Historical Kalisz-type Scenarios

[Raellus]

I'm currently in a cycle of my WWII Ostfront/Great Patriotic War phase but, as usual, I keep coming back to T2K.

In reading about the German 9th Army's [in name only] attempt to break out of the encirclement of Berlin through the Spree forest, I thought about what a great example it was of a Kalisz-like scenario. The 9th Army was, during the breakout, a conglomeration of ad-hoc and miss-matched units from various Armies, Corps, Divisions, and Kampfgruppen, including Werhmacht, Luftwaffe, Waffen SS, and Volksturm units and thousands of civilian refugees. It was surrounded by overwhelmingly superior Soviet forces and hammered day and night by artillery and air strikes and bits and pieces of it had to fight themselves free or die trying.

This got me thinking about using the T2K game rules to run such a scenario and from there, to other similar scenarios from history. I want to keep the same basic theme of mixed-up units, little conventional C&C/rank structure, overwhelming odds against, behind enemy lines, trying to escape.

I've come up with a couple so far:

Allied Airborne units during the first couple of days of the Normandy invasion.

Long-range Desert Group in North Africa.

German units fighting out of the Cherkassy-Korsun pocket in early '44.

Any others that come to mind I can think of ones from earlier in history, but I wouldn't know how to use the T2K rules to play a scenario set in any period before the widespread use of firearms.

[Mohoender]

- Chindits in Burma (1944).

- The French in indochina or Algeria. As a matter of fact most colonial wars including the one fought by Portugal up to 1975.

- Why not the British attempt at invading Afghanistan in 1878-1880 and, of course, the soviet intervention of 1979-1989.

- The Boer war in South Africa (essentially the second one, theone that ended in 1902).

- Port Arthur in 1904-1905.

- The events at Dunkirk (1940).

- The arabic campaign of 1914-1918 (the one that saw Lawrence of Arabia).

- Many events after the taking over of Russia by the Bolcheviks (essentialy in 1919-1920). After 1921, the situation change and the white are those in trouble.

- The battle for Port Moresby may be also plus the attack on Singapore and part of the campaign in the Dutch Indies. Not to forget the US fight in the Philippines.

- If you feel like playing the bad guys you can include Manstein defense after the fall of Stalingrad (I think it was during the winter 1943). The guy defeated the soiviets with second line German units, Hungarians and Romanians.

That's all for now but exemples could be endless.

[Adm.Lee]

You guys beat me to the 1940 French campaign and the Desert, and the Russian Civil War. Lots of encirclements by both sides on the Eastern Front. Americans and Filipinos behind Japanese lines, or Commonwealth soldiers in Burma or Malaya. For patrol-style actions, any of the South/Southwest Pacific island battles.

Someone once suggested "Twilight:200" being Roman legionaries, auxiliaries (recruited from across the Empire, of course), and/or civilians cut off behind some barbarian invasion. I agree, you might want a different rules set.

I've wanted to do a T2k-rules game in post-WW1 Eastern Europe or Siberia; or a Merc-style commando game against Nazi-occupied Norway or France. Merc-style meaning in & out jobs, not a long-term survival game.

I recently read a book on Robert Rogers and the Rangers (French & Indian War, or Seven Years' War) in North America, 1755-1763. That, or any guerrilla war, really, would qualify for action in Twilight style.

[Legbreaker]

New Guinea in 1942-43 () would be ideal. Starting with the Japanese offensive southward across the mountains along the Kokoda track opposed by a mere handful of Australians, through to the assaults and recapture of the Buna and Gona areas on the north coast a few months later.
Virtually all units involved were short on ammo, food, fuel (for the half dozen or so vehicles involved), and especially, healthy soldiers (almost every last soldier from all sides suffered terribly from a variety of tropical diseases).

[Targan]

The Maori Wars: the Waikato and Taranaki Campaigns, Redcoats and Von Tempsky's Forest Rangers vs Maori guerilla forces such as those led by the legendary Maori war chief Te Kingi.

[jester]

Any of the Comando operations in WWII.

The raid on the ports in Norway. The raid on the French Port where an old ship was run into the port and blown up.

The PCs can be guys who couldn't make it to the extraction point and now have to make it to wherever for safety.

Marines in the Makin or similiar raids. In this case a fictional raid on an unknown island. I actauly was prepping my players for this in my First Offensive campaign. They survived a few days of machinegunning Japanese and going hand to hand on Guadalacanal. Then they were releived to do some coast watching on one of the smaller outer islands. The campaign fizzled at that point.

Merrils Maruaders to go with Wingates Chindits. Those would be hellacious campaigns.

Or men who managed to elude capture early in the war, be they soldiers, civilians or sailors whose ships were sunk, or captured. Or even the old China Marines.

Another one to go with sailors who were beached, but also aircrewmen who had to bail out or crashland in enemy territory.

