SOF in T2K

[Raellus]

What's your take on special operations forces in the Twilight world

I tend to think that SOF warriors would be fairly rare in the later stages of the Twilight War. SOF types tend to draw the more dangerous missions and seem to suffer disproportionate casualties compared to line units. After three or four years of high intensity combat, one could argue that there would be very few true SOF left.

On the same tack, after the TDM, SOF training programs would probably suffer. Considering the historical antipathy towards SOF in the upper echelons of the conventional force structures of most armies, I could see the brass being reluctant to part with their "best" (this might be relative in after '97) men as the fresh recruit pool dwindles.

On the other hand, the nature of warfare after '97 (a non-continuous front, lower force-to-space ratios, cantonments, "raids", etc.) would seem to favor unconventional warfare and its practitioners.

As a GM, I usually allow folks to play SOF types, despite myself. I know that playing SOF types is rather alluring and I don't want to spoil anybody's fun. As a result, in my PbP campaign, the proportion of SOF to non hovers around 4 to 14, although at times during the campaigns three-year history, its been higher. This usually lends to a decent balance but the SOF types usually have more to work with, both skills and gear-wise. As a GM, I'm not sure how to address these imbalances fairly.

As a player, I've never played an SOF type. I usually prefer the "ordinary men in extraordinary circumstances" motif. Part of me, though, really wants to RP the highly skilled, professional warrior; the other part is weary of descending into munchkinism. Lately, I've gotten a hankering to try playing an "operator". ATM, I'd love to play a grizzled German KSK noncom, decked out in Flektarn and strapping an G8/HK21 with all the trimmings, a P21/USP pistol, and sweet dive/combat knife.

Special forces in the Twilight War are neither special nor particularly forceful. Discuss.

[cavtroop]

I think lots of small groups in T2k would be called SOF, but aren't 'true' SF (ie. Q course, etc.). Just small groups of infantry/scouts that work well together, that would be given missions that would traditionally go to 'true' SF units. Actual operators would be exceedingly rare I'd think, for the reasons you outlined - they'd all be dead/stranded/etc.

When I used to GM (I would now, but can't find players!), I let people be SF if they wanted. Generally though, I had good players that didn't abuse it. I'd make them come up with a real good story of how they got to where they were, etc. I never played an SF player - it's kind of like playing the game on 'easy mode'

[weswood]

I prefer to let players be the character they want to be. It's a game, played for fun. As long as the player can justify the character, I tend to let them run with it.

But I think in order to balance the game, they start out with minimal gear. Either they start out as having escaped from POW status, or they managed to lose the gear ( boat flipped over, whatever.)

[kato13]

Canon modules have Russian, Czech(IIRC) and US Special forces. I think strong unit cohesion and general survival knowledge will help these units survive better than most, somewhat countering their use on the more difficult missions.

[Webstral]

In addition to the proper SF types, there would be a need for lots of guys doing SF types of missions. Once again using my own work as a concrete example, in Thunder Empire the leadership identifies a very strong need for both LRS and small unit trainers to raise local militias and give them the training they need to make the most of whatever weapons they do have. (Knowledge goes both ways, by the way.) None of the soldiers who come to operate in these modes are properly trained SF.

In Poseidon's Rifles, my newest name for the USCG enclave on the northern New England coast, there is a need for LRS and for commando-style raiders to precede attacks on enemies throughout the area. The Marines who become part of First District pretty much run the training for both of these functions.

LRS pretty much defines the SF role among the Green Jackets (State of Vermont), the Granite Brigade (State of New Hampshire), the Black Watch (southern Vermont), the forces of Keene (also New Hampshire), and the 43rd Military Police Brigade in western MA. The infantry units, LRS or otherwise, are trained for raiding, but it would be hard to confuse them with properly-trained Special Forces.

In Silver Shogunate, the Shogun (Nevada) really doesn't have any SF. His special troops are more like SWAT or are members of his secret police.

I've been cooking up some nastiness for southern Idaho, which is under the control of New America [Howling Wilderness]. My working title for this is The Final Solution. As in other locations, LRS-style operators are about as close as they come to true SF.

