SOF in T2K

[Abbott Shaull]

As far as reservists being not as good as their Regular Army counterparts in their military capacity....

The finest Soviet Motor Rifle Regiment in the world happens to be the OPFOR at Fort Irwin, California (National Training Center). This unit does nothing but Soviet tactics for most of the year and has the well-earned reputation for regularing kicking the bejesus out of every visiting unit. The OPFOR is so seldom defeated that when it does happen, the rest of the Army litterly sets up and take notice...like when a National Guard pulled it off. I can still remember the utter shock of my unit's officers/NCOs that a Guard unit managed to pull off something that we hadn't been able to do....

Of course, my faith was restored when the next NG unit in rotation was gutted in proper fashion!

Still, whenever someone makes the claim that the Reserves just aren't as good as....

It also goes to show that not all Reserve/National Guard Officers and their staff think "inside the box" as most in the Regular Army have been taught. As with many modern battlefield it not the General and his Staff that win the battle, it some Team Leader, Squad Leader, Platoon Leader, Company Commander, and/or Battalion Commander/XO/S-3 that happens to be Johnny on the spot and makes a decision that their opponent hadn't account for. By the time they realize they are in trouble it way too late.

I remember in the book "Team Yankee" when the Armor Company had been reinforce for supporting attack. They weren't the main axis of the attack, but somehow had captured a bridge. After they had reported to Battalion, the Brigade S-3 I believe who overheard the report came on. There was awkward silence as everyone tried to figure if they let the Battalion continue with their main attack in attempt to capture the bridge head the Battalion was after or shift the Battalion main axis. If they didn't shift the Battalion main attack then the question was there anyone they could move hastily to support the lucky reinforce Armor Company in holding their Bridge...

In modern Mechanized/Armor/Motorized warfare as we have seen these days it takes only little incidents like these to change things. In WWII there was this minor attack that led to the Battle of the Bulge. In which the German main attack had happen to strike at a point of the battle field that was held by green US Division that broke with none to little resistance against a force that no one was expecting to strike there.

[Abbott Shaull]

during vietnam eery major deployable unit had their own organisational long rang recon units. this has been carried on into present though the name for such unit types has changed(its currently RSTA).

having been in a reconnaissance surveillance and target acquisition squadron myself it would not be unlikely that such units would continue to exist in the later stages of the twilight war. though im certain they would still be ignored as is characteristic of most brass.

At least at one time all US Division had on the book in theory of National Guard unit that would take long range recon unit. Most of the so call "Light" had National Guard or Reserve Battalion that was to provide most of the Anti-Tank assets too.

With that said, I know in the most of the Regular Army "Light" Division there would be enough ex-Paratroop, ex-Air Assault, tabbed Rangers, and so on that by 1998-1999 that each would re-start the pre-ranger classes they had before the war and expand them to make a small company size unit that was able to act as the LRRP units had with each Division in Vietnam.

I can see some of these troop being 'borrowed' by Corps and other Division to set up similar units at those levels too. As well as setting up Infantry training school at both Corps and Division level to help retrain the excess support units personnel and personnel transferred in from other service to get them ready for their new job.

If one was to believe the troop levels that were expressed in the game, it wouldn't be far fetch to have Platoon/Squad with wide variety of skills sets, even in the Regular Army units. Another thing I have seen posted time again is the fact the misconception that National Guard that had been raised in one State or Region would still have a heavy influence from there. Yes, there would still be several troops left over from those areas, but if they had been in the fighting at any time until after late-1997 the odds are with the replacement for wounded dead would water it down quite a bit. This is due to the fact that the US Army would be responsible to provide replacement, not the National Guard of whatever state they came from. As support I would like to point out during the build up to WWII the 28th Division which was PA NG unit prior to Federalization had been tapped several time to provide cadre to other units that were being raised and Federalized. It was so out of hand at one time a certain Major General Bradley had sent word back up the chain of command that, yes the Division could provide another cadre, but he would need one sent to the Division to help train the replacements that they were still trying to train and bring up to speed.

[Abbott Shaull]

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

Webstral

No honestly it can go either way. There could be a Company with 4 platoons... One for each of the three Brigades and one for Division. Or one "Company" in sense that many other Companies happen to be in. It would depend on a number of things, the Division itself, how much combat the Division has seen, and other factors. Armored and Mechanized Divisions would probably have a smaller "Companies", while a Light Infantry Division commander would try to field a company. One of the rationale behind this would be they would help the Divisional Cavalry in their assignment too. Remember in the US Army of the Twilight 2000 war, Brigades didn't have their own recon units. They relied on Division diverting assets to them or worse diverting the assets at Battalion level for their need.

