4th ed T2K

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by FPSlover

The only possible way London could justify having most of the TA deploy is if they recreated the Home Guard or something equally as mad to take over defense at home. Which again, is not their job, as it's the TA's job to conduct home defense. Even then, at least SOME (call it at least 25% and more probably 30%) of the TA would have to remain at home so as to properly train said units and war replacements.

There are often misconceptions about the TA's role in T2K. That may be because the original V1 British order of battle was a complete work of fiction in that it completely ignored the TA and appeared to have been written by someone who had zero knowledge of their role / structure (IRL the TA would have formed the bulk of the 2nd UK Division and would have also rounded out other Divisions in the same way that US National Guard Brigades rounded out Regular Divisions). Or it may be because at the end of the Cold War the TA's role changed so it can sometimes take a bit of digging to get to the Cold War period.

The TA in this period was split. Some units did have a home defence role, but others were tasked with reinforcing BAOR. LouieD is more of an authority on this than I am and can correct me if I'm wrong but off the top of my head, the split was something like 75% to BAOR vs 25% UK Home defence (both of those figures include support as well as combat units).

From memory there were something like 14 TA Infantry Battalions and 2/3 Light Recon Regiments (each equivalent to a Battalion and equipped with Land Rovers) allocated to home defence - roughly one per civil defence area plus a couple of spares. There would have probably also one Regular Brigade tasked to home defence, probably based in the London area and mostly made up of Guards Battalions. The TA have no training role - that would have been down to the Regular Army.

Also, there was an attempt to recreate the Home Guard in the early 1980's - it was called the Home Service Force, and numbered approx 5000 men in approx 50 Platoons across the UK at its peak.

As some of you know in the past I've spent many hours working on a realistic (and non canon) T2K timeline for the UK. I've read the new timeline (briefly) and the section on the UK. I find the idea of a Soviet invasion of the UK fanciful and will be ignoring it going forward but I do not think it's Alien Space Bats territory. If I really had to rationalise it I'd posit it the same way as Division Cuba in V1 - a Division sized unit (7th Guards Air Assault according to the UK write up) secures a toehold, HMG is unable to assemble the forces to kerb stomp them, and the Soviets end up securing a town (or maybe a County) - it's basically the Group of Soviet Forces England in the V1 SGUK on a larger scale.

Other than that, while I appreciate it's only a few paragraphs, I don't think they've done too bad a job with the UK setting. There's room for improvement for sure (even with no help from the mainland I rather doubt the IRA would be able to hold their own against the RUC and the UDR without overt military support from the Irish Republic) but it's certainly an improvement on the V1 Survivor's Guide to the UK (although that is admittedly a pretty low bar - at least they didn't have the Queen abdicating). The Cornish Independence angle is plausible.

[FPSlover]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

The TA in this period was split. Some units did have a home defence role, but others were tasked with reinforcing BAOR. LouieD is more of an authority on this than I am and can correct me if I'm wrong but off the top of my head, the split was something like 75% to BAOR vs 25% UK Home defence (both of those figures include support as well as combat units).

From memory there were something like 14 TA Infantry Battalions and 2/3 Light Recon Regiments (each equivalent to a Battalion and equipped with Land Rovers) allocated to home defence - roughly one per civil defence area plus a couple of spares. There would have probably also one Regular Brigade tasked to home defence, probably based in the London area and mostly made up of Guards Battalions. The TA have no training role - that would have been down to the Regular Army.

Also, there was an attempt to recreate the Home Guard in the early 1980's - it was called the Home Service Force, and numbered approx 5000 men in approx 50 Platoons across the UK at its peak.

As some of you know in the past I've spent many hours working on a realistic (and non canon) T2K timeline for the UK. I've read the new timeline (briefly) and the section on the UK. I find the idea of a Soviet invasion of the UK fanciful and will be ignoring it going forward but I do not think it's Alien Space Bats territory. If I really had to rationalise it I'd posit it the same way as Division Cuba in V1 - a Division sized unit (7th Guards Air Assault according to the UK write up) secures a toehold, HMG is unable to assemble the forces to kerb stomp them, and the Soviets end up securing a town (or maybe a County) - it's basically the Group of Soviet Forces England in the V1 SGUK on a larger scale.

