Unit Descriptions: Air, Naval, Land

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Capitan

A big thanks for posting my first two write ups so quickly.  My next write up will be XXX Corps which, given its extensive WWII combat history will give me far more to write about - what a great Unit!.  Before I get carried completely carried away, is there a maximum length for these write ups?     

Rgds

Warspite1

No fixed limits. But remember that if you want people to read your write-up it should not be so long as to cause them to lose interest. So, this is up to your discretion, but try to hit only the high points if there is a ton of information available.

I think of the write-ups as 'teases', to induce people to find books and read more about the units that fought in the war.

[brian brian]

Mentioning British 'Territorial' divisions quickly leads a reader to wonder how they relate to WiF 'Territorial' units. I've never known what the 'Territorial' designation means... ?

[jesperpehrson]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I think of the write-ups as 'teases', to induce people to find books and read more about the units that fought in the war.

Yeah for sure, this is what it is all about. We want to inspire and make the gaming perhaps even more immersive.

This said, there are many different styles in the writeups, some short and direct, others long and winding. Both works though.

[jesperpehrson]

ORIGINAL: brian brian
Mentioning British 'Territorial' divisions quickly leads a reader to wonder how they relate to WiF 'Territorial' units. I've never known what the 'Territorial' designation means... ?

That is interesting. I always figured it was a common word for when talking about WW2.

Wikipedia says: "The Territorial Army (TA) is a part of the British Army, the land armed forces of the United Kingdom, and composed mostly of part-time soldiers paid at the same rate, while engaged on military activities, as their Regular equivalents."

Here is a list from Wiki as well:
List of TA Divisions, World War II

The Territorial Army armoured and infantry divisions during World War II were:

* 1st Line:
o 1st Cavalry Division (1st Line Yeomanry)
o 10th Armoured Division (1st Line Yeomanry)
o 42nd (East Lancashire) Infantry Division
o 43rd (Wessex) Infantry Division
o 44th (Home Counties) Infantry Division
o 48th (South Midland) Infantry Division
o 49th (West Riding) Infantry Division
o 50th (Northumbrian) Infantry Division
o 51st (Highland) Infantry Division
o 52nd (Lowland) Infantry Division
o 53rd (Welsh) Division
o 54th (East Anglian) Infantry Division
o 55th (West Lancashire) Infantry Division
o 56th (London) Infantry Division

* 2nd Line
o 9th (Highland) Infantry Division
o 12th (Eastern) Infantry Division
o 15th (Scottish) Infantry Division
o 18th (East Anglian) Infantry Division
o 23rd (Northumbrian) Division
o 38th (Welsh) Infantry Division
o 45th (Wessex) Infantry Division
o 46th (West Riding) Infantry Division
o 47th (London) Infantry Division
o 59th (Staffordshire) Infantry Division
o 61st (South Midland) Infantry Division
o 66th (East Lancashire) Infantry Division

----

This suggests you are right Brian. Territorial means part-time militia from the British isles or somesuch.

Looking for the colonies on the same page I found this:
"Throughout the British Empire, home defence units, like the Royal Hong Kong Regiment, were raised in various British colonies with the intention of allowing Regular Army units tied-up on garrison duty to be deployed elsewhere. These have generally been organised along Territorial Army lines. Although the British Government, as national government, is responsible for the defence of the territories, and holds direct control of military units raised within them, the local forces are raised and funded by the local governments of the territories. These units must meet British Army standards in organisation and efficiency."

This suggests the existence of local territorial units. Furthermore we are aware of several formations such as the "Kings African Rifles", "West African Frontier Force", "Sudan Defense Force" and so on.

So in conclusion we can see that it is an ambigous term that can be understood in several different ways.

[marcuswatney]

As a Briton, I was rather surprised (and uncomfortable) to see 'Territorials' appearing in MWiF, as the name feels anachronistic.  The present day Territorials (or TAVR = Territorial And Volunteer Reserves, to give them their full title) are highly respected and are much more than mere militia.  At first glance, they might appear to have similarities with America's National Guard, but the position is rather more subtle: the TAVR would never be used at home to quell civil unrest (thoughts of Kent State University) and do expect to serve alongside Regular units abroad.  They are being rotated through Iraq at the moment.

The thinking behind the modern TAVR was that a war in Europe in the sixties and seventies would be so intense and so fast that there wouldn't be time to mobilise retired soldiers on the reserves-list or conscript civilians.  So the TAVR was trained to work alongside the BAOR (joint exercises etc) and were to be shipped out within days of a crisis.

The men and women of the TAVR are paid for their weekends training and must also be willing to go on exercise for a week or two each year.  But one of the great attractions of the TAVR is that bosses approve strongly of that sort of commitment, so it definitely helps your civilian career too.

But I think the situation in the Second World War was very much different, particularly since there was conscription.  Almost the entire British Army is organised on the regimental system and always has been.  So that long list of place names in Post 644 isn't a feature merely of 'Territorial' units.  My father, for example, joined the Royal Sussex Regiment as a Regular, and although he transferred to a variety of duties during the war, ending up with a unit called Phantom, he was always somehow listed with the Royal Sussex (and he was a Londoner!)

