Milgov vs. Civgov

[kato13]

DeaconR 10-17-2005, 10:01 AM Due to the fact that my game involves players working for Civgov in an area that is technically a Milgov area I had to seriously think about the nature of this conflict.


First of all, on a pragmatic basis, the East Coast is one of the least likely regions of the USA in the game to have any kind of intact government survive. The situation is untenable in Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina. There is no government save for the United Brotherhood of Fishermen in New England. New York, Pennsylvania and Delaware are by turns terrorized/devastated or in anarchy. The remaining Civgov/Milgov forces are about all that stands between everything being like "A Boy and his Dog"/"Mad Max" or a possible recovery.


Of course I don't think anyone here or anyone else who plays the game is naive enough to believe that people simply do what is in their own best interests.


However aside from the question of practicalities there is the matter of other problems that each political group has.


Milgov has the problem of lacking any legitimate constitutional basis for continuation. I doubt that many under their authority would be that concerned with that, however there are vast numbers of men and women who must be anxious to see their families again and who might, given the way the canon goes, doubt the importance of their continuing to do their duty anyway. Without a clear mandate, a government becomes suspect, and ultimately at some point of weakness loses significant amounts of authority. This is borne out by the game in that for instance the commander of the 47th ID goes nuts and tries to declare an independant state; that the 43rd MP Bde mutinies, that certain reserve and national guard divisions refused to follow Milgov's orders and sided with Civgov to begin with. What I could see happening with Milgov would be an increasing amount of local concern (witness what happens with forces in Alaska). But the mandate problem has a more specific issue: supposing the Chiefs of Staff, who are not young men and are doubtless more in danger of stress related health issues than before the War die? Who replaces them? If the Chairman remains alive that is simple enough, but will they degenerate into basically being another group of warlords or become a sort of junta paying only lip service to the Constitution?


Civgov has a similar problem, though it is more related to the fact that they lack the heavy equipment and logistical advantages of Milgov (which controls key areas on the Mississippi for instance). The local authorities can scarcely afford to stand on their high horse if a matter of cooperation comes up.


What I think would happen would be one of three scenarios.


1. Reconciliation. The governments in question are forced to recognize that the separation is not working and that they must swallow their legalistic concerns in favour of the USA surviving as an entity at all.

2. Degeneration. Even if the above is attempted, breakdown of communications and supply lines force government to act principally on a local level anyway, if that is even possible.

3. Continuation. The divisions remain in spite of any local attempts at reconciliation.


Of course there is also a fourth scenario: that all of them happen at once, based on what is going on in particular areas.

********************

shrike6 10-17-2005, 11:27 AM Deacon, Civgov was as illegimate if not more so than Milgov. The "Rump" Congress, which is the genesis of Civgov, never had a quorum. Some of the congressional representatives were never elected, in some cases they were local strongmen who appointed themselves to the seats, or in other cases they were people who had never stepped foot in the district they purported to represent. Hell in one case, one guy was shot to death over a disputed seat while Congress was in session. I don't see how any of that is over heavy equipment or logistics.


As far as your scenarios go I agree with your four options. I think the fourth option is probably the most likely. I can see different things happening in different areas. It will take time to restore order to the whole country.

********************

DeaconR 10-17-2005, 03:10 PM What you said is a fair point, but what I was really talking about with regard to heavy equipment and logistics is simply that Milgov has more resources for military purposes. And if you recall, I did say that there is a similarity. This kind of thing is common in history, unfortunately.

********************

Targan 10-18-2005, 05:30 AM Here are my thoughts:

1 - The importance can not be underestimated of MilGov's superior communications network (as mentioned in Howling Wilderness), because comms are the key to running any governmental system over a wide geographic area.

2 - In the shorter term (early 2001) alot of soldiers who have just returned from Europe will feel pretty darn positive about MilGov, because MilGov brought them home. So a lot of the returnees (of course, mainly the ones the military wants) are going to be prepared to stay on in the services. CivGov might get a few returnees come over to their side, but in general the forces that CivGov sent overseas independently never got to come home, so CivGov would be less popular among returnees.

3 - Draftees and National Guardsmen are likely to want to get out of the service more than professional soldiers. And professional soldiers generally much prefer to be professionally led, by commanders they respect, and not by civilians (case in point: the recently retired CO of the Aust Defence Forces, General Peter Cosgrove, was widely admired and respected by the forces under his command, because he fought as an infantry officer in Vietnam and was decorated for leading from the front).

4 - My current campaign is a good example of why MilGov will rule the roost, at least during 2001 on the East Coast, because they are far more likely to retrieve the gold reserves from NYC than CivGov forces, which would provide MilGov with the basis for maintaining at least some kind of viable economic system.

5 - After the evacuation from Europe, chances are MilGov will reestablish contact with the Coast Guard, as detailed in a Challenge module I've got hidden away somewhere. That and the recovery of the last sub would help MilGov consolidate control of key parts of the East Coast.


Sorry about the length of this post. Whatdya reckon about those thoughts?

********************

DeaconR 10-18-2005, 08:24 AM One problem in the canon though is that the troops brought back from Operation Bremerhaven don't seem to do much more than reinforce a units like the 78th ID. I don't remember the exact numbers but at least 15,000 troops or so that are made up of intact units seem to simply disappear. So I'm not quite sure who those who would be grateful to Milgov would be.

********************

abaumgartg 10-18-2005, 02:28 PM I think *part* of the battle between the two governments is overrated for two reasons. First there is hardly complete acceptance of MilGov for all those claiming loyalty to this group. That is some troops are truly loyal to it, others believe in the cause but are much more worried about their own survival, while others profess servitude because it is convenient. The same could be said for CivGov. My books are not in front of me, but I recall getting that impression after reading the canon.


This next part is my own thoughts. Secondly MilGov in Seattle probably doesn't have any problem with CivGov outside of its reach, say in the Ozarks. In all honestly, they would probably rather boarder CivGov than New America or a disputed territory.


I apologize again if I don't get all my statements quite right. But I seem to recall that CivGov was seriously considering moving north from the Ozarks to Wisconsin. Mean while there are loyal MilGov troops in the "oil fields" in Illinois that are considering staying put rather than moving at MilGov's orders.