Other than that, while I appreciate it's only a few paragraphs, I don't think they've done too bad a job with the UK setting. There's room for improvement for sure (even with no help from the mainland I rather doubt the IRA would be able to hold their own against the RUC and the UDR without overt military support from the Irish Republic) but it's certainly an improvement on the V1 Survivor's Guide to the UK (although that is admittedly a pretty low bar - at least they didn't have the Queen abdicating). The Cornish Independence angle is plausible.

And your post is why I shouldn't reply to someone without collecting my thoughts and half asleep. I was well aware of the TA's role in the BAOR, albeit given the war, most would have long since called up to fill it and other places. Indeed, from what I can gather, most would have been gone and mobilized within the first few months of the war being made official.

As for the HSF, I did not know that and I suppose further research will be needed on that front. 5,000 men dispersed across the country would have been hard pressed to stop any invasion. Even the one you imagined. Does it say anywhere if they expanded it during the war period?

As your your scenario in particular, I agree with it. Albeit it is rather odd sacrificing such an elite division for a task that is almost certainly suicidal. Sure, they may not die immediately, but it will only take time for remaining British units in country to converge and destroy them. And for what in the grand scheme of things? Chaos? Even landing in NATO's rear would have produced a slightly higher survival rate (and caused more damage/loss of life) than landing them in the UK.

It is good to hear at least that Operation Armageddon was not implemented by the Irish government. Although that might actually make sense when compared to what I've read on here and elsewhere. With fanciful landings of Soviets in the UK, a broken US and armies destroyed left, right and center, a Irish invasion of Northern Ireland seems like nothing in comparison. As it stands though, that did not happen and we are left with an unusual situation. The IRA (at least as of the late troubles) were not meant to go toe-to-toe or even close with British units in the UK. If they had tried, they would have been destroyed.

[Raellus]

Although I too have some issues with the new backstory, I don't think hyperbole and name-calling is helpful or even merited. This is an Alpha, and if enough folks offer CONSTRUCTIVE criticism of certain problematic aspects of the project, they might get fixed.

IMHO, some folks are reading a bit much into the bit of the backstory regarding the failure of NATO's Operation Reset offensive (unless I'm missing a more detailed description of said op somewhere else in the Alpha). It seems to me that the authors were deliberately vague in order to leave room for Ref interpretation. One is free to interpret it as "NATO is effectively destroyed and running for the hills", OR one can interpret it more conservatively (closer to what happens to the Summer 2000 offensive described in v's 1 & 2).

Also, I think some people miss the entire point of the game- that player parties are supposed to be cut off and on their own. T2k is not a wargame. It's a military ROLE PLAYING GAME.

-

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Also, I think some people miss the entire point of the game- that player parties are supposed to be cut off and on their own. T2k is not a wargame. It's a military ROLE PLAYING GAME.

It's almost as if you've read the game, Rae:

Originally Posted by Twilight: 2000 Play Manual (1st Edition)

Twilight: 2000 is Game Designers' Workshop's trademark for its role-playing game of survival in a devastated world.

A character is more than a battle rifle and an 18 on a random vehicle table. A story is more than a set of combat results. The foremost objective of any RPG setting design process should be an interesting environment in which the player characters have the freedom to act and the capability to evoke meaningful change on some scale.

- C.

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Raellus

This is an Alpha, and if enough folks offer CONSTRUCTIVE criticism of certain problematic aspects of the project, they might get fixed

Didn't happen when they were actually asking for input. Played around the edges a bit and threw some lace on to pretty it up....

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Believe me though, this is MUCH better than it was in earlier versions!

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Played around the edges a bit and threw some lace on to pretty it up....

They've made significant changes from earlier versions, and then toned it down again, so now it's set in stone? I don't quite follow that line of reasoning.

Plus, this time, they're soliciting feedback from all of the KS backers, not just a select few. Might that have a little more weight than small group that got an exclusive sneak peek?

-

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Raellus

They've made significant changes from earlier versions, and then toned it down again, so now it's set in stone? I don't quite follow that line of reasoning.

Plus, this time, they're soliciting feedback from all of the KS backers, not just a select few. Might that have a little more weight than small group that got an exclusive sneak peek?-

It was far more than a sneak peek. We were encouraged to actively contribute and then our suggestions either ignored of given only the slightest attention. In some cases there were glaring issues raised and all that happened was changing of a word or two with the core problem remaining.

