NationStates Jolt Archive

The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Creating a Military

By now, I’ve seen several new players who have asked in one form or another how to create a military. Many of the questions seem to center on creating an army, the logistics breakdown of an armed force, how much of the population should serve in the military, and the actual RP of a military.

I’ve earned many of my RP stripes through naval RP, but this is intended to be a combination thread that illustrates some basics of military RP so that the reader can use that information with confidence.

First thing’s first: You’re a five million population country and you’re going into your first experience as a RPer on these forums. You have no idea how to create a military and all this talk about battalions and brigades and armoured divisions has you confused. Or, you’re a seasoned RPer who has sent space fleets into battle or has ruled the skies for a long time, but you’re finding out you need boots on the ground to win a war. You could even be someone who may be pretty comfortable with the technologies or the mechanisms of combat RP on the ground, but you could use something to make your RP experience even better. That’s where this comes in.

The first thing you need to do is to look at your population. If you’re a tiny country (for instance, a population of five million), you can and likely should devote about two percent of your nation’s population to the military. Does this mean that you would have a 100,000 man army of pure combatants? Not if you want a realistic fighting force. Keep in mind that you would need to have logistics personnel, such as cooks, repair technicians, medical corps, communications officers, not to mention administration. And that holds true for the Navy and the Air Force as well. In addition, you’re likely going to need to have a unit like the Marines and you’ll need special forces. All of a sudden, 100,000 people in your military seems even smaller.

A couple of other factors play into your RP of your military. If you’re landlocked, you won’t need a Navy. But you’ll also have problems with getting goods except on the ground or through the air, and those goods will have to pass through a neighboring country’s airspace or territory. If you’re an island country, you will need to put more emphasis on your Navy because you’ll have more coastline to defend. Once you’ve decided which aspect to RP, you can go from there to the actual creation of your military.

Army Combat Issues
One of the cardinal rules of combat is to mind your logistics. Many RPers disagree on exactly how much logistics to combat personnel to use for a realistic portrayal of ground warfare. I’ve seen anything from a minimum of 1:4 (one combat soldier to four logistics personnel) to 1:9. One thing to keep in mind is that ratio relates to units, not specifically men. One cook could keep a company well-fed and perhaps one medic can take care of a platoon. Maybe those numbers in themselves aren’t exactly accurate, but the idea is that you don’t need to have an overwhelmingly large logistics base, but don’t forget to include logistics. Your uber tank of doom can’t do its job if it runs out of fuel or weapons. Your men will starve to death if you don’t supply them with food or they don’t eat the food off the land. And if you decide to rely on the enemy’s countryside for combat sustenance, your troops are going to spend valuable time looking for food when they could be spending it advancing on your enemy. Not a good idea.

One more thought on logistics. I’ve seen many RPers who have seven or eight or more different main battle tanks or several different infantry rifles. I’ve been guilty of this too in my early days of NS. Why do I consider this a problem? Guns need ammunition and soldiers need training on how to use their weapons. The more classes of weapons, tanks, APCs, etc. they have, the longer they will have to train on these items, the more confusing it could potentially be to a soldier, and the harder it will be to keep enough supplies on hand for a prolonged conflict. It’s best to concentrate on no more than one or two types of rifle, tank, etc. It makes it a lot easier to repair tanks when your engineers have seen the same type of tank over and over than it is when they have eight types to learn.

As much as I’ve harped on logistics, why go through the trouble when many people don’t RP a supply convoy or the mechanics of repairing a tank? When you can get away with deploying 100,000 troops and writing something like, “plus logistics personnel,” why spend so much time on the logistical matters? Simple. It helps make for more entertaining RP if you can paint a realistic combat scene. Yes, there are people who have served in the military who play this game. Many of us haven’t. But that doesn’t prevent the people who couldn’t last the first night in military boot camps from writing entertaining military reading.

One more point to discuss when you decide on developing your army: There are lists of breakdowns of army organisations, how many armoured divisions or airborne battalions or whatnot. You can use those for a guide in building your army, but the most important consideration is to decide what your army is going to specialise in. Is it going to be built on infantry actions on the battlefield, or is it going to be a counter insurgency unit? Those change the way you plan your army.

Navy Matters
I’ve spent a lot of time discussing the Navy in other threads, so I’m not going to devote as much time to my NS bread and butter here. The basic considerations you have to keep in mind when you develop a Navy are its main mission. Is your navy going to be intended to project naval power anywhere in the world? Is it primarily going to be a coastal defence unit? Or is it going to have to be a jack of all trades unit? Those factors change the complexion of how you build a navy. The joint treatise on naval strategy (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=412713) that Praetonia and I wrote goes into much greater detail, but those are some of the basics. You also have to keep supplies in mind with naval RPing because ships need fuel (if they’re nuclear powered aircraft carriers, they need fuel for their jets and helicopters) and sailors need food and uniforms.

