[Wiggum]

Will the Europeans have to make do with the Waffen Grenadiers again?

No, i think not.

That was only because they sold it in stores so they had to get a USK/PEGI or whatever rating.

And they took a look and said: "What, there is SS ingame...no way !".

So we got Waffen-Grenadiers, at least they saved us from turning into Nazis immediately...

[flamingknives]

I had thought that it was because the European distributor was based in Germany and therefore ran afoul of the laws in that country.

Buying direct from BFC (possible even from Europe) got you the hamstertruppen in all their detail.

[Vark]

I had thought that it was because the European distributor was based in Germany and therefore ran afoul of the laws in that country.

Vaguely remember seeing that, ok will order mine direct and just hope that I don't forsake my deeply held political views because of playing a game!

[Magpie_Oz]

.... As a hayseed, I will continue to use "Commonwealth," but I must insist that the likes of Barkhorn, Blackcat and Magpie use "those English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Newfoundland, Canadian, some French, Polish, Czechoslovakian, Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian, Greek, Australian, New Zealand, and Luxembourgian (but not US or some other French) forces that were trained and equipped exactly like the purely British forces, and commanded by British commanders in North West Europe during Op OVERLORD, the Battle of Normandy, and the subsequent decisive military campaign in North-West Europe" whenever they refer to those English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Newfoundland, Canadian, some French, Polish, Czechoslovakian, Belgian, Dutch, Norwegian, Greek, Australian, New Zealand, and Luxembourgian (but not US or some other French) forces that were trained and equipped exactly like the purely British forces, and commanded by British commanders in North West Europe during Op OVERLORD, the Battle of Normandy, and the subsequent decisive military campaign in North-West Europe.

Thank you for your attention

JonS

You are free to insist what ever you want just as I am equally justified in ignoring your rubbish.

There is no problem in saying "the SS were fighting the Commonwealth forces" if they were fighting the UK or Canadian forces. The use of the term Commonwealth, or more correctly Dominion, is fine in that instance for the sake of brevity.

The only time when it becomes a problem is when all of the other ones you list who were NOT dominions are lumped in as Commonwealth as it is belittling the identity of those countries who continued to fight along side the Commonwealth forces after being conquered.

As for Virginia and Pennsylvania? well we are talking about THE Commonwealth not just any commonwealth. By the same reasoning we could claim that Pennsylvania and Virginia are part of Australia as we are a commonwealth as well.

[Glukx Ouglouk]

Magpie_Oz, I don't think anyone here is claiming that Poland is part of the Commonwealth... AFAICT, what as been said is that:

- Polish forces used the same equipment and TO&E as the commonwealth units present in Normandy, and fought in 21st Army Group - so, in game terms, it makes sense to lump them together with commonwealth forces if Polish forces are to be included;

- Polish units (division level, I think?) took their orders from Commonwealth higher-ups (corps level and higher, right?), so it makes sense to say that Polish forces were part of larger commonwealth units, or were under Commonwealth command - now, where on Earth would that imply that Poland was ever part of the Commonwealth?

- The first module is referred to as "the Commonwealth module" because it's centered around Commonwealth forces and because nobody wants a name that is fifteen words long to describe everything that's in it - that doesn't have to imply that it won't contain anything that isn't part of the Commonwealth! Case in point: there will be new German units too...

Frankly, as a French, it wouldn't come to my mind to deny that the 2ème DB, while certainly being a French unit, was part of the American forces in Normandy - because the units it was part of (XVth corp, IIIrd army) were led by Americans, not by a joint command.

[MengJiao]

Magpie_Oz, I don't think anyone here is claiming that Poland is part of the Commonwealth... AFAICT, what as been said is that:

- Polish forces used the same equipment and TO&E as the commonwealth units present in Normandy, and fought in 21st Army Group - so, in game terms, it makes sense to lump them together with commonwealth forces if Polish forces are to be included;

- Polish units (division level, I think?) took their orders from Commonwealth higher-ups (corps level and higher, right?), so it makes sense to say that Polish forces were part of larger commonwealth units, or were under Commonwealth command - now, where on Earth would that imply that Poland was ever part of the Commonwealth?

