T2K Fortification

[Marc]

Bon dia!

Mmmmm... no previous idea about the existence of the film, but I've searched in the Wikipedia after your post and it seems it could be interesting. The correct title is Beaufort and is directed by an IDF veteran.

Thanks for the suggestion. This post remembers me that I still have, in my hard drive, another film to see: The Goods must be crazy. I think it was suggested by Kato.

[kato13]

Originally Posted by Marc

This post remembers me that I still have, in my hard drive, another film to see: The Gods must be crazy. I think it was suggested by Kato.

Just so everyone knows this movie has NOTHING to do with post Apoc. It is a pretty silly comedy about how outside technology can disrupt an Aboriginal clan. There is a tyrannical despot in the story but I am not sure if any one could pull gaming ideas from this movie.

[AcesandEights]

Originally Posted by kato13

Just so everyone knows this movie has NOTHING to do with post Apoc. It is a pretty silly comedy about how outside technology can disrupt an Aboriginal clan.

Yup. An instant classic, as well! I'd heard there was a sequel done back in the late 80s or early 90s.

There is a tyrannical despot in the story but I am not sure if any one could pull gaming ideas from this movie.

If only all marauder leaders came from such a mold!

[Panther Al]

This is a bit of thread necromancy but I noted a post by chalkline about Vauban style fortification making good T2K forts. This is something I've always been into and done a number of papers on back in the school days so I would like to point out that he is right only to a point: against small arms and light automatic cannon you couldn't ask for better, but the real reason this style of fortification died wasn't air power or modern indirect fire guns, it was the advent of rifle cannon. The heavy hitting and accurate fire was just the ticket to destroying specific sections of wall whereas before it was impossible to focus the cannon fire tight enough to so. Roll up to one today with anything 40mm in size and you'll go through faster that a corporal running to his first NCO call.

Have to admit though that I always wanted to play a game where my character can build up such a place.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Marc

Thanks for the suggestion. This post remembers me that I still have, in my hard drive, another film to see: The Goods must be crazy. I think it was suggested by Kato.

The Goods Must Be Crazy: This is a movie about a T2K village getting a bunch of trade goods infested with rabid mice. Pretty funny, if you ask me.

Or...the hilarity that ensues when an insane couple named the Goods move in next door.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by AcesandEights

Yup. An instant classic, as well! I'd heard there was a sequel done back in the late 80s or early 90s.



If only all marauder leaders came from such a mold!

I always wanted them to do a sequel where, after he threw it off the edge of the world, it came down and hit some other primitive culture...

Originally Posted by Panther Al

This is a bit of thread necromancy but I noted a post by chalkline about Vauban style fortification making good T2K forts. This is something I've always been into and done a number of papers on back in the school days so I would like to point out that he is right only to a point: against small arms and light automatic cannon you couldn't ask for better, but the real reason this style of fortification died wasn't air power or modern indirect fire guns, it was the advent of rifle cannon. The heavy hitting and accurate fire was just the ticket to destroying specific sections of wall whereas before it was impossible to focus the cannon fire tight enough to so. Roll up to one today with anything 40mm in size and you'll go through faster that a corporal running to his first NCO call.

Have to admit though that I always wanted to play a game where my character can build up such a place.

Tybee Island, South Carolina is a place people should visit to see evidence of one of the first, if not the first successful employment of rifled guns against a fortified emplacement. Fort Pulaski was taken because of Union Captain Quincy A. Gillmore's decisive exploitation of a new, experimental rifled cannon battery.

http://www.gorp.com/parks-guide/trav...ev_068099.html

Another fortress I have some knowledge about is the Brest Fortress in the city of Brest, Belarus. I think a good touch to a scenario or story taking place there would be to have eerie, or horror elements to the story whereby the characters hear, see, or encounter horrific things of the past from WWII when the Germans placed siege upon the fortress and the trapped garrison of troops within it.

As far as the film Beaufort. I own the book, and am watching the film on Netflix right now.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by bigehauser

Tybee Island, South Carolina is a place people should visit to see evidence of one of the first, if not the first successful employment of rifled guns against a fortified emplacement. Fort Pulaski was taken because of Union Captain Quincy A. Gillmore's decisive exploitation of a new, experimental rifled cannon battery.

http://www.gorp.com/parks-guide/trav...ev_068099.html

Another fortress I have some knowledge about is the Brest Fortress in the city of Brest, Belarus. I think a good touch to a scenario or story taking place there would be to have eerie, or horror elements to the story whereby the characters hear, see, or encounter horrific things of the past from WWII when the Germans placed siege upon the fortress and the trapped garrison of troops within it.

