Where are the South Africans

[SeaMonkey]

Well, where are they? Now if my historical memory serves me correctly, didn't the SA field 3 infantry and 1 armored division?

Now I realize they might be represented in other arenas, if so, just say so. For the sake of historical accuracy, I would like to see at least 1PP coming out of SA for the WA. So what's the deal?

[Harrybanana]

I suspect the South African population is included with the other Commonwealth Nations. By my calculations each population point for the developed countries represents about 8,000,000. Not sure what the combined "white" population of South Africa and Australia were at the time, but suspect it was well less than 10,000,000. Actually on the whole I think Britain and the Commonwealth are a bit ripped off when it comes to population in this game. Canada for example had population of approx. 12,000,000 at this time but only gets 1 pop. Also the game doesn't take into account the tens of thousands of men from many conquered nations who made there way to England. There were whole divisions of Poles and French and many smaller units made up of Czechs, Belgians, Dutch, etc. The shortages of manpower faced by Britain and the Commonwealth really didn't materialize until later in the war. But I must admit I tend to favor the WA, so I am probably biased in my views.

[5cats]

Canada's contribution to WW2 was HUGE! Particularly considering our small population. Armour, elite Infantry, Merchant Marine, Sea Escorts, Airforce (training, crews & aircraft production) just to name a few things where Canada excelled.
A friend said once "Oh the Soviets had 100 divisions, Canada only had 12" I replied "Yes, but Canada had 12 in 1941 when every man counted, not 1945 like the USA and Russians" [:'(]
With one pitiful Pop Point, the Canadian army (4th largest Modern Army in the world in 1945 BTW) is just a dream...[:@]

[Drax Kramer]

ORIGINAL: 5cats

A friend said once "Oh the Soviets had 100 divisions, Canada only had 12" I replied "Yes, but Canada had 12 in 1941 when every man counted, not 1945 like the USA and Russians" [:'(]

How about listing them? Let me help you:

1st infantry (France, Sicily, Italy, NW Europe)
2nd infantry (Dieppe, NW Europe)
3rd infantry (NW Europe)
4th armoured (NW Europe)
5th armoured (Italy, NW Europe)

In addition, there were two more independent armoured brigades attached to infantry divisions:

1st (Sicily, Italy, NW Europe)
2nd (NW Europe)

One other brigade sized formation that saw action was lost in Hong Kong in December 1941.

So, with entire Canadian ground contingent easily represented with one infantry and one tank unit, I'd say that one population point is adequate representation.


Drax

[pyrhic]

agree with you on the land forces drax, but what of the air and, in particular, the naval contributions?

The problem is pop is used to build any unit except supply and research. Armies are people intensive, navies and air forces are vehicle intensive. There's no differentiation made in the game for that. In the game terms, canada would probably produce a destroyer or transport a turn...but certainly couldnt produce an army a turn(and probably one a year is a stretch). I don't think the current level is a problem though; adjusting it would just make things worse.

[dapamdg]

IIRC, Canada had the second largest Navy at the end of WWII. Granted, I do not think they had anything larger than a destroyer, or maybe light cruiser, but they did have a LOT of them.

For my part, I would give Eastern Canada more populations points, but limit their builds to transports and light fleets (supply and research too, of course). Consider their ground forces to be represented by builds in England (we do not want to allow the Canadian factory to turn out gobs and gobs of infantry and armor). Maybe some air units, if any of our Canadian friends have more information on Canada's contributions to the air war.

[Maginot]

Is it that far a strech to say that some of the transports that start in the Atlantic are Canadian, along with some of the British fleet?

[5cats]

Lol!
I do realize that Canada's contribution is blended into the British Empire as a whole. Still, we Canucks are getting tired of having our contributions in World Wars, Peacekeeping and such overlooked. Hey you guys in Croatia! Did you meet any Canadian peacekeepers when they were there?

[Drax Kramer]

ORIGINAL: pyrhic

agree with you on the land forces drax, but what of the air and, in particular, the naval contributions?

No battleships, no carriers, two cruisers and 27 destroyers.

Air contribution was larger, but more difficult to measure since a number of Canadians served in RAF although one of the Bomber Command groups was designated a Canadian one as well as number of squadrons.


Drax

[pyrhic]

...and the corvettes, frigates, mine-sweepers and convoy escorts? I think i read canadian shipbuilding produced over 900 ships in the war...though i can't find a reliable confirmation of that number anywhere. It's funny how difficult it can be to find solid factual information about the war. It's easier to find out generalized statistics, but trying to get detail on a specific aspect can be daunting...imagine what it'll be like in 30 years..

