They had a larger wartime economy by the end of the conflict than either Japan or Italy.
I have to say, I’m not entirely convinced by this line of thinking. Canada was untouched by the war and able to manufacture in peace within it’s own borders. Its wartime economy was also boosted by the fact that Britain and Russia were buying things it made. Like the US, Canada was one of the only countries to make money from the war.
Italy was occupied from 1943 onwards, and had the war fought on its own soil. Japan’s industrial centers were bombed relentlessly from '44 onwards, and they were being starved of fuel and materials vital for production in the later war stages by the Allies. Also, there is no comparison between the number of men fielded and lost by both Italy and Japan to Canada.
And I believe by war’s end they had the 3rd largest navy.
See above.
I do, however, think that if Anzac deserved its own place, then so did Canada. In fact, I think Canada deserved it more. I would like to see an option in the global game where the Empire is under British control, but if new players are introduced then Canada and Anzac could be a stand alone under a single player. I still think that whatever we see in the European game may differ from the ‘global rules’ merged game. We shall see.
I don’t think splitting the ‘minor’ Empire territories makes sense. They were really ‘support’ arms for British efforts. Canada is an exception in terms of production.
I would really like to see the stats for war production/troops fielded for all Empire territories (UK included) in order to see just how the Empire would break down. All house rules should at least start from some kind of historical basis.