This could make for an awesome political setting. These two groups could battle it out for the few remaining resources in the area or they could cooperate. If they fight, both groups would probably destroy each other. If they allied they could control a pretty large area and have a good chance of making a small pseudo nation eventually. A *great* setting for clever PC's, but I digress.


I guess my point is that the MilGov/CivGov disagreement is becoming more and more irrelevant and direct confrontation less and less common. It is hard to stay committed to a cause that is far away

********************

DeaconR 10-18-2005, 06:35 PM I kind of agree with that too; convenience seems to play a part. Certainly there are Soviet units who switch sides, and not just those who are in the republics that want independance, but troops in Alaska and in Germany.

********************

Targan 10-19-2005, 01:35 AM All true. As shown in the RDF book, CivGov and MilGov forces in the Middle East pretty much ignore the political wranglings back in the States and work well together. My comments really only related from the period Decenmber 2000 to the end of 2001. By the end of 2001 the situation in the States would have collapsed to the point that many MilGov and CivGov units and political regions would be forced to work together just to survive. I would imagine that MilGov and CivGov would reunify sooner than is stated in the back story for Traveller:2300.

********************

graebardeII 10-19-2005, 02:24 AM MilGov has remianed in force only because the CivGov can/will not get their act together. The sole reason the military refuses to relenquish control to the civilians is they are not really the bona fide government. As was pointed out, the civilian government collapsed with the nukes. Martial Law was imposed, and it has been said as soon as a census and 'legal' elections are held, the military will turn control back to the civilians.


As for CivGov loyal military units in armed conflict with MilGov units, I feel it would not be as common as the canon seemed to depict. Recovery I think would be in everyones best interest, and there would be more cooperation. I feel there would be "were all American's" in the dialog between uniformed forces, unless of course the military commander was so power hungry as to make it all "it's mine and mine alone" in which case the unit would be more rouge (independent) than for either MilGov or CivGov.


These are just my feelings, and more how I run things in my world. Yes there are exceptions, and the four options are all in effect I think, depending on the locale.


Now as one other observation. The comment was made I believe to the effect of 'we have the gold, so the troops will follow us, or were in control'? What the hell does gold do for you but weight you down in the long run? FOOD is what they want, assistance from their neighbors, medical support,... gold is NOT going to get these things readily. Who is there to sell food for gold, when there is not a viable market using gold as exchange. Now this is not to say it's NOT important in the over all recovery, but I think gold is a red herring in the big picture. It reminds me of the fellow in Alas Babylon that went to Miami and got all the jewels etc and died of radiation poison from running his hands through the treasure. Gold is a pre-war fancy, not for survival in the short-intermediate term. And 2000, it canon prevails, is still the short term for alot of the country.


To WIN the war at home the commander MUST win the hearts and minds of the people. Restore order, feed the masses, care for the sick, establish recovery of transportation and communications. Get the people involved in the process. They have to relearn there is NO free lunch anymore for those that are able to work.


In anarchy-devistated areas, I think those that are industrious will have a working containment with in a year, or move out of the area and have one up in another area. Those people will band together, and prevail in the end (or at least I hope they would).


Enuff of the ramblings of an old fart.


Grae

********************

DeaconR 10-19-2005, 02:59 AM I find most of this pretty helpful in that I've been thinking about the fact that I had thought it practical to make the units remaining in Military Region I/the 1st Army ops area cooperate. However I had wanted some feedback before making this more than a happenstance thing. In my game, the players discovered the information about the gold during the "Allegheny Uprising" adventure. Furthermore there is an arbitrariness to where allegiance lies. My players found themselves in Military Region III, and decided not to be concerned with politics but with practicalities, such as "these people will give us ammunition and food and shelter if we cooperate." And yes, the "What the hell, at least they're Americans" came up in the in character discussion too.


The gold mission...well I don't entirely agree. It is not useful for pure practicality but it is in another sense; it is a symbol of government. Even some of it, furthermore, could be used as a basis of trade with more stable areas. It is not say as practical as having food, warm clothing and fuel, but it is not entirely useless.

********************

Targan 10-19-2005, 03:13 AM Deacon, what you say about the gold is exactly what I meant. Having it would just further legitimise a government, but not necessarily actually be used for trade or whatever. As for food, the MilGov forces have a lot more power on the east coast than CivGov, and have far more maritime units available, so a major food source for their troops would be fish. CivGov have far less coastline to access for fishing, and far less boats. But once again I draw your attention to the available communications networks. You simply can not have a viable government covering a wide geographic area if you do not have a viable communications network, and without a doubt, MilGov's comms would be far superior to those available to CivGov. Obviously my thinking is influenced by how things have turned out in my current campaign, where MilGov effectively ended the war in western Europe and was alot more proactive back in the States during the first part of 2001 than CivGov was.

********************

DeaconR 10-19-2005, 05:04 AM Tarquan I'm not sure what you mean by more power on the East Coast. The Southern East Coast seems to be dominated by Civgov from the Carolinas to Florida. And to the north, the 43rd MP Bde mutinies while the 78th seems to be surviving in its enclave. I have never found any stats or realistic ideas about the Milgov enclave at Norfolk, which I also have a hard time believing in since the area supposedly is nuked.

My understanding of the scenario is that cooperation would be a matter of practicalities in such an area.

********************

Targan 10-19-2005, 05:39 AM IMO it seems that any CivGov enclaves on the East Coast are going to be more likely to collapse sooner than MilGov. Sure, several areas around Norfolk are going to be uninhabitable, but if the modules say that is where the main MilGov enclave is, that is where I consider it to be. The salvage potential from the badly damaged parts of the Norfolk area would be priceless, and the less damaged or undamaged military sites would definitely be occupied. Yes, there are CivGov forces on the SE coast, but Florida will surely go completely over to New America eventually. In my campaign I strongly suspect the 43rd will not get to have their mutiny, since there is a reasonably important DIA operative placed high up in the 43rd's command structure, and I am expecting that my players will want to travel to the 43rd's cantonments in late February/early March 2001. In other campaigns, well I gues you would have to take it as read that the mutiny will go ahead. I still think that the Coast Guard, if recontacted, would go over to MilGov, and MilGov would be likely to pull out all the stops to get back the last sub. And hey, will someone please comment on the whole communications thing! I thought that was my strongest point! Ha ha.

