1914 - version 0.2

[The Albatross]

If they were not treated as an integral part of the British Army, then why were the Dominion Prime Ministers so insistent at the Imperial War Cabinet in Spring 1917 that they be allowed the means of direct communication to their commanders without having to rely on the British government? Why did they protest to Lloyd George that they were badly informed about the status of their units serving in the BEF?

The fact is that they were units of the British Army and were under the same chain of command. Irrespective of their attitudes to disciplinary matters - which really is quite inconsequential in a modification such as this that stresses grand strategy - they were part of the same body. There is no case here for representing the Dominions as separate entities, and therefore, in complete control of their own units.

I disagree -- AST troops were "let go" by their commanders after particularly hard battles, and these soldiers would go to the rear areas and "have a bit of fun" and then go back into the lines -- you have not addressed the issue -- Combat fatigue and Battle stress -- and your nations willingness to shoot those who could not cope!!! ( Don't meddle with niceties here -- you will fail )

There have been other forum members here telling us that the Dominions simply followed the path of British High Command directives -- not true -- the Australian Govt had been lobbying for a united AST Command for some time before Monash finally got his way.

On another note -- King George V knighted Monash on the battlefield for his efforts in defeating the GER Axis -- first time this had happened in 200 years -- please don't try to overwhelm us with smoke and mirrors...how do you explain this????? Our King knighting our Colonial Commander!!??!!!

" The fact is that they were units of the British Army and were under the same chain of command. Irrespective of their attitudes to disciplinary matters - which really is quite inconsequential in a modification such as this that stresses grand strategy - they were part of the same body."..

In fact these AST and CAN troops never were an organic part of the British Army mindset, simply because they came from another land.......read my last ....they were volunteers.....

And don't try to fob me off to another thread -- the elements that I am discussing here are relevant to the gameplay....Did you take the time to read the reference that I provided on "SHOT AT DAWN"??? Here it is again:

http://www.shotatdawn.org.uk/page38.html


And if you need any more detail as to why the British troops were "Lions led by Donkeys", then go here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1998/10/98/world_war_i/197586.stm

Notice that there is no mention whatsover of Monash -- just oblique talk about Domionon Forces.

And here is a reference from our American cousins who, under General Pershing, placed their trust in a foreign General (Monash - note -- this has never happened since - i.e US Forces placed under a foreign Commander) and their appreciation of the final days of WW I.

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-battles/ww1/france/yank.htm

Are there any questions -- are there any doubtful points???

Cheers

 

[The Albatross]

Could you please move this UK Dominions debate into some other thread, preferably open a new one in 1914 mod subforum. This thread is for 1914 0.2 issues, problems and game experiences only

No -- it is relevant to gameplay, and that is my point -- I would appreciate some intelligent assessment as to the facts that I am presenting as a fellow Dominion member in supporting Hawk_345s comments.

And yes, it does present a gameplay problem if the Dominion troops are not correctly represented in their capacity, capability, battle honours, leadership and victories.

Perhaps reading General Sir John Monash's relevant quote at my message end may make my position on this a little clearer......does this type of concept trigger anything in successful military strategy such as Combined Operations????

Cheers

 

[Allenby]

Are there any questions -- are there any doubtful points???

Yes - I think that you should calm down. Your above post portrays you as a highly-strung individual, full of hyperbole and ill at ease with any possible contention that could disagree with your own point of view.

What on earth are you doing accusing me of trying to 'meddle with niceties'? From where do you draw this nonsensical grandiose talk of 'you will fail'? Where on earth have I tried to 'overwhelm you with smoke and mirrors'? How do you justify the indignant demand that I not 'fob' you off 'to another thread' when I did no such thing?

I think that it is really quite crass of you to weigh in here and lecture us like an old-fashioned school teacher, asking whether we had taken the time to read your references.

With perfect courtesy, I responded to the points that you raised. You responded in a highly impetuous tone which I find distasteful in the extreme.

 

[Allenby]

I disagree -- AST troops were "let go" by their commanders after particularly hard battles, and these soldiers would go to the rear areas and "have a bit of fun" and then go back into the lines -- you have not addressed the issue -- Combat fatigue and Battle stress

How did this practice differ any more from the rest of the BEF?

There have been other forum members here telling us that the Dominions simply followed the path of British High Command directives -- not true -- the Australian Govt had been lobbying for a united AST Command for some time before Monash finally got his way.

