An Australian Long Campaign?

[Riun T]

I wouldn't mind that either,,I mean VA comming down off that mightyer than thou accusing others of slander,,, "ACCOUNTABILITY",, and KIBITZING,,,,, AND I'm gonna go look up the forum user agreement on another member and delete pages of posts ,,,,, ya this will be a real treat if he could leave his cheesegratter,terse,, know it all attitude out of it,,,,,, and maybe consider others feelings in a true "DEBATE" but we'll see. WHATS WRONG VA did u ware on everybodys nerves over at the depot,,, or the scenarios/campaigns slot here at SPWAW forums where your little buddy needed playtesters just this month?? ago ??? guess everybody wasn't holding u in the centre of attention and u figured u had to come back here to do another "heres the thing about long campaigns" topic interupt!!!!
Make him earn some respect,, and our attention ALBY,,, cause personally I don't like how he started his FORUMing

[h_h_lightcap]

Aussies---first to defeat the Japanese (New Guinea)...First to defeat the germans (Tobruk)---in a battle---------



hh

[vahauser]

Riun T,
 
I've been a member of this Forum since May 2000 (do a search on posts by "victorhauser" to verify this if you don't believe me).  I was one of the first to join the Matrix SPWAW Forum.  I've been "Foruming" here a lot longer than you have, so you don't have any idea how I started "foruming" here.
 
My suggestion to you is for you to do what azraelck did and put me on permanent ignore.  That would make us both happier I think.  It would certainly make ME happier.

[Riun T]

Spineless phsyco-babble,nice try sport,, notice something else about my posting record,,I've never gotten a repremand or foul mention or "warnings" of political content from admin's,,, never deleted anything I've posted and give full free access to members PMing me and haveing my personal REAL military background discussed,,, I don't try and CATIGORIZE anybody and dilligently try to respond to ALL the questions and rebukes in a calm, respectful,intelligent manor,,,, and would never insult someone by calling them kibitzers,,,or suggesting to anyone to put me on ignore,just because I'm too good to reasonably answer them.... WHY do u see me having the problem? with the way U seem to butt in to what ever thread has the most action whenever u want,spew all kinds of blasphamy, degradation and topic destortion,,,,THAT screams "I know better than lowly stupid U" and then run off to go bother other forumers and not continue what U interupted!!?? I originally said that u completeing a "WHOLE" campaign using your extreme challenge settings was a whopper of a brag,,,, u showed us 1 battle of a camp.,and then stopped.... grab some balls and complete the thing for ALL of us to see and then maybe I'll respect you enough to leave u alone
DO U UNDERSTAND!!!!![:@]

[Alby]

kib·itz (kbts)intr.v. kib·itzed, kib·itz·ing, kib·itz·es Informal
1. To look on and offer unwanted, usually meddlesome advice to others.[/align]
2. To chat; converse.
[X(][X(][X(][X(]
[/align][/align]

[vahauser]

Riun T,
 
You are delusional if you think that I care about anything you say.  I don't care.  I am not interested in anything you have to say.  I told you that over a month ago, but apparently you weren't paying attention.  I didn't care then and I still don't care now.
 
I told you over a month ago that I would not give you anything further.  You will get nothing from me.  Nothing.  Ever.  Get it?
 
P.S.  Wait.  It occurs to me that you ARE getting something from me.  My total indifference.  You can have that.
 
 

[Riun T]

WHAt a polite,careing,,forethought answer from a longstanding RESPECTFUL, concerned for the feelings and impressions of other forumers{ new members benifit} catigory U are buddy.[8|]

[KG Erwin]

Ok, back on topic. Apart from the Australian Official History, which is an invaluable online resource, I had difficulty finding anything readily available about the Aussie experience in the Pacific during WWII.

However, the local library does have a copy of Eric Bergerud's "Touched With Fire", which covers the experience of war as fought by the Americans & Australians in the Solomons and New Guinea from 1942-44.

Given that my forte is the USMC in WWII, it's high time that I examined the PTO from a different perspective.

[KG Erwin]

Something else that's bothering me is -- when to start the campaign? I'm leaning towards January 1942, with the focus on the Pacific. I've noticed that in the 1942 battles there was NO armored support at all. Grants, Stuarts & Matildas started deploying to New Guinea in 1943.

So, I'm thinking of going ahead and buying a Carrier Platoon, for conversion into armor later.

One other thing I'm gonna do -- in Australian parlance, the PIAT is called the PITA (Projector, Infantry, Tank-Attack). Between these and the earlier Boys ATRs, this is basically the only anti-tank defense the Aussies had early on. (Remember, I'm speaking strictly of the PTO).

Note: dang, and I thought that the US Marines' TOEs were difficult to sort out. [X(]

[KG Erwin]

Here's a photo of the type of diggers that faced the Japanese in mid-1942. These are members of the 39th Battalion, a militia unit. The veteran desert regulars of the 6th and 7th Divisions had not yet arrived in theater. A motley-looking crew, indeed, but they proved to be tough as nails.

[h_h_lightcap]

Gunny try getting your hands on Peter Brune's "A Bastard of a Place" or anything else by Peter Brune---The aussies in New Guinea fought several masterfull battles vs the Japanese.
Yes, NO TANKS-----You should not start a PTO campaign in early 1942, american or anzac, with any!!!

HH

[Alby]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

ORIGINAL: pbhawkins

KG,
Having served with the 2/40 (captured in Ambon Indonesia early in the fight to save Australia) and the 2/12 (both Tasmanian regiments), I think you will enjoy the variation to your favourite Gyrenes versus the Japs for Aussies versus the Japs!