********************

DeaconR 10-19-2005, 10:48 AM Tarquan, I think you are missing one or two points.

First of all, if you are sticking religiously to canon when it comes to Norfolk, why don't you do it when it comes to the 43rd? The Howling Wilderness game and the Challenge Articles I've seen don't mention the USCG as being particularly loyal to anyone but the USA overall and to the survival of the communities they are close to.


However, the main point I've been trying to make is: would Civgov and Milgov personnel in actuality cooperate? You don't seem to think so, which is fine, but I'm more considering such issues as basic survival, preventing utter anarchy, dealing with New Americans and so on. There are some instances where units are near major resource areas that I can see would be a problem, but an area like the East Coast which is depicted as being near total collapse I had felt that they might not be so concerned over who was in conflict at the top of the chain of command.


And yes, there are better communications available to Milgov command units, I know. That does not seem, in the Howling Wilderness case, to have prevented the breakdown of units in the 9th Army, the 6th Army, and the collapse of the 78th's chain of command or the mutiny of the 43rd. You seem to be ignoring the actual information provided about the units in question. If you didn't agree with the canon and are enjoying your own campaign on that basis, then cool, that sounds fun. When I look at the material written what I see is that both groups have their problems, and that it is possible that locally there might be cooperation and ultimate reconciliation on that basis.

********************

Rainbow Six 10-19-2005, 04:34 PM Deacon, I favour the fourth option you mentioned, ie various different things going on in different parts of the US.


With specific regard to co operation between MilGov and CivGov, I'm quite certain that this would take place in some areas, most likely when uniting against a common enemy (not neccessarily human - could be a natural disaster, etc). After all, canon makes reference to NATO and Warsaw Pact troops co existing in places such as Alaska - I think co operation between MilGov and CivGov is an extension of that principle.


That said, I'm sure that there would also be areas where the relationship between the two Governments' forces would be openly hostile to each other, so I really think looking at the picture nationally, you would have to say Option Four. Which leaves each of us free to use whichever option works best for our own particular game.

********************

Targan 10-20-2005, 12:01 AM Deacon, you are right, I have not been very objective. I think that in late 2000/early 2001 cooperation between MilGov and CivGov would be low, but would increase as time goes by because the alternative would be a faster decline.

********************

DeaconR 10-20-2005, 09:04 AM Personally, Rainbow Six, I tend to agree with option 4 as well. I think that areas like say the midwest are more likely to have some confrontations or a no man's land or what have you rather than the regions where society is simply collapsing and the cantonments are like roman forts facing the picts.


Tarquan: fair enough. I know you are really caught up in your campaign right now so I understand why you were thinking the way you were. But when you say minimal cooperation do you mean in general or do you mean here and there like in my option 4?

********************

Targan 10-20-2005, 11:52 PM Well, as far as what is written in the books goes, it is obviously possible that large scale cooperation could occur in the States, because across the entire Middle East theatre MilGov and CivGov have thrown in their lots with one another. It goes without saying that in the States the most likely areas of cooperation would be where MilGov and CivGov zones of influence border one another or overlap (the exceptions perhaps being where the two sides have had a recent history of armed conflict). Also, when CivGov embarks on its epic overland exodus from the East Coast, it will be forced to make agreements with any MilGov forces along the route.

********************

DeaconR 10-21-2005, 11:12 AM According to canon as you say the 228th and 184th will embark for greener pastures, and that is one of the points I was concerned about. I agree with you, that they would likely have to negotiate. I also wonder how much ammunition and fuel the 184th would have left after encountering New Americans in the Cumberland Gap..especially after some recent information provided by one of our friends here.

********************

abaumgartg 10-22-2005, 10:28 AM Perhaps I am naive, but I think the 228th and 184th would be pretty humble about entering any MilGov territory. Once they could convince MilGov they are just passing through, I think MilGov would extend some help to the 228th and 184th as they move out and away from their territory. The initial encounters may be interesting though. Also, MilGov may try to get the CivGov forces to move through disputed or NA territory to clear these areas out a little (keeping a keen eye on what happens). I also suspect MilGov would try to cherry pick needed troops, vehicles, etc. The new info on the Cumberland Gap area makes me think that after such an encounter many troops would be all too happy to settle in with MilGov.


The initial encounters between the 184th & 228th forces encounter 194th in Illinois would be the crucial. I would do what I could as a GM to have PC's around for that one. I don't really know what the CivGov forces have to offer the 194th, except the possibility of a more stable northern boarder. Again, I see the 194th trying, perhaps forcefully, to "re-supply" themselves from the 184th & 228th.


My philosophy as a GM is that while I don't want the PC's to be too influential, I like to include them in these issues. They would have to be pretty darn smart and work hard to earn a seat at the negotiating table (in other words a pretty unlikely outcome). But I would certainly have the PC's be around when the two sides first meet. I think the initial week or so will have a huge impact on the final outcome. There will almost certainly be some firefights, but once the body count gets too high there is no going back.


If including the PC's isn't feasible or your style, I think the CivGov strength and scouting information would be the deciding factor. If the 184th & 228th can convince the 194th they could be a potential ally, things would likely be resolved peacefully. If the 194th thinks they are too weak to hold their own they will likely destroy the remaining CivGov forces. I don't think the 194th could risk the CivGov arms, vehicles, and personnel to fall into marauder hands.


Also, what the CivGov troops know moving into an area will be muy impotante. But by the time they arrive (if they make it), the remaining 184th & 224th troops will likely be excellent scouts.

********************

DeaconR 10-23-2005, 06:10 AM I think the way to involve pcs in such a scenario would be this: if/when I have that take place in my game the players will probably largely be acting as advance scouts for whatever unit (most likely the 228th) that they are attached to. Also in my game in particular one of the players' characters has enough rank to be included in negotiations. However, as you say the 194th is one of the strongest forces they are likely to come across. But this again depends on reliance on the canon: in Howling Wilderness they are greatly reduced in strength and materiel and are somewhat stretched thin across their territory.

********************

graebardeII 10-23-2005, 07:45 PM There's a premise here I that I feel is being perpetrated about the 184 and 228. Yes by canon they were converted to 'infantry' brigades (though I'm not exactly sure why they would have been other than to have more gunslingers in the world). The personnel, especially senior and long standing members of BOTH brigades I think would have a lot to offer the 194.