On another note -- King George V knighted Monash on the battlefield for his efforts in defeating the GER Axis -- first time this had happened in 200 years -- please don't try to overwhelm us with smoke and mirrors...how do you explain this????? Our King knighting a our Colonial Commander!!??!!!

" The fact is that they were units of the British Army and were under the same chain of command. Irrespective of their attitudes to disciplinary matters - which really is quite inconsequential in a modification such as this that stresses grand strategy - they were part of the same body."..

In fact these AST and CAN troops never were an organic part of the British Army mindset, simply because they came from another land.......read my last ....they were volunteers.....

And don't try to fob me off to another thread -- the elements that I am discussing here are relevant to the gameplay....Did you take the time to read the reference that I provided on "SHOT AT DAWN"??? Here it is again:

http://www.shotatdawn.org.uk/page38.html


And if you need any more detail as to why the British troops were "Lions led by Donkeys", then go here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1998/10/98/world_war_i/197586.stm

Notice that there is no mention whatsover of Monash -- just oblique talk about Domionon Forces.

And here is a reference from our American cousins who, under General Pershing, placed their trust in a foreign General (Monash - note -- this has never happened since - i.e US Forces placed under a foreign Commander) and their appreciation of the final days of WW I.

http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-battles/ww1/france/yank.htm

Are there any questions -- are there any doubtful points???

Cheers

I really fail to see how any of this is relevant to the point being debated - whether the Dominions should be represented as having a separate chain of command.

Even if the Dominions lobbied hard for their units to be placed into corps commands, this does not alter the fact that the decision to put this into effect was taken by the British government and the army command in France.

King George V knighting Monash reveals nothing except that he was a highly regarded commander, not that his units were not part of the British Army's command structure.

Furthermore, the mindset of colonial troops is completely irrelevant. Does anyone suppose that, because the men of the Indian Corps, having come from such varied backgrounds from their British counterparts, that they were somehow detached from the command structure of the BEF in 1914 and 1915?

And thank you for the BBC link - thankfully, Peter Simkins is an excellent, balanced historian.

 

[The Albatross]

Yes - I think that you should calm down. Your above post portrays you as a highly-strung individual, full of hyperbole and ill at ease with any possible contention that could disagree with your own point of view.

What on earth are you doing accusing me of trying to 'meddle with niceties'? From where do you draw this nonsensical grandiose talk of 'you will fail'? Where on earth have I tried to 'overwhelm you with smoke and mirrors'? How do you justify the indignant demand that I not 'fob' you off 'to another thread' when I did no such thing?

I think that it is really quite crass of you to weigh in here and lecture us like an old-fashioned school teacher, asking whether we had taken the time to read your references.

With perfect courtesy, I responded to the points that you raised. You responded in a highly impetuous tone which I find distasteful in the extreme.

This is not a lecture, and I am quite calm, -- as to you labelling me as a "highly strung individual", I disagree...... if you read references concerning AST troops, you will find that they were "one of the most ill-disciplined soldiers on the Western Front" --- some things never change...

The comment about 'meddling with niceties' refers to the shooting for desertion of UK, CAN, Sth African and NZ soldiers for desertion -- now debated in the Uk Parliament for amnesty -- I invite you to comment on the current press statements about "shooting deserters" -- so, do you support the amnesty or do you support the Canadian viewpoint??

I simply make the point -- AST soldiers went to WW I in support of the Motherland, Great Britain.

Spricar suggested that this information goes to another thread -- I disagree -- I have not "canned" him or you -- in fact, I am appreciative of your efforts in utilising a WW II game to "go back in time" to WW I.

What I do not appreciate is the way that UK Imperial history portrays the minor efforts of the Dominion troops -- especially Monash. You may not be aware of his background -- he was born of German Jewish parents -- Monasch -- so he had a very hard time in convincing people that he was on our side and not theirs.

If I am appearing "emotional" about this subject, it is because the Dominion effort has for so long been labelled under "British Forces", and accepted as such by UK residents and others.

It is time to acknowledge the contribution that our forefathers in the Dominion armed forces made.

And would you like to comment on the Knighthood conveyed upon Gen. Monash on the battlefield?? i.e Do you think that he deserved it???

Don't shoot the messenger....