This was in a period where there were supposed to be broad changes made to the foundations of the background. You really think they're going to do anything significant now? All that will happen now is tweaks to layout, spelling, and MAYBE a few names here and there.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

It was far more than a sneak peek. We were encouraged to actively contribute and then our suggestions either ignored of given only the slightest attention. In some cases there were glaring issues raised and all that happened was changing of a word or two with the core problem remaining.

This was in a period where there were supposed to be broad changes made to the foundations of the background. You really think they're going to do anything significant now? All that will happen now is tweaks to layout, spelling, and MAYBE a few names here and there.

Well, I don't know. I've been hearing hints of this "sneak peek" for a while now but I don't really know what to make of it. Call me overly cynical, but I'm always a bit leery of "I can't tell you anything about it, but trust me on this..." [secret knowledge] type hints and allegations stuff. And you yourself wrote,

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Believe me though, this is MUCH better than it was in earlier versions!

And yes, I imagine that if enough KS backers chime in with constructive criticism, it might lead to some change. I mean, if a hundred people poke holes in the game world history, it might have more of an impact than when a select, mostly anonymous few did. Then again, you could be right and I could be wrong.

My point is, I don't see the point in bitching and moaning about something that isn't necessarily set in stone. I doubt it will do much good. I'd rather try to stimulate change through constructive means and official channels, than rant and rave about it on a fan site.

-

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

It was far more than a sneak peek. We were encouraged to actively contribute and then our suggestions either ignored of given only the slightest attention. In some cases there were glaring issues raised and all that happened was changing of a word or two with the core problem remaining.

This was in a period where there were supposed to be broad changes made to the foundations of the background. You really think they're going to do anything significant now? All that will happen now is tweaks to layout, spelling, and MAYBE a few names here and there.

I also had a ton of comments with Tomas and Marc - and got flat out ignored by them and told that what was leaked wasnt the reality of what the game would be -
I have direct quotes that say basically said that what was leaked was totally inaccurate as to the timeline, background, war and campaign start situation - and then out comes the Alpha and it backs up the leaked material - and if anything its worse

and refs can ignore anything they like - but the war and timeline and background is canon if its not changed and would have to be used by anyone writing for the 4th edition - and frankly as stated before its a goat screw - and at this point I doubt Tomas will be listening to anyone even with them getting ripped a new one on FB, here and discord. After all he hasnt been listening to anyone so far.

[Rockwolf66]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

It was far more than a sneak peek. We were encouraged to actively contribute and then our suggestions either ignored of given only the slightest attention. In some cases there were glaring issues raised and all that happened was changing of a word or two with the core problem remaining.

As someone who did see draft information, We did complain about the timeline and how pro-Soviet it was and got told that we were looking at "Outdated information" and that the finished project would not reflect "current politics in any way".

This is lies because President West is a warmongering Idiot who embodies multiple Leftist stereotypes of Republican Politicians.

As such I hope to get the game used as not to give them a dime for it.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Although I too have some issues with the new backstory, I don't think hyperbole and name-calling is helpful or even merited. This is an Alpha, and if enough folks offer CONSTRUCTIVE criticism of certain problematic aspects of the project, they might get fixed.

IMHO, some folks are reading a bit much into the bit of the backstory regarding the failure of NATO's Operation Reset offensive (unless I'm missing a more detailed description of said op somewhere else in the Alpha). It seems to me that the authors were deliberately vague in order to leave room for Ref interpretation. One is free to interpret it as "NATO is effectively destroyed and running for the hills", OR one can interpret it more conservatively (closer to what happens to the Summer 2000 offensive described in v's 1 & 2).

Also, I think some people miss the entire point of the game- that player parties are supposed to be cut off and on their own. T2k is not a wargame. It's a military ROLE PLAYING GAME.

-

It specifically says that all the NATO units assigned to RESET were overrun and the troops running for the hills.

They assigned EIGHT FULL CORPS to RESET - this isnt just the 5th Division - this is every division that was assigned in the SECRET document

So that means 3 Polish Corps, One German, One British, One Belgian, One US and One Netherlands Corps all overrun and destroyed

SOVIETS UBER ALLES

I read the entire Alpha player manual for the background and the war.