Remember a Divisional Commander could come from any branch of the military in theory. Artillery unit or Engineer or Armor/Armor Cavalry/Mechanized minded Commanders wouldn't realize the what an 'asset' this type of company could be. On the other hand many Commanders who had seen service in Vietnam would view all Special Force with mix feelings. Some would know and understand what they are capable of, while others would go out of their way to not use them. It really depend on how any commander would feel what they need to provide the security for their unit. Much like a member of this group wrote up re-organization of the 5th US Mechanized Division in which it was basically one Heavy Brigade and two Light Infantry Brigade with enough transport to move a Battalion or two of those Brigade if need be.

One has to remember before the US Army committed troops World War II to the Battle that the Armor Division were basically 2 Armor Regiments and 1 Armor Infantry Regiment. Later all but two of the Divisions were reorganized 3 Armor Battalions and 3 Armored Infantry Battalion usually organized in into three combat commands that would have one Battalion of each to work with. Again Combat Command were quite fluid in who had what.

Up until 1943 the US Army had tried organize Motorized Infantry Divisions but the idea was dropped and it was decide that if they needed a Motorized Infantry Division they would supply a Division from Corps/Army/Army Group levels transport assets to make the unit mobile. Not only that many Division had enough Motorized Recon Vehicle (jeeps) and other transport to move up to Regiment at when need in leapfrog fashion. Much how the 101st had done with their Air Assault assets during Operation Desert Storm.

[dragoon500ly]

It also goes to show that not all Reserve/National Guard Officers and their staff think "inside the box" as most in the Regular Army have been taught. As with many modern battlefield it not the General and his Staff that win the battle, it some Team Leader, Squad Leader, Platoon Leader, Company Commander, and/or Battalion Commander/XO/S-3 that happens to be Johnny on the spot and makes a decision that their opponent hadn't account for. By the time they realize they are in trouble it way too late.

Don't know about thinking inside the box, but there are several units (the armored cav regts especially) that were trained to "wing it" as necessary. We were always taught that the doctrine was just a base and that the units had to key off of the individual track commander, if necessary. In several REFORGERS, for example, the 2nd ACR was famous for its end runs as well as its ability to find that special weak spot. We had scout tracks launching what turned out to be a regimental-sized attack just because they found a gap that the OPFOR wasn't watching. Regulars blindly following doctrine....not in any unit that I served in!

In modern Mechanized/Armor/Motorized warfare as we have seen these days it takes only little incidents like these to change things. In WWII there was this minor attack that led to the Battle of the Bulge. In which the German main attack had happen to strike at a point of the battle field that was held by green US Division that broke with none to little resistance against a force that no one was expecting to strike there.

Hmmm, first time I've every heard of a minor attack launching the BoB!! I study/read about the BoB and I've walked most of the ground that was fought over. The Germans went into the fight knowing that they were going to hit a thinly held sector, held by a mix of green and worn-out troops. Fifth Panzer Armee's attack was actually modified from Hitler's plan to take advantage of just how thinly the 28th Division held the front. As for the 106th...the main attack was keyed for the Lorsheim Gap, a major avenue of approach into St. Vith that was held by a single cavalry squadron with an attached battery of towed tank destroyers. Seeing that the Germans threw in a Fallschrimjager Division...the cav tried but failed to hold the line.

[HorseSoldier]

With that said, I know in the most of the Regular Army "Light" Division there would be enough ex-Paratroop, ex-Air Assault, tabbed Rangers, and so on that by 1998-1999 that each would re-start the pre-ranger classes they had before the war and expand them to make a small company size unit that was able to act as the LRRP units had with each Division in Vietnam.

By '98-99, divisions in everybody's military will have large bodies of really serious veterans. And units will be getting small enough that resume qualifications will be switching more to word of mouth and less and less about schools and tabs and other pre-war resume entries. Honestly, guys who survive through to 1999 have been through levels of privation and stress while doing the job for real under fire that eight weeks of suck in the woods of Georgia and swamps of Florida won't have imparted anything they haven't learned the hard way.

[natehale1971]

I've always felt that PCs are pretty much the SOF of their unit... mainly because of the things they end up doing during the campaign. With all the combat experiences they've had since the start of the war... they have the OTJ training necessary for the kinds of missions that pre-War SOF personnel/teams had been tasked for.

[Abbott Shaull]

I've always felt that PCs are pretty much the SOF of their unit... mainly because of the things they end up doing during the campaign. With all the combat experiences they've had since the start of the war... they have the OTJ training necessary for the kinds of missions that pre-War SOF personnel/teams had been tasked for.

Yeah I have felt that almost any unit that one throws together for the game would bring a good cross selection of skills sets that would allow them to pull of most operations. It was one of the few things that GDW got right with the game. Especially if one took the time to read the Player guide line and the back story in it about they used for the unit they used.