Air Force Comments
Now we go on to the Air Force. In a modern NS world where the battleship still reigns supreme, aircraft aren’t quite the ultimate weapon they are in real life, so why devote much time to them? The Air Force or naval aviation wings often replace the sailing frigate of the 1800s as the eyes of a fleet and can provide solid escort cover to a fleet. I usually keep at least one squadron of fighters in the air at all times in the event of an aerial attack. That allows me to respond quickly and buy time until I can get the rest of my jets in the air.

In addition, airlifts of combat vehicles and troops are a fast and effective way of getting combat troops into theatres or near enough to set up their attacks. You can strike at ground targets using strike fighters, helicopter gunships, and fighter-bombers, but in aerial matters, you still have to keep logistics in mind. More and more, people use unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for reconnaissance missions, and there are now smaller and smaller, backpack-sized UAVs that can evade radars. There is still a role for electronics intelligence aircraft, and in flight refueling is a good way to keep those heavy bombers in the air to do their jobs. Speaking of the bomber, unless it’s a stealth bomber that can double as a fighter in a pinch, it will need a fighter escort. Just one more bit of logistics for you.

As for actual aerial combat, you can read novels that include dogfights (even though one-on-one dogfights are rare in the NS world) or aerial battles so you can get a general feel for the lingo and how to plan general tactics. But even a basic understanding of strategy can go a long way toward making you a successful aerial combat RPer. I don’t consider myself an aerial expert in any way, shape, or form, but I’ve had success with aerial combat RPs and I’ve done pretty well with an aircraft storefront.

Special Forces
The newest “branch” of a modern day military, the special forces seems to have become a specialised form of RP in its own right. Similar to the terrorist attack RPs that were legion at one time, the special forces RPs require you to be meticulous about the planning for your attacks. You will most likely need to get cooperation from your “victim,” for such an attack. Some information you’d probably need are names of cities, important landmarks, bridges, supply convoys, etc. Your mission as a special operations agent is to disrupt the enemy from carrying out his missions. Doing stuff like taking out power lines or destroying a communications tower forces the enemy to solve those issues before he can fight effectively. If you’ve planned it right, you can hit an enemy before he’s managed to supply himself and you can win a fight you otherwise might have lost.

Space RP
There hasn't been much discussion of space in this thread and in other modern-geared threads similiar to this one. There has been some discussion of future tech logistics and a couple of guides to modern space combat issues, one of the notable threads being this one (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416572) by Whittier. Another great thread for you to look at is Siesatia's Guide to Modern Tech Space Weapons (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=406258). Many of the same logistics basics (supplies, etc.) also apply to space, but there are other factors as well. If you're a modern tech or postmodern tech country, you have to contend with matters such as prolonged effects of micro G (micro gravity) when you write your RPs. If you can travel near the speed of light, but can't quite get as fast as light speed, you may also have to deal with time distortion. In other words, a two year trek to Proxima Centauri could find you watching your grandchildren retire!

Conclusion
It may seem to the NS novice or even the veteran RPer that creating a military, even on a RPG where everything is text-based and much of the game involves creativity and imagination, is highly complicated and confusing. Ultimately, though, in a game where the story’s the thing, the more effort you put into the development of your story, the better it will be and the more enjoyable it will be. Happy hunting!

Links
What Logistics Is (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=275828) by The Evil Overlord
Creatively and Effectively Using an Air Force (http://www.forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=415156) by Geisenfried
The Art of Losing (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416665) by Dracun imperium
Dictionary of Military Terms/Jargon (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=286344) by The Evil Overlord
Creating a tank? Here's something to keep in mind (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8932677&postcount=148), written by GMC Military Arms.

Excellent work.

http://img73.exs.cx/img73/9313/Imperiallogo.jpg
Official Imperial Endorsement

OOC: Wow. I am quite impressed by this thread man. It is very good. It will be wuite helpful when I finally put my military together for real. Thank you and keep up the good work!

Thanks! :)

Nice work Sarzonia!

Do I feel a sticky coming on... :)

Well done comrade... Well done. ^_^

Great job Sarzonia!

Oh and for the record, I'm a fairly big nation with a decent RP record and I still haven't exactly worked out my armed forces.

So it isn't realy required that you work out every last detail(I have a general picture in mind that I keep to) but its handy so I'll be starting on it someday soon; after delaying for about a year that is...