[madmickey]

ORIGINAL: 5cats

Canada's contribution to WW2 was HUGE! Particularly considering our small population. Armour, elite Infantry, Merchant Marine, Sea Escorts, Airforce (training, crews & aircraft production) just to name a few things where Canada excelled.
A friend said once "Oh the Soviets had 100 divisions, Canada only had 12" I replied "Yes, but Canada had 12 in 1941 when every man counted, not 1945 like the USA and Russians" [:'(]
With one pitiful Pop Point, the Canadian army (4th largest Modern Army in the world in 1945 BTW) is just a dream...[:@]

I am Canadian actually, I prefer to be called an Albertan. I have little use for the rest of the Canada especially with the latest political nonsense. Canadian had 5 oversea division in 1941. Canada had a limited home defense draft and only after the fall of 1944 were drafted troop was supposed to go oversea. Other countries in the British Empire had similar practices.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedi ... is-of-1944
"Background
Canada declared war on Germany on September 10, 1939, and sent one division to Europe, which had no chance for combat before France was completely overrun by Germany. In the election of 1940, Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King pledged to limit Canada's involvement in the war, and especially promised not to impose conscription. This promise helped Mackenzie King's Liberals win the election. Most Canadians preferred King's pledge, even as it became obvious the war would drag on for years. Volunteers continued to sign up for military service, but, as in World War I, Britain-born Canadian residents volunteered more often than English and French-Canadians combined. As in the First World War, young French-Canadians who were looking for adventure or a way to escape the boredom of farm life flocked to the few traditional "French" regiments of the Canadian army, such as Les Fusiliers Mont-Royal, where barracks life was in French and only the command language was in English. Again, as in World War I, most of them had to be turned away because the general staff in Ottawa was obstinate in its refusal to expand the traditional "French" regiments or to create new ones. In June of 1940 the government adopted conscription for home service in the National Resources Mobilization Act, which allowed the government to register men and women and move them into jobs considered necessary for wartime production, but did not allow them to be conscripted for overseas service. Men conscripted into the Army under the NRMA could, however, be forced to serve anywhere within North American, including the Aleutian Islands.


The Plebiscite of 1942
By 1941 there were enough volunteers for five overseas divisions. The Canadian army saw little fighting, except at Hong Kong in 1941 and Dieppe in 1942. In both battles they were heavily defeated. Meanwhile the Conservatives were pressuring King to introduce conscription. In April of 1942 King held a plebiscite, which asked the population not to support immediate conscription, but rather to allow the government to rescind its promise made during the 1940 election, so that it could introduce conscription whenever it felt necessary. King's famous quotation on the issue, "conscription if necessary, but not necessarily conscription," reflected the ambiguous nature of the plebiscite. Unsurprisingly, the plebiscite was supported by most English Canadians, who voted 80% in favour, but hardly at all by French Canadians, especially in Quebec, where anti-conscription groups (including one led by Henri Bourassa, the most vocal opponent of conscription in 1917) helped 72.9% of the population vote against the plebiscite. The government then passed Bill 80, repealing the sections of the NRMA that did not allow for overseas conscription. However, many Canadians still did not support immediate conscription; there were a few riots in Montreal, although these were not on the same scale as the 1917 and 1918 riots. Even in Toronto, a strongly pro-conscription region, Conservative Arthur Meighen was defeated in a by-election after promising to help introduce conscription.

See Referenda in Canada for detailed results of the 1942 vote.

Introduction of Conscription
After campaigns in Italy in 1943 and the Battle of Normandy in 1944, combined with a lack of volunteers, Canada faced a shortage of troops. Colonel James Ralston argued in favour of finally introducing conscription, interpreting King's statement on "necessity" to mean the necessity of maintaining an army in the field. King disagreed, interpreting his remark to refer to the necessity of conscripts to win the war. King's French-Canadian ministers, and Quebec in general, did not trust Ralston, and King felt it was politically sensible to replace him as Minister of National Defence with the anti-conscription colonel Andrew McNaughton in November of 1944. Unfortunately, MacNaughton was unable to produce large numbers of volunteers for the army, although there were numerous volunteers for the navy and air force. King's cabinet threatened to resign and bring down the government. King finally accepted conscription on November 22. French-Canadians, who preferred a King government to a Conservative government led by Meighen, tacitly accepted the decision. Meighen was still considered an enemy in Quebec, as he had drafted the hated Military Service Act in 1917, while King was respected for doing all he could to avoid conscription.