So unless you are a Soviet Fan Boy the 4th edition isnt for you as far as timeline and background

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Although I too have some issues with the new backstory, I don't think hyperbole and name-calling is helpful or even merited. This is an Alpha, and if enough folks offer CONSTRUCTIVE criticism of certain problematic aspects of the project, they might get fixed.

IMHO, some folks are reading a bit much into the bit of the backstory regarding the failure of NATO's Operation Reset offensive (unless I'm missing a more detailed description of said op somewhere else in the Alpha). It seems to me that the authors were deliberately vague in order to leave room for Ref interpretation. One is free to interpret it as "NATO is effectively destroyed and running for the hills", OR one can interpret it more conservatively (closer to what happens to the Summer 2000 offensive described in v's 1 & 2).

Also, I think some people miss the entire point of the game- that player parties are supposed to be cut off and on their own. T2k is not a wargame. It's a military ROLE PLAYING GAME.

-

What part of “all the divisions involved in Reset were overrun and their survivors running for the woods” was unclear? That’s eight Corps including the entire Polish Army overrun and the survivors running for their lives. I have read a lot of military history and that pretty much is a destroyed NATO and Soviets Uber Alles situation - that is not in any way close to V1 or V2.2 - we aren’t just talking the 5th here - we are talking every division in the Secret handout.

And this is very late in the war - this isn’t a situation like where units were overrun in Korea in V1 - this is the last gasp the last effort - ie there isn’t anyone left to stop the Soviets

Sorry but that is utter BS - and one other big question - where are the hundreds of thousands of reinforcements that the US put together - are you telling me the Soviets killed them all or most of them in the big naval battle? Because there isn’t a lot of fighting between the supposed huge naval battle and Reset

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Olefin

What part of “all the divisions involved in Reset were overrun and their survivors running for the woods” was unclear? That’s eight Corps including the entire Polish Army overrun and the survivors running for their lives.

Repost from #152:

"In the end, the NATO divisions of Operation Reset are overrun, survivors fleeing into the woods. The final order from HQ is short and to the point: “Good luck. You’re on your own now.”"

p. 148 v4 Player's Manual (Alpha Version)

I still think this is vague enough to allow Ref's room for interpretation. It doesn't say "destroyed" or "annihilated" or "wiped out". "Overrun" doesn't necessarily mean any of these things. Several US divisions could be described as having been overrun during the Battle of the Bulge, but organized elements of said continued to fight on. German divisions on the eastern front during the later years of WWII were routinely overrun, but many broke out of Soviet pockets and fought their way back to German lines, sometimes over and over again.

-

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Repost from #152:

"In the end, the NATO divisions of Operation Reset are overrun, survivors fleeing into the woods. The final order from HQ is short and to the point: “Good luck. You’re on your own now.”"

p. 148 v4 Player's Manual (Alpha Version)

I still think this is vague enough to allow Ref's room for interpretation. It doesn't say "destroyed" or "annihilated" or "wiped out". "Overrun" doesn't necessarily mean any of these things. Several US divisions could be described as having been overrun during the Battle of the Bulge, but organized elements of said continued to fight on. German divisions on the eastern front during the later years of WWII were routinely overrun, but many broke out of Soviet pockets and fought their way back to German lines, sometimes over and over again.

-

From the Secret Handout

5th Infantry Division’s avenue of advance from LESZNO to LODZ along
route RED is bounded on the right (south) flank by the III US Corps main elements, including 2nd Armored Division and 1st Cavalry Division (main body of III US Corps advance to LUBLIN) with 3rd ACR in reserve. 29th and 34thinfantry divisions are advancing further south on their right flank, along the Czech and Slovak borders, toward KRAKOW.
(S/NATO) 5th Infantry Division’s avenue of advance from LESZNO to LODZ is bounded on the left (north) flank by elements of I German Corps (1st and 7th Panzer Divisions, 11th Panzergrenadier Division, and 27th Fallschirmjaeger Brigade) and the
Polish Warsaw Corps advancing from POZNAN to WARSAW.

They are supported by I Netherlands Corps in reserve. On their left (north), I UK Corps and the Polish Pomeranian Corps are to move from SZCZECIN to surround and bypass GDANSK and then move to occupy BIALYSTOK with I Belgian Corps in reserve holding the perimeter around GDANSK.

