[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by Raellus

That's an interesting premise. Does that scenario include Finland at all?

I thought it was rather v1-compliant, so it should match what's in the rulebook. Yes, NATO went into Finland and the Finns fought back. I can confirm it's from Chico, with input from Lurken.

Agreed. One way to explain less of Soviet presence in Sweden (i.e an Army- equivalent to a NATO Corps- rather than a Front) is that Stavka intended to send additional formations to Sweden in follow-up waves once the beachhead was well-established and transport freed up, but the war took a turn for worse elsewhere and the Soviets just didn't have any "spare" units to significantly reinforce their Army (corps) in Sweden.

Well, in '98, there's plenty of other things going wrong for the Pact.

Ideally, there could have been another Soviet offensive, overland from the Murmansk area, and that could have been another army and the rest of a Front. I didn't want to take the time to work that one out, but I ruled that the bulk of the Swedish army must have stopped them north of the game map, probably on some river line.

That makes sense. Going by the v1 timeline, the closer to 2000 that events get, the fewer air and sea assets there are available. If the Soviets are going to invade Sweden by sea and air, they're going to need ships and aircraft, and, maybe more importantly, fuel for them. By mid-1998 in the v1 timeline, all of those things are in much shorter supply. That's why I went with '97 instead.

Fair enough. I figure the Baltic Fleet might have had time through late '97 to make some repairs, and maybe build up some shipping to make it happen.

Yes, I think so. This is a bit of a stretch, but maybe one could explain US XI Corps getting left behind during OMEGA by placing it in Sweden instead of NW Poland.

True, but I thought XI Corps was too "heavy" to be diverted from the main front in '98, I'd say the same for late '97. By using IV Corps instead, I could keep its late '98 shipping out, and it wouldn't be a diversion from the '98 fighting in Germany. There's no evidence the Marine division was in that fighting, so it could go north, too. I didn't want to break up the XI Corps' attack in '00, nor the death rides of the 5th & 8th Mechs.

Using the IV Corps, they still might get left behind by OMEGA, since they declared loyalty to CivGov.

AFAIK, no explanation is given in canon for why XI Corps does not make its way to Bremerhaven in November 2000. A lot of virtual ink has been expended here trying to come up with a likely explanation (without consensus).

Yep. I had my hypothesis in that go-round.

You don't have a USMC unit in your Sweden c.2000?

Not in 2000, I kept it on the SE coast, until the 2000 offensive, then pulled it south to Poland. OTOH, when IV Corps goes to CivGov and the Marines stay with MilGov, I figure there are individuals and maybe small units that don't go with the rest of their companions. So the Marines might have a company or a battalion-sized task force of soldiers that wanted to stay with MilGov, and IV Corps might make up a smaller Marine unit. (So if I get some players that want to play Marines while others want to be soldiers, I'm covered. )

I like that idea. I'm all for using forces described in the VG's as basically just sitting around far from an active front. In my mind, they're fair game to be put to good use elsewhere.

Well, I swiped a division that's supposed to be tangling with another division that deserted in Latvia, but there's a few more that could be doing the same thing.

I figure that capturing Gotland would be in Soviet strategic plans as a second or third phase operational objective. Again, the Soviets don't get around to it due to limited forces. -

Fair.