Colorado is going to need scads of true SF to bring other sections of the US back into the fold. How they will manage to train and equip these soldiers is an open question.

Webstral

[Abbott Shaull]

I don't see many people being sent back to US and by 2000 sent back to even the UK for training. I can see selected members of unit who have been through the training setting up 'mini-courses' to help train what may be needed locally.

Would you find them in the T2K settings, well there was Soviet unit operating in Southern Poland. I think they made it in the original modules and they returned again in the series of modules that were suppose to take place in 2001 a year later for those who didn't move on to catch the boat. Even in the Krakow and Warsaw Modules one of the unspoken things if they had the pleasure of meeting DIA/CIA agents in those areas would try to recruit the party to carry out such operation for them. There was small A-Team on Operation Reset that B troop of the 116th was suppose to support.

As for units of trained Green Berets, SAS, SBS, Seals, or your particular flavor of Special Operation unit would be hard press to be completely made of members who have been trained to pre-war standards. Even these units one of the things for NATO units is they train, train, and train more. I see Long Range Recon Patrols type Vietnam style Ranger companies being recruited and trained too at Corps and Division level where possible.

Also one of the issue with canon I have had was the fact that the all of the 75th Ranger Regiment was sent to the Middle East when in reality either the Battalion from Fort Stewart or Benning going there, the other one to Europe and Fort Lewis being deployed to Korea, with probably a couple Battalions in training. As well Special Forces Groups and Seal Teams in various stages of training in late 1997. Many of these units were kept home to help in the rebuilding process after the Thanksgiving 1997. Many of the not Ranger units could be put to good use in helping out. Yes, granted they aren't using their combat skills, but an A-Team or Seal Platoon could be put to good use in places where you don't have the means or population to send various support brigades.

From 1999 and 2000 there are regions of the Eastern Europe that are ripe for the type of missions that SF, Seals, and the SAS have trained for. In making partisan units behind enemy lines. I am sure there are Soviet groups doing the same thing in Eastern Germany. Also I am sure there would be various groups working in Southeastern Europe and Italy to work with pro-NATO partisans. Where as many of the units before 1999 were there to harass enemy and didn't do much force multiplier operations. Also the Polish Legions were suppose to be under the control of US SF groups too during the final Offensive that lead to the destruction to the 5th US Mechanized Division.

As for the playing the game in easy mode. No I find it the opposite to be true, especially if the GM limits it to one type in the group. Yes, this person has all of this training, but at the same time he has to prove to his 'new' team he knows what he doing, and then there is rank issue too. If Generals have trouble in accepting advice from a mere Sergeant, it not any easier trying to convince a Lt or Captain that their plan wouldn't work and your would work. Even in a Group without an Officer, and the Sergeant was the highest ranking person, he would still have convince the party to do things his way.

Remember many Officer and many Non-coms are fond of the Spec Warrior types. There are even some who have passed the various course aren't confident that they can do what others believe and shown they have been able to do. The thing is this type of character has to work to 'fit' in. For Lone Rangers won't last too long in the T2K world.

Abbott

[chico20854]

To reinforce one point Abbot brought out, there are really two roles people have in mind when discussing SOF in the Cold War/T2k context.

The first is the one made popular by the movies, and into which US Army Special Forces have slipped into post-Cold War, and many other militaries have their SOF execute - direct action, commando-type operations - basically raids against high value targets by highly trained, superior quality light infantrymen.

The second role, which had been largely downplayed in the popular imagination and press, was conducting insurgency and counterinsurgency campaigns and training local forces. During the 80s this largely overshadowed the direct action role for US Army Special Forces - they were chock full of guys that spoke Russian, Polish and Ukrainian.

The Ranger battalions were the direct-action guys, the SF were the ones to make the Soviets divert combat troops to protect their supply lines, (in the T2k context the Polish Free Legions were the children of 10th SF Group.) In addition, SF and the Long-Range Surveillance guys were providing targeting info for deep strikes (air, cruise missile, IRBM).

There had been a lot of discussion on the old board about raising additional Ranger battalions. It makes sense to me, makes GDW's commitment of the entire 75th Ranger Rgt to CENTCOM more reasonable to understand.