As far as the film Beaufort. I own the book, and am watching the film on Netflix right now.

Pulaski is the perfect example, and the one I had in mind. While rifled guns was used earlier it this that convinced the world that they was the thing to bet on. Been to it lots of times and I encurage others to go. Pulaski's claim is based on location: it was impossible to mine, out of range from any land based cannon of the day, and in perfect location to guard the approaches to the city. It was only the use of rifled guns, and the fact that only rifled guns had the range and accuracy (by the days standards) that allowed the DY's to take the place. At that point no one doubted that the day of the smoothbore was done.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

This is a bit of thread necromancy but I noted a post by chalkline about Vauban style fortification making good T2K forts. This is something I've always been into and done a number of papers on back in the school days so I would like to point out that he is right only to a point: against small arms and light automatic cannon you couldn't ask for better, but the real reason this style of fortification died wasn't air power or modern indirect fire guns, it was the advent of rifle cannon. The heavy hitting and accurate fire was just the ticket to destroying specific sections of wall whereas before it was impossible to focus the cannon fire tight enough to so. Roll up to one today with anything 40mm in size and you'll go through faster that a corporal running to his first NCO call.

Have to admit though that I always wanted to play a game where my character can build up such a place.

A lot of people don't remember the epic stand of the 2nd Battalion, 110th Infantry Regiment, 28th Infantry Division, elements of B Company, 707th Tank Battalion and elements of B Company, 2nd Tank Battalion, 9th Armored Division at the town of Clervaux, Belgium...December 17-18, 1944. While the Americans fought house to house against elements of the 2nd Panzer Division and were mostly either destroyed or forced to retreat by 1825 hours on the 17th, elements of the 2nd Battalion held the chateau for another day, blocking traffic for another 24 hours, allowing time for CCR of the 9th Armored (and that bunch from the airborne mafia whose name escapes me at the moment...) to get into position to block the drive towards Bastogne.

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

A lot of people don't remember the epic stand of the 2nd Battalion, 110th Infantry Regiment, 28th Infantry Division, elements of B Company, 707th Tank Battalion and elements of B Company, 2nd Tank Battalion, 9th Armored Division at the town of Clervaux, Belgium...December 17-18, 1944. While the Americans fought house to house against elements of the 2nd Panzer Division and were mostly either destroyed or forced to retreat by 1825 hours on the 17th, elements of the 2nd Battalion held the chateau for another day, blocking traffic for another 24 hours, allowing time for CCR of the 9th Armored (and that bunch from the airborne mafia whose name escapes me at the moment...) to get into position to block the drive towards Bastogne.

or the last stand of the 106th

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

A lot of people don't remember the epic stand of the 2nd Battalion, 110th Infantry Regiment, 28th Infantry Division, elements of B Company, 707th Tank Battalion and elements of B Company, 2nd Tank Battalion, 9th Armored Division at the town of Clervaux, Belgium...December 17-18, 1944. While the Americans fought house to house against elements of the 2nd Panzer Division and were mostly either destroyed or forced to retreat by 1825 hours on the 17th, elements of the 2nd Battalion held the chateau for another day, blocking traffic for another 24 hours, allowing time for CCR of the 9th Armored (and that bunch from the airborne mafia whose name escapes me at the moment...) to get into position to block the drive towards Bastogne.

or the last stand of the 106th Division. 110 men 12 .50 cals and 1 M-8

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Dog 6

or the last stand of the 106th

The fights that the 28th and 106th Infantry Divisions, 9th Armored Division, 14th Cavalry Group and their attached units are seldom heard about in any discussion of the Battle of the Bulge. Most people fix on the 101st Airborne at Bastogne as the turning point. Not discounting the bravery of the airborne; but the true, unsung heros of the Bulge were the infantrymen, tankers and artillerymen who held the line for the first, crucial 48-hours.

One of the critical fights was for the twin villages of Krinkelt-Rocherath, were the 3rd Battalion, 393rd Infantry, 99th Infantry Division and 3rd Battalion, 23rd Infantry, 2nd Infantry Division fought fought major elements of of the 277th Volksgrenadier Division and the 12th SS Panzer Division. To give an idea of the scale of the fighting, the 3rd Battalion, 23rd Infantry went into the battle for the twin villages with a strength of 600 men, 217 men survived to rejoin the US lines.

