German III Corps?

[Marc]

From my research for the analysis, the north end of the start line is way too far east. With a startline where you've marked, it makes much of the first few weeks of the offensive a cakewalk for NATO, totally changing the ultimate outcome. I'll try to mark out the start positions as I assessed them in the next few days.

Great, then I will redraw the map with your modified initial positions.

I also envisaged the offensive as more of a fish hook in shape, III Corp pushing eastward several hundred kilometres before swinging south to cut off Pact units, or at least threaten encirclment against the mountains to the south.

I've drawn the plotted movements of the German III Corp in south-east direction to not interfere with the path of the 5th ID as described in "Escape from Kalisz". Perhaps it would be better to make this movement a little longer and then turn them to the south or even the south-west to look for the soviet rear, with the fish hook shape you say.

The 2nd Marines were also conducting an encirclement operation, but on a much smaller scale. It was their task to take the river delta, but also push inland to cut off the northern Polish troops and allow the 8th ID an easier time of it.

Obviously almost no unit actually reached their objectives for a variety of reason. However, the 8th was probably the most sucessfull of all the NATO divisions, overshooting their objective by an embarassing distance.

One possibility is to attribute part of the success of the 8th to a quick victory over the Polish units directly in its path of advance before the other Polish units "dissoluted" in front of the III Corps (or even in front of the 5th ID) initiated their movement toward the north to harass the left flank of the NATO. Althought the 8th archieved successful deep penetration, a more slower advance could have helped to consolidate the Baltic Coast wiht the 5th Armored and the 2nd Marines once the things started to fall apart.

BTW: What about the gap between the 50th Armored and the 5th ID. Perhaps it was supposed to be covered by the Canadians and the 116th ACRCould they delay in disengage from the British/Soviet "front" have been the cause for the dangeroulsy exposed left flank of the 5th ID

[Marc]

Mmmm...I've just noticed I missed the proper symbol for the 21th Panzergrenadier Division. I will arrange it in the next version of the map.

Another possibility is that the 50th Armored was to follow the advance of the 5th ID, covering its right flank, while the Canadians and the 116 ACR must fill the gap between the 50th and the 8th. Again, the delay of these two units forced the harassing Polish units from the south could be the critical factors before the start of the Soviet counteroffensive.

[Legbreaker]

Quote:
"Meanwhile amphibious landings were to be made by the 2nd MARDIV across the river estuaries of northern Poland with the 8th ID heading further east to cut lines of any hope of reinforcement from Russia. The 50th Armoured Division was to fill the gap between the 5th and 8th while 116th ACR and Can 4th Mech Bde were held in reserve.

The remainder of the 3rd Army were tasked with filling the gap between the 5th ID and the British forces. They, like the British, had barely reached the start line recently vacated by the US units before the Soviet 4th Guards Army screwed everything up."

XI Corp were to be the spearhead with the German Divisions following along behind. It would have been up to the Germans to protect the southern flank allowing the Americans to remain on the offensive.

Unfortunately the Pact forces moved before the Germans could really get moving and so the US 50th AD, 116 ACR and Canadian 4th Mechanised Brigade had to be pulled form the offensive and retasked to flank and supply line protection. After the dust settled, the Germans (and British) had barely moved from the cantonments they'd been occupying for the previous year or two. Ultimately this was a good thing (or as good as could be hoped for) as only the US 5th and 8th ID were lost instead of most of an army...

[Cdnwolf]

Okay just a query... with all the unrest happening in Canada... what the heck were the troops still doing over in Europe

But great information folks...

I would still love to see more of what happened in the Austria, Hungary, Italy region and anything on the importance of the Danube River in the war.

[Legbreaker]

Why are there US troops still in Iraq even though the US is apparently having "cash flow" issues

Politics has to play a big part both there and in T2K.

More impportantly perhaps, at least on a day to day level, is the severe lack of available transportation to take them home again.

[Targan]

Politics has to play a big part both there and in T2K.

So true. After the US governmental scism both MilGov and CivGov continued to send troops to Europe despite those troops being desperately needed at home. That seems to me to have been mostly politically motivated (and perhaps a case of "one upmanship").

[Webstral]

So true. After the US governmental scism both MilGov and CivGov continued to send troops to Europe despite those troops being desperately needed at home. That seems to me to have been mostly politically motivated (and perhaps a case of "one upmanship").

It's so completely [expletive deleted] up that it rings true. I abhor the idea, therefore I love it.

Webstral

[Cdnwolf]

I meant the CANADIAN troops only...lol.