In 2000, I would imagine that there might be remnants of Ranger and other direct-action units scattered about, possibly attached or part of regular infantry/combat units. The SF guys would be a mixed bag... some would be deep into Byelorussia and the Ukraine, some in Poland, some "come back in from the cold" with whatever friendly unit they bumped into or were assigned to by whatever remained of high command. Some would have gone native and never come back. The state of the army in 2000 IMHO would argue against having much direct-action guys concentrated together, as the casualties would be irreplaceble and the insertion, target location and commo assets needed to perform missions scarce.

[Legbreaker]

There was small A-Team on Operation Reset that B troop of the 116th was suppose to support.

Minor correction - B troop had a completely seperate mission totally unrelated to Reset. Unfortunately they did not receive their final mission briefing from their contact and so never found out what it was (it was something relating to the retrieval of the Black Maddonna).
There is a specific mention of this in Black Maddonna, something about the right hand not knowing what the left was doing....

I believe the situation regarding SF types may resemble the approach the Germans took in WWII - there were no specialisted SF units. Missions were simply assigned to line units who were expected to carry them out.

This may be reflected in T2K as a unit trying it's best to carry out mission specific training and rehearsals, but as has been said, I doubt there'd be any organised SF training courses, schools and the like after late 97.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

...I believe the situation regarding SF types may resemble the approach the Germans took in WWII - there were no specialisted SF units. Missions were simply assigned to line units who were expected to carry them out.

There was at least one and even when they no longer operated under their original title they continued on as a specialized unit, the Brandenburgers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburgers

http://thirdreich.net/Brandenberg_Commandos.html

[Raellus]

Here's an idea I think I presented on the old forum, and which may explain the relatively high proportion of "Ranger" characters that seem to populate the Twilight world.

Before '69 (IIRC), there were no separate Ranger regiments in the U.S. army. Instead, each division in the field (we're talking Vietnam here) was responsible for creating its own LRRP (long range reconaissance patrol) company. These LRRP companies were the precursors to modern Rangers and were designated as such in '69 (IIRC). Later, these companies were reorganized into the regiments still in existence today.

So, perhaps after '97 in the Twilight timeline, divisions in the field would create their own organic "Ranger" companies for LRRP'ing, prisoner snatches, ambushes, etc. This would make sense given the nature of warfare after the TDM. Perhaps each theatre would set up its own "Recondo" school to train these shake 'n' bake Rangers. In Twilight 2000 terms, "company" is a bit of a misnomer. Of course, by 2000, a company would probably be around pre-war TOE platoon strength.

Although this precedent/proposition applies to the U.S. (and Rangers, in particular), other countries could use a similar system.

With a war raging across the globe, I just don't see the quantity or quality of the remaining SOF being particularly high, c. 2000. Even at full Cold War strength, the SOFs of most nations would be stretched pretty thin once WWIII was in full swing.

[Targan]

As many forumites will know from my past crazy stories about my long running campaign, it focused on a core group of SF-type PCs and important NPCs. But the PC commander Major Po actively sought out and recruited SF types for his team where he could, and they weren't easy to find. Many important roles in his team were filled by characters who didn't have an SF background but were very good soldiers and were given additional training where possible by Po's SF personnel.

I'm not sure that SF troops would have survival rates that much lower than other troops. Sure they get sent on very dangerous missions but they are also damn good at what they do and they are some of the toughest and most resourceful troops. I think their survival rates would be on par or even slightly higher than line infantry.

In an RPGing context, having an SF-oriented campaign is all about balance in my experience. Sure Major Po's group were hard core killers and tended to utterly dominate similarly sized and equipped opposing forces, but they also attracted a higher quality of opposition too. In my campaign from Krakow onward Major Po's group were being actively hunted by elements of Spetznaz, the GRU and even the CIA. And once they made contact with Colonel Richard Stark from the DIA they were tasked with some horrendously difficult missions, they prime example being their (successful) deploying of a backpack nuke at WarPac Reserve Front HQ in Lublin.