Meteorolgical team in the boonies who is found out. There was a movie with Richard Widmark about a naval team in Mongolia, but it actualy did happen, and the Germans also had a post in the N. Atlantic. You are part of a platoon, you are attacked <your numbers dwindle, and equipment destoryed> You and the survivors have to salvage what is left and get out of town before the followon forces show up.

Coastwatchers, a T2K version of Father Goose with Carey Grant.

A covert comando team. Much like the Italian frogmen who based out of an interned vessel in Spain and regularly attacked the British at Gibralter.


As was said, the campaigns of the 7 Years War,

Any of the expeditions into the frontier of the time, think Boone and Kenton and that era, with the British and French and all the various indian tribes. As well as other expeditions and companies. And lets not forget bandits and highwaymen too.

Anytime in the New World as one of the privatiers going after the Spanish settlements and vessels laden with riches. You were raiding ashore with your boat when a Spanish fleet arrived. You couldn't make it back to the ship so you took to the jungle and are now hunted.

Korea, the Winter of 1950, or even the Pusan Perimeter. You somehow got bipassed by the Reds and you need to make your way into either the Pusan Perimeter, or to the Port of Hamhung and the safety they offer.

Dien Bien Phu; you somehow make it out and are making for the safety of where But becareful because the Viet Mihn are hot on your trail aided by many local tribes.

The Book, "The 5 Fingers" always wanted to do a campaign on that one.

Those are some of the campaigns I have thought of over the years.

[Mohoender]

I forgot about the various resistance movements in Europe during WW2. In France why not but the most interesting would be in Poland, Russia or Serbia.

The russians were almost part of the regular army and they were collaborating with regular units (the cavalry we had been talkig of at some point).

In Yugoslavia, you'll find plenty of idea. Don't forget that Yugoslavian resistance movement were facing a full army corps (200.000 German soldiers and allies) and managed to free their country all by themselves (except for limited supplies by the Soviets and the allies).

The events in the gettho of warsaw are outstanding and despite ultimate failure it remains IMO one of the most impressive achievement in military history. About 60.000 people managing to resist 6 months in front of well equipped and brutal nazi troops. if you want to be even darker, you can think of Sobibor. Still in Warsaw, the uprising of 1944 is as outstanding and would have succeed if Stalin had not ordered the red army to sit and watch.

In a similar manner you can play Kurdish or Shiite in 1991 Iraq, facing a full offensive by Saddam's troops under the very nose of those who were involved in the first Gulf War (no politcal statement or judgement here, just a fact as these helicopters were allowed to operate over the no-fly zones). Your PCs will have to deal with attack helicopters and chemical weapons while having only infantry weapons at hands.

[Legbreaker]

In Yugoslavia, you'll find plenty of idea. Don't forget that Yugoslavian resistance movement were facing a full army corps (200.000 German soldiers and allies) and managed to free their country all by themselves (except for limited supplies by the Soviets and the allies).

Although not directly supported with troops etc, the Yugoslavs were assisted by events elsewhere in the continent. If the Germans were not occupied elsewhere, then that 200,000 strong corp is sure to have trounced them eventually.
Sure they contributed to the overall German defeat, but I rather doubt they'd have managed to free their country without the events occuring throughout the rest of the world.

Still, it does make an interesting setting.

[Mohoender]

Although not directly supported with troops etc, the Yugoslavs were assisted by events elsewhere in the continent. If the Germans were not occupied elsewhere, then that 200,000 strong corp is sure to have trounced them eventually.
Sure they contributed to the overall German defeat, but I rather doubt they'd have managed to free their country without the events occuring throughout the rest of the world.

Still, it does make an interesting setting.

True but what you say is valid for every fight anywhere during ww2. Without the soviets, Europe would have fall to Nazi rule. Without US, Australia would have been crushed by Japan. Without the Allies finally landing in France, it would have been difficult for the Red Army to win. Without Australians holding Tobruk, Egypt and the Middle east after it would have been conquered by Rommel. Without the French Spahis from Morocco, casualties at Monte Cassino would have been much higher. And so on and so forth...

[Legbreaker]

Absolutely correct!

Nothing happens in isolation.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Without US, Australia would have been crushed by Japan...

While the USA certainly made a difference in the region, I would dispute that Australia would have been crushed by the Japanese without the US. Trying to put aside any "Aussie pride", the Japanese were probably spread too thin to effectively damage Australia's ability to wage war and they would certainly have had a difficult time trying to invade mainland Australia.
We held our own more so because of our distance and isolation as well as being completely self-sufficient in primary resources (along with setting up our own aircraft and vehicle manufacture even to the point of designing and building our own medium tank, the Sentinel).
Where the US aid was really felt was in the mass supply of aircraft and tanks, something which our own facilities could not match and something which was more effective than the supply of such items to Australia from Great Britain (who arguably needed them for the war in Europe).
I for one am thoroughly sick to death of hearing how the US saved our arse in WW2 because it is simply not that simple and most certainly isn't correct when stated in such simplistic terms.
Okay, my rant is over now

[ChalkLine]

Japan could never have occupied Australia, the Australians barely occupy it. It's huge, and the settlements are spread evenly around the coast. It's one of the great questions on why the Japanese tried to get where they did, they couldn't have achieved much.

