Austria in T2K

[Tegyrius]

One obstacle that I'm running into is Austria's geography. It's pretty mountainous, making it difficult to move around and limiting the amount of arable land. According to Going Home, the Soviets have strong forces inside or close to Austria's most productive agricultural region. I've come up with a bunch of factions, but there aren't a whole lot of places to put them that make sense.

I think that's a feature rather than a bug. If the Pact forces are sitting on the main food supply, then they have a mechanism for controlling the surviving civilian population (and/or Austrian puppet government). The same situation also makes all the other factions devote too much effort to self-sustainment to really be effective threats to local Soviet power. Which makes a perfect situation for PCs to stumble into...

- C.

[Raellus]

I think that's a feature rather than a bug. If the Pact forces are sitting on the main food supply, then they have a mechanism for controlling the surviving civilian population (and/or Austrian puppet government). The same situation also makes all the other factions devote too much effort to self-sustainment to really be effective threats to local Soviet power. Which makes a perfect situation for PCs to stumble into...

Perhaps. I'm trying, but I don't think I see what you do. I'm still going to finish what I started, though. I'm just finding that the geography issues are making the area much less sandboxy than I originally imagined it. It was that wide-open feeling- in terms of the relative chaos of the region and the potential players present there- that attracted me to Austria. Unfortunately, its geography is really squeezing the freedom out of the country. For example, in mountainous central Austria, geography can railroad PCs since, in many cases, their choices will be limited to heading up the valley or heading down the valley. Put a marauder force in there at either end and it seems even more like a two-way track. I hope I'm making sense.

I've been writing up the factions with the notion that a group of PCs puttering around in Austria could realistically expect to run into each and every one of them but, the more I look at Austria's topography, that just seems unrealistic, and it's disappointing.

On the other hand, scaling back the forces that each faction can support (due to limited agricultural output in most parts of Austria) might make it a little easier for the PCs to really have a lasting impact on the region (i.e. it would be easier, relatively speaking, for a PC party to destroy a marauder force of 100 than it would one ten times larger).

[simonmark6]

I don't know if you've considered this, but in mountainous regions, arable agriculture isn't the only option. A lot of agriculture in Austria involves a method called transhumance. In this style of agriculture, the flocks and herds are moved up to high pastures in the spring/summer and kept up there as long as possible. This leaves more fertile land lower down to concentrate on winter feed and food for the farmers.

My uncle uses a similar method although the altitudes aren't as extreme. The flocks and herd graze the common land on the Beacons from about April until early October and all they need is care from shepherds and an intense two weeks for shearing. This leaves the good land he has (about thirty acres) to be planted with sugar beet and some type of hay for winter bedding and silage as well as the more intensive uses like market gardening and some potatoes.

It's a fairly self-contained system and whilst it's a hard life that's dependent on the weather and a little bit of luck you can scrape a living off what is essentially rock.

My uncle's farm is about half the size of an Austrian mountain farm and he raises a flock of over five hundred mountain sheep, a hundred heritage sheep, twenty Welsh Black cattle and assorted pigs, goats and poultry that are more a hobby than an industry. The farm rarely has to buy in fodder to sustain these animals and in addition produces enough fruit, veg and potatoes to feed about fifty people as well as the family.

The only thing it doesn't produce is bread as we don't grow wheat. Switching some of the potato acres to oats would solve this.

Now, assuming that the farm would operate on a much less efficient footing without modern technology (not as inefficient as a big farm but the tech does make life easier), these farms are still viable. If we assume that the farm can sustain 20% of its production (I'd guess more like 50% but let's assume less), the farm could still sustain the family and workers (fifteen people) and twenty other people with a fairly balanced diet. If people are growing their own potatoes, the meat and milk production could sustain up to thirty more.

Bearing in mind the farm is half the size of the average Austrian Alpine farm I would guess that an Austrian farm would sustain thirty people on the land and provide food for another hundred (some sort of starchy food would need to be grown in addition to what my uncle produces).

At present there are about 70,000 such farms in Austria and they are located in areas that wouldn't necessarily be ravaged by war.

So by deciding how many of these farms survived in your version of Austria, it is feasible to support populations that are larger than the available arable land would suggest: maybe not much larger but enough to give you more confidence in being able to support the factions you are imagining. The diet would be boring: skimmed milk and potatoes as standard with a small amount of mutton or beef with the occasional egg or foul or bit of pork. The sugar beet is a big advantage as it can be processed and provide a nutritious winter feed for the animals as well as providing some sugar in the diet (probably in the form of alcohol as you'd need to be smashed regularly to endure such a boring diet).

I hope this helps and isn't too boring to read.

[Webstral]

Nice!

[Raellus]

At present there are about 70,000 such farms in Austria and they are located in areas that wouldn't necessarily be ravaged by war.

So by deciding how many of these farms survived in your version of Austria, it is feasible to support populations that are larger than the available arable land would suggest: maybe not much larger but enough to give you more confidence in being able to support the factions you are imagining. The diet would be boring: skimmed milk and potatoes as standard with a small amount of mutton or beef with the occasional egg or foul or bit of pork. The sugar beet is a big advantage as it can be processed and provide a nutritious winter feed for the animals as well as providing some sugar in the diet (probably in the form of alcohol as you'd need to be smashed regularly to endure such a boring diet).

I hope this helps and isn't too boring to read.

This is quite helpful and not the least bit boring to read. You've considerably alleviated my concerns about Austria's capacity to feed its surviving population outside of the prime agricultural region controlled by the Soviets. In fact, a countryside of scattered smallholders/yeoman farmers is in many ways ideal for what I've got in mind.

[boogiedowndonovan]

Do you have a copy of the NATO 1989 orbat thats floating around the internet

Although the title is NATO orbat, later versions include non-aligned nations like Austria, Finland, Sweden, Ireland that could be drawn into conflict on the side of NATO

here's the thread from Tanknet. The author hasn't updated the doc in awhile but people keep adding to the thread.

http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.phpshowtopic=20414&page=35

Here is the entry for Austria. As you can see, Austria had a huge defensive reserve force including stay behind troops.

[Raellus]

Thanks, BDD. All of this helps.

[Muti]

Raellus,

I suggest you to read "Confrontation - The Strategic Geography of NATO and the Warsaw Pact" by Hugh Faringdon. It contains several useful information on the strategical importance of the central european neutrals countries like Austria, Switzerland and even Liechtenstein.

[Raellus]

Thanks, Muti. I'll see if I can find a copy.

[Muti]

Don't think about it, Raellus.

Here you go: