OpOrd Omega Q's

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Is there any definitive word on who issued Omega? I'm guessing it's MilGov?

Why is it outlined that so many units refuse the order? Alignment with the other half of the government? E.g., they don't recognize the legitimacy of either MilGov or CivGov or is it just pure apathy or what?

Rough numbers shows me about 300 AFVs of various types (which I guess would range from improvised-armor gun trucks up to brand-new (as far as anyone in theater is concerned) M1E1s in the hands of USAEUR). If the ratio has stayed roughly the same throughout the war, this means the Bundeswehr has approximately 40 AFVs left (and the trade-for-fuel leaving them all US vehicles will be an enormous shot in the arm, with one of the most "mechanized" armies in Central Europe on a man-to-vehicle ratio). Is this about right?

Any indication on what portion of evacuated troops are taken to the RDF area of operations?

[Webstral]

It seems to me that the refusal of many US units to report for OMEGA reflects the general disintegration of the civilization. Units that opt to stay in Germany have decided that they have a better chance of survival by holding onto what they have built for themselves in Europe than they do by giving up their heavy equipment and returning to the US. Many units no longer are willing to accept orders because the government can do little for them or little to them. Supplies are procured locally, and geopolitical concerns have fallen by the wayside, for the most part. Obviously, not everyone feels this way. However, I think it fits with the world that GDW created to have some American formations putting down roots in Germany.

I can't comment on the numbers of AFV.

I seem to recall that about 6,000 US troops from Europe are sent to CENTCOM.


Webstral

[Raellus]

It seems to me that the refusal of many US units to report for OMEGA reflects the general disintegration of the civilization. Units that opt to stay in Germany have decided that they have a better chance of survival by holding onto what they have built for themselves in Europe than they do by giving up their heavy equipment and returning to the US. Many units no longer are willing to accept orders because the government can do little for them or little to them. Supplies are procured locally, and geopolitical concerns have fallen by the wayside, for the most part. Obviously, not everyone feels this way. However, I think it fits with the world that GDW created to have some American formations putting down roots in Germany.

+1

As for AFV numbers, the numbers given in canon represent MBTs only*. So, if "Going Home" lists a division with 5 AFVs, that means 5 MBTs. You can add IFVs, APCs, etc. to that number as you see fit.

As a rule of thumb, as of 2000, I would say that for every MBT an armored or mechanized unit has, it would have 3-5 IFVs/APCs. Infantry divisions would have maybe 0-1 per MBT. Does this sound reasonable to everyone?

In order to determine how many MBTs the U.S. is ceding to German control, just tally up the number of AFVs listed for units that are evacuating. If you have Going Home, this shouldn't be too hard (it'll probably be pretty time-consuming, though).

*The U.S. Army Vehicle Guide says AFV numbers given are "to the nearest tank or assault gun" (p.2). For assault gun, I'm assuming they were referring to the LAV-75.

[Abbott Shaull]

Honestly many of the units realized once they got to the States they would either be sent to Mexico or release from duty. While the vast majority would be left to find their way to where ever home will be in the future. So to some units they were better off and much better shape to stay in place. Also remember around the 4th US Army their were still hostile force on the other side that wouldn't mind filling a void left by the US units leaving...

Just some thought.

[Legbreaker]

It was absolutely Milgov behind the order - Civgov only holds sway in the former Yugoslavia (although there are a few rare exceptions), due to them raising and sending units there later in the war in an effort to show they still could (politics! :rolleyes:).


As a rule of thumb, as of 2000, I would say that for every MBT an armored or mechanized unit has, it would have 3-5 IFVs/APCs. Infantry divisions would have maybe 0-1 per MBT. Does this sound reasonable to everyone?
I'd put a higher number of APCs and other light armour in an Infantry (mechanised) unit as a ratio to MBTs. Probably anything up to 10 light AFVs to each MBT (they started with less tanks and are likely to have not been put up against enemy armour as much as an Armoured Division).

[Tegyrius]

*The U.S. Army Vehicle Guide says AFV numbers given are "to the nearest tank or assault gun" (p.2). For assault gun, I'm assuming they were referring to the LAV-75.

I think the Stingray and Sheridan might fit that category too.

- C.

[Abbott Shaull]

I think the Stingray and Sheridan might fit that category too.

- C.