- The first module is referred to as "the Commonwealth module" because it's centered around Commonwealth forces and because nobody wants a name that is fifteen words long to describe everything that's in it - that doesn't have to imply that it won't contain anything that isn't part of the Commonwealth! Case in point: there will be new German units too...

Frankly, as a French, it wouldn't come to my mind to deny that the 2ème DB, while certainly being a French unit, was part of the American forces in Normandy - because the units it was part of (XVth corp, IIIrd army) were led by Americans, not by a joint command.

Well, there was only one army group (21 Army Group) in Normandy until Late July. So using the logic of Cladistics, you should separate the Americans (who, along with the French 2nd Armored, will eventually be the 12th army group), rather than specify the others. "American" would be the outgroup characteristic (a pliesomorphy I think), just as with early fishes:

Stratophenetics isolates Climatiida, the earliest occurring acanthodian lineage, dating from the Middle Silurian, as basal to the entire taxon. Counter-intuitively, climatiid acanthodians display the most apomorphic morphology comparative to other members of the lineage, including the presence of two dorsal fins, and numerous paired intermediate spines on the ventral surface of the body—a condition autapomorphic of Acanthodia itself. The time-dependent phylogenies go on to isolate the Acanthodida, as the most derived acanthodian fishes, and yet they display the most plesiomorphic of all acanthodian morphologies, retaining a single dorsal fin, and with but one pair of intermediate spines. The two groups are separated by a mere 12 million years—which, to geology, is a blink of the eye.

The time-dependent phylogeny, therefore, has two significant flaws: it ignores the fact that the most basal members of a lineage, as Carroll himself would point out, are those which will display the most plesiomorphic anatomy comparative to other members of the ingroup, and will have more synapomorphies comparative to the outgroups, than will the most derived members of the lineage. Yet here we have the most derived members of the acanthodian lineage, from a morphological point of view, being advanced as the most basal. Furthermore, the time-dependent phylogeny must invoke massive reversal with no apparent causal factor, to explain why such a plesiomorphic form should have been recapitulated by the acanthodiids. All in all, this phylogeny is something of a mess.

[Vark]

Oh dear, some of us really need to play this game...badly! I wonder if the Swedish authorities will declare it to be addictive as WoW, WHEN it comes out?

[RogCBrand]

Oh dear, some of us really need to play this game...badly! I wonder if the Swedish authorities will declare it to be addictive as WoW, WHEN it comes out?

Kind of reminds me of that part in "Kelly's Heroes"-

Look, Captain! You can't let them do this!

I must get my men near some broads

before they start freaking-out.

I'm aware that,

that situation might be developing.

But replace "broads" with "CMBN"

[Magpie_Oz]

Well of course you are all right. I don't know what came over me.

Of course the Polish. Belgians, Luxembourgers, Czech et al should all be referred to as "Commonwealth" and why not? The might sound a bit funny, but they all look the same and have the same stuff so why bother differentiating them?

I agree the French should not be distinguished from the Americans, they have a close affinity and share the same gear too.

In fact given that the Americans themselves are actually a Dominion, if we overlook that little hissy fit they had in the 1770's, so really they are part of the Commonwealth. Ergo the French are Commonwealth too, so come on in!

That will make the American Commonwealth's first battle in North Africa a bit confusing as they will be fighting against the Commonwealth Vichy French in North Africa and trying to meet up with the Commonwealth 8th Army forces coming in from the East but I am sure they will work it out.

IN FACT given that there were a substantial number of GERMANS, about 10000, who served in the British army it leads us to see that Germany is really part of the Commonwealth as well so the module with the SS in it is quite justified as being termed "The Commonwealth".

Then too there were considerable numbers of Soviets who served with the German Army so I guess the USSR is part of the Commonwealth as well !

The Italians are of course considered Commonwealth, being as they were fighting along side their Commonwealth German Allies.

Finally and of course quite obviously there were numerous ethnic Japanese who fought with the US Commonwealth forces so they get a guernsey as well.

So really when it comes down to it what we call "World War 2" should really be the "Commonwealth Civil War" and in fact CM should not stand for "Combat Mission" but "Commonwealth Module"

[JonS]

You need to work on your sarcasm, bro.

And your hissy fits.

Other than that you're doing great.