In my campaign the CIA started a program in 1996 aimed at detecting and preventing any military takeover of the US Government in the event of a global war. This would seem like an act of prescience and in fact it was (a result of one of the great successes of Project Stargate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_Project). Major Po was one of a team of 12 US Army SF and Intelligence officers and NCOs who were recruited by the CIA and placed in positions in the US military where they keep watch for signs of a military coup. That is why Po (originally a medical doctor) went from being an FBI forensics agent to being comissioned as a US Army Green Beret captain. His SF and officer training were fast tracked but the escalation of the war prevented him from receiving all of his training and that is why he didn't have jump wings.

After the TDM in 1997 Po decided that CivGov was responsible for the destruction of the US and he went to the DIA and told them all about the CIA project he was involved in. After that the CIA went to a great deal of effort to have him killed. In my campaign there were some really vicious CIA vs DIA stoushes that continued right on into the Armies of the Night module.

I think that if a GM allows a player to have an SF-type character it should be on the condition that the player puts some effort into researching the role and playing the character appropriately. The players of SF characters in my campaign had very complex back stories and tended to be played (IMO) appropriately.

[Webstral]

So, perhaps after '97 in the Twilight timeline, divisions in the field would create their own organic "Ranger" companies for LRRP'ing, prisoner snatches, ambushes, etc. This would make sense given the nature of warfare after the TDM. Perhaps each theatre would set up its own "Recondo" school to train these shake 'n' bake Rangers. In Twilight 2000 terms, "company" is a bit of a misnomer. Of course, by 2000, a company would probably be around pre-war TOE platoon strength.

You've summarized my thinking more succinctly than I did.

Webstral

[fightingflamingo]

All US divisions will start the war with an organic LRS which is basically as described above. They are a division asset, roughly of company size. Corps will have larger LRS units but they exist in the prewar force structure for the divisions. They can be used in the long range recce, or as a direct action asset for the division or corps commander. Typically, the NCO's and officers to a large percentage will have gone through ranger school, in addition to the LRSU leaders course, plus the entire unit is airborne capable. I think some of these assets are listed on the Tanknet OOB, but I'm not sure. I know the 104th Inf Det (LRS) was part of the 28th ID.

[Matt Wiser]

I'd go along with Raellus and Webstral on that one. The professional SOF would be held at Corps and Army level for really high-value operations, while divisions would be setting up these Recondo schools for their own "Rangers." Of course, anyone who was already Ranger qualified would be in high demand as instructors.

Our group at CSU Fresno had six SEALs as PCs, but as the unit grew, to include some Soviet defectors, cut off Army personnel (with armor) and so on, it became more of a conventional unit. But those SEALs got to use their skills on numerous occasions-like when we did a Kelly's Heroes style adventure, and hitting the POW camp described in the Challenge article Black Siberia. (we gave the Commandant to the prisoners...his fate was, shall we say, richly deserved-the surviving guards were executed, and the trusties were lynched)

[simonmark6]

From my reading and research, there may be way more soldiers in the US Army with Ranger Tabs than there are Rangers in Ranger units. Ranger School seems to be a major way of developing leadership potential in soldiers of all combat arms.

In several of Harold Coyle's novels, I got the impression that completing Ranger School was, if not required, definately advantageous to getting promoted if you were an officer.

As the war went on, it is possible that troops with Ranger Tabs formed the core of LRRPs etc.

For other armies, simlar institutions may exist (I'm not sure), I do know that in British Regiments there are individual platoons or companies that train for specific missions, there are for instance, platoon traine as paratroopers (often called Pegasus Companies), jungle fighters (Chindit Companies) and other specific missions. This is supposed to garuntee that any given regiment has a cadre of trained troops should the unit be tasked with that type of mission.

It's not inconcievable that other armies do the same.

As for playing SF types, when I began playing FtoF Twilight, the role of SF was just coming into the popular conciousness and nearly everyone wanted to play SF types. Later we explored other roles and enjoyed playing line troopers.

Sometimes there is the temptation to kick back and play an action hero style SF member, but Twilight isn't really the system for that because, quite frankly the difference between SF careers and normal ones isn't that great.

Still, one day I'd love to run my munchkin character, but it probably wouldn't be as much fun as I think it would be.