Cheers

 

[The Albatross]

How did this practice differ any more from the rest of the BEF?




I really fail to see how any of this is relevant to the point being debated - whether the Dominions should be represented as having a separate chain of command.

Even if the Dominions lobbied hard for their units to be placed into corps commands, this does not alter the fact that the decision to put this into effect was taken by the British government and the army command in France.

King George V knighting Monash reveals nothing except that he was a highly regarded commander, not that his units were not part of the British Army's command structure.

Furthermore, the mindset of colonial troops is completely irrelevant. Does anyone suppose that, because the men of the Indian Corps, having come from such varied backgrounds from their British counterparts, that they were somehow detached from the command structure of the BEF in 1914 and 1915?

And thank you for the BBC link - thankfully, Peter Simkins is an excellent, balanced historian.

Sorry, Simkins has got it wrong -- tell me -- in the early years of WW I there was the British Army, after the Somme Battles they then had to recruit for "The New Army" -- now why was that, i.e. what happened to the "Old Army"??

Cheers

 

[unmerged(47177)]

Ok, how about this: Allenby is the sole leader of this mod, he has made a decision most of the mod team supports, you are nobody as far as this mod goes, all you have done is annoy people and fail to convince anyone of anything.
How about you stop trying to change everyone's minds and littering these forums with verbal fellatio of the dominion forces?
Maybe if you start contributing you will be taken more seriously.
As it stands you've contributed nothing but annoyance.

 

[Hawk_345]

But something u overlooked about canada is that unlike australia, canada was in the actuall signing of the traite de versaile in france, granted they could not make any demands, but they ahd a seat and were able to sign the document wich endend the war and put all blame on the germans, also Some of the canadian leaders such as the u metioned were wrong but that was because they learned from the old ways of the british army like the minister of militai in canada thinking the troops were ready but were not even close.

Also dont know if u noticed but canada puts alot more into remebering ww1 than any otehr war, did u even see the vimmy memorial, it is the largest ever built and was untouched by the germans during ww2, it took almost 8 years to build it. And also most of the canadian army was not drafted until the end of the war when more reinforcements were needed but that was when the war was pratically finished and canada let people out if they had many reasons not to get in the army.

Also is any1 planing on making this fantastic mod for DD1.2REBB anytime soon, i really want to play it.

 

[unmerged(47177)]

Nobody on this mod team.
Here's a suggestion: go to the other mods and scenarios subforum, and start a thread for converting this.
There already is a SMEP conversion for DD, why not 1914?

 

[unmerged(45331)]

The comment about 'meddling with niceties' refers to the shooting for desertion of UK, CAN, Sth African and NZ soldiers for desertion -- now debated in the Uk Parliament for amnesty -- I invite you to comment on the current press statements about "shooting deserters" -- so, do you support the amnesty or do you support the Canadian viewpoint??

What does Allenby's opinion on shooting deserters has to do with this game? This mod doesn't simulate shooting of soldiers for desertion at all. The question whether Australia should appear in the game has absolutely nothing to do with shooting deserters.

I simply make the point -- AST soldiers went to WW I in support of the Motherland, Great Britain.

And AST soldiers and their commanders do appear in this mod.

Spricar suggested that this information goes to another thread -- I disagree -- I have not "canned" him or you -- in fact, I am appreciative of your efforts in utilising a WW II game to "go back in time" to WW I.

Well, I think you should debate this in another thread in 1914 subforum. Yes, this is an important matter for this mod, and it should be discussed, but this particular thread is made so that people can download the version 0.2 of the 1914 mod and perhaps to ask some short question or put comment. It is not made for long and complex debates. I don't see why it is so hard for you to open the new thread for the discussion on this topic.

What I do not appreciate is the way that UK Imperial history portrays the minor efforts of the Dominion troops -- especially Monash. You may not be aware of his background -- he was born of German Jewish parents -- Monasch -- so he had a very hard time in convincing people that he was on our side and not theirs.

If I am appearing "emotional" about this subject, it is because the Dominion effort has for so long been labelled under "British Forces", and accepted as such by UK residents and others.

It is time to acknowledge the contribution that our forefathers in the Dominion armed forces made.

No member of this mod ever said that Dominion troops or general Monash were unimportant. What we said is that Australia is not an independent country in this mod because of the command structure and the authonomy degree (if we make Australia independant, we would have to do the same with Hungary, Finland, Texas, California etc. and that is not the way this mod is planned to work). ANZAC troops are in the game - they are classed as guards/assault troops, which is the strongest unit type. General Monash is in the game - he has his id number, his picture, his skill 4 (which is the best starting skill in this mod, btw) and his traits (engineer, fortress buster). So ass you see, we have all the details needed for general Monash. His origins and biography are not there, because they have nothing to do with the game mechanics.

And would you like to comment on the Knighthood conveyed upon Gen. Monash on the battlefield?? i.e Do you think that he deserved it???

Again, Allenby's opinion on general Monash has nothing to do with the way Australia is presented in the mod. And I think Monash's in-game skill can tell you something about our opinion on him.

Anyway, the point is - the current status of Australia is the simplest for the mod, we are consisent and we use the same logic for other nations too. Some of the things you mention can't be presented in this game at all - this is the grand-strategy game.

 

[ptan54]

Monash is a good commander. He gets knighted. Says nothing about whether he took orders from the British High Command or whether there was an Ozzie high command independent of London.

And just because the Dominion troops didn't have command independent of London says nothing whatsoever about their fighting ability, spirit, and contribution to the Entente war effort. Allenby is fully aware of the contribution the Dominion troops made, but that does not mean they had independent command centres. The bravery and gallantry of the Sikhs, Punjabs, Rajputs (and Hong Kong/Singapore/Burman/Malayan soldiers in WW2) certainly does not make India, Burma, Hong Kong, Singapore, or Malaya independent military commands. Making a point about command structure has nothing whatsoever to do with the bravery of a fighting force and the contributions it made to the war effort.

 

[JFeatherston]

when will 0.2 come out on doomsday

 

[Shadow Knight]

Woah Albatross calm down man...take a deep breath.

The decision to place all of the Dominions and the UK + colonies together as one nation was made oh about 3 years ago or so when we worked on TGW mod. The decision has been made and is final. You are welcome to mod it to your tastes but please do not argue with the mod team.

Thanks,

SK and the 1914 team

 

[The Albatross]

Woah Albatross calm down man...take a deep breath.

The decision to place all of the Dominions and the UK + colonies together as one nation was made oh about 3 years ago or so when we worked on TGW mod. The decision has been made and is final. You are welcome to mod it to your tastes but please do not argue with the mod team.

Thanks,

SK and the 1914 team

Hi Shadow.....I have taken a breath.....I must admit that I am somewhat passionate about the subject.......

I once went over to Belgium, to a town called IEPERS -- it was only when a lovely Belgian girl took me on a tour of her town...when we walked through the Menin Gate, I ran smack into the walls upon walls of marble with the names of all the Fallen on it that I realized I was standing at YPRES.
I remember just standing there...shocked to see the numbers....she told me that "many of your Australians know Iepers".....

Our education system here does not go into much detail about Dominion WW 1 effort (apart from the loss at Gallipoli).... and much is understated about the AST Corps.....we lost our last WW 1 veteran last year....now there are only history books left to tell the tale.....

In any case, my apologies to you and the team if you thought that I was conducting a personal attack on your efforts...

Cheers

 

[Shadow Knight]

Hi Shadow.....I have taken a breath.....I must admit that I am somewhat passionate about the subject.......

I once went over to Belgium, to a town called IEPERS -- it was only when a lovely Belgian girl took me on a tour of her town...when we walked through the Menin Gate, I ran smack into the walls upon walls of marble with the names of all the Fallen on it that I realized I was standing at YPRES.
I remember just standing there...shocked to see the numbers....she told me that "many of your Australians know Iepers".....

Our education system here does not go into much detail about Dominion WW 1 effort (apart from the loss at Gallipoli).... and much is understated about the AST Corps.....we lost our last WW 1 veteran last year....now there are only history books left to tell the tale.....

In any case, my apologies to you and the team if you thought that I was conducting a personal attack on your efforts...

Cheers

Thanks Albatross. No I didn't think it was a personal attack of any kind. To be honest while your efforts were passionate they paled in comparison to the old Finnish lobby of yesteryear [during the modding of TGW]... :shudder: They were almost a natural force amongst themselves...and they were so many of them...so many.

 

[T'ung Dynasty]

yeah, ver 0.2 is out, but the music file will need to take me 5h 30min to download.......

