Anzak Bias in wargames

[gamer78]

British designers see as its shock troopers. Problem for designers from -Common Wealth- nations. I see a lot in designs. Pro British design is not bad of cource but limits wargaming.

[ncc1701e]

Well Tobruk held due to them. What do you suggest?

[ernieschwitz]

It is almost as bad as the clear preference for Russian ships and armor in things like World of Warships and World of Tanks.

[Platoonist]

Well Tobruk held due to them.

As did Milne Bay with the Australians. Often credited as the first Allied land victory in the Pacific.

[warspite1]

Their record wasn’t perfect - look at Malaya and Singapore. But no army is perfect - and there are many factors at play. And all the factors in play in the Far East means that allowances need to be made.

Fact is though, that overall, the ANZAC performance in WWII was excellent. I read once that the Kiwis were Monty’s favourite troops. I’ve not found a source to support that, but I would not be surprised if that were true.

Here’s to our Antipodean cousins

[RangerJoe]

I think that part of the ANZAC seemingly supremacy is that while they had the British/Commonwealth kit, training, and command structure, they also fought differently. Looking at parts of the movie "The Lighthorsemen" when the Australian lighthorsemen were not under British command, they did use different tactics and the enemy was not prepared for those differences. For the Battle of Tobruk, instead of trying to stop the Panzers with their infantry, the Australians let them through and then fired at the following infantry and support units.