The defense of the twin villages brought precious time for the remainder of the 2nd Infantry Division and for the 1st Infantry Division to build up a defensive line along Elsenborn Ridge that held the northern shoulder of the Bulge.

For the Germans, the twin villages were just as bloody, the 277th Volksgrenadier suffered the loss of all of its battalion commanders, 80% of its company commanders and the majority of its NCOs (the poor training and poor quality of the new troops required its leadership to lead from the front) as well as the loss of an estimated 1,500 soldiers. The 12th SS Panzer suffered the loss of about 60 AFVs in the fight and its 25th SS Panzergrenadier Regiment suffered 60% losses.

[helbent4]

Group,

While remnant fortifications could be used, these are mainly a matter of research for interested GMs.

I'm reminded of (I think) some wealthy industrialist in Poland living with his family in a castle near Krakow with a small security force. Not a warlord or anything like that, just surviving. So old castles can be used as fortifications by military units, refugees and other survivors.

The Twilight war didn't come out of nowhere, war broke out after years of hostilities and tensions. Therefore, shelters and depots like the one in Allegheny Uprising would be fairly common. There would not just be leftover Cold War bomb shelters and installations (in various states of rehabilitation) but newly-built ones if there was a crash program to enhance government and military survivability in case of nuclear attack.

Further, these hardened facilities (government/military communication centres, command posts, depots, etc.) not just in the CONUS but all throughout Europe in both NATO and PacWar territory.

Further, modern fortifications are not difficult to construct. They mostly require normal construction equipment and common materials that could easily be commandeered by the military/government. Now that mobile warfare has basically stopped, many cantonments and former cantonments might have permanent fortifications constructed. Anything from a series of isolated concrete bunkers and pill boxes to interlocking defensive positions to a full blown permanent fortress where none existed before the war. Again, these would litter Europe and North America.

Tony

[Panther Al]

Absolutely agree helbent4, my focus in my comment was on the older stuff floating about. There is a reason all the modern facilities are buried by and large, or at least masked so direct fire can't hit them.

My personal fave fortification in the "modern" era?
The swedish KARIN. How can you not love a fully automatic, watercooled, 120mm cannon that has a range of 27km?

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

The swedish KARIN. How can you not love a fully automatic, watercooled, 120mm cannon that has a range of 27km?

Unless your weapon has a range of 27.5km...

[helbent4]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

My personal fave fortification in the "modern" era?
The swedish KARIN. How can you not love a fully automatic, watercooled, 120mm cannon that has a range of 27km?

Al,

That would be a "hard rain" indeed!

Fortifications dating back to WWII and beyond in history litter Europe and to a lesser degree, North America. it's almost worth just saying using google to ferret them out if your campaign is in that area!

Fascinating article on interwar (post-WWI) German fortifications in what is now Poland (built to defend Germany from Polish attack in case of war with France):

http://www.holidayapartmentpoland.co...ers_poland.htm

Castles near Krakow detailed in "Free City" and "White Eagle" include the Stronghold of Ojcow (abandoned) and Pieskowa Skala (occupied by the self-styled "baron of Ojcow", an industrialist and recluse).

List of castles near Kracow:

http://www.krakow-info.com/eagle.htm

I don't have a copy of "Castle by the Sea", and I think Twilight Encounters might have had castle floor plans, too.

Tony

[WallShadow]

A friend of mine ran a USA-based campaign local to South Central PA: during one scenario, we encountered an agricultural freehold that was fortified with pre-formed concrete silo wall arc-sections scavenged from a neighboring abandoned farm. Pretty handy, re-bar reinforced, easily maneuvered with a medium sized truck mounted crane. Plow some earth infront and brace behind it--voila!

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by WallShadow

A friend of mine ran a USA-based campaign local to South Central PA: during one scenario, we encountered an agricultural freehold that was fortified with pre-formed concrete silo wall arc-sections scavenged from a neighboring abandoned farm. Pretty handy, re-bar reinforced, easily maneuvered with a medium sized truck mounted crane. Plow some earth infront and brace behind it--voila!

Therese is a co. In Norway tatt used to make culverts and cisterns etc that also sell sections of these reinforced etc as pre made firing positivismen and shelters for 1-4 troops. Dig hole and haule piece in. Fill in drit.done.