Okay heres something that I am curious about... what happened in Europe after the American troops came home

I think I read something about it in one of the DC group papers but wasn't sure.

[Fusilier]

I meant the CANADIAN troops only...lol.

Okay heres something that I am curious about... what happened in Europe after the American troops came home

I think I read something about it in one of the DC group papers but wasn't sure.

Going Home module has some insight to this.

[Legbreaker]

Going Home module has some insight to this.

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.phpp=9184#post9184 should give you an idea or two.
Basically the Canadians, along with the rest of what's left of the XI Corp (less the 8th ID), are stuck. They're not technically behind enemy lines, but to withdraw back into Germany requires movement into and through Pact controlled areas.

[Raellus]

I'm still having trouble reconciling 3rd Army's failed offensive with the Soviet/WTO forces present in northern Poland.

What Soviet and WTO units are involved in attempting to cut off the 3rd Army spearheads along the Baltic Coast The map in the v2.2 rulebook and the unit location listings in the U.S., Soviet, and NATO vehicle guides don't place any powerful Soviet/WTO units in the north. For the most part, the only WTO listed near the Baltic coast are weak horse cavalry and BG units. The Polish 9th MRD is the only WTO unit in the region with any significant armor/heavy weapons.

5th ID's destruction makes plenty of sense considering the correlation of forces in the Lodz-Kalisz area. Based on the mauling the 5th ID gave most of the Soviet and WTO units involved in its destruction, it doesn't seem like those units could have turned north to stop significant NATO 3rd Army forces or even threaten its right flank enough to halt operations along the Baltic Coast.

As Leg pointed out, 3rd Army contains two tank divisions, five mechanized infantry/panzergrenadier divisions, one Marine division, and an ACR. It shouldn't have had any trouble clearing the coast and sending additional units south to support 5th ID.

If it's a case of halting units due to a larger Soviet counteroffensive to the south, why are the units of the 3rd Army still listed as being in northern Poland and Germany One would assume that if they were stopped due to pressure on the UK forces in west-central Poland, at least a few of the units (probably the 3 German divisions) would be shifted south to shore up the British or attempt to retake ground lost to the Reds. From looking at the correlation of forces in the UK area of responsibility, it looks like the Soviet and WTO units could pretty easily take Berlin if they wanted too. Yet canon shies away from even mentioning a broader Soviet or NATO offensive. They make it sound like the 3rd Army's offensive is the only show in town.

I don't know what the game designers were thinking to make NATO so much more powerful in the north and the Soviets significantly more powerful in the south. The situation as of late July 2000 would make much more sense if the forces were more evenly matched along the front.

And then there's the status report for the 2nd Marine Div. in the U.S. Army Vehicle Guide. It says that the location and status of the division is unkown after its amphib assaults along the Baltic Coast. This suggests that it is in a state of distress. If the 8th Mech. ID's location in LATVIA (I still don't know what the designers were thinking there) is known, then something must be wrong with the Marines. Trouble is, I just don't see a bunch of relatively small Polish horse cavalry and BG units being able to crush a Marine division. Wouldn't the 8th ID and Marines have operated together for at least part of the duration of the 8th drive to Latvia What about other follow-on 3rd Army units Besides the 5th ID, what are the German armored and PZGr units doing Or the Canadians, Danes, and U.S. TD and ACR More than 75% of the 3rd Army is unaccounted for during its offensive. If the Germans aren't participating, why is an American Corps subordinated to them That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

I'm really trying to explain the offensive's failure. 5th ID's part in it is clear cut but the rest is a muddled mess. Are there any Challenge articles about the rest of the summer offensive

It just doesn't make any sense.

[Raellus]

After a little more research, it's clear that there are a couple more relatively powerful Polish divisions in the Baltic region that could have helped blunt 3rd Army's offensive. In particular, the 1st MRD (2500/7), the 9th MRD (2500/10), and the 5th TD (3500/16). There's also the 17th CD (2000), 12th CD (1500), 3rd CD (1000), and 7th MarDiv (only 600 men but presumably "elite" troops).

I also went looking for Soviet units in the Baltic states that could have been sent to deal with 3rd Army. Most of the units listed as being in the Ukraine are either in full revolt or engaged in attempting to suppress it so I figure they would be busy and unavailable. A couple of units in Belarus are also listed as being engaged fighting the Ukranian separatists so that eliminates them.

The following units are posted in Belarus and apparently unengaged during 3rd Army's offensive and could therefore have participated in a counterattack. Units marked with an asterix are the ones I see as being most likely to be involved.