The CEV 728s were included in these numbers too. Yet yeah, depending on the unit, if it was Light Infantry or National Guard/Reserve Infantry Division they would tend to have few APCs, IFVs, ACCVs, and CFVs. While the other Divisions would tend to have few more. Hard to pin hard numbers because every unit would of been in different shape after 1998/1999 or so and some vehicles would no longer be operational for this reason or another...

[HorseSoldier]

And similar foreign equivalents, since the same logic applies to everyone's force summaries.

The Bundeswehr's AFV strength is outlined in the NATO Vehicle Guide though it is lacking German reserves/National Guard equivalents.

[dragoon500ly]

It seems to me that the refusal of many US units to report for OMEGA reflects the general disintegration of the civilization. Units that opt to stay in Germany have decided that they have a better chance of survival by holding onto what they have built for themselves in Europe than they do by giving up their heavy equipment and returning to the US. Many units no longer are willing to accept orders because the government can do little for them or little to them. Supplies are procured locally, and geopolitical concerns have fallen by the wayside, for the most part. Obviously, not everyone feels this way. However, I think it fits with the world that GDW created to have some American formations putting down roots in Germany.

I can't comment on the numbers of AFV.

I seem to recall that about 6,000 US troops from Europe are sent to CENTCOM.


Webstral

You are correct, the RDF Sourcebook quotes the 6,000 figure as incoming personnel.

[dragoon500ly]

I think the Stingray and Sheridan might fit that category too.

- C.

In the USAVG, there are a couple of formations that include CEV in their AFV totals. But both of these are in the US, and none of the overseas formations mention CEVs at all...

[Legbreaker]

In the USAVG, there are a couple of formations that include CEV in their AFV totals. But both of these are in the US, and none of the overseas formations mention CEVs at all...

I think they're Civgov units too aren't they?

[dragoon500ly]

I think they're Civgov units too aren't they?

One is a CivGov Engineer Brigade; the other is MilGovs 49th AD.

[Legbreaker]

Hmm, I could have sworn I'd seen an M-728 listed somewhere in Europe... :confused:
Maybe I'm just remembering a game I played in back in the 80's...?

[HorseSoldier]

In the USAVG, there are a couple of formations that include CEV in their AFV totals. But both of these are in the US, and none of the overseas formations mention CEVs at all...

For active duty divisions and the better equipped ARNG ones, I suspect that the CEVs wouldn't be around by 2000 -- ammo would be scarce, but parts for M60 based vehicles would be problematic when almost all of your fleet of tanks and tank like vehicles are M1s and M1 derivatives. Same thing if you include the Sgt Yorks in the force mix at all (which, despite its real world failure, I always loved the twin 40mm's in game play . . .)

Lower readiness 'Guard units that have a lot of '60s (or even 48s) might be able to keep CEVs up and running better.

[dragoon500ly]

For active duty divisions and the better equipped ARNG ones, I suspect that the CEVs wouldn't be around by 2000 -- ammo would be scarce, but parts for M60 based vehicles would be problematic when almost all of your fleet of tanks and tank like vehicles are M1s and M1 derivatives. Same thing if you include the Sgt Yorks in the force mix at all (which, despite its real world failure, I always loved the twin 40mm's in game play . . .)

Lower readiness 'Guard units that have a lot of '60s (or even 48s) might be able to keep CEVs up and running better.

At one point the CEVs were actually pulled from the engineer battalions and placed in depot storage for either overseas sales or disposal. When Iraq kicked off, it turned out that there really was a need for the 165mm demo gun and the ole CEV got pulled back into service.

Now that things are winding down, the remaining CEVs are, once again being sent back to depot storage, although Saudi Arabia picked up some 24 of them.

By the way....the last M-67 was finally disposed of by the USMC....that's the flame gun version of the old M-48A3, they have been sitting in storage out in California all of these years.

[kalos72]

Whats your take on HMMWV numbers and other support vehicles?

[Legbreaker]

As many or as few as the GM wants to include.

They're VERY common to begin with, but on the other hand they're extremely vulnerable to enemy fire and easily destroyed, so it's really a GM's call I'd say based on about a thousand factors.

An infantry Division in one place may be down to their last dozen softskins, while down the road, a carbon copy unit (prewar) may have a hundred or more - all depends on what they've been through in the previous 5 years, how much they were resupplied, how good the mechanics and scroungers are, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.....