228 was a signal brigade/group originally. The personnel of prewar still with the unit, in all likelyhood were retreaded to 'infantry' from communications. They would have the skills necessary to help restore communications in the 194 area. NOT necessarily radio, but wire. They were technicians before they were grunts.


184 was a transportation group/brigade in the pre-oops world. I know at one time (IIRC) they were more than motor transport, with terminal services (which has small craft operators up to 200 foot craft capable, and railway services units. Now I don't know about the young troopers, but surely the surviving NCO's who have been around the block a few times have something to offer.


It is also my opinion, that the NCOs would be less likely to cause hostilites off the bat too. I don't know, and it's entirely up to the HoG of course, but I think it comes back to 'we're all Americans', and how badly people want to see America recover/rebuild. I'm sure there are those that are happy with the chaos and mayhem, but the older you get, the more you see, the less you want it to happen, unless you've grown so cynical and callused to just say f**k it.. in which case you cease becoming a part of the solution and are now part of the problem.


Another thought for those that have not thought of it and not overly familiar with the southern Illinois are. It is a HUGE coal field. Coal I think will be as important, maybe more so, than oil for recovery. And without a lot of operational machinery, there will be the need for coal miners. Now several of the mines in the area are open pit, so what does it take to mine? Just a strong back, pick, and shovel.



Grae

********************

DeaconR 10-23-2005, 09:46 PM This is very true...actually in my game I didn't change the designations because there is no indication that they were given new equipment and materiel, and also it seemed more interesting.


You give a lot of good reasons for why things would be more fluid, and I appreciate it. I think that the polarization the game presents is a cool idea, but clearly most of us feel that you need to adjust on a case by case basis.

********************

firewalker 10-23-2005, 10:44 PM . i've heard the US described as the Saudi arida of coal. isn't there a way to convert coal into a diesel /gasoline type thing? i think the Germans in ww2 did a lot of that.


hadn't even thought of artifact skill in the older vet's. make's you wonder about the prevues MOS's of some of the other converted unit's.


another thing to consider is how cometed the veaius solder's are to there side. how many of your solder's are with your side (civ or milgove) because they feel strongly about the legitimist of there side or lack of same for the other. and how many are just sort of there

********************

Blackrider 10-24-2005, 12:05 AM the coal would be needed for any major reconstruction in the US a good number of the old power plants were coal fired and still are... maybe thats the reason NA set such a strong presence in those hills....


but as to matters of resupply.... here is a lil bit of juice info just outside memphis is one of the asenal depot. makers of artillery and tank shell ammo... mybe the 184th would like to have a crack at it instead of th 197th hitting them up for supplies...


and there is still a large number of national guard and reserve armories in that area....


also... the true prize of reconstruction... the nuke powerplants and hydroelectric dams of the TVA

any ideas?

********************

graebardeII 10-24-2005, 09:44 PM I assume your refering to Milan TN, though there are several other plants in the heartlands: Independence MO, Middletown IA, Bloomfield IN, Richmond KY, Texarkana TX, McAlester OK, and Granit City IL (the island in the Mississippi). Several in the Texas (Red Star-Lone Star) area, but the first four definately close to the southern Illinois area. Also you have several Army posts close with Ft Knox KY, Ft Campbell KY, and Ft LWood MO. 194's home base is/was Knox.


Any and all would be treasure chests for the warlords, be the civgov or milgov.


As for the armories, I doubt there would be alot left in any of them with the mobilizations, however who knows what got left behind any where. I recall 'exploring' Cp Picket in about 1973. The post was a WWII embarkation staging post. There was a small area that was pretty well maintained and used for NG/Reserve training, but most of the buildings were rotting away. Two of us decided to see what we could find in the old buildings (risking our butts as the areas were 'off limits'). In an old post theater, no windows or doors left we found CRATES of BAR magazines in cosmoline, tripods for the old M1919-series light machineguns, several boxes of the cloth belts for the M1919. At the post hospital, where trees were growing through the falling in roof (a truely erie place even in the daylight) there were some cases of medical instruments wrapped in oiled paper, some medical supplies that were well dated and rat tasted, numerous bedpans and urnials, an autoclaive, pots, pans, and kitchen items in the mess hall. We only went out a couple days for an hour or so each, but we found a heck of a lot of stuff that had been just left to rot. NO we did not take any of the stuff (though it was thought of). We spent the last 20 minutes of the last day dodging a pair of MPs and deicided to abort further explorations. But it goes to show some of what is possibly laying in unexpected places, and I venture to say most of that stuff was there since at least 1953.


grae

********************

Targan 10-25-2005, 01:17 AM Cool story, Grae. I would love to explore an old military site that still had stuff to find.

********************

Blackrider 10-25-2005, 09:25 AM yes its the Milan arsenal, the produce artillery rounds for the 155mm How. and other types of artillery rounds


as to the Richmond/Bluegrass depot, here is a sight for a fun (using the chinese definition of the word) :skullt: its main claim to fame is being the US Army largest stockpile of chemical weapons in the US. once got lost driving on the grounds of the depot back in the mid 1980s... took a a couple of wrong turns... and found myself in a area with large bunkers. wasnt there for a min before stoped by a mp patrol and escorted :spank: out of the area. it was only after that i realized what they were... ammo storage bunkers for the chem rounds... :eek3:


for those munchkin players or those that love to be different, fort know as the patton musceum with a large number of classic WWI and WWII tanks on display... imagine your players coming around a corner and coming face to face with a German Tiger I tank!!


any thoughts

?

********************

Targan 10-26-2005, 01:13 AM My players sailed down the Vistula River on an old Shershen-class torpedo boat they stole in Warsaw, and christened USS Hornet. On the way they hid their non-Russian-speaking crew below decks and took aboard a couple of KGB officers, and managed to spark a KGB-GRU dispute along the way before assassinating the KGB guys when they reached the sea. Good times had by all.

********************

thefusilier 10-29-2005, 08:18 AM Aren't Milgov and Civgov already at a semi-state of a "war"? There is the material on the 194th Armored Brigade Fighting the Civgov units in Illinois and the conflict in (dam I cant remember exactly... no books here)... some air/navy base near florida/alabama? Is this isolated conflicts because I would have thought at least the order for the 194th would have come from 5th Army or higher?