First thing’s first: You’re a five million population country

Stop right there, please. Here is another tip for realistic RPing, I do not understand why people make such a big deal of the Nation States population counter. Not even a whole planet can give birth to 10's of millions of babies a day. For instance, my NS population is about 1.5 billion population, but I role play it at 55 million. I am sure you are very smart, but it is really stupid to base your army on those numbers. In fact, I think it is god-moding, and I find it sad that so many people take it seriously. So, unless you have conquered a good large chunck of the planet, It would be very unlikely for it to have over 1 billion population. Also, there would be plenty of small ones with under 5 million. Here is some real world nations with their approximate populations:

China 1,150,000,000

India 1,000,000,000

USA, 300,000,000

Vatican, 1,000 <---- Yes, it really is that small!

Serbia, 10,000,000

Ireland, 3,000,000

Germany, 82,000,000

Russia, 150,000,000

Italy, 60,000,000

Poland, 39,000,000

Iran, 60,000,000

Brazil, 160,000,000

Australia, 25,000,000

Canada, 35,000,000

Mexico, 110,000,000

World, 6,400,000,000

Anyway, besides that, I just added this to my favorite links, in case this won't be stickied.

You put my humble attempts at organizing a military to shame. While I can organize combat divisions like no other, logistics is still a pain for me to work out.

Very well done. Keep writing.

Stop right there, please. Here is another tip for realistic RPing, I do not understand why people make such a big deal of the Nation States population counter. Not even a whole planet can give birth to 10's of millions of babies a day. For instance, my NS population is about 1.5 billion population, but I role play it at 55 million. I am sure you are very smart, but it is really stupid to base your army on those numbers. In fact, I think it is god-moding, and I find it sad that so many people take it seriously. So, unless you have conquered a good large chunck of the planet, It would be very unlikely for it to have over 1 billion population. Also, there would be plenty of small ones with under 5 million. Here is some real world nations with their approximate populations:

Newsflash, this ain't yo daddy's earth, this is nationstates, get used to it.

If you want realism switch off the computer and go outside.

Stop right there, please. Here is another tip for realistic RPing, I do not understand why people make such a big deal of the Nation States population counter. Not even a whole planet can give birth to 10's of millions of babies a day. For instance, my NS population is about 1.5 billion population, but I role play it at 55 million. I am sure you are very smart, but it is really stupid to base your army on those numbers. In fact, I think it is god-moding, and I find it sad that so many people take it seriously. So, unless you have conquered a good large chunck of the planet, It would be very unlikely for it to have over 1 billion population. Also, there would be plenty of small ones with under 5 million. Here is some real world nations with their approximate populations:
(snip)

Well, that's nice, but NSEarth is approximately the size of Jupiter, and multiplanar to boot, so there's no real limit on population save imagination.

Vastiva can support a population nearing two billion because of it's colonies and expansions. As this becomes impossible, we will either conquer more or expand upwards - or find some other method. Why? Because we like the challenge and we accept the NSEarth model.

There's also no way a FT nation of "five million" or "fifty million" could be effectively holding planets and running spacefleets, so a greater population "behind the scenes" could be assumed.

If you don't, that's your choice - but there is no *standard* here everyone abides by, so it is probably best to talk to whomever you are roleplaying with first to get a handle on things.

Agreeing with Vastiva again, this place sure is going to hell...

Stop right there, please. Here is another tip for realistic RPing, I do not understand why people make such a big deal of the Nation States population counter. Not even a whole planet can give birth to 10's of millions of babies a day. For instance, my NS population is about 1.5 billion population, but I role play it at 55 million. I am sure you are very smart, but it is really stupid to base your army on those numbers. In fact, I think it is god-moding, and I find it sad that so many people take it seriously. So, unless you have conquered a good large chunck of the planet, It would be very unlikely for it to have over 1 billion population. Also, there would be plenty of small ones with under 5 million. Here is some real world nations with their approximate populations:

China 1,150,000,000

India 1,000,000,000

USA, 300,000,000

Vatican, 1,000 <---- Yes, it really is that small!

Serbia, 10,000,000

Ireland, 3,000,000

Germany, 82,000,000

Russia, 150,000,000

Italy, 60,000,000

Poland, 39,000,000

Iran, 60,000,000

Brazil, 160,000,000

Australia, 25,000,000

Canada, 35,000,000

Mexico, 110,000,000

World, 6,400,000,000

Anyway, besides that, I just added this to my favorite links, in case this won't be stickied.