[WallShadow]

In Ruins of Warsaw, rubble walls and elevated gun emplacements are de rigeur for field-expedient fortifications.
A question regarding this: for "blocked rubble" hexes, are they already considered as a rubble hex wall, or does one still have to apply more rubble to it to gain that defensive advantage? And as for being blocked, just how "blocked" is it? What negative movement modifiers are applied to any unit attempting to traverse the hexside? Can they manage it at all? No vehicular traffic? I can see how judicious use of isolated gun platforms in a sea of rubble could close off the non-blocked rubble hex paths and really cause the Baron a headache or two, providing the blocked hexes are impassable.

Now, if you've marked and rigged for remote detonation any UXB's discovered in the rubble, these would be an extra pain in the Baron's backside.

[Cdnwolf]

http://www.nps.gov/features/saju/001/virtual/

Forts of the Caribbean can give good examples of layouts

[Apache6]

An interesting thing about 2tK is that every type of fortification can be encountered. What resources you have to make them are important (barbed wire, backhoe loader, ISO containers, precast concrete sewer pipes...).

- The weapons available to your enemies, how effective they are with them, and how much ammo they have are all relative.

- Barbed wire is very common in hardware stores in US, and with the lack of heavy weapons. WWI trenches (dug by modern Heavy Equipment?) and supported by barbed wire could be very effective, just check history of former Yugaslavian Wars.

- ISO containers (the standardized shipping containers used to move stuff) have been used a lot to create barriers. Against people armed only with small arms, they could make effective forts very quickly. Against a force that you outgun, they would be effective castles.

- Already mentioned, but armored vehicels that dont run, or have no fuel, make effective pillboxes. So do sewer lines. Park a nonfunctional truck (drained fuel) over a manhole cover and you can build a very effective MG nest in plain sight, and have both effective fields of fire down the street, and covered approaches.

- Land mines are not hard to fabricate, they were first used in American Civil War and simple ones are easy to make. Can be set as mines to detonate when driven over or stepped on, or 'command detonated' either by wire or radio control, just like IEDs. Can also be set as boobytraps (again, this was very common in former Yugaslavia. "Minefield' signs may mark actual mines, or dummy minefields.

- bridges over major rivers, are very likely to be fortified on one or both ends.

- Road blocks and checkpoints, can have a great amount of variation. Wrecked vehciles and boobytraps on roads and bridges are easy. Dropped trees covered by sniper fire are effective. Can be supported/reinforced by mortars pre-registered on targets. This would delay many enemies to allow reinforcements to move or militia to muster...

- I'd expect most protected area would have some level of defense in depth. Out posts and/or opservation/listening posts, on the outskirts to provide early warning. Road-blocks and checkpoints securing key terrain and blocking avenues of approach. A mobile reserve force, containing the best combat power available and a heavily fortified redoubt, to which the population can withdraw.

- A common and relatively labor effective redoubt would be a couple lines of trenches, surrounded by barbed wire fences at 400 and 200 meters (in good times used to graze cows). These could protect several heavy industrial buildings or maybe a brick high school or some such...

[ArmySGT.]

[ArmySGT.]

[Panther Al]

Ah, Vaubon style fortifications. (The ones that are all star shaped)

The good:

In the TW2K Verse where heavy (as in cannon) weapons are scarce and rifle calibre stuff is about as heavy as it gets by and large, its perfect. They was designed to defeat infantry assaults without breaking a sweat. Its when you bring direct HE fire things fall apart. Which is the bad.

For a throw up the dirt and hide behind it sort, It serves. Add in mines and wire, muuuuuch better. Earth takes HE reasonably well. Depend on masonry construction however and its not too good.

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

Ah, Vaubon style fortifications. (The ones that are all star shaped)

The good:

In the TW2K Verse where heavy (as in cannon) weapons are scarce and rifle calibre stuff is about as heavy as it gets by and large, its perfect. They was designed to defeat infantry assaults without breaking a sweat. Its when you bring direct HE fire things fall apart. Which is the bad.

For a throw up the dirt and hide behind it sort, It serves. Add in mines and wire, muuuuuch better. Earth takes HE reasonably well. Depend on masonry construction however and its not too good.

That its true - the masonry chip on HE impact and becomes shrapnel in iotself before it all crumbles and falls down in a smouldering heap. But bear in mind that thats after x number of impacts. Infantry portable mortars like 60s and 81s , AA automatic cannons, HMGs etc dont really cut it when it comes to bringing down sturdy masonry and concrete - as seen in Dubrovnik for instance. All the roofs went, and lots of peopl ekilled. But No breach. Also the "Håkons hall" in Bergen in 1944 - a German munitions ship blew up on the dock next to it. Untold number of tons of HE. 14th century walls still good.

