The Military Deployments of T2K

[dragoon500ly]

CENTCOM in T2K manages to hold onto Saudi Arabia with no serious drama, so NATO's oil situation is okay. Contesting Iran is important but kind of just the bonus round -- and an economy of force mission when the European theater is full tilt boogie. If they can hold without augmentation, especially not another heavy division, that's likely to be all they'll get.

After rereading some of Harold Coyle's novels and RDF sourcebook as well; the impression you get is that the push to hold onto Iran was a desire to have as much strategic depth as possible in order to protect the Saudi/Gulf oil fields. Okay, makes sense...but the force commitment is what is so screwed. A single heavy division, no matter the size its commander's balls is going to be able to push against 1 or more Soviet armies. Even dropping the 82nd behind the lines to break the LOC would run into serious trouble from the 2nd & 3rd echlon divisions. And while the ole maroon beret may make its wearer semi-bulletproof....it doesn't have any effect when the enemy switchs from 7.62mm to 152mm...(now if the 82nd pulled a Chuck Norris and ripped off their BDU shirts and exposed their heroic manly chests....and a salute to Steve Jackson and his Heroic Hollywood Nudity stat!). Nope CENTCOM doesn't have the force structure to do half of what the canon material says they did.

My own feelings is that in order to pull off the "canon" material, CENTCOM had to have some form of additional force. My approach is to add two heavy divisions, an ACR, an LCR as well as some additional Iranian forces. I also debate about some kind of NATO force, most likely a British/Commonwealth Brigade....and yes I do add an Aussie battalion to the mix. Yes, it draws units from the CENTAG/NORTHAG mix...but I've always had issues with what GDW "sent" in that front.

And just for arguments sake...what in the world were they thinking when they decided to ship MILGOV/CIVGOV forces to Yugoslavia Got tired of fighting against overwhelming odds and decided to enter Europe's free-fire zone

[James Langham]

Iranian forces

After rereading some of Harold Coyle's novels and RDF sourcebook as well; the impression you get is that the push to hold onto Iran was a desire to have as much strategic depth as possible in order to protect the Saudi/Gulf oil fields. Okay, makes sense...but the force commitment is what is so screwed. A single heavy division, no matter the size its commander's balls is going to be able to push against 1 or more Soviet armies. Even dropping the 82nd behind the lines to break the LOC would run into serious trouble from the 2nd & 3rd echlon divisions. And while the ole maroon beret may make its wearer semi-bulletproof....it doesn't have any effect when the enemy switchs from 7.62mm to 152mm...(now if the 82nd pulled a Chuck Norris and ripped off their BDU shirts and exposed their heroic manly chests....and a salute to Steve Jackson and his Heroic Hollywood Nudity stat!). Nope CENTCOM doesn't have the force structure to do half of what the canon material says they did.

My own feelings is that in order to pull off the "canon" material, CENTCOM had to have some form of additional force. My approach is to add two heavy divisions, an ACR, an LCR as well as some additional Iranian forces. I also debate about some kind of NATO force, most likely a British/Commonwealth Brigade....and yes I do add an Aussie battalion to the mix. Yes, it draws units from the CENTAG/NORTHAG mix...but I've always had issues with what GDW "sent" in that front.

And just for arguments sake...what in the world were they thinking when they decided to ship MILGOV/CIVGOV forces to Yugoslavia Got tired of fighting against overwhelming odds and decided to enter Europe's free-fire zone

Don't forget the Iranian Army - these play quite a large part in the war.

[dragoon500ly]

Don't forget the Iranian Army - these play quite a large part in the war.

GDW forget the Iranian Army. I've always felt that a lot more than 5 divisions survived. My own game has between 12-15 divisions surviving and help holding the line.

[James Langham]

GDW forget the Iranian Army. I've always felt that a lot more than 5 divisions survived. My own game has between 12-15 divisions surviving and help holding the line.

I'm not sure they did, I assume that they disperse and act as guerrillas or bandits, tying down a lot of Soviet troops.

[Abbott Shaull]

In World War Two, here in the UK we spent 1940-1944 training a division for mountain and arctic warfare then deployed it to Holland...

Well the current 10th Mountain Division is much like the 101st an Airborne Division. True that Fort Drum is close to the mountains in up state New York, but it was basically Light Infantry unit. Much like the 101st is organized along similar lines of the 82nd Airborne Division, the Division is trained in Air Assault and Airmobile operations.

Even in WWII their was a couple Divisions trained in the US that were called Mountain Divisions, I believe only the 10th made it to Italy...

[Abbott Shaull]

After rereading some of Harold Coyle's novels and RDF sourcebook as well; the impression you get is that the push to hold onto Iran was a desire to have as much strategic depth as possible in order to protect the Saudi/Gulf oil fields. Okay, makes sense...but the force commitment is what is so screwed. A single heavy division, no matter the size its commander's balls is going to be able to push against 1 or more Soviet armies. Even dropping the 82nd behind the lines to break the LOC would run into serious trouble from the 2nd & 3rd echlon divisions. And while the ole maroon beret may make its wearer semi-bulletproof....it doesn't have any effect when the enemy switchs from 7.62mm to 152mm...(now if the 82nd pulled a Chuck Norris and ripped off their BDU shirts and exposed their heroic manly chests....and a salute to Steve Jackson and his Heroic Hollywood Nudity stat!). Nope CENTCOM doesn't have the force structure to do half of what the canon material says they did.