********************

DeaconR 10-29-2005, 08:35 AM Yes, there are a number of encounters along those lines: the refusal to follow orders on the part of the 84th Infantry Division, which result in it forming part of Military Region V instead of part of the 5th US Army is a good example. And in this sort of case you are quite correct, the conflict forces units to chose loyalties.


However, the question I had really was firstly about more isolated units such as the 78th Infantry Division for instance. In "Howling Wilderness" the 1st Army and the XII Army Corps as well as the 43rd MP Brigade have ceased to exist. The closest other units appear to be Civgov units, apart from the vagaries surrounding the supposed Milgov enclave in Virginia. So would they cooperate with Civgov units or not?


The secondary part was referring to the movements of units such as the 228th and the 184th, which evacuate from their enclaves inland. Since the Milgov units depicted in the areas they are likely to run into (mostly the 194th and 197th Brigades) I had wondered at the likelihood of conflict given the truly grim circumstances. Would cooperation, open conflict or avoidance be likely in these cases?

********************

thefusilier 10-29-2005, 08:47 AM Hmm, for me considering that the 184/228th are pretty much forced to leave (although I barely ever follow Howling Wilderness), and 194/197th are both man depleted. Why wouldn't they cooperate?

Maybe I am looking at this too simple but its hard for me to imagine 4 US brigades (both which havent been torn apart in battles in Europe so they probably still retain alot of pre-war soldiers/also they would be low on the priority list for replacements) fighting it out because there leaders are at odds.

You guys are better at debating this than I am.

********************

Blackrider 10-29-2005, 08:54 AM there was a article one challange 42 called rock in troubled water. it gave not olny the statis of the 78th but had a run down on all Milgov groups (whats left of the US Navy there) and a almost complete run down on the state and even had a rumor table.


the article stated the the 78th was cut off and actually surviving and trying to expand its area of control in NJ

********************

thefusilier 10-29-2005, 09:07 AM I guess you could also throw into the confusion and conflict the states which declared for neither Milgov or Civgov and hard for the most part intact with some form of armed force. I beleive there is mention in Challenge articles about the Ohio being one of them.

********************

DeaconR 10-29-2005, 09:18 AM Yes, I was just responding to your question of 'aren't they at war anyway' fusilier. I have the rock in troubled waters article and I am using it for my New York game as part of the background for nearby locales.


In my game the players are part of a Civgov unit that is sent to New York City following the "Allegheny Uprising" module, and I had been trying to figure out if the Milgov enclave would be hostile to them or act supportively under the circumstances. I've gone with the latter, generally, given everyone's isolation.


Recently I drew on a map of the United States the general areas that are held by any groups that are providing commerce and security over any kind of range. The East Coast looks shockingly bleak, with just a tiny couple of pockets of civilization in the north and a couple of larger ones in the south, and a large space in between the East Coast areas and the Mississippi, basically. So I figured that the "We're all Americans and the barbarians are at the gates" feeling would prevail. I would apply that as well to the Canadian enclave in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

********************

Targan 10-31-2005, 11:46 PM OMG "Rock In Troubled Waters"? I will be very happy if I can get that article. I didn't even know it existed. It could make a big difference in my ongoing campaign to have that article. Goody, something top look forward too. You guys are great. These forums could be the best thing that has ever happened to my Twilight campaign.

********************

DeaconR 11-01-2005, 01:57 PM Hi Tarquan, I was actually trying to message you with regard to your interest in "A Rock in Troubled Waters". If you want, send me an email at poe@allstream.net and I will be able to contact you about it.

********************

thefusilier 11-01-2005, 06:18 PM Same, I don't know if the message was actually sent. There seems to be a problem with the PMs on the forum.

********************

ChalkLine 11-02-2005, 03:29 PM As an Australian, I've never quite understood the MilGov/CivGov thing, and I don't use it in my campaign. I hope you guys can help me out with this.


Although I fully understand that a Rump Congress may call for an end to military law, I have trouble believing any military unit would follow such a command when the situation is so obviously dire, especially with the New America organisation controlling large parts of the country and lawlessness is rife. In fact, it's my take that the military, which is fighting a kill or be killed war in Europe, the Middle east and Asia as well as on your very own north west and southern borders, would view any comment by an irregular congress with some humour. It's obviously vital that the military stay in control even if it's just to ensure a flow of materiel to the front line troops, no American I know personally (which obviously isn't as much as you guys! ) would allow political infighting to undermine your efforts in that situation. I know that many people would be opposed to the war, but this is not VietNam or Iraq, but a conflict where the enemy has nuked the CONUS and invaded it's soil, a very different kettle of fish.


I've always thought of this wrangling as a high end political thing that manifested more in discontent rather than mutiny, while commanders may think that the military law had run it's course (how, I don't know) I can't see them proposing to their lower level officers that they mutiny as has been said.


What seems to be lacking is descriptions of how the US has changed from a peace to a total war society. The nuke strikes, in comparison to say WW2 Germany or Russia, are quite moderate in the damage they appear to have caused. It's my view that evacuation and relocation would be 70% completed within a year and war manufacturing restarted, even if it's just boots and steel helmets. The WW2 Germans managed their major technical innovations and manufacturing after the Western Allies had strangled their resource imports (they had almost no wolfram for tungsten).


Damn, I've got off track again!

********************

graebardeII 11-02-2005, 07:42 PM I too have had problems with the civgov-milgov conflict. While I'm sure there are rouge units in the country, and there might be power struggles going on. The politicians are well politicians.. though some are good people and will work to improve life for the people at large, while some will work to imprive only their own standings.


The rump-civilian government I do not think would be able to 'control' the military, at least active duty military. Of course if you look at the units which have gone over to civgove, they are nasty guards or reserve units. NG units HQ personnel are POLITICAL. The State Adjutant is a POLITICAL appointee by the governor. This could explain some of the thought. The units which have turned away from the milgov (martial law aspect) as far as I would be concerned are rouge units, and would be a small percentage of the forces at hand. And they are commanded by POLITICIANS out for power and self-serving reasons.


