A New AH Equipment Source

[devildog45co]

scottlowe187 said:

Oh no Brian, I've got your number now! Kidding of course.

It wouldn't be so bad if this were coming up at a time when the Germans could field 60 guys, having 10 or 15 Austrians would be no problem. But for this last event we had 12 or less (I didn't exactly count), of which the IR23 only had a couple guys. We need the IR23 to be a solid unit first, then worry about other units.

More than likely, the guys that might do this new unit, would come from our existing ranks, not newcomers (maybe a mix). It's just a really bad time for us to lose anyone from the German side.

That last statement is hard for me to argue against

[oskar2ndchev]

Guys-

This is wandering WAY off-topic. If you want to discuss it further, please start another thread in the GWHS area.

Also, please note that the GWHS by-laws does provide for the creation of new units so long as specific criteria is met to include a minimum membership of 6. We will be posting this for everyone's reference in the near future.

Everyone may not agree on creating new units but the possibility does exist.

[scottlowe187]

I have moved my response to Sephton's last post to the GWHS area. It's under "New Unit Discussion."

[oskar2ndchev]

Thanks!

[kvaternik1914]

As the Officer Commanding or NCOIC (depending on where you place a Fahnrich on a rank table!) for the Western US's one & only Austrian unit...honestly I wouldn't mind getting my guys out to Cali and putting them under German command (which tended to be the case more often than not when both the senior members of the Central Powers operated together late-war)

But: I think a desire to have "one big unified" Allied unit and "one big unified" Central Powers unit is a bit unrealistic for the following two reasons.

1) No offense to Kaiser Bill's lads and the AEF, but you can find "Stutzer" model M-1895 Steyrs and SMLE's for a lot less and a lot more readily than M-1903's or Gewehr 98's. This might sound heretical but if you REALLY REALLY want 2 big units, hang the rest, we'd be looking at IR 51 or someone A/H versus the Lancashire Fusiliers or a like British regiment. Dreadful sorry but the rifles are cheaper and more readily available so there's greater growth potential for "First String Alternate" WW1 units than the "Usual Players"

2) I have had some run-ins with the Great War Association Back East, and from what I've picked up, there really aren't that many "big units" there either. Neither IR 63 out of PA nor East Coast IR 51 out of MD/VA would meet your association's "six member" requirement, and this would also apply to many of the other nationalities from what I know.

OBTW: No Bulgarians were on the Western Front. They, like the Italians were pretty much a "one theatre" combatant--in their case Macedonia/Greece. And also like the Italians in WW1, they pretty much had their hands full with just one front, so they couldn't spare anybody.

Eljen a Kiraly & Hoch der Kaiser Karl!

Raden Gregory, St. Baon 12, IR 100

[oskar2ndchev]

Hi-

Please take a moment to post an introduction in the "Introductions" section. As for a new AH, interested parties are welcome to do so under the GWHS "New Unit Formation" guidelines."

This thread is not the place to debate the merits or lack thereof and any further debate is counterproductive at this time so I will be locking this thread.