Gallipoli in Heroes of Battle

[SWBaxter]

And I just got to irritated for words, so I had to vent steam here....

Not sure what there is to get irritated over - WOTC's paragraph is claiming that "the trench warfare of the Western Front in WWI" (which lasted from 1914-1918) is more famous in WWI lore than the Gallipoli campaign (which lasted about 8 months). I find it hard to dispute that factoid in any objective way - the former involved more soldiers from more countries, went on a lot longer, resulted in hugely more casualties, covers multiple campaigns, etc. Saying "this is more famous than that" does not translate to "that is inconsequential".

 

[green slime]

While I can understand your frustration and concern, I don't think that the Author of the piece was in anyway stating that the Gallipoli campaign was not significant but that it was not as well known. This is most likely coming from an American point of view. Now I know that most people in Australia and New Zealand "know" about Gallipoli but the average Joe in the United States, Canada, Germany, Japan, etc wouldn't. Though I bet the average Australian hasn't a clue about what Gettysburg’s was about so it kind of evens out.

I agree the author wasn't downplaying the importance of the campaign in the war at general, but the recognition factor in a section on recognition points in the book. But surely the general populace of the prime antagonists are surely the ones to whom the recognition points should be applied, not the population of the world at large?!? Speak to any Turk, Kiwi, Aussie, or Pom, about whether they are aware of Gallipoli.

Otherwise there are really extremely few historical battles a character could participate in that would be truly recognised world-wide....Stalingrad, the battle of Britain, The Gulf Wars (but no single encounter would earn recognition points by this standard), D-Day, and Custer's last stand, ....

But would the world at large recognise the battles of Midway, Coral Sea, Gettysburg, Burma, Leningrad, Moscow, Ypres, Mons, Crete, North Atlantic, Poltava, and a myriad of battles, which in their time were significant and well known in the consciousness of the people waging these wars?

And while most aussies may not know exactly what occured at Gettysburg, I'm sure a large number would be able to pinpoint it to an important battle in the American Civil War. (Hollywood)

Though I would like to say that I (an American) am a bit of a military history buff so I know a lot about Gallipoli and the roll of Australian and New Zealand played in WWI and WWII. And I am sure glad that they were on our side (Allies).

And I for one are glad we were all on the same side too. Without which history would have taken a turn for the worse, IMNSHO.

 

[Yellow Sign]

I'm with you on this one. This (British) European has heard of Gallipoli and I'm not alone. You'll just have to live with the fact that it was written by an ignorant Yank who refers generically to 'the trench warfare of the Western Front in World War I' rather than to actual WW1 battles like the Somme or Flanders (or Gallipoli).

My list of famous battles would include have Stamford Bridge and Hastings at the top, followed by Trafalgar, Waterloo, Culloden and Flodden Field. It certainly wouldn't include Gettysburg.

It's simply cultural, I couldn't name one important Chinese or Japanese Battle. Oh! (River Plate) yes, I can.

Not all us Yanks are ignorant. Though don't call me a Yank...I am from TEXAS!

Famous Japanese battle....hummm....Battle of Tsushima, 1905. The Japanese Navy totally crushed the Russian Navy. Twenty Russian ships were sunk and another five were captured.

 

[green slime]

... who refers generically to 'the trench warfare of the Western Front in World War I' rather than to actual WW1 battles like the Somme or Flanders (or Gallipoli).

That got up my nose as well, but I choose to focus on what irritated me most. By that "trench warfare" comment the standard would be applied not to a particular battle, but to an entire theatre of war! So the poor russkis get a few recognition points for the entire war on the Eastern front of WWII.... Sucks to be them!

 

[Wilphe]

Well let's take a look at the examples:

Gettysburg
Custer's Last Stand
Western Front of WWI
Normandy Invasion
v
Pea Ridge
Battle of Fallen Timbers
Gallipoli
Torch


That's pretty fair really.

Gettysburg is pretty famous and significant

Custer's death is famous and insignificant (Ditto the Charge of the Light Brigade)

No specific battles mentioned in WWI? Well not really, almost eveyone thinks they have an idea of what that fighing was like and the discernable battles that did take place are despressingly similar upon a casual study

Normandy. No contest

v

Pea Ridge, Fallen Timbers - never heard of them, I guess they are battles from the Rebellion of the 13 States or the War between the States

Galliopli - Is extremely important to ANZACs, but outside the antipodes it's nowhere close to D-Day

Torch - Isn't really important to anyone much, it's a periperhal campaign in a minor theatre.

 

[green slime]

Not sure what there is to get irritated over - WOTC's paragraph is claiming that "the trench warfare of the Western Front in WWI" (which lasted from 1914-1918) is more famous in WWI lore than the Gallipoli campaign (which lasted about 8 months). I find it hard to dispute that factoid in any objective way - the former involved more soldiers from more countries, went on a lot longer, resulted in hugely more casualties, covers multiple campaigns, etc. Saying "this is more famous than that" does not translate to "that is inconsequential".

Except it is in the context of "Recognition Points" for participating in a single major battle. And lumping an entire theatre of war, and at that one of the two major theaters of war of the entire struggle into the same context as a single battle of the Civil War?!? Do you have no sense of proportion or history?!?

The text is supposed to give some kind of "baseline" for the award of recognition points in a game, and yet by its very ignorance manages to somehow completely muddy the waters of what is really not too difficult. The author should have kept his examples to those of the American Civil War, rather than divulge his ignorance of what other people regard as important in events that have occured beyond the borders of the US.

 

[green slime]

So by your standard Wilphe, the only recognition points for participation in battles in WWII should be limited to D-Day and Stalingrad and the Battle of Britian? Because it is in that context recognition points are awarded.

Participating at the Battle of the Bulge... no points. Battle of Coral Sea... no points. Battle of Kursk.... no points. Montgomery's push for a bridge too far, no points.

Recognition points are to be awarded not for Important Battles, but for participating in famous battles. They are supposed to represent a fascination by civilians and soldiers who are elsewhere. Obviously in the billigerent countries.

As such, IMO, recognition points should be obviously awarded to people participating at Gallipoli, and every major battle on the Western Front in WWI individually, because these events were followed closely by the civilians at home.

 

[Felon]

"Battle of Gallop Polls"? Never heard of it.

Please find something more important to get upset about.

 

[Yellow Sign]

Gallipoli

No specific battles mentioned in WWI? Well not really, almost eveyone thinks they have an idea of what that fighing was like and the discernable battles that did take place are despressingly similar upon a casual study

Gallipoli was in World War I.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

The author should have kept his examples to those of the American Civil War, rather than divulge his ignorance of what other people regard as important in events that have occured beyond the borders of the US.

The majority (and I don't doubt it could be a vast majority) of RPG buyers are American. When WotC makes a statement about something that is generally recognizable, it can be assumed that they're speaking to an American audience, because that's who they need to market to. It's not intended to be a slight, nor does it strike me as ignorance. It strikes me as being well aware of one's audience.