Examples the one way - but there are of course the othr way too..

[ArmySGT.]

Masonry aka brick absorbs kinetic energy and turns to powder. It is stone and concrete that shatter and throws fragments.

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

Masonry aka brick absorbs kinetic energy and turns to powder. It is stone and concrete that shatter and throws fragments.

To a point yes: But even then, large fragments will fly out.

Its not the fragmentation though that makes masonry fortifications a bad idea - unless you put a lot of rebar and the like in it - Its the fact that unlike earth, its relatively brittle. The 'shatter' effect of direct fire HE on stone/concrete/brick is amazing. But, Earth is more, for lack of a better word, flexible. Of course, you have to take the fact that foot for foot it isn't as good as masonry into consideration when deciding how thick and how high it goes, but it is in the modern world, overall better than old fashioned works.

Its the addition of Rebar - and lots of it - that changes the equation once again. Now we have a 'binder' of sorts that, although HE will shatter the concrete, the rebar density is to the point that it will keep the wall in shape for far longer. Tiergarten is a very good example: it was so laced with rebar and such that it survived everything the soviets could through at it - and like every other flak tower of berlin, none was taken by storm. Even direct fire at almost point blank range by 203mm artillery pieces didn't faze them.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

To a point yes: But even then, large fragments will fly out.

Its not the fragmentation though that makes masonry fortifications a bad idea - unless you put a lot of rebar and the like in it - Its the fact that unlike earth, its relatively brittle. The 'shatter' effect of direct fire HE on stone/concrete/brick is amazing. But, Earth is more, for lack of a better word, flexible. Of course, you have to take the fact that foot for foot it isn't as good as masonry into consideration when deciding how thick and how high it goes, but it is in the modern world, overall better than old fashioned works.

Its the addition of Rebar - and lots of it - that changes the equation once again. Now we have a 'binder' of sorts that, although HE will shatter the concrete, the rebar density is to the point that it will keep the wall in shape for far longer. Tiergarten is a very good example: it was so laced with rebar and such that it survived everything the soviets could through at it - and like every other flak tower of berlin, none was taken by storm. Even direct fire at almost point blank range by 203mm artillery pieces didn't faze them.

The Flak towers in Berlin are reinforced concrete. The Pre-WW1 forts were masonry or masonry over stone/concrete because the brick essentially absorbed a bullet or a shell burrowed into it. No ricochets.

Building with masonry was and is more expensive than pouring concrete.

Even with explosives, when an explosive detonates the shearing forces turn the surrounding brick facade into a crater and the path of least resistance is away from the wall.

Enjoy this video by the U.S Marine Corps. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...30260633420235

[raketenjagdpanzer]

I realize we're talking about basically 500 year old weaponry but one of the great things about building early forts in FL from Coquina rock is that cannonballs (and musket balls) had a tendency to just chunk right in and stop. On the surface.

[headquarters]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

I realize we're talking about basically 500 year old weaponry but one of the great things about building early forts in FL from Coquina rock is that cannonballs (and musket balls) had a tendency to just chunk right in and stop. On the surface.

In my student days I lived in Bergen where you had a church tower that still had English cannon balls lodged in plain view from 180something when the Brits in dastardly and conniving manner subjected the fair and peaceloving Danish-Norwegian union to unlimited blockade and naval warfare with disasterous collateral damage results.

But back to the point - the cannon balls(s) lodged themselves in there.

Another thing - I saw mythbusters ( yes..they are a tv show and not scientists etc etc ) paint a brick wall with a prepping paint ( it was red) I dont know the English word for it - we call i t grunning. This greatly enhanced the walls AV regarding concussion damages as it where.

The advent of efficient artillery ended the days of the high walled fortifications in favour of more squat and in some cases earthen covered stone constructions.

But as larger military hierarchies with access to efficient artillery become rarer - the days of the walled fortification are coming back im humble o

But dedicated fortifications are not the only ones- a multistory reinforced- concrete building ( like a sturdy built housing complex) could with a few tweaks become an efficient stronghold. It has space, firing positions could be made and so on. It wouldnt do if the enemy has modern heavy artillery - but that is getting seldom in the T2K verse as I see it.