The only strategic value would be inhibiting the use of Australian ports by US fleets, but the numeric advantage of the US fleets coupled with their ability to replace and add ships quickly made that impossible. All it would do would be to further lengthen supply lines, spread Japanese troops out more and made the collapse quicker. Japanese troops resorted to cannibalism in New Guinea in well documented cases; in fact some were executed after the war for it. This was a direct result of Japanese flawed strategic thinking; wishful campaigns that ignored logistics.

[Raellus]

I agree with Chalk's assessment that the Japanese could never have fully conquered the vastness of Australia. In the absence of the U.S.N., however, the Japanese probably could have conquered the coastal population centers or blockaded them into some degree of submission. Trying to maintain control of said cities for any sustained period of time would have been extremely difficult, if not totally impossible, for the Japanese military. I foresee a "conquered" Australia quickly becoming Japan's Vietnam.

I'm not a flag-waving jingoist reactionary but I do take some umbrage at any attempt to discount America's contribution to the ultimate outcome of WWII in the Pacific. Simply being sick of something doesn't make it any less valid. I'm not sure the claim of Australia "holding [its] own" against Japan can be made with any credibility considering the massive involvement of the U.S. military in the Pacific Theater. That's like Americans claiming that they could have/would have won the war in Europe without the help of the Soviet Union. Really Come on.

By all accounts, the Australian militiary contribution in North Africa and Italy was outstanding. Due to the U.K.-directed commonwealth system, the bulk of Australia's best units served in the ETO, though. According to Max Hastings' (a Brit) in Retribution, the performance of the Australian military in the Pacific, as her forces inched further from their home country/continent, was less than spectacular, if not highly suspect. Dockworker strikes in Australia also disrupted operations in the region. That dockworkers decided to go on strike in the middle of an ongoing World War- a war that directly threatened Australian sovereignty- is almost beyond belief. I haven't read that much specifically on the subject of Australia's military contribution in the PTO so I don't necessarily take Hasting's assessment entirely at face value but if what he writes is even partly true, it further discredits any claims that Australia could have "held [its] own" against the Imperial Japanese military.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Take as much umbrage as you want because I wasn't discounting the US effort in the Pacific at all, what I stated was that I take umbrage at those people who claim that Australia would have been speaking Japanese if it wasn't for the US saving our arse.
The fact is, that both the US and Great Britain plus Australia herself (geographically as much as militarily), prevented the Japanese from taking over Australia.
While the Japanese may have been able to blockade Australian ports, it would have been next to useless as they could not have stopped the flow of supplies from landlines to those ports. What they would have achieved was the temporary prevention of some supplies being received/sent from those ports but within a short enough period of time other ports would have been used. The country is so vast the Japanese would not have had enough ships to permanently blockade enough Australian ports to prevent us from receiving supplies from Great Britain and the US.
The port of Fremantle in Western Australia was one of the most significant ports in Australian wartime use and if the Japanese had succeeded in doing any damage to that port, the next port in Bunbury would have been used and then after that it would have been Albany. Bunbury is approximately 100km away from Fremantle and Albany about 1200km away from Fremantle. Australia's geography alone helped prevent some Japanese ambitions.
The Australian policy of 'Scorched Earth' which would see the complete destruction of all resources and infrastructure would have further made any territory conquered by Japan a hollow victory.

[Targan]

Nobody in Australia would dispute that it was the USA's efforts that won the war in the Pacific, but saying that Australia held its own against the Japanese in no way discounts America's winning of the Pacific war. No one is suggesting that Australia could have beaten the Japanese in the Pacific by ourselves but we most certainly could have beaten them here in Australia.

As for the quality of Australia's forces fighting in the Pacific theatre, just take a look at the Kokoda campaign. Poorly trained, poorly equipped Australian militia forces (not even regular army) performed EXTREMELY well in Papua New Guinea against the Japanese Imperial Army. We thumped the Japanese, mostly through sheer grit, toughness and determination.

We would have done even better against the Japanese if it wasn't for the gutless British generals who totally botched the defence of Singapore. Had it been up to Australia's military commanders there is no way in hell we would have surrendered all those thousands of Australian troops in Singapore. Absolutely pathetic bloody decision by the British. Many hundreds of Australian troops tried to get back to Australia by themselves rather than surrender. The Australian officers on the ground should have allowed any Australian who wanted to withdraw to do so.