|
|
|
#1
09-11-2010, 03:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
5th ARMY
plz post your 5th army's here
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr. 
|
|
#2
09-11-2010, 09:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My 5th ARMY as of 6/1/2003
5th ARMY HQ: 2000 men, 1 M-1A1 Houston TX 15th Aviation Brigade: 2800 Men, 11 AH-1, 15 OH-58, 17 UH1H, 7 CH-47, 2 CH-54, 2 MI-24, 4 MI-8, 3 AH-64D, 13 UH-60 units can be found all over 5th ARMY A.O. 220th MP Brigade: 1600 men, 29 Peacekeeper, 23 M-706, 12 M750 HQ 200 men Houston. units can be found all over 5th ARMY A.O. 420th Engineer Brigade: 2500 men 3 M-728CEV's HQ 300 men Houston. units can be found all over 5th ARMY A.O. 90th CORPS HQ 1900 men, 1 M-1A1 San Antonio TX 103rd Artillery Brigade: 2600 men , 34 M-109, 11 M-110, 8 MLRS units can be found all over 90th Corps A.O. 90th Transportation Brigade: 3500 men 700 Trucks , 270 Tankers units can be found all over 90th Corps A.O. 90th supply Brigade: 4000 men San Antonio 49th Armored Division: 6000 men, 49 M-1A1, 9 M-1A2, 88 Stingray II, 23 M-60A3, 103 M-113, 29 M-2, 25 M-109, 2 MLRS Brownsville 52nd Mechanized Division: 5000 men, 90 Stingray II, 37 M-2A1, 135 M-113, 22 M-109 , 2 MLRS , 26 LAV 25, 5 T-72, 3 BMP-2, 8 BTR-70 Laredo 56th Infantry Division: 3700 men, 21 M-113, 5 M-60A3, 17 105mm How, 6 155mm How Eagle Pass 122nd CORPS HQ 1500 men 1 M-60A3 Midland/ Odessa TX 479th Artillery Brigade: 2700 men 38 155mm HOW, 22 105mm How units can be found all over 122nd Corps A.O. 122nd Transportation Brigade: 2900 men 590 Trucks , 240 Tankers units can be found all over 122nd Corps A.O. 122nd supply Brigade: 3900 men Midland/ Odessa 45th Mechanized Division: 9500 men, 159 Stingray II, 191 M-113, 37 M-2, 41 M-109, 26 M901, 3 MLRS Persidio 80th Reserve Infantry Division: 4400 men, 16 M-113, 11 M-48A5, 16 155mm How, 29 105mm How Pumpville 57th Infantry Division: 6500 men, 33 M-113, 21 M-48A5, 49 105mm How, 14 155mm How Van Horn 111st CORPS HQ 1400 men Alamogordo NM 111st Artillery Brigade: 1500 men 40 105mm How, 8 155mm How units can be found all over 111st Corps A.O. 111st Transportation Brigade: 2400 men 470 Trucks , 100 Tankers units can be found all over 111st Corps A.O. 111st supply Brigade: 3000 men Fort Bliss NM 60th Infantry Division: 5300 men, 16 M-60A3, 27 M-113, 31 105mm How, 6 155mm How Douglas NM 84th Reserve Infantry Division: 4200 men, 13 M-48A5, 15 M-113, 12 155mm How, 18 105mm How, 5 ERC-90, 3 BTR-70 Columbus NM 85th Reserve Infantry Division: 2500 men, 2 M-48A5, 7 M-113, 11 105mm How, 3 155mm How, 4 T-55, 5 BTR-70 Rodeo NM 196th Mechanized Brigade: 3800 men, 29 M-1A1, 92 M-113, 16 M-2, 16 M-109, 9 M-901 EL Paso TX Enjoy 
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr. Last edited by Dog 6; 09-12-2010 at 03:51 PM.
|
|
#3
09-11-2010, 10:14 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I haven't really messed with the 5th Army too much really, been focusing my works on the NYC area for my campaign.
Can I ask, why did you go through a write up for that command and in what situation/scenario you use it in? Your numbers and equipment are much more robust then most here would normally see. I would love to know your story or situation you are basing this work from. Good stuff either way for sure! Thanks! 