(S/NATO) Note that current end-strength of the units designated as divisions
is approximately equivalent to one brigade of vehicles and heavy equipment (including artillery) and few or no air assets. Personnel strength for most units is about 50% of nominal end-strength for the peacetime unit size. Corps strengths are similarly reduced to the approximate strength of a full-strength division. All units under OPERATION RESET have been reinforced and resupplied to the maximum amount available by EUCOM/LANDCEN

Ok so the Soviets overran all those forces and the survivors went running for the woods? Suuuurree - that is flat out ridiculous

Per their own handout you are talking about eight Corps that in total are the size of full pre-war divisions, with the divisions making them being approximately the size of a brigade in size and at half strength - i.e. this isnt the 1000 man divisions of V1 and V2.2.

Basically its the end of NATO - this isnt the death of a Division - this is the death of NATO as a fighting force -again this is Soviets Uber Alles and they win the war - which definitely 100% is not what V1 and V2.2 in any way were - not at Kalisz

Frankly this timeline and background is a goat screw.

I know people were hungry for the new edition - but unless you are someone who cheered the Soviets on in Red Dawn I doubt this will be well received by anyone as anything they can build a campaign on.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Ok so the Soviets overran all those forces and the survivors went running for the woods? Suuuurree - that is flat out ridiculous

Per their own handout you are talking about eight Corps that in total are the size of full pre-war divisions, with the divisions making them being approximately the size of a brigade in size and at half strength - i.e. this isnt the 1000 man divisions of V1 and V2.2.

Basically its the end of NATO - this isnt the death of a Division - this is the death of NATO as a fighting force -again this is Soviets Uber Alles and they win the war - which definitely 100% is not what V1 and V2.2 in any way were - not at Kalisz

Frankly this timeline and background is a goat screw.

I know people were hungry for the new edition - but unless you are someone who cheered the Soviets on in Red Dawn I doubt this will be well received by anyone as anything they can build a campaign on.

Repost #2:

I still think this is vague enough to allow Ref's room for interpretation. It doesn't say "destroyed" or "annihilated" or "wiped out". "Overrun" doesn't necessarily mean any of these things. Several US divisions could be described as having been overrun during the Battle of the Bulge*, but organized elements of said continued to fight on. German divisions on the eastern front during the later years of WWII were routinely overrun, but many broke out of Soviet pockets and fought their way back to German lines, sometimes over and over again.

*... and "fleeing into the woods." Some of those overrun divisions were rallied, hastily reorganized and reinforced, and put right back into the fight.

If you want to interpret, "In the end, the NATO divisions of Operation Reset are overrun, survivors fleeing into the woods...” as the absolute worst-case scenario, you're free to do so, but I don't see anything in the Alpha rules that states one has to interpret the above the way you have.

And again, the whole point of the backstory is to arrive at a "Good luck. You're on your own..." point where the military-themed survival role-playing game can begin. T2k is not a strategic war game- it never was.

-

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by FPSlover

And your post is why I shouldn't reply to someone without collecting my thoughts and half asleep. I was well aware of the TA's role in the BAOR, albeit given the war, most would have long since called up to fill it and other places. Indeed, from what I can gather, most would have been gone and mobilized within the first few months of the war being made official.

Yeah, when I researched the subject for my alternative Survivor's Guide it seemed pretty likely that trying to cover home defence commitments would be challenging, especially if you presume that some of the home defence Battalions would be either in or close to nuclear targets so may have been vaporised.

Originally Posted by FPSlover

As for the HSF, I did not know that and I suppose further research will be needed on that front. 5,000 men dispersed across the country would have been hard pressed to stop any invasion. Even the one you imagined. Does it say anywhere if they expanded it during the war period?

I haven't had a chance to study V4 in detail but they seem to prefer a big picture, broad strokes style, so I'd be surprised if there's a specific reference to the HSF being expanded - it's probably something that can be left to an individual to decide. I'd agree that the HSF would be unlikely to make much impact on a Soviet invasion.

Originally Posted by FPSlover

As your your scenario in particular, I agree with it. Albeit it is rather odd sacrificing such an elite division for a task that is almost certainly suicidal. Sure, they may not die immediately, but it will only take time for remaining British units in country to converge and destroy them. And for what in the grand scheme of things? Chaos? Even landing in NATO's rear would have produced a slightly higher survival rate (and caused more damage/loss of life) than landing them in the UK.

