[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Re timing, that is correct. As I write this, I don't have access to the v1 timeline but, IIRC, the Soviets don't launch a counteroffensive in Norway-Finland. The Finns stop NATO's northern drive into Soviet territory without Soviet assistance.

I was partly working from an Arctic article I got from around here, I think it's Chico's group? That one has a Soviet counterattack after NATO's push stalls out. The 10th US Mtn Div tries to shortcut thru Sweden as it retreats, and is pursued by the Soviets. There is some shooting between US and Swedes trying to intern them. The Soviets end up leaving a division behind there.

I envision the invasion of Sweden taking place after NATO troops in Poland have been pushed back closer to the German border, so probably late summer, 1997 (I imagine one would try to avoid major combat ops once the days get shorter/colder). So, the Soviets wouldn't have to run three major offensive concurrently (at that stage in the war, I doubt they'd be capable to doing so)- they'd be running two operations consecutively.

I was thinking about this last night and I figure another casus belli for Moscow would be Soviet troops cut off in northern Norway by the NATO offensive "escaping" encirclement by crossing the border into neutral Sweden. Sweden interns them and refuses to repatriate them until hostilities have ended. I would use this in addition to the other strategic objective of outflanking NATO forces in the north. It also makes sense that the best of Sweden's active duty military forces would be oriented north, keeping an eye on the fighting up there between NATO and the Soviet Union/Finland, thereby leaving the southeastern region more vulnerable to a surprise Soviet invasion.

That sounds just as plausible to me.

Also, bigger picture, strategically, invading Sweden poses a threat to Norway and Denmark, forcing NATO to weaken its forces in central Europe to shore up the northern front. If the net result would be the same, the Soviets might prefer to take advantage of a "soft" Sweden than continue bludgeoning away at strong NATO forces in Poland in a war of attrition.

If the Soviets want this to be more than a punishment, they need to commit some big forces, at least a Front.

I did go for '98, as that would be after NATO shuts down Norway as an active theater, and the Americans, British, and other non-Norwegian units have left for Germany. That might seem like an opportunity for the Soviets?

I would suggest that NATO sends forces to Sweden in late summer, 1997. I'd go with 2nd MarDiv, since that's what v4 uses. If that messes up your Poland c.2000, then you could use a reactivated Marine Division (there were 6 in WW2; IIRC, there are only 3-4 identified in T2k canon). I'd also throw in some Danish and Canadian troops to make it interesting.

I squared that circle by having the Marines show up in the initial NATO reaction, then get pulled out again for the 2000 offensive on the Polish Baltic coast.
Danish troops would be a good idea, too, though their territorials are probably tied down with civil defense.
Now that you have me thinking about it, the Danish division and Canadian brigade that appear in the 2000 Baltic coast offensive might be better used here?

As for PACT forces, v4 has 1 Soviet Air Assault division, 1 Marine Infantry Brigade, and 2 Motor Rifles divisions. That seems about right to me. I'd include the Polish marine regiment as well, to spice things up and make it a true PACT endeavor.

I looked at the Soviet Vehicle Guide, and noticed there were 2 short armies in the Reserve Front. Two of the divisions in the 9th Guards Army matched, or were close to, the numbers of the divisions FL used. QED, I moved the 3rd MRD over there, too. The naval and desant guys were a no-brainer.

I do see Gotland has possessing strategic value for the Soviets. SAM and SSM batteries, and aircraft based there could aid in maintaining Soviet air and sea supremacy in the eastern Baltic, and would held secure the sea and air lanes between Soviet forces operating in SE Sweden and the Motherland. That said, I agree with you that capturing the island would be a significant undertaking, and one the Soviets could not pursue concurrently with landings in SE Sweden. I think your description of how the Soviets would deal with Gotland instead is a more manageable/plausible approach.

Yeah, that island would be great to have, perhaps more useful than the mainland south of Stockholm if there were plans to push the offensive further towards Denmark or Germany. But, as you say, sometimes you can only get one target with the forces you have.