+- PG-HQ Forums (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms)
+-- Forum: Panzer Grenadier (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: PG-HQ Q&A (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: U.S.A., not America (/showthread.php?tid=1092)
Pages:
1
2
U.S.A., not America - t1M0t8yk - 04-21-2015
Is there a reason PGHQ calls the U.S. "America"? There is a difference. The U.S.A. fought in WWII, not "America". PGHQ should amend this error.
To PGHQ's credit at least they call the U.S.S.R. the Soviet Union, which is an acceptable alterate name. What really drives me crazy are otherwise intelligent wargame designers who refer the the U.S.S.R. as "Russia". (There is a WWII grand strategy game that claims to be the definitve entry in its genre. Absurdly, when I searched its 200 page rulebook I never once found the word "Soviet".) Again, there is a difference. The U.S.S.R. fought in WWII. Russia was just one part of the U.S.S.R. (admittedly, the dominant part). Remember, Stalin himself was not Russian.
RE: U.S.A., not America - plloyd1010 - 04-21-2015
(04-21-2015, 09:17 AM)t1M0t8yk Wrote: Is there a reason PGHQ calls the U.S. "America"? There is a difference. The U.S.A. fought in WWII, not "America". PGHQ should amend this error.
You can can be a U.S.A'er or whatever, as for me, I'm proud to be an AMERICAN.
RE: U.S.A., not America - plloyd1010 - 04-21-2015
When it comes down to it, those 6-3 guys are American Soldiers!
Are you teabagger or something? Sheesh!
RE: U.S.A., not America - larry marak - 04-22-2015
Not speaking ex cathedra for Shad, but U.S.A. would be confusing, as the abbreviation for the army in the United States is U.S.A., just as the abbreviation for the American Marine Corps is U.S.M.C.
RE: U.S.A., not America - richvalle - 04-22-2015
Ouch, that was a little harsh plloyd.
And I love Stripes!
"What kind of training son?"
"Aharmy training sir!"
RE: U.S.A., not America - plloyd1010 - 04-22-2015
A bit. It looked to me like Tim wanted to start an emotional argument as to the national game identity should be. If it had been more this what I think it should, and laid out a case, I would have answered differently.
Stripes is pretty cool! I want an RV like that.
RE: U.S.A., not America - t1M0t8yk - 04-22-2015
(04-22-2015, 03:22 AM)plloyd1010 Wrote: A bit. It looked to me like Tim wanted to start an emotional argument as to the national game identity should be. If it had been more this what I think it should, and laid out a case, I would have answered differently.
I asked a question about geography. Nothing I said had anything to do with how those of us who live in the lower 48, Alaska, Hawaii, and the posessions identify themselves or their soldiers now or during WWII.
There are a lot of people who use U.S., U.S.A., and America interchangeably. There are also many people who used Russia, the Soviet Union, and U.S.S.R. interchangeably. APL presents itself as having some credible scholarship. Neglecting the distinctions among these terms undermines that credibility. I haven't seen anything in my PG modules and scenario books to question APL's scholarship. If PGHQ wants to represent APL's products as well as possible, it should also attend to these details.
Incidentally, I would change "America" to "United States". Like "Soviet Union", no one will challenge that. And it sidesteps the concern about U.S.A. refering to "U.S. Army".
P.S. Sorry to anyone who may not like any of the tone of this thread. If I anticipated a potential misunderstanding I would have tried to be more clear right away.
RE: U.S.A., not America - plloyd1010 - 04-22-2015
Tim, you started out with:
Quote:Is there a reason PGHQ calls the U.S. "America"? There is a difference. The U.S.A. fought in WWII, not "America". PGHQ should amend this error.Not exactly a geography question. More of a declaration & directive.
For me it was (and somewhat still is) a balloon in front of a dog's nose. Ruff, ruff, snap, POP! I think you are being too serious about this.
RE: U.S.A., not America - t1M0t8yk - 04-22-2015
(04-22-2015, 04:11 AM)plloyd1010 Wrote: I think you are being too serious about this.
My concern derives from that "definitive" WWII grand strategy game I mentioned in the original post. 200 pages of rules, countless charts, and it's always "Russia", never once (that I've ever seen) the Soviet Union or U.S.S.R. I soured on that system when one game all countries got involved - every last one joined the fight! Even Sweden, Ireland, Ukraine, Spain, and Turkey.
That's when I realized that game system was more akin to Axis & Allies than a serious conflict simulation. Now when I see a lack of attention to such detail, I notice. Fortunately it appears APL itself understands this.
I guess it's more something to watch for in game designers, not third-party support website administrators.
RE: U.S.A., not America - Shad - 05-22-2015
(04-21-2015, 09:17 AM)t1M0t8yk Wrote: Is there a reason PGHQ calls the U.S. "America"? There is a difference. The U.S.A. fought in WWII, not "America". PGHQ should amend this error.
This is a really good question. I've been trying to think back to when we started and what might have prompted the incongruity in naming. It wasn't discussed as far as I can tell, and in trying to retroactively explain my own logic the best possible reason I could come up with is facilitating talking about countries and forces.
Compare:
Germany -> Germans
Japan -> Japanese
Soviet Union -> Soviets
America -> Americans
With:
United States -> Americans
U.S.A. -> Americans
etc.
As someone who travels frequently I'm sensitive to the fact that the USA does not hold a monopoly on the concept of "America", though I would argue that in the historical context of WW2 the phrase "the Americans" or "the American military" is indisputably clear.
Changing it to United States seems the best compromise between fact and website formatting (United States of America is too long, USA / U.S.A. too short). But before changing it I need to poke around in the code to see if that will screw anything up.
Thanks for pointing that out!
(04-22-2015, 03:22 AM)plloyd1010 Wrote: A bit. It looked to me like Tim wanted to start an emotional argument as to the national game identity should be. If it had been more this what I think it should, and laid out a case, I would have answered differently.
I think you read way too much into the original post, and bringing teabaggers into it (whether you be for or against tea) is over the line, particularly against a new member who may not be familiar with you.
I very much like the apolitical, areligious bubble PG-HQ exists in. I get more than enough drama away from my keyboard. Let's keep it friendly and welcoming!