But as Chalkie points out, there was an attack on the US by foreign forces, both hike attacks and ground forces. While American's may get at each others throats, and divide over support of a war/conflict, when attacked from outside, NOTHING brings them together faster or stronger. SO with that said, I could not see units of the military just wandering off on their own to do their own thing unless they are totally rouge. Now a thought just rolled through the brain cells.. maybe, just maybe the commanders of the rouge units are actually NA 'moles'?


Finally, YES there is a marked lack of how the US transitioned from peace to total war footing, but they had 12 months to do it, if not closer to two years. I think, and in my games, the transition started about the time the Sino-Soviet war started. Small at first, with the increase in war stock production of missiles and munitions; war rations; increased production of the M1/M2 to get the NG units up to speed, of course they get the older equipment anf the regulars get the new stuff; readiness of NG units is increased, so by December 96 most units are getting up to speed for what ever. In my world, Desert Storm never occured. Clinton was never elected. By fall of 1996, an election year, Bush has continured improvements in the military and BOne (as well as B2 production) was increased over the period while the BUFF's were not reduced in numbers; F116 numbers were increased, though not brought to public front page notice, the Devers M8 came into production and equips the ground cav units of the 82nd as well as light divisions; as well as other items.


A dream world? Yep, but it is MY world and I'll make it that way. On the WP side I make them as perceived just to balance the scale some. It makes for a nasty grinder war on the ground and in the air.


Also I have made the Nuke Strikes of Thanksgiving a heck of a lot worse than just hitting the oil refineries and a few strikes on Washington. Thinking it is better to hit ALL control, as well as the lines of communication. However not ALL the oil would be taken out, as even the list produced in the canon does not hit ALL the refineries, and who says all the missiles hit their targets eh?


The situation in CONUS post-Nov 1997 is grim. Think of it as 100's of Katrina's hitting all over the nation in a matter of hours without warning, in the middle or start of winter. Luckily in MY world the FEMA is a bit better than in RL, though how much remains to be seen.


Post-strike production? Steel, coal, and oil would be priority, along with food. American farmers are not like those of old for the most part. They rely on petro-chemicals and hybred seed for the abundant yields they get today. Within a year of the strikes, our production will be less than half of todays yields IMO, back to about the 1930's levels. Everyone thinks 'well we'll use draft animals for power on the farms', but WHERE will these animals come from? How many people will survive that even know how to use a team of horse or oxen? These are LEARNED skills, not something learned by trial and error, though Im sure some would try. Most farmers would probably be doing good to raise enough to feed themselves and families, with a bit more for trade, though they'd prefer to save it for the next year in case of crop failure.


Who'se to feed the factory workers, if there are factories to work in? Trust me, it will take a LOT of coordination and cooperation to just get enough food to feed the survivors, UNLESS the FEMA has a food plan on the ground.


But I ramble.. sign of age they tell me.

Did I answer the questions? Probably not, rather just made more of them to be answered and 'discussed'.


Fred/grae

********************

DeaconR 11-03-2005, 02:11 AM I dunno, you guys. People do weird things politically and sometimes violence happens as a result of them.


However, here's a good example from the books about why one unit made a decision about whom to serve under.

quote from the U.S. Army Vehicle Guide:

84th INFANTRY DIVISION (light)

The division was formed on 7/20/98 by redesignation of the 84th Training Division (U.S. Army Reserve) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The division was employed in a variety of internal security and disaster relief missions throughout 1998 and early 1999. In August of 1999 the division was ordered to prepare to move south to reinforce the 5th Army in Arkansas, Oklahoma and Louisiana. Instead, the division commander placed the personnel at the disposal of V Military Region Headquarters (U.S. Civilian Government.)


Looking at this, the answer why seems obvious: the division by placing itself under Civgov gets to remain close to home. I think that one thing that would be concerning some people in uniform would be just that: when people right at home are suffering and need protection, why get sent far away? This has been something of a problem in many wars. I remember reading that the Confederate Army in the US Civil War had to create a special dispensation to get men who had deserted back into uniform.


I respect that some prefer to make up their own canon, and actually your alternate universe makes some sense.


Another thing about the conflict though is this: in the USA the supreme authority is supposed to be the Constitution, not the President, Judiciary or Congress; in fact properly speaking they function differently and receive different titles of respect but they are under the constitution legally equals.


Looking at it this way, Congressman Broward would as part of Congress voting as a whole be an entity within a sovereign body. But as a mere Representative he can only act within the Constitution. (theoretically) It is on this basis that he is challenged by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.


I think this sort of thing is really common throughout human history. It's a power conflict, really, that gets out of hand.


Of course there are elements left out of it, which I've begun putting in my game. For instance US Senators and non-military Federal authorities who do not recognize the Presidency of Broward either. Would these perhaps be trying to organize another election altogether?

********************

Targan 11-03-2005, 02:28 AM I agree with everything in the last post from DeaconR.

********************

graebardeII 11-03-2005, 09:30 AM Good imput Deacon. I agree with why a reserve unit would 'opt to stay home', and it does make sense.


What you say about the 'third faction' also makes sense. From what I can see/recall about MilGov, and what they have consitantly said, is they will relenquish to civilian authorities the control, after there is a census and proper elections. However they are a bit preoccupied with other tasks at hand to oversee such activities. CivGov has no intention of doing this, as it would undermine their power, and most of them would be voted out probably, since they were never really voted in? That leaves the third faction, who is constitutional minded to see that it happens. Now the military units in various areas, no matter if they are under milgov or civgov, would/could help them do the census.


But yep, it's a bucket of worms. And truely I think there are a lot of American's that just don't give a rat as to who thinks they are in charge, want to be left alone to rebuild/survive without interference from politicians, whether they are duly elected, rump, or wearing army green. 'keep the raiders at bay and we can do it ourselves. Been doing it for the past three years."

********************

DeaconR 11-03-2005, 12:49 PM Yeah, I mean I think it is cool if guys like you for instance don't care for the conflict and don't find it would lend interest to your games, or if guys like Tarquan prefer a Milgov on top scenario. But the Civgov vs. Milgov conflict is certainly interesting and it is the resolution of it either locally or overall that intrigues me. My players have done a fair bit in that direction, particularly on the East Coast. In my campaign the idea really is that the few remaining cantonments of the US Government in whatever sense are so much surrounded by devastation and anarchy that they HAVE to pull together regardless of higher orders, since none of them are getting resupplied by higher command anyway, at least not on a regular basis.