My own feelings is that in order to pull off the "canon" material, CENTCOM had to have some form of additional force. My approach is to add two heavy divisions, an ACR, an LCR as well as some additional Iranian forces. I also debate about some kind of NATO force, most likely a British/Commonwealth Brigade....and yes I do add an Aussie battalion to the mix. Yes, it draws units from the CENTAG/NORTHAG mix...but I've always had issues with what GDW "sent" in that front.

And just for arguments sake...what in the world were they thinking when they decided to ship MILGOV/CIVGOV forces to Yugoslavia Got tired of fighting against overwhelming odds and decided to enter Europe's free-fire zone

Yeah I have to agree there would of had sent more to hold. Look back at the first PG1 they had nearly half of the Regular US Army sitting in the Desert.

Then we have current operation in Iraq of the last 8 or so year that throw things askew. Granted their isn't a fighting Soviet Front thrown into the match. Yet, GDW has sent only 1 Airborne, 1 Air Assault, 1 Mechanized, 1 Light Motorized (Test-Bed) and 2 Marine Divisions with 1 Air Combat Cavalry Brigade does seem too light. I agree that couple more Heavy Divisions and ACR or two wouldn't hurt.

As for the 82nd being sent to cut the LOC of the advance Soviet unit that were engaged with the 3rd US Army and its allied forces.

What I do see even with the 82nd and 101st Division is that they would cross-attach a Brigade with other US Army Division to balance out the forces. In the resource book GDW stated that each Division was regular pulled from the fronts lines and shipped to Saudi for rest and refit.

Another thing I am sure the British would have sent more in the lines of Commonwealth Division in which HQ, support units, and one or more combat Brigade from the UK and the rest from whatever they could scrounge up from Commonwealth members.

[Abbott Shaull]

I'm not sure they did, I assume that they disperse and act as guerrillas or bandits, tying down a lot of Soviet troops.

Yeah their would be some units who would support the US, others would support the Soviets. While many probably would be good Iranians and fight whatever satan who happen to currently 'own' the local area at the time.

[HorseSoldier]

Well, the GDW Iran had a moderate and pro-western sort of government. Some Iranians might take up arms against everyone, but I'd think the Soviet invaders would be seen as a bigger threat than the western support (especially since in the T2K timeline the Soviets were still "waging war against Islam" in Afghanistan, if I remember right).

The other thing to remember in the T2K timeline is that Israel and the Palestinians reached some sort of amicable settlement. I'd guess that at the peak of the conventional war, a larger IDF expeditionary than is shown in theater circa 2000 was on the scene, after they settled their slugging match with Syria.

[Legbreaker]

On the Soviet side, the units available are apparently less than reliable with a number of units only held in check by the KGB units shoving them forward. In that environment, I don't see a huge need for a strong western presence to create the situation we're presented with.

The whole region though is a bit of a mess with what appears to be several different factions within the same nationality (looking predominately at the locals here). We've also got the French in the background too which can only help the western cause (because they're mostly unaffected by the greater world war). Might not have a lot of troops on the ground and in the front lines, but just the threat of them post winter 97-98 is likely to put a check on Pact offensive intentions (or at least make the commanders think twice about it).

[dragoon500ly]

Guess it all boils down to what the GM feels most comfortable with. I perfer to go with a reinforced CENTCOM and a larger Iranian Army. I also go with a more even mix as far as the Soviets go. Wargaming it out allows for a more balanced fight. Roleplaying it allows for more options for the players.

But I still question the DoDs choice of units for the RDF. It always stank too much of "we have all of these Light Divisions, now how can we publicize them"

[Rainbow Six]

Another thing I am sure the British would have sent more in the lines of Commonwealth Division in which HQ, support units, and one or more combat Brigade from the UK and the rest from whatever they could scrounge up from Commonwealth members.

I think the problem with sending additional British forces is simply where would these forces come from It's not impossible, however the overwhelming majority of the British Army would already be committed elsewhere, so unless one advocates increasing the British Army's strength to more than it was in real life, any additional troops sent to the Gulf would have to mean less troops available for other roles (imho probably BAOR reinforcements or UK Home Defence).

Also, with regards to the Commonwealth, whilst it's possible that Commonwealth members would send troops to the Middle East (or Korea and Hong Kong for that matter), I think it's important to note that the Commonwealth now is completely different to what it was at the start of the Second World War when the UK declared War on Germany and various Commonwealth members duly followed suit in line with the Mother Country.

Commonwealth members now are all independent states (I think their only tie is that they retain the Queen as their Head of State), so would be under no obligation to enter WW3 as a belligerent on the Allied side (Canada is an obvious exception as it is also a member of NATO). I'm not saying that it wouldn't happen and the Commonwealth nations wouldn't answer the mother country's call, just it's not something that I would take for granted.