 

[unmerged(47177)]

Our education system here does not go into much detail about Dominion WW 1 effort (apart from the loss at Gallipoli).... and much is understated about the AST Corps.....we lost our last WW 1 veteran last year....now there are only history books left to tell the tale.....

According to wiki there is still John Campbell Ross, the last of the diggers and either way, Russia contribution was much larger than Australia's, is often overlooked if not entirely than mostly, and our last veteran died two years ago.
Yet nobody is lobying to get anything changed because this is not meant to have full historical accuracy, it's meant to be accurate to a reasonable standard.

 

[Hawk_345]

Well but all this can be said for Canada as well, they are overshawdowed by the brtish and we too lost alot of people at Ypres and otehr battles aswell, in pachedale we lost over 15 000 in casulys and wounded, at vimy we lost just as many. But sorry to the team about this arguing but it seems very unfair in alot of cases becuase Places like Canada and Australia and others are also jumbled into 1 or the otehr big power, it really annoys me at times to hear this. Thats all.

 

[unmerged(53222)]

We should make Metz Australian and give them Finnish tech teams.

 

[The Albatross]

According to wiki there is still John Campbell Ross, the last of the diggers and either way, Russia contribution was much larger than Australia's, is often overlooked if not entirely than mostly, and our last veteran died two years ago.
Yet nobody is lobying to get anything changed because this is not meant to have full historical accuracy, it's meant to be accurate to a reasonable standard.

No one is arguing about Russia's contribution in either War ( WW I and especially WW II -- Eastern Front ) -- the facts speak for themselves. For me to properly convey to you the historical perspectives of the relationship between the Dominions and the British Empire will take volumes and a long time.

Whilst I don't want to clog up this thread with a long narrative -- I feel that I need to explain to you some background...as you pose the question.

You will recall that the British first used Australia as a penal colony -- NSW, TAS, and QLD. (and yes there were also free settlers in South Australia etc)
Immigrants also went from Britain to the US -- the US, South Africa, Hong Kong, India, Burma, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (and everwhere else -- it is a long list) share a common thread with colonial expansion -- for many years after colonisation, residents of these countries were treated as 'colonials' by the mother country (UK). As colonials, there was a subtle stigma or treatment as 2nd class citizens -- whilst we were a 'part of the Empire', we were never really accepted as being 'quite good enough' to be In Charge or 'run things'.

The US were the first group of colonies that told the 'mother country' to 'bugger off' over taxation and representation issues -- the rest of us just put up with it.

This all went on for some time, but strangely enough, the colonial residents still felt a great affinity to the UK (mother country) -- any wars that involved Gt Britain always involved the colonies.

Unfortunately, and I speak of AST now, the isolation and hard land naturally developed a society that would not tolerate 'bullshit' or 'toffy-nosed twits'. There was a distinct 'irreverence' to authority, even to Australian Govt authority.

In the early 1900's we went to war against the Boers in South Africa -- it was a guerilla style war and Australian methods of fighting the Boers were not seen as conventional -- in fact they were really controversial -- leading to the courts-martial of Lt Harry Morant and 3 others. The AST troops said that they were acting under the orders of Lord Kitchener, but in the end they were executed by firing squad.

The result of this raised such an outcry in Australia that the AST Government decided that "Australian soldiers could only be tried by Australian Military Authorities".

Then came WW I -- you know the rest of the military history.

Here is a reference to our last Gallipoli veteran:

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/stories/s558558.htm

You will also hear that some to the British forum members will say that AST and CAN whilst being a 'part of the Empire' were not actually independent. This can be argued by Constitutional Law -- however, I put it to you that in the referendums concerning Conscription (1917 and 1918) Australian voters rejected forcing people into the war........if that is not independence, then what is??

If you read anything about military history of WW I, you will see references to the Front Commanders and the various Armies -- such as the Fourth Army -- the successes will be attributed to these Armies, always under British Commanders -- but dig a little deeper and you will find out about the actual units that fought in the battles -- I am not trying to put Australian efforts in front of any other nations, including Russia, but for so long our efforts have been labelled as British Forces, and not AST, CAN, Hong Kong or whatever.....

Does this make the story a little clearer???

On a personal note -- do you ever travel to Volgagrad??? -- I want to go there one day to see where the Russians turned the tide.....

Cheers