View Single Post
  #9  
Old 05-23-2011, 11:23 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Webstral View Post
Ergo, it's worth noting that by December 1997 all of the previous schemes of organisation go out the window in favour of task organisation based on available resources.
Absolutely correct. Once units start suffering serious casualties with little hope of receiving replacements, their taskings will be radically altered to fit their diminished capabilities. Commanders are sure to be actively seeking to absorb other units, supplies and equipment to maintain their effectiveness and retain some basic mission flexibility.

Initially it's likely pre-existing structures will be retained as much as possible, but by 1999 there's likely to have been so many consolidations and internal reorganisations that a unit will be almost totally unrecognisable in either form or mission to what it was in 1996-97.

As we've all seen in the books, there are examples of Brigades, even Battalions with a greater strength than entire Divisions. It therefore cannot in all conscience be argued that previously assigned missions, or even designations can apply in 2000. An airborne unit for example, although still named airborne, without aircraft is probably only going to be given light infantry or rear area security missions. Same goes for a Tank Division without tanks, or the surviving crew of a sunk naval warship stuck on land.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

Mors ante pudorem
Reply With Quote