Possible Module Followups

[Raellus]

Nice. And I'd like to see more of that sort of thing. Why didn't the architects of the T2K U.S. military include the 29th ID of D-Day fame (the US Army Vehicle book includes reference to a 116th ACR but it doesn't clarify its pedigree) or the 79th ID, or the 83rd ID, or the 4th MarDiv Perhaps it was easier to make up units out of whole cloth than to research the lineage of RL ones. What we can sometimes forget is that the creators of the original T2K material didn't have easy access to the digital mountains of information that we do today.

[Rainbow Six]

Missing formations isn't a uniquely American challenge when it comes to the original material. There's no mention anywhere in any published material of the West German Territorial Heer (12 Brigades and a larger number of separate Regiments) or the British Territorial Army (off the top of my head around 40 Infantry Battalions, two thirds of which would have formed the 2nd (UK) Infantry Division, the real life version of which bears no resemblance to its T2K equivalent).

[Raellus]

Missing formations isn't a uniquely American challenge when it comes to the original material. There's no mention anywhere in any published material of the West German Territorial Heer (12 Brigades and a larger number of separate Regiments) or the British Territorial Army (off the top of my head around 40 Infantry Battalions, two thirds of which would have formed the 2nd (UK) Infantry Division, the real life version of which bears no resemblance to its T2K equivalent).

Absolutely. I didn't feel qualified to mention this- my knowledge base has its limits- so I am pleased that you did.

[Olefin]

They did have some missing formations - i.e. the 4th, 5th and 6th Marines are mentioned - but very cavalierly exposed to Soviet naval forces during deployment - and their PacFlt wasnt anything as strong as their Atlantic one

[Raellus]

They did have some missing formations - i.e. the 4th, 5th and 6th Marines are mentioned - but very cavalierly exposed to Soviet naval forces during deployment - and their PacFlt wasnt anything as strong as their Atlantic one

Where are they mentioned

[kato13]

Where are they mentioned

US Army Guide. All Three were sent to Korea so very few details.

That might be the next ripest fruit for a source-book.

One of the 4th Battalions (2-24th) was 2 blocks from my high-school and I spent some time there so I felt connected to them. Kinda funny, it was also about a half mile from our Korea town. So maybe they picked up a few phrases before they shipped out.

[Olefin]

Raellus - do you have the US Army Guide - if not I can put up a quick description after I get home - and I agree with Kato - Korea definitely needs a sourcebook

[Raellus]

US Army Guide. All Three were sent to Korea so very few details.

OK, I found them. I was just skimming and 3rd MarDiv was the last division listed before it seemed to switch to regiments. I didn't notice that those regiments were still part of active divisions.

Korea is indeed fertile ground for a T2K Sourcebook.

[cawest]

Raellus - do you have the US Army Guide - if not I can put up a quick description after I get home - and I agree with Kato - Korea definitely needs a sourcebook

don't forget all of those island north of Soul, and the ones down south. those are each ripe to be little kingdoms all by themselves.

[Olefin]

OK, I found them. I was just skimming and 3rd MarDiv was the last division listed before it seemed to switch to regiments. I didn't notice that those regiments were still part of active divisions.

Korea is indeed fertile ground for a T2K Sourcebook.

It switched to regiments due to losses in the three divisions who seemed to take a hell of a lot of casualties getting over to Korea - which is something I find highly curious due to that fact that they arrived after the Soviet fleet should have been destroyed - and you would figure the Navy would do everything they could to protect the Marines - they belong to the Navy after all

One thing that doesnt make sense is how the Soviets kept their navy going in the Pacific as late as they did - i.e. look at Satellite Down - they still have a group of six destroyers going very late in the game - ones that somehow have the fuel to operate off the coast of Mexico (which I would think they got from Mexico and opens up another interesting idea on possible additional Soviet units in Mexico - i .e. did the Soviets not only help Mexico with Division Cuba but also with Pacific Fleet units sent there to operate out of Mexican ports) - and even the one very old DD that the Virginia sinks after its grounded for good at Haven

[cawest]

i was thinking this might fit better in you Africa section but not for sure.

I was reading a jane's post about the Argentine Army TAM's and the long over due to be updated to the TAM2C.

Argentina was not hit that bad in the war (i think) they built these tanks and have the production lines still. So you have countries that are losing tanks faster than they can be replaced.

Why not buy a unit full, the locals would replace the lost older TAMS with new built TAM2Cs.

now what it they were to trade them to the middle east or Africa what would they want them.... oil and raw ores like uranium

what do you all think

[Rainbow Six]

Argentina was not hit that bad in the war (i think) they built these tanks and have the production lines still.

I think it's unlikely. Argentina fought a War with Brazil that ended up with both countries nuking each other. From the BYB V2.2, pg 241

Argentina itself withdrew [from the Falkland Islands] when war broke out with Brazil in 1998, and a smallscale exchange of low-yield nuclear weapons between the two countries completed their slide into chaos. Central government in both countries has broken down.

[Olefin]

it also comes down to if you want to adjust the timeline - V1 has both nations as intact after the war - V2.2 has them fighting a nuclear war - but neither nation ever developed nukes - so it may be a question of ignoring V2.2 and going with the V1 timeline - or making adjustments per se

And frankly that is another part of the timeline that makes no sense - if Argentina is going to war with anyone its Chile - they had major issues with Chile and came close to war several times in the last few decades - one reason Chile bought upgraded M109's from BAE when I was there was to offset improvements in the Argentine Army

[Rainbow Six]

it also comes down to if you want to adjust the timeline - V1 has both nations as intact after the war

Does it Can you point me in the direction of where that's stated