However, only 13 000 men were conscripted, most of whom were from the home service conscripts drafted under the NRMA, rather than from the general population. Home service conscripts, who had been waiting for two years to be sent overseas, were by this time called "zombies" by many pro-conscription Canadians. The "zombies" had had few opportunities to do anything productive in home service, and they were one of the strongest pro-conscription groups in the country. Few of them saw combat in Europe, only 2463 men reached units on the front lines. Out of these, 69 concripts lost their lives. These numbers are relatively low, as the war was over within a few months of their call-up. Politically, this was a successful gamble for King, as he avoided a drawn-out political crisis and remained in power until 1948.


Sources
R. MacGregor Dawson. The Conscription Crisis of 1944. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1961.
R. Douglas Francis, Richard Jones, Donald B. Smith. Destinies: Canadian History Since Confederation. Toronto, Harcourt Canada, 2000. ISBN 0-7747-3665-8
J.L. Granatstein. Conscription in the Second World War, 1939-1945: A Study in Political Management. Toronto: The Ryerson Press, 1969. ISBN 0770002498
J.L. Granatstein and J.M. Hitsman. Broken Promises: A History of Conscription in Canada. Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1977. ISBN 0195402588 "

[Drax Kramer]

ORIGINAL: pyrhic

...and the corvettes, frigates, mine-sweepers and convoy escorts?

What about them? This is a grand strategic game where Light Fleet units represent no less than ten destroyers and associated smaller vessels each.


Drax

[rocksk]

That is why it is call Light Fleet and not destoryer.

[pyrhic]

ORIGINAL: Drax Kramer
What about them? This is a grand strategic game where Light Fleet units represent no less than ten destroyers and associated smaller vessels each.

A lot of that atlantic fighting was done with those 'associated smaller vessels'..

Eventually roughly half of the escorts in the North Atlantic convoys were corvettes.

http://uboat.net/allies/warships/listing.html?navy=HMCS


as for the other bit...

Of a population just over 11 million more than one and a half million Canadians and Newfoundlanders served in the Second World War. Of these more than 45,000 gave their lives, and another 55,000 were wounded. Countless others shared the suffering and hardship of war. By the end of the war Canada was the fourth strongest military power in the world behind only the USA, the USSR and Britain.

[Drax Kramer]

A lot of that atlantic fighting was done with those 'associated smaller vessels'..

Eventually roughly half of the escorts in the North Atlantic convoys were corvettes.

And what was the ratio between US/UK ones compared with the Canadian ones?

Of a population just over 11 million more than one and a half million Canadians and Newfoundlanders served in the Second World War. Of these more than 45,000 gave their lives, and another 55,000 were wounded. Countless others shared the suffering and hardship of war.

Now take Rumanian prewar population, the size of its armed forces and the losses they suffered and say that Canada is underrepresented.

By the end of the war Canada was the fourth strongest military power in the world behind only the USA, the USSR and Britain.

I don't think Canada was any stronger than France on May 8th 1945 and if you take both Polish armies (western and eastern) there is strong argument that Poland had stronger land forces than Canada.

I am not trying to belittle Canadian, often neglected, contribution to Allied victory, but simply to prevent the pendulum from going to the opposite extreme.


Drax

[Harrybanana]

ORIGINAL: Drax Kramer



No battleships, no carriers, two cruisers and 27 destroyers.

Air contribution was larger, but more difficult to measure since a number of Canadians served in RAF although one of the Bomber Command groups was designated a Canadian one as well as number of squadrons.


Drax

Actually Canada had an aircraft carrier at the end of the war, the Warrior. Although this carrier was built in England it was paid for and crewed by Canadians. I know this because my father-in-law was serving on it as the war ended. This was a full carrier, not just an escort carrier. I'm looking at a picture of it in my den now.

Canada had the 3rd largest fleet (of over 480 vessels) in the World at the end of the War, not the 2nd.

OK, how about these statistics. By May 1945 the army had over 700,000 men, the navy more than 100,000 and the RCAF over 250,000. This does not include Canadians serving in the RAF or the merchant marines. 1 person in 11 was in the services, the vast majority of them volunteers. Canada was the only Allied nation not to accept American Lend Lease and in fact gave Britain more than 4 Billion Dollars of free aid. Canada manned and paid for the Commonwealth Air Training Program located in Canada. This explains why so many Canadians (including my father) opted for the airforce as opposed to the army or navy. By Wars end 4 out of 5 men flying in Commonwealth squadrons anywhere in the World had been trained in Canada. There were 48 Canadian Bomber and Fighter Squadrons in England, not to mention the coastal watch squadrons at home. 25% of the flight personnel in the RAF were in fact Canadian.

Canadas industrial production was also huge. We were, of course, the bread basket for Britain during it's darkest hours. The quantities of food shipped to England were enormous. By wars end 1,100,000 Canadians working in War plants had turned out 900,000 rifles, 794,000 motor vehicles, 244,000 light machine guns, 16,000 aircraft, 486 Naval vessels, 391 cargo vessels, and 6500 tanks.

Supposedly we did all this with 1 pop point and 3 production points per turn.

[5cats]

Seriously, France? Poland? In June 1945 they had how many tanks? How many aircraft? Both combined were a fraction of Canada's forces. I'm talking Modern Army here. China undoubtedly had more men "under arms" but I'd hardly call them soldiers. They instantly formed into factions and fought each other as soon as the war with Japan ended.
All our troops on the front lines were Elite quality. Just look at Canada's record, it's amazing. Our equipment was often crappy, but the men were made of iron just like in WW1.
And as I'm fond of repeating, Canada was there from day 2 (We waited one day, lol!) right to the end.

>>I want to add, to make sure there's no doubt, that Britian, Russia and the USA were obviously far and away the 3 most important Allied armies, countries & etc in WW2. I'm just proud to be #4, however far back, to those brave peoples. Each nation contributed the best they had, suffered greatly & have every reason to be proud of themselves & their allies
Can I hear an Amen!

[Grifman]

ORIGINAL: dapamdg

IIRC, Canada had the second largest Navy at the end of WWII. Granted, I do not think they had anything larger than a destroyer, or maybe light cruiser, but they did have a LOT of them.

Well, that's probably only due to the fact that the German, Japanese, and Italian navies were on the sea bottom

[Drax Kramer]

The order of battle of French First Army in 1945:

I Corps

1st Armoured division
4th Moroccan mountain division
9th Colonial division

II Corps

5th Armoured division
2nd Moroccan division
3rd Algerian division

2nd Armoured division
1st Motorised division
10th division
14th division
27th Alpine division

All divisions were organised and equipped according to US standards.


At the same time Canada had two armoured and three infantry divisions as well as two independent armoured brigades, all in 1st Canadian army divided in two corps (one was transfered from Italy).


Poland had one armoured and two infantry divisions spread between 21st and 15th Army groups as well as one armoured brigade in Italy.

In addition, there were nine infantry divisions and one tank corps in Polish army that fought in First Belorussian front during the Wisla-Oder and Berlin operations.


As I already wrote, I admire Canadian contribution, but let's keep the things in the perspective. To go back to the game, look at the scenario files, count the number of units available to Wallies in order to determine the scale and see whether you can build a game substitute for Canadian ground army (1 tank and 1 infantry) and maintain it for the course of the game.

I suppose that everyone's aware that only a fraction of 700,000 men in Canadian army were front line troops represented by infantry, artillery, tank and flak units in this game. The majority of these men were in the support units that are represented by trucks and that use no population points.


Drax

[Harrybanana]

Drax, I absolutely agree that historically the size of the Canadian army in WWII was relatively small. Fighting strength in Europe was approx. 6 divisions as you say. The reason for this, as I already stated, is that a decision was made that Canada would focus on the airforce (which made sense given that the training facilities were here). However, GGWaW is suppose to be a game which allows you to explore other possibilities such as Canada concentrating on it's army rather than it's airforce or navy. Canada could historically have fielded a much larger army. In WWI Canada, with a much smaller population and industrial base, fielded 5 divisions which were considered (and not just by Canadians) as the elite force in the Allied armies.

With respect to the French and Poles, yes they had larger armies at the end of the War (well actually I never knew about the Polish divisions in the Russian army, very interesting) but their equipment was all American, British or Canadian made; whereas Canada not only equipped it's own army but provided equipment to others. Canadians are generally perceived around the world as hewers of wood and haulers of water. We help foster this image ourselves with our tourism brochures of Mounties, blue skies and lakes, and green forests. In fact even in 1940 Canada was one of the leading industrial nations and by the end of the war this was even more true.

To be fair Canada should receive 1 1/2 population points, which of course is not possible. The game designers had to choose between giving Canada 1 pop or 2 pop and chose the former. I note that the US, with a population only 10X that of Canada, was given 17X pop points. I would have no problem with this (well not much anyway) if the designers were more generous with the other British and Commonwealth pop points. But it seems to me that they were a bit stingy with the Commonwealth pop points as a whole; again especially when you consider all the Poles, French, Dutch, Belgian, American, etc. young men who fled (or went) to England and Canada to join up. Just my opinion, but again I admit to being biased.