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 07-25-2020, 10:08 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

It's possible the Osprey book got it wrong (it was written during the cold war) and they mistook an existing unit which had been temporarily deployed there, or they just made an assumption based on what they thought should be there using similar situations elsewhere as a template.
It's also possible the Black Sea unit was only a training unit and stripped for reinforcements later in the war. The weather there allows for year round training in the fundamentals much more so than does postings further north.
As for the 63rd in Korea, it's quite likely there was only limited transportation and escorts available (after all, the last major fleet in being had just been destroyed off Norway), so it's quite likely the 63rd were reassigned to Korea when it became apparent that not only could they not be lifted to Alaska, but the Soviets were having trouble supplying the units they'd already sent. Additionally, it appears they were needed as reinforcements against the US/UN offensive.
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-25-2020, 10:31 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Southern AZ
Posts: 4,328
Default It's There

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
It's possible the Osprey book got it wrong (it was written during the cold war) and they mistook an existing unit which had been temporarily deployed there, or they just made an assumption based on what they thought should be there using similar situations elsewhere as a template.
Possible, yes, but multiple other, current sources do list a brigade (not a cadre/training unit- that was listed separately) as being in the Black Sea Fleet OOB.

But, in the T2k writers' defense, neither source ('85 Opsrey) or Global Security.org, et al was available when they were writing the various T2k OOBs and campaign/unit histories.

Or, they misplaced it. There were four RL Naval Infantry brigades and the SVG lists four Naval Infantry Regiments so they may have mis-labeled the Black Sea Fleet one and forgotten to fix it. It was a huge project, and minor errors were bound to happen. There are lots of little mistakes like that throughout canon (numbers transposed, units listed as being in two places at the same time- that sort of thing).

Anyway, I'm a big fan of missing units (ie RL units that aren't mentioned in the SVG), so I'm totally cool with it. Missing units allows an aspiring source book author to expand a bit on canon without departing from it. For example, I found two Far East TVD units that the T2k authors missed (or didn't know about, more likely) and, with Marc Miller's permission, incorporated them in Soviet Forces Korea in the KPSB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker View Post
As for the 63rd in Korea, it's quite likely there was only limited transportation and escorts available (after all, the last major fleet in being had just been destroyed off Norway), so it's quite likely the 63rd were reassigned to Korea when it became apparent that not only could they not be lifted to Alaska, but the Soviets were having trouble supplying the units they'd already sent. Additionally, it appears they were needed as reinforcements against the US/UN offensive.
That sounds more than reasonable. Good call.
__________________
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 07-25-2020, 10:47 PM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

Naval Infantry make a bit of sense in Korea anyway. After all, MacArthur used marines at Inchon to good effect, why wouldn't the Soviets/NK's try something similar?
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-26-2020, 06:07 AM
mpipes mpipes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 290
Default

And you can always have a few more raised. Never forget, in each of the canon time lines, the Soviets had increasingly been mobilizing for the China War. By time WW3 broke out, all their Cat C forces were either mobilized or were mobilizing and a lot of Reservist had already been called up. By the time NATO was involved, all of their wartime production plans were up and running (but so too was the West's for the most part - either to supply the Chinese or as part of the run-up to full war).

Clearly, GDW did not have EVERY unit accounted for, even US forces are woefully incomplete. For example, there are dozens of brigades of various types not mentioned anywhere. Combat Engineer Brigades and Corp Artillery Brigades are all but ignored. Corps HQ units are barely mentioned, and each US Corps command brings a TON of combat support and fire power to the fight. Same with the Soviets. Also, the Spetsnaz and MVD/KGB units are never really discussed either, which gives any game master wanting to add a lot of a fertile unit territory to mine.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-26-2020, 06:42 AM
Legbreaker's Avatar
Legbreaker Legbreaker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 5,070
Default

I don't think it was necessary to include every major unit though, only those in the European theatre the PCs were likely to bump into to begin with. Also, after several years of war, some of those Corps level units may have been broken up and used as replacements further down or permanently assigned at the Divisional, even Brigade or Battalion level as communications became more and more difficult - not much good having a artillery unit for example that can't provide supporting fires because nobody can talk to it, and there's no fuel for them to move into position anyway.
Engineers in my experience are often broken up with component units widely dispersed anyway - they're usually (again, my experience) units for administrative purposes only and very, very rarely come together in one place at the same time.

Worth considering also that the PACT units appear to have taken greater casualties than NATO - Divisional strengths are on the average much lower even though there seems to be more of them. On the other hand they started out with less personnel as well, so perhaps when expressed as a percentage of authorised strength they come out about even...
__________________
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
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-26-2020, 07:42 AM
mpipes mpipes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 290
Default

BIG agree there. By 2000, a lot of units have been disbanded and personnel and equipment re-allocated by all militaries.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-26-2020, 11:43 AM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 4,354
Default

One thing to keep in mind is that Naval Infantry are NOT Marines. In most countries, Marines have a lot more training, from marksmanship to specialized assaults to rearguard actions.

The closest Western approximation to Russian Naval Infantry are the troops who landed on the beaches on D-Day -- they are trained to land on beaches and take objectives, then fight their way in, and some of them has specialist training to allow them to do things like blow wire and blast seawalls and fortifications -- but they are not specially-trained troops like Marines are.
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
soviet naval infantry, soviet navy


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 02:36 AM.


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