So in the Second World War, I wouldn't take the designation 'Territorial' to have any practical meaning at all.  For example, I see in that list of 'Territorials' the 43rd (Wessex) Division, which was part of XXX Corps' drive up Hells Highway, and 52nd (Lowland) Division, which was the air-landing division tasked to land at Deelen airfield northwest of Arnhem as soon as 1st Airborne had secured it.

All British units in that list would have been required to serve wherever they were posted, so they were not 'Territorial' in the sense of MWiF.

The one anomaly was the Indian Army, which was organised as an entirely autonomous entity.  At Imphal-Kohima for example, one of the divisions is designated British to show that it was part of the British Army rather than the Indian Army.

[Mziln]

But the TVR did not exist until 1967.

[marcuswatney]

Precisely, in support of BAOR ... which is why the word 'Territorial' in MWiF feels so odd.

[Mziln]

What the game is supporting is the Territorial and Reserve Forces Act 1907

Area of service

The TF was liable to serve in any part of the United Kingdom but could not be carried or ordered to go out of the country. Nevertheless, it was permitted for TF units or men to offer, through their commanding officer, to serve in any place outside the UK or to be called out for actual military service for home defence.

[Norman42]

I think we are reading too much into a simple term. The main reason they are called Territorials, is that the majority of them appear in *territories* of the Major Powers and need a term to seperate them from the regular forces of said MP, since they have different rules.

Many major powers besides Great Britain have territorials for their colonies, so even though GB had a specific identity of Territorial Forces, the game itself uses the term for a larger picture: Locally Raised Irregular Forces and Militias; ie French Foreign Legion, Kings African Rifles, Afrikaaners Defence Guard, Philipene Army, Manchukuo Army, Rhodesian Scouts, Libyan Blackshirts, etc etc.

Territorials is just a catch all term. Just like "Militia" covers British Homeguard, US National Guard, German Volksturm, Soviet Worker Corps, Chinese Warlords (depending on game version), etc

[marcuswatney]

Might have been better to call them 'Regional'.

[warspite1]

Apologies for having caused confusion.  The British Army at the start of World War II contained the professional soldiers of the Regular Army and Territorials i.e. volunteers.  My uncle was such an example having volunteered for the Army in 1939 and was posted to the 4th Battalion Wiltshire Regiment (part of 43rd Wessex Division).  He was lucky in that he received 4 years of trainning before the "Wessex Wyverns" were sent to Normandy just after D-Day.  However for some volunteers, the trainning time was necessarily less and performance in the field - not unnaturally - could reflect this.  The intention of mentioning the Regular/Territorial split was to add a bit of flavour to the make up of that Corps at the start of the war.
 
My throw away line in the 1st Corps write up was perhaps unwise considering that Territorial units exist in WIF and which are something completely different to the British Territorial Army.  I shall be more careful in future and a) look to pitch the text at a more general audience, and b) check for ambiguity. 
 
 

[warspite1]

I am doing the write ups for the remaining UK Land forces and have hit a slight problem.  One of the counters is the 3rd Cavalry Division....which didn`t exist in WWII.  I presume other countries counters have some similar anomolies?  If so - and to be consistent - how have they been written up?
 
I could either go down something like the - "this unit did not exist in WWII as the advent of the tank in WWI, began rendering traditional cavalry units obsolete" route or try and give possible unit types that this counter could represent.  I prefer the former as the write ups are supposed to be historical but want to ensure consistency.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I am doing the write ups for the remaining UK Land forces and have hit a slight problem.  One of the counters is the 3rd Cavalry Division....which didn`t exist in WWII.  I presume other countries counters have some similar anomolies?  If so - and to be consistent - how have they been written up?

I could either go down something like the - "this unit did not exist in WWII as the advent of the tank in WWI, began rendering traditional cavalry units obsolete" route or try and give possible unit types that this counter could represent.  I prefer the former as the write ups are supposed to be historical but want to ensure consistency.

Here is an example from the US for cavalry.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

And a second example from the many US infantry units that are in the game but never activated.

The writer here has written a paragraph or two for each of these ficticious units, which taken as a whole make up a long discussion on the US planning and execution of forming units before and during the war.

[marcuswatney]

You could say that all British Cavalry units were gradually mechanised over the course of the Second World War, but the unit is included because this need not have been so.
 
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:RlZVUSvxFxYJ:www.wwiireenacting.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php%3Fp%3D404310+%22British+Cavalry%22+WWII&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=8&gl=uk says that the last British cavalry was used in Syria in 1941, and that Indian cavalry was used in Burma.

[jesperpehrson]

Short update!

Stabilo (Klaus) and Warspite1 (Rob) are both doing great progress. Stabilo finished the German ART and Warspite1 has made a good start with the UK forces! Things are looking really good! If only we can get Hazpak (who has emailed me and is willing to keep going) to have some fortune in his research everthing would be peachy! [:)]

[jesperpehrson]

I am going to Dublin to inspect some army installations over the weekend. One of my Irish writeups needs some research done to be just right. Steve and Matrixgames of course covers all expenses.

Anyone volounteer for doing write-ups? I bet Brazil or Mexico would be interesting to see and write about! [:)]


[font="courier new"]This is of course not true except that I am going away over the weekend so any work will be done after I come back[/font]

[warspite1]

Capitan - Am happy to do Canada if this is not taken. 

[jesperpehrson]

Rob, it is all yours!

[sw30]

I'll take the South Americans, and then if I have time, go to Central America