As ever, my comments based primarily on a V1 timeline, although whilst canon mentions various Commonwealth members fighting "local" Wars, e.g. India fighting Pakistan and (I think) Australia fighting Indonesia I don't believe there's anything in canon for either version to confirm one way or the other whether any of them - other than Canada - were active participants in the "Global" War

Well, the GDW Iran had a moderate and pro-western sort of government. Some Iranians might take up arms against everyone, but I'd think the Soviet invaders would be seen as a bigger threat than the western support (especially since in the T2K timeline the Soviets were still "waging war against Islam" in Afghanistan, if I remember right).

The other thing to remember in the T2K timeline is that Israel and the Palestinians reached some sort of amicable settlement. I'd guess that at the peak of the conventional war, a larger IDF expeditionary than is shown in theater circa 2000 was on the scene, after they settled their slugging match with Syria.

To be honest, given the efforts made to keep the IDF out of the first Gulf War (which I realise came after the RDF sourcebook was published), the presence of an IDF contingent always struck me as one of the more "out there" parts of the sourcebook. The cynic in me always thought it was done purely as a mechanism to allow players to play IDF characters.

Granted, I am probably biased here - I much preferred the sort of scenario put forward in Harold Coyle's Sword Point to the one portrayed in the RDF Sourcebook.

[dragoon500ly]

I think the problem with sending additional British forces is simply where would these forces come from It's not impossible, however the overwhelming majority of the British Army would already be committed elsewhere, so unless one advocates increasing the British Army's strength to more than it was in real life, any additional troops sent to the Gulf would have to mean less troops available for other roles (imho probably BAOR reinforcements or UK Home Defence).

Also, with regards to the Commonwealth, whilst it's possible that Commonwealth members would send troops to the Middle East (or Korea and Hong Kong for that matter), I think it's important to note that the Commonwealth now is completely different to what it was at the start of the Second World War when the UK declared War on Germany and various Commonwealth members duly followed suit in line with the Mother Country.

Commonwealth members now are all independent states (I think their only tie is that they retain the Queen as their Head of State), so would be under no obligation to enter WW3 as a belligerent on the Allied side (Canada is an obvious exception as it is also a member of NATO). I'm not saying that it wouldn't happen and the Commonwealth nations wouldn't answer the mother country's call, just it's not something that I would take for granted.

As ever, my comments based primarily on a V1 timeline, although whilst canon mentions various Commonwealth members fighting "local" Wars, e.g. India fighting Pakistan and (I think) Australia fighting Indonesia I don't believe there's anything in canon for either version to confirm one way or the other whether any of them - other than Canada - were active participants in the "Global" War

The most likely reinforcement for the MEFF might be a recon regiment with Scorpions/Scimitars, possibly a Australian battalion group and, at most, a company from New Zealand. Anything more than that is really stretching the force mix. I've also pulled the Paras out of the Middle East, with an entire Airborne Division available, there would be little need for more paratroopers, IMHO.

To be honest, given the efforts made to keep the IDF out of the first Gulf War (which I realise came after the RDF sourcebook was published), the presence of an IDF contingent always struck me as one of the more "out there" parts of the sourcebook. The cynic in me always thought it was done purely as a mechanism to allow players to play IDF characters.

Granted, I am probably biased here - I much preferred the sort of scenario put forward in Harold Coyle's Sword Point to the one portrayed in the RDF Sourcebook.

Always had problems with the IDF/Jordanian mix itself, especially with the Israelis stationed in Iraqi, they would spend more times fighting the locals than the Soviet-backed locals.

[Rainbow Six]

The most likely reinforcement for the MEFF might be a recon regiment with Scorpions/Scimitars, possibly a Australian battalion group and, at most, a company from New Zealand. Anything more than that is really stretching the force mix. I've also pulled the Paras out of the Middle East, with an entire Airborne Division available, there would be little need for more paratroopers, IMHO.

My MEFF has a recon Squadron drawn from 1st Mech Bde's recon Regiment, but that's as far as I've gone in terms of changes.

Mind you, you could perhaps stretch British deployments slightly if you didn't have two Battalions sitting in Canada...

[dragoon500ly]

My MEFF has a recon Squadron drawn from 1st Mech Bde's recon Regiment, but that's as far as I've gone in terms of changes.

Mind you, you could perhaps stretch British deployments slightly if you didn't have two Battalions sitting in Canada...

I've always felt that with the example of the Sino-Soviet War, that NATO would have, at the very least, increased its readiness levels, reactivated some units, brought Reserve units up to a higher level of training. So I can see the two battalions maining the training area, but I can also see at least a handful of regiments being reactivated (no more than 4-7), that's where my extra forces come from.

[Rainbow Six]

I've always felt that with the example of the Sino-Soviet War, that NATO would have, at the very least, increased its readiness levels, reactivated some units, brought Reserve units up to a higher level of training. So I can see the two battalions maining the training area, but I can also see at least a handful of regiments being reactivated (no more than 4-7), that's where my extra forces come from.

Yes, I think that's a relatively common theme...I've done it myself and I've seen several other British Orders of Battle that have a modest number of reactivated Battalions.