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!" TheDarkProphet
|
|
#4
09-12-2010, 12:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
What does the above have to do with Twilight 2000?
|
|
#5
09-12-2010, 12:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I'm getting around to typing up my world obo's (got them on paper). lets see. hmmm well my game starts about the same with china and Russia. but nukes don't pop off till 1998 and did not go after oil but did tactical and counter-force. I have France getting pwned in 2001, Switzerland joining the NATO side. had Sweden and Finland join nato 98-99. oh 11th corps 2000 offensive was a success. ( 5th and 8th id didn't go so far.) lots of combat in south America. Brazil on our side. north Korea rolled up by 2002, troops pulled out. I have lots of combat in Africa. Armys are much bigger then in canon around 2 times the size, supply and replacement AFV's can still be had as can oil. air-forces still have plans to fly. Navy s still have some ships.
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
#6
09-12-2010, 10:56 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nice to see some other time lines and such. Would love to see your time line stories and such to get a good feel for how your world is put together.
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!" TheDarkProphet
|
|
#8
09-12-2010, 02:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
#9
09-12-2010, 02:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Ahhhh..now that makes sense now. Thats why your troops and vehicle levels are so much higher. How much fun would a war game be with the crap left over in the T2K canon stuff. :P
__________________
"Oh yes, I WOOT!" TheDarkProphet
|
|
#10
09-12-2010, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
#11
09-12-2010, 03:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Webstral post your 5th army's.
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
#12
09-13-2010, 10:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
|
|
#13
09-13-2010, 10:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It does seem odd that France wasn't hit with the same level of megatonnage as the US/UK if just to take their resources off the table for potential use by NATO, and I'd agree that some sort of diplomatic deal with the USSR must have been worked out -- though it may have been as simple as France telling the Soviets that they could either leave them alone and they'd stay neutral or if attacked they'd unload their own nuclear arsenal in return, only with the aim of wiping the 10 largest (or so) Soviet cities off the map entirely rather than the incremental anti-oil campaign.
|
|
#14
09-14-2010, 01:31 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I haven't done much with Fifth US Army. The closest I've come to Fifth US Army turf is a bit of work on Cannon AFB, which isn't really near any of the Fifth Army units, and a touch of work on an Oklahoma SDF that runs rear area security behind the screen of Fifth US Army. In all honesty, I'd not be inclined to change the US Army Vehicle Guide listing terribly, other than to add some Operation Omega veterans and account for some losses between July 2000 and April 2001.
Webstral
|
|
#15
09-14-2010, 05:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Uhm I think the Soviets/Russia and France have had an agreement for sometime. Hence, explain their temporary withdraw from NATO. On other hand the France and Soviets realize the deal was made with players they have never really been able to trust unless they had a common enemy. With that said, both had expectation of their respective and would of been too willingly in my assessment of both, they would of been too use their Nukes if one side or the other went beyond a 'Line in the sand'. They knew where the magically point but none of their allies knew, much less many of the units operating in the said region.....
|
|
#16
09-14-2010, 06:21 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The French really come across as Machiavellian in T2K.
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
|
|
#17
09-14-2010, 07:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Author of the unofficial and strictly non canon Alternative Survivor's Guide to the United Kingdom
|
|
#18
09-14-2010, 08:20 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
There's one thing to be said for the French in T2K - at least they found a way to avoid surrendering this time...
:P
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem Last edited by Legbreaker; 09-14-2010 at 09:54 PM.
|
|
#19
09-14-2010, 09:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Like I said they have worked out a deal long time ago...
|
|
#20
09-22-2010, 07:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
#21
09-23-2010, 01:04 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That series of events drove French foreign policy ever since and was the specific reason for France to acquire nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants.
|
|
#22
09-23-2010, 05:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Like I stated before it is three way draw on who would use Nukes first. Soviets and US believe the other side would be the first to used them, while both side more or less know how far they would allow the other to get to before risk of it going nuclear rapid raise. While the French with their exit of NATO and acquiring Nukes have implied where they intend to start using them to their at the time former NATO allies and it was hell of lot sooner than NATO Command hand agreed too.
|
|
#23
01-23-2011, 02:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
positive thoughts are welcome.
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr.
|
|
#24
02-07-2011, 12:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
a big bump
__________________
"There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time." --General George S. Patton, Jr.
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Linear Mode
