RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-02-2017, 12:00 PM
unkated unkated is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Eastern Massachusetts
Posts: 416
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by .45cultist View Post
How many Russian mechanics can maintain the Western turbines?
They may not have practice, but I'll wager that by 1995, they have access to a translated maintenance manual.

IMHO, by late 1997, I would more expect vehicles to be retained for use by the unit that captured it (for either side), rather than turned back to a central authority.

Picture any unit commander - "While I'd rather have a magnificent vehicle (tank, APC, IFV, SPG) produced by my nation to match the others in my battalion, I cannot get any more (I have been told I will receive them later - much later). Meanwhile, this foreign beast is still working (mostly) and shoots, so while it works, it is better than the crews I have running around as leg infantry."

In the middle of a campaign season, I think few commanders would want to waste the troops (crew + escort) or fuel to send a captured vehicle back to some higher command to be accumulated with other captured vehicles.

And yes, this view seems to be carried in the various vehicle guides.

Uncle Ted
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-02-2017, 01:26 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southern AZ
Posts: 4,340
Default

Nice image, James.

Earlier in the war, I think small units made up exclusively of captured vehicles (for relative ease of resupply) are plausible. Later in the war, I see local commanders making use of whatever is at hand- there'd be a lot more mixing than matching. There's historical precedent for this pattern in how the Germans made use of captured war material throughout the course of WWII.
__________________
Author of Twilight 2000 adventure modules, Rook's Gambit and The Poisoned Chalice, the campaign sourcebook, Korean Peninsula, the gear-book, Baltic Boats, and the co-author of Tara Romaneasca, a campaign sourcebook for Romania, all available for purchase on DriveThruRPG:

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...--Rooks-Gambit
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ula-Sourcebook
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...nia-Sourcebook
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...liate_id=61048
https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/...-waters-module
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-02-2017, 02:30 PM
Rainbow Six's Avatar
Rainbow Six Rainbow Six is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,623
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Nice image, James.

Earlier in the war, I think small units made up exclusively of captured vehicles (for relative ease of resupply) are plausible.
While I don't think it was ever confirmed one way or the other, I believe there were rumours that the East German NVA had a unit equipped with West German vehicles / uniforms etc whose mission in time of War was to operate behind NATO lines a la Otto Skorzeny.
__________________
Author of the unofficial and strictly non canon Alternative Survivor’s Guide to the United Kingdom
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-02-2017, 08:52 PM
swaghauler swaghauler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: PA
Posts: 1,482
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Nice image, James.

Earlier in the war, I think small units made up exclusively of captured vehicles (for relative ease of resupply) are plausible. Later in the war, I see local commanders making use of whatever is at hand- there'd be a lot more mixing than matching. There's historical precedent for this pattern in how the Germans made use of captured war material throughout the course of WWII.
I wouldn't want to use enemy vehicles too early in the War. Too many heavily armed aircraft still flying to be riding around in a "commandeered" AFV (no matter how many US markings you put on it). Later on (when the Exchange is over), I'd love to play "chameleon" with captured enemy equipment. It might just keep you alive long enough to "grab them by the belt and settle things."

Reading this thread, I cannot help but remember in Band of Brothers when the guy wearing a German smock got bayoneted by his squad mate as he woke him up for guard duty. Fratricide is a thing in war.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-03-2017, 01:19 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southern AZ
Posts: 4,340
Default

+1 to Adm. Lee.

Quote:
Originally Posted by swaghauler View Post
I wouldn't want to use enemy vehicles too early in the War. Too many heavily armed aircraft still flying to be riding around in a "commandeered" AFV (no matter how many US markings you put on it). Later on (when the Exchange is over), I'd love to play "chameleon" with captured enemy equipment. It might just keep you alive long enough to "grab them by the belt and settle things."
You make a very valid point, but even not using captured AFVs can result in blue-on-blue incidents. Unfortunately, it's simply a side-effect of the inevitable "fog of war". For a recent example, during the 1st Gulf War, at least one Bradley IFV was destroyed by U.S. aircraft. During Barbarosa, and until the Germans lost air superiority on the eastern front, many of their Panzers had Nazi flags spread out on their topside as a recognition symbol to keep their own Stukas from bombing mistakenly bombing them.

Obviously, troops would take every reasonable precaution to avoid becoming the target of friendly-fire, but I see the need for armor outweighing any increased risk. Also, PACT weapons were already an integral part of the reunified German army (in the v.1.0 timeline) so I think improved training would be the solution, instead of avoiding the use of enemy armor.
__________________
Author of Twilight 2000 adventure modules, Rook's Gambit and The Poisoned Chalice, the campaign sourcebook, Korean Peninsula, the gear-book, Baltic Boats, and the co-author of Tara Romaneasca, a campaign sourcebook for Romania, all available for purchase on DriveThruRPG:

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...--Rooks-Gambit
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ula-Sourcebook
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...nia-Sourcebook
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...liate_id=61048
https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/...-waters-module
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-05-2017, 03:26 AM
James Langham2 James Langham2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mansfield, UK
Posts: 157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
+1 to Adm. Lee.



You make a very valid point, but even not using captured AFVs can result in blue-on-blue incidents. Unfortunately, it's simply a side-effect of the inevitable "fog of war". For a recent example, during the 1st Gulf War, at least one Bradley IFV was destroyed by U.S. aircraft. During Barbarosa, and until the Germans lost air superiority on the eastern front, many of their Panzers had Nazi flags spread out on their topside as a recognition symbol to keep their own Stukas from bombing mistakenly bombing them.

Obviously, troops would take every reasonable precaution to avoid becoming the target of friendly-fire, but I see the need for armor outweighing any increased risk. Also, PACT weapons were already an integral part of the reunified German army (in the v.1.0 timeline) so I think improved training would be the solution, instead of avoiding the use of enemy armor.
There is a good argument that the German Army in later versions would still have some of the kit in storage.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-05-2017, 03:29 AM
James Langham2 James Langham2 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mansfield, UK
Posts: 157
Default

Updated with a few extra thoughts on the creation of the unit.
Attached Images
File Type: pdf 746th Independent Tank Regiment.pdf (1.54 MB, 62 views)
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-02-2017, 03:06 PM
Adm.Lee Adm.Lee is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,387
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by unkated View Post
IMHO, by late 1997, I would more expect vehicles to be retained for use by the unit that captured it (for either side), rather than turned back to a central authority.

Picture any unit commander - "While I'd rather have a magnificent vehicle (tank, APC, IFV, SPG) produced by my nation to match the others in my battalion, I cannot get any more (I have been told I will receive them later - much later). Meanwhile, this foreign beast is still working (mostly) and shoots, so while it works, it is better than the crews I have running around as leg infantry."

In the middle of a campaign season, I think few commanders would want to waste the troops (crew + escort) or fuel to send a captured vehicle back to some higher command to be accumulated with other captured vehicles.
IMO, in '97, it seems more likely that the command & logistical structures would be still be strong enough to push captured vehicles to a few units, rather than leave them with the captors. That is, before the nukes fly, captured equipment would just be removed & stored. By winter, they'd be forming units with that captured gear, probably at the army or front level.

It's in '98 and later that divisions & smaller would be hanging onto vehicles as described above.
__________________
My Twilight claim to fame: I ran "Allegheny Uprising" at Allegheny College, spring of 1988.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.