22nd TD (2000)
3rd MRD (2000/10)*
138th MRD (4000/20)*
83rd AAB (600)*

The following units are posted in Latvia. One issue here is the 26th GMRD's (4000/28) mutiny (they are garrisoning the newly free city of Riga). I would assume, therefore, that the other, loyal Soviet units listed in Riga are probably going to be busy dealing with the 26th. On the other hand, maybe the Soviets have assessed the threat posed by 3rd Army's offensive as being much greater and have decided to deal with it first. That could free up the following units for a counterattack against the 3rd Army.

40th GMRD (500/4)
40th MRD (500/4) -an odd coincidence but that's what the v1.0 SVG says.
107th MRD (4000/36)*

If the above units- or just a few of them- were involved in a counterattack against 3rd Army's offensive, it would explain a lot.

[Legbreaker]

Yes, the 3rd does appear to be very strong on the face of it, but they also have a terrible weakness - fuel.
In my assessment of the offensive written a while back, I came to the conclusion that the 2nd Marines had to have suffered some sort of catasrophy and the units following along behind the 5th and 8th had to have been held up.

The most appropriate event I could think of for the marines was the sinking of their supply ship and almost total loss of fuel reserves. This meant their mobility and firepower suddenly became a lead weight around their necks as they were reduced to rationing what little was left in vehicle tanks and operating on foot.

The poor state of units in northern Poland as shown in Canon are after the offensive - they'd been battered and torn apart by the 5th, 8th, 2nd marines and then 50th AD and assorted smaller units. While not particularly strong or capable of significant offensive action on their own, they were still a thorn in the side of XI Corp and needed to be hedged in. Therefore, until the following German units could be brought up, the 50th AD, 116 ACR and the Canadians had to pause their forward movement and secure the flanks.

Unfortunately, the Pact forces in the south took offensive action of their own shortly after Nato began it's eastward move. I've had them apply pressure to the southern areas as well as drive northward towards the Baltic Sea to cut off the XI Corps. With the pressure placed upon the British, the Germans had little option but to reinforce Southern Germany instead of following the US XI Corp, or risk the Soviets breaking through into some of their most important lands.

The Pact forces did not act in response to the Nato offensive - they had planned the attack months, if not a year or more ahead. I envisiage they intended to place the bulk of their effort into the south, however Nato moved first. To prevent the Pact offensive being cut off they had two options - withdraw as was hoped by Nato command, or modify their plans. They chose the latter and took a chance - this of course was to redirect their reinforcement units nortward to cut of the XI Corp, much like Nato was trying to do to the Soviets.

Neither side suceeded, or at least not as well as they'd hoped. The Pact forces battered themselves to exhaustion against the British, Germans and US units in Western Poland but did manage to fix the XI Corp in position in north west Poland where they still were in November. The units around Kalisz were rushed in from Russia and the Ukraine using fuel from Romania. I'm certain this move had not been intended as part of their offensive, but was prompted by a very strong US infantry division wandering about in central Poland causing no end of trouble. If these units had been intended to take part in the offensive, they would have been brought up much slower in the months beforehand, thereby saving the hundreds of thousands of litres of petroleum based fuels.

Nato managed to halt the Pact offensive, however lost the two US divisions who had made it to their objective areas (5th and 8th). They also ended up with the rest of XI Corp effectively cut off from Nato lines (although otherwise in reasonable shape). Nato probably gained more ground than the Pact overall, but only because they moved first (the area XI Corp is squatting on). Nato's offensive also spoiled what would have been a devastating Pact offensive in that it caused Pact reinforcements to be redeployed, easing pressure in the south and allowing those Nato units to survive.

I hope that rambling makes sense.

[Targan]

In my assessment of the offensive written a while back, I came to the conclusion that the 2nd Marines had to have suffered some sort of catasrophy and the units following along behind the 5th and 8th had to have been held up.

The most appropriate event I could think of for the marines was the sinking of their supply ship and almost total loss of fuel reserves. This meant their mobility and firepower suddenly became a lead weight around their necks as they were reduced to rationing what little was left in vehicle tanks and operating on foot.

A really severe, unforseen storm would do the job nicely. Entirely plausible too.

[Legbreaker]

I think I had a couple of Soviet coastal patrol boats or similar torpedo the largest of the cargo ships right after the bulk of the combat vehicles had been offloaded. Left the 2nd with plenty of firepower for the intial landing, but once the fuel in the tanks ran out...