So for instance there is the coalition of state and milgov authority in New Jersey. There are what remains of the enclave in Frederick Maryland, though I have had some of those elements chose to go to New Jersey instead of going west. There are the US Coast Guard elements in Newport, Rhode Island (taken from "Rifle River" the challenge article which I strongly recommend for anyone interested in adventures in the New England area) and apart from the players' little mission around New York City that's about it. Nominally the UBF on Nantucket are supposed to be pro-Civgov, but whether or not they'd actually take orders is dubious. According to both "Howling Wilderness" and "A Rock in Troubled Waters" the situation near the larger cities is desperate for the survivors, many of them in unadministered refugee camps or simply wandering on their own recognizance, stripping the countryside bare like locusts. In this desperate situation, with the nearest larger commands in many cases over six hundred kilometers away, I thought it would make sense for the remaining forces of law and order to join forces regardless, sharing intelligence, responsibilities and even such materiel as they can spare. For instance, my players alerted the Milgov enclave in New Jersey to an aviation repair yard with more salvage than they could take with them, while the New Jersey enclave has in return promised to drop them off some spare mines to help make their area on Plum Island defensible.

********************

Targan 11-04-2005, 01:10 AM In my campaign SOG One Team Alpha was tasked with conducting a census as cover for their search for the gold reserves in NYC. Despite it being a cover story, the MilGov regular heirarchy expected the census to be conducted, but shortly after arriving in NYC Po decided it would be too hard a job so he adopted a doctrine he called "Target Zero". Under the "Target Zero" doctrine, Po's troops would attempt to reduce the population of NYC as much as possible, with an eventual census population target of, you guessed it, zero. See why the campaign depresses me?

********************

ReHerakhte 11-04-2005, 01:37 AM Having read the latest additions to this thread after reading the Sniping thread, I have a suggestion.

This is going to sound harsh and it can lead to a lot of pissed off Players but... if Po insists on killing everyone in NYC, have some of the inhabitantsof NYC insist on killing off Po, a sniper with a long range weapon hidden in a high rise for example.

Perhaps the vampire coven has some good shots amongst its number.

This is going to sound even more harsh but... you need to take back control of your game and killing Po may be the the most effective option you've got.


Kevin

********************

Targan 11-04-2005, 01:45 AM The last game session ended mid way through a gigantic s..tfight between the vampire coven and its... various minions, and a team of a dozen or so of Po's people including Po, who are holed up in one of the control towers among the remains of La Guardia Airport. Actually Po is in the co-pilot's seat of the group's Bell Longranger/Kiowa, having just attempted and failed to evac some of his wounded. And the Master Vampire is inbound in the form of an absolutely enormous bat-thing. There is every chance Po and most if not all the other PCs will die. Serve them right, too.

********************

thefusilier 11-04-2005, 05:21 AM In my campaign SOG One Team Alpha was tasked with conducting a census as cover for their search for the gold reserves in NYC.


Just wondering, did you implement the populations interest in NOT being a part of a census? It mentioned in the sourcebook that many probably won't like it as a census means the government (the old official one) which means the return of taxing their livlihood (which is meager).

********************

Targan 11-04-2005, 05:47 AM Yeah, the population's reluctance to participate in the census was one of the reasons Po devised the "Target Zero" doctrine. I think his deliberate release of smallpox into the populace was an aspect of that doctrine, too. And the guy was originally a Medical Doctor! Such a compassionate man.

********************

DeaconR 11-04-2005, 08:14 AM Hm. It sounds like he is getting a wee bit out of control, your Mr. Po. I would suggest that if you have karma as an element of your game that he might start getting some that's bad.

One thing I always do to players who get callous about killing is to have it bite them in the ass. Force them to realize that it is not something you do just because you feel like it; emphasize that the people they are dealing with are human. This won't stop some people but I find it usually works, specially if you find some way to make them feel guilty.

Most action movie style approaches to violence in games will lead people to respond in the same vein. If on the other hand you make him feel like he's one of the SS camp guards in "Schindler's List" he might get a bit queasy. Make sure he realizes that small children and pregnant women are dying as a result of his actions. Show a sobbing young man lowering his dead wife into a wheelbarrow. Make some areas reek with the stench of death.


One thing I strongly feel about Twilight 2000 (gee, can you tell?) is that it should NOT be a game where violence is taken lightly. On the contrary, it should be grimly realistic and one should not forget that with all the real problems out there (marauders, disease, starvation, warlords, etc) that for people to take life lightly is, forgive me for the strong word, but a sin. I actually believe that if players are approaching the game with the sense that they are on the top of the food chain and that's all she wrote that they are missing the point entirely.

********************

abaumgartg 11-04-2005, 09:30 AM One thing I strongly feel about Twilight 2000 (gee, can you tell?) is that it should NOT be a game where violence is taken lightly. On the contrary, it should be grimly realistic and one should not forget that with all the real problems out there (marauders, disease, starvation, warlords, etc) that for people to take life lightly is, forgive me for the strong word, but a sin. I actually believe that if players are approaching the game with the sense that they are on the top of the food chain and that's all she wrote that they are missing the point entirely.


I couldn't agree with you. It is a tough balance however. In creating a grisly world where roving marauders and insane warlords rule, it is easy to encourage excessive PC violence. It has been years since I ran a t2k game, but in more than a few situations the party lived or died based on past action. This could be in the form of a peasant helping the PC's escape a warlord's "prison" compound (in this case the PC's had gone out of their way to help a farmer defend his family from some marauders). Another time a PC was seriously wounded in a firefight in a town. The PC's were stupid and callous in starting the fight and resulted in a small child being killed in the cross fire. As the PC was lying around basically unable to do anything, he saw a woman cautiously moving towards him. Thinking she was going to help he was quite surprised when she pulled out a pistol and blew his brains out.