I'd agree with all of that. A Soviet invasion makes zero sense to me (other than as a plot device to potentially create interesting adventures in the UK. Again, I find myself drawn to comparisons with the original Group of Soviet Forces England)

Originally Posted by FPSlover

It is good to hear at least that Operation Armageddon was not implemented by the Irish government. Although that might actually make sense when compared to what I've read on here and elsewhere. With fanciful landings of Soviets in the UK, a broken US and armies destroyed left, right and center, a Irish invasion of Northern Ireland seems like nothing in comparison. As it stands though, that did not happen and we are left with an unusual situation. The IRA (at least as of the late troubles) were not meant to go toe-to-toe or even close with British units in the UK. If they had tried, they would have been destroyed.

V4 hints at some Irish Republic support for the IRA but doesn't go into detail as to what that support might entail. Again, if I had to posit a scenario, I'd say there are reports in the South of Loyalist atrocities (real or imaginary) and a local Irish Army commander unilaterally decides to intervene and crosses the border. Once that genie is out of the bottle I don't see it getting put back in. The best comparison I can think of would be the Balkans in the 1990's. When I wrote my non canon V1 stuff I compared Derry to Stalingrad.

I do wonder if a UK Sourcebook might be in the pipeline for later.

[Louied]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

There are often misconceptions about the TA's role in T2K. That may be because the original V1 British order of battle was a complete work of fiction in that it completely ignored the TA and appeared to have been written by someone who had zero knowledge of their role / structure (IRL the TA would have formed the bulk of the 2nd UK Division and would have also rounded out other Divisions in the same way that US National Guard Brigades rounded out Regular Divisions). Or it may be because at the end of the Cold War the TA's role changed so it can sometimes take a bit of digging to get to the Cold War period.

The TA in this period was split. Some units did have a home defence role, but others were tasked with reinforcing BAOR. LouieD is more of an authority on this than I am and can correct me if I'm wrong but off the top of my head, the split was something like 75% to BAOR vs 25% UK Home defence (both of those figures include support as well as combat units).

From memory there were something like 14 TA Infantry Battalions and 2/3 Light Recon Regiments (each equivalent to a Battalion and equipped with Land Rovers) allocated to home defence - roughly one per civil defence area plus a couple of spares. There would have probably also one Regular Brigade tasked to home defence, probably based in the London area and mostly made up of Guards Battalions. The TA have no training role - that would have been down to the Regular Army.

Also, there was an attempt to recreate the Home Guard in the early 1980's - it was called the Home Service Force, and numbered approx 5000 men in approx 50 Platoons across the UK at its peak.

As some of you know in the past I've spent many hours working on a realistic (and non canon) T2K timeline for the UK. I've read the new timeline (briefly) and the section on the UK. I find the idea of a Soviet invasion of the UK fanciful and will be ignoring it going forward but I do not think it's Alien Space Bats territory. If I really had to rationalise it I'd posit it the same way as Division Cuba in V1 - a Division sized unit (7th Guards Air Assault according to the UK write up) secures a toehold, HMG is unable to assemble the forces to kerb stomp them, and the Soviets end up securing a town (or maybe a County) - it's basically the Group of Soviet Forces England in the V1 SGUK on a larger scale.

Other than that, while I appreciate it's only a few paragraphs, I don't think they've done too bad a job with the UK setting. There's room for improvement for sure (even with no help from the mainland I rather doubt the IRA would be able to hold their own against the RUC and the UDR without overt military support from the Irish Republic) but it's certainly an improvement on the V1 Survivor's Guide to the UK (although that is admittedly a pretty low bar - at least they didn't have the Queen abdicating). The Cornish Independence angle is plausible.

Rainbow is spot on, the bulk (for instance 26 of the 40 TA Inf Bns had NATO commitments) of the TA would be going across the Channel on TTW. Plans were very detailed (I have even found documents in the NA showing that plans were being drawn up in the late 1980's to blow the Channel Tunnels which had just started being built !). My co-authors and myself are currently engaged in fleshing out UKLF, besides the 47 HSF Coys, there were 175 HD Res Coys, 14 TA Bns, and 17 Regular Bns committed to Home Defence. Not to mention the whole 7,000 plus UDR would be placed on active service in NI......

If anyone needs more detail I will start a new thread (and I'll try to be short....)