Thanks, Peter. As a matter of fact, I'm gonna work on a special customized ANZAC OOB, with ONLY Australian units. Maybe I'll call it "The Digger Mod".

Alot of the Anzac oob in enhanced is seperated now, with AUS and NZ troops so labeled IIRC

[KG Erwin]

I saw that, Alby. Trying to figure out a realistic core for the Aussies in 1942 is what I'm working on.

I only have a basic battalion structure. I will have four rifle companies, a mortar platoon, a pioneer platoon, a carrier platoon, and maybe a AA platoon. The AT platoon wasn't needed in the PTO. The 1943 Jungle Battalion included a scout element, too.

In any case, this core force is infantry-heavy, which suits jungle warfare. The distribution of support elements is what's got me puzzled.

A disadvantage is that I already know, in general terms, how the Japanese pick their forces. So, my natural inclination is to pick counters for them, i.e.,. lots of MGs and mortars.

For the Aussies, though, in 1942, there were shortages of many items. I have to take this into account. They had to rely in a large part on home weapons production. Still working on it.

[vahauser]

Erwin,

My personal gaming preference is the ETO rather than the PTO, mainly due to the greater variety of terrain and weather and opponents in the ETO.

My planned ANZAC campaign will focus on a small ("double-strength" battalion) combat group that will be shuttled all over the world, starting in the late summer of 1940 in North Africa.  I just like the idea of getting my licks in against all the major Axis allies (Germany, Japan, and Italy) under all sorts of different conditions. 

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Erwin,

My personal gaming preference is the ETO rather than the PTO, mainly due to the greater variety of terrain and weather and opponents in the ETO.

My planned ANZAC campaign will focus on a small ("double-strength" battalion) combat group that will be shuttled all over the world, starting in the late summer of 1940 in North Africa.  I just like the idea of getting my licks in against all the major Axis allies (Germany, Japan, and Italy) under all sorts of different conditions. 

I have no problem with that. I think a misconception started a long time ago -- the New Zealanders contributed one division to the Allied war effort, but the lion's share was done by the Aussies. Nevertheless, the WWI designation of ANZAC was put into the database.

If you wanna do the Aussies right, then, yeah, you start against the Germans. However, they vastly reconfigured their TOEs to match their later commitments against the Japanese. This makes upgrade paths questionable.

The Aussies had NO tanks in New Guinea in 1942. So, what do you do? I have no idea. The old argument about type 1 vs type 2 gaming comes back. It is meaningless. What do you want to achieve? That's all that matters, right?

My philosophy: I want to learn about the history, set the historical parameters in the game as best I can, and see if I can do better in the conduct of the battles.

Another gamer has a different approach? That's fine with me.

No one way of gaming is better than any other, IMHO.

I also love the AARs/DARs. As long as the parameters are defined, then take literary license and make them entertaining. I think it's a great outlet.

[KG Erwin]

A photo of a "typical " Aussie infantryman in WWII:

[vahauser]

Erwin,
 
My "Group Andrews" is loosely based on the precedent of the US-Canadian 1st SSF.  It is a fictional small combined force of Australian and New Zealand volunteers who want to get into the fighting as soon as possible. 
 
The small size of Group Andrews (a "double-strength" battalion) allows it to "fall through the historical cracks" as it were, and since it is so small it can be shuttled all over the place from theater to theater quickly.
 
Also, since Group Andrews will be required to fight under every condition possible against a wide variety of opponents, it will have to be a combined-arms force.  This, in turn, means that Group Andrews cannot be custom-tailored to a specific combat environment (for example, a Group that stays in the PTO can be much more custom-tailored for its environment than Group Andrews will be).  This, in turn, means that Group Andrews might not always have the best possible mix of troop types for the battle at hand. 
 
This is a deliberate choice on my part to have a "general-purpose" force since it requires me to be more creative sometimes in the way I approach and resolve specific combat problems.

[robot]

Are they using the sticks to fight the Japs dont see many guns there.

[KG Erwin]

For what it's worth, I've decided to model my core force after the 39th Battalion, a militia unit.

The Wiki article about this unit is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/39th_(Militia)_Battalion

I picked them because it was pointed out that the average age of this unit was just 18-19, and they were rated very low in training standards before being sent to New Guinea.

Despite that, they rendered valuable service in 1942 during the Kokoda Trail campaign, and were disbanded in 1943 due to the heavy losses they suffered.

So, if I can keep them intact, why not do an alternate history, and keep them on the rolls until 1945?

My next project is to search out all mentions of the unit in the Official History, and start compiling a list of identified sub-unit commanders.

For Robot -- If you look closer, each man has his right hand on his rifle, and in his left his walking stick. That photo also influenced my decision to call my core force the 39th.

Why go to all this background study? Well, if I'm gonna put the Marines aside for the time being, I figured I should start immersing myself properly so I can identify with these blokes.

I have a rough idea of how the CMF battalions were organized, so I'm well on the way to purchasing the force and initializing the campaign. The 39th had five companies (A-E), with E Company being the MG platoon organized as line infantry. However, I'm gonna keep E Coy as a weapons outfit. I have a feeling I'm gonna need those Vickers MMGs (all six of them), plus four 3-in mortars (one per company).

[h_h_lightcap]

Gunny,
 
1/3 of the book i recommended to you is about Kokoda---and the 39th is in it.....
 
 
HH