The point is the, especially playing US PC's in Europe, the party stands out. When they do something generous, they bring hope to those who have none. A beacon of light in a new dark age. When they do something unnecessarily harmful, they are worse than the local warlord or marauder; they are outsiders and should not be here. Either way, word will get out about the PC's. The more powerful they are the more quickly word will spread. Smaller tactics can be used, if the PC's have been "active" in an area for a week or so, the may get better or worse deals when trading depending on how they have treated the local population.


Not every action deserves reward or punishment. But if your players are reasonable, it is amazing how these carrots and sticks can direct the campaign.

********************

shrike6 11-04-2005, 11:30 AM CivGov has no intention of doing this (conducting a census), as it would undermine their power, and most of them would be voted out probably, since they were never really voted in?



Actually thats not correct Grae, in "Armies of the Night" one of the possible encounters is with a group of Civgov census takers.

********************

DeaconR 11-04-2005, 01:06 PM abaumgartg, that is very well put, and a major point that I forgot. Yes, there is the 'what goes around comes around' factor as well. That scene you described with the mother and child is very vivid.


BTW, shrike6, you are quite correct; in fact they are led by an arrogant CIA field operative if I'm not mistaken. And in my game the players work for Civgov.

********************

Targan 11-06-2005, 10:58 PM I want to point out that if I were a player in my campaign, I would not act as Po does, because I would rather be a benevolent, heroic type. And there is an element of reward and punishment in my campaign, assuming a character has some sort of spiritual belief, through piety or karma depending on the faith. But in terms of bending events in the game, I don't punish or reward the players. What happens, happens. Many characters have paid for Po's evil deeds in the campaign, but not Po. In fact, Po is his player's only character in the campaign. Po's player is the same age as me (early 30s), is a psychologist and is a highly intelligent man. He is also pretty much amoral in real life. I don't much like a lot of the events in the campaign, but I continue to be stimulated and amazed at the plans and problem solving methods the player comes up with.

********************

DeaconR 11-07-2005, 01:56 AM Forgive me, but you yourself sounded concerned and it was that I was responding to. As for 'what happens happens' I was saying that in my games what happens as a result of a player's actions can come back to haunt them.


A good example of this in the real world would be something like say the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich. And yes, he was one of the planners of the Final Solution, the tyrannical Hitler appointed Protector of Bohemia and Moravia, and a very unpleasant character. However, his assassination caused the Nazis to undertake some rather horrible reprisals.


So on that basis I was saying that if you are concerned by Po's actions there is always just the simple truth that every action can have effects we cannot see at the time.

********************

Targan 11-07-2005, 02:54 AM I think my concerns are that bit by bit, I am not enjoying the campaign as much as I used to, because it is not a very uplifting story. I have known Po's player for more than half my life, so I have gotten used to his psyche. Po's player and character both know that there are large numbers of NPCs that want Po dead. I think eventually he will be killed, and it will quite likely be as a result, direct or indirect, of his past actions.

********************

DeaconR 11-07-2005, 02:56 AM Hm. So it sounds to me like on the one hand you don't feel you ought to judge your players' actions but that their actions bother you. Is that about right?


You might want to talk directly to your players about this. If you aren't having as much fun you might want to think about winding the game down. However, I've found that you can salvage situations like that and regain your pleasure in the game. Sometimes it takes a bit of communication, other times it takes you seeing the game from a different perspective.

********************

Targan 11-07-2005, 02:59 AM Well, with any luck I can find some joy again with a new group of players, if I can find some who are not afraid to try a new rules set. I don't want to wind down my current campaign until the PCs are killed off. I couldn't bear to do without some solid closure to it all.


BTW DeaconR, your assessment is quite accurate. I don't want to judge my players' actions but many of their actions bother me.

********************

DeaconR 11-25-2005, 08:34 AM I've put together some more ideas about the 'third party' factor.


Basically a group of older senior officers, people with wealth and influence (such as still exists) and politicians, in particular several who are veterans have begun on both sides of the political question to propose that some kind of agreement be set up for the good of the country. They are led by Senator James Arthur, who is a Vietnam veteran and had been on the Armed Services Senate Committee before and during the early years of the war. As senior senator from Kansas he has had to contend with many difficult issues but has come to believe that if the nation does not pull together everthing will eventually fall apart. He believes that if Civgov and Milgov pull together that jointly they will be able to defeat the remaining New Americans and warlords, reestablish transport and communication and hold back the night. To do this, he has generally proposed that they work together with the intention of holding an election as soon as it is feasible to do so, within a time limit of about 3 years. At the very least, let them not contest one another but work together as fellow Americans. While he is not really agreed with yet the Senator commands enough respect in both groups to be received in Omaha or Colorado Springs without being openly mistrusted.


While he is respected there is some hostility to his ideas. There is a great deal of mistrust on either side of the question, and pride is a factor that cannot be ignored. General Cummings for instance refuses to call Broward anything but "Mr. Broward" or "The Honorable Representative from Arkansas". Broward regards Cummings as being a military dictator and practically a mutineer.


Another side to this question is one raised by certain parties who feel that the situation may not be salvageable. For instance, already state governors and local military commanders have been forced to cut some people off from the resources and protection they have available. (Examples would include Governors like Britt of Rhode Island or Morris of Arkansas pretty much running perhaps a tenth to a quarter of their states, or the commander of the 197th Infantry Brigade having to reduce range of patrols out of Memphis) On this basis realpolitik suggests that in fact things as they are might enable a few communities to survive as opposed to all falling down together. This somewhat cynical view is not without influence in either capital.

********************

Targan 11-27-2005, 11:25 PM DeaconR, I like it. Believable and well written. The back history for Traveller: 2300 talks about the reunification talks, and I believe Caldwell from the Allegeheny Uprising module is a major player. Maybe Caldwell was recruited to the cause by Senator Arthur?

********************

DeaconR 11-27-2005, 11:49 PM In my game Caldwell is a major proponent of Arthur's plan. In my particular campaign area I have changed the main idea of the 228th evacuating to proposing consolidation with other forces in the region.


Partly this is based on something one of my players had suggested; namely that hydroponics and greenhouses could possibly save people from starvation. If it is soil and change in climate that will cause famine, would it not be possible to control those elements?

********************

Targan 11-27-2005, 11:57 PM Quite reasonable. The major reason given in T:2000 for the 228th's relocation was the fear of starvation. Overcome that problem, and the relocation is no longer worthwhile.

********************