[Raellus]

I've always felt that PCs are pretty much the SOF of their unit... mainly because of the things they end up doing during the campaign. With all the combat experiences they've had since the start of the war... they have the OTJ training necessary for the kinds of missions that pre-War SOF personnel/teams had been tasked for.

That's a really good point, Nate. I do think an in-theatre RECONDO school would still be a good investment in the Twilight U, though. It would serve as a finishing school, if you will, for long-range patrolling, fieldcraft, small unit tactics, and E&E skills.

[natehale1971]

That's a really good point, Nate. I do think an in-theatre RECONDO school would still be a good investment in the Twilight U, though. It would serve as a finishing school, if you will, for long-range patrolling, fieldcraft, small unit tactics, and E&E skills.

Exactly... to give the personnel additional skills they would need for their missions. be it small unit training to get use to working the other members of their team out of combat or training them to use specialized weapons or equipment (because supplying specialized equipment and weapons would actually be easy all things considered, look at what happened with WW2 and the wonder weapons that the Germans were able to make while they were getting bombed 24/7, or the gear that OSS was coming up with out in the field).

[helbent4]

I've always felt that PCs are pretty much the SOF of their unit... mainly because of the things they end up doing during the campaign. With all the combat experiences they've had since the start of the war... they have the OTJ training necessary for the kinds of missions that pre-War SOF personnel/teams had been tasked for.

Nate,

I seem to recall in one of the adventures it kind of suggests that when the PCs get back home, they are kept together because they are proven to function as a team. This gives what is probably an ad hoc unit a more permanent arrangement. (I thought this was laid out in "Going Home" but I can't find it now.)

The implication could be that this group is "special" in some sense and therefore are best kept intact as a kind of crack cadre or unit instead of broken up to reinforce other more conventional units.

Tony

[natehale1971]

Nate,

I seem to recall in one of the adventures it kind of suggests that when the PCs get back home, they are kept together because they are proven to function as a team. This gives what is probably an ad hoc unit a more permanent arrangement. (I thought this was laid out in "Going Home" but I can't find it now.)

The implication could be that this group is "special" in some sense and therefore are best kept intact as a kind of crack cadre or unit instead of broken up to reinforce other more conventional units.

Tony

Yup... that's what gave me the idea that PCs are ad hoc SOF type units that came into being on the front lines, and became the stuff of legend!

[Webstral]

Getting back to the levels of experience in the combat units, I think it"s worthwhile to look at the encounter tables and the modules. A large slice of the combatants the PCs are expected to encounter are relatively (or not so relatively) unseasoned. This is because new guys are constantly being inducted. Many of them die pretty quickly, but the veterans are getting killed, too. It"s a tough world.

Webstral

[Abbott Shaull]

Getting back to the levels of experience in the combat units, I think it"s worthwhile to look at the encounter tables and the modules. A large slice of the combatants the PCs are expected to encounter are relatively (or not so relatively) unseasoned. This is because new guys are constantly being inducted. Many of them die pretty quickly, but the veterans are getting killed, too. It"s a tough world.

Webstral

So true, there was episode in the "Band of Brothers" in which many of the veterans wouldn't befriend new guys right away since they seemed to get killed so quickly. As stated even luck of the veterans would run out too.

[helbent4]

Yup... that's what gave me the idea that PCs are ad hoc SOF type units that came into being on the front lines, and became the stuff of legend!

Nate,

Dang, am I imagining the information on PC groups from some Challenge article or some adventure They give tips for dealing with unit leaders that are of too low rank, suggesting that PCs can be promoted on a permanent of brevet basis.

Well, either way, a kind of "in theatre" school could qualify for a sort of SOF unit. Many T2K GMs understandably want to add skills to starting PCs. Such a "school" would be a perfect mechanism to give PCs a basic grounding in combat skills, especially some of the more esoteric ones. Also, it would even things with PCs that really are SOF.

Getting back to actual SOF and their inclusion as PCs, I think they tend to be over-represented and the GM is within their rights in drawing the line and limiting them to a few, at most. Unless the PCs are part of a kind of special unit, they are going to be rare as hen's teeth. As well, I guess in a Kalisz type scenario SOF might try to band together for survival, then allow others to travel along as "meat shields". Then again, if you allow SOF PCs, no one can rightfully complain if you, as a GM, throw some real bad hombres to oppose them!

Tony

[natehale1971]

all of the SOF guys i met, had said that rank didn't matter when out in the field on a mission. The person with the skills needed at that moment was the one in the lead. And that's how we always ran our groups... the person with the best 'hands on' knowledge would be the one in charge. The highest ranking member would be in charge when NOT in combat, they'd basicly be in charge of making sure we had food, water, ammo, shelter and the like. Basicly like the 2LT is in command of a platoon, but the Platoon Sergeant is the one who does the heavy lifting!