MATE U ARE WAY OFF

Australia is about 20 million, i would know as i live there, and serbia aint 10 million

This is an excellent reference. Way to go, Vastiva.

If you want to get really complicated, the supply troops have to eat too.

Well, that's nice, but NSEarth is approximately the size of Jupiter, and multiplanar to boot, so there's no real limit on population save imagination.

Vastiva can support a population nearing two billion because of it's colonies and expansions. As this becomes impossible, we will either conquer more or expand upwards - or find some other method. Why? Because we like the challenge and we accept the NSEarth .

There's also no way a FT nation of "five million" or "fifty million" could be effectively holding planets and running spacefleets, so a greater population "behind the scenes" could be assumed.

If you don't, that's your choice - but there is no *standard* here everyone abides by, so it is probably best to talk to whomever you are roleplaying with first to get a handle on things.

Yes, If you owned an interplanetary Empire, with many earth-like planets, and you are still conquering other solar systems, than you probably could get +20,000,000 population a day, but I was talking about modern tech nations. Think, if the US population grew at 20,000,000 per day, our hospitals would be overflowing, and soon, 9 out of 10 people would be babies, so the American government would colapse in a week or two because of overpopulation. Btw, I am aware that 1 Real life day does not equal 1 Nations States day.

We're going off topic here, so let's stop this soon.

Yes, If you owned an interplanetary Empire, with many earth-like planets, and you are still conquering other solar systems, than you probably could get +20,000,000 population a day, but I was talking about modern tech nations. Think, if the US population grew at 20,000,000 per day, our hospitals would be overflowing, and soon, 9 out of 10 people would be babies, so the American government would colapse in a week or two because of overpopulation. Btw, I am aware that 1 Real life day does not equal 1 Nations States day.

We're going off topic here, so let's stop this soon.True. If you follow the peacetime scale 1 RL day = 1 NS year, then your nation is growing about 6 million a year, which is similar to most developing countries with large populations. However, later population growth in real life will fall. The only reason why that doesn't happen on NS is because it's fun to have a population of 5.135 billion and be considered an "old hand" at the game. I think.

And if this isn't stickied, it should be added to the consolidation sticky.

~Czardas, Supreme Ruler of the Universe

[Sticky!]

That is fantastic.

*honoured to have read the thing, for crying out loud!* :p

[Endorsement to be Posted in II Consolidation!]

On account of the sheer magnificent awesomeness of this guide, I hereby grant it a picture of Slash as a reward.

http://usera.imagecave.com/mobrule132001/Slashsofuckingawesomeresize.bmp.jpg

Sarzonia............Outstanding! Great job!

Note: The way I've handled the population thing is to export most of my human pop to my colonial planets and have AI technology perform most of the planetside functions (excepting the military). With the AI units taking on the routine human jobs, it not only gets the jobs done more efficiently, but frees-up more humans for the military, hence 10% of my pop is military instead of the usual 2-5%.

If i was still a n00b, this guide would be my savior.

Well done, cap'n.

Thanks for the compliments everyone! And thanks for Slash! :D

http://img261.echo.cx/img261/8804/image084mad0rp.jpg

TIN the Pirate approves this thread.

*bump*

*bump*

Extremely well done, Sarzonia.

And I got included in the links! Yes! :D

Extremely well done, Sarzonia.

And I got included in the links! Yes! :DHow could I NOT add your guide to using an Air Force? ;)

Now if you could add the section about organisation, it would totally rock!

*bump*

me likes

*bump*

Me likes too

Thank you! :)

*bump*

Sarz, would you mind if I stuck one of my Div models up as an example for any interested parties?

Sarz, would you mind if I stuck one of my Div models up as an example for any interested parties?Not at all. Be my guest! :)

wow, that definately gave be a better insight on how to RP, thank you Sarzonia. :D

Unit organisations


Mechanised Infantry units

Squad: 8 men, 1 IFV
Platoon: 32 men, 4 IFVs
Company: 128 men, 16 IFVs
Battalion: 320 men, 40 IFVs
Regiment: 960 men, 120 IFVs.


Armoured, ESM/ECM and recce units

Platoon: 4 vehicles
Company: 16 vehicles
Battalion: 32 vehicles
Regiment: 96 vehicles


Artillery units (gun, mortar, MRLS, SAM/AAA)

Battery: 4 guns/, 2 resupply MT-LBs, 1 battery control vehicle (ACRV M1974-1 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/mt-lbu.htm)) (Artillery and AAA units)

SAM units: 4 launchers, 1 long-range surveillance radar, 1 battery control vehicle, 2 resupply Transloaders.

Battalion: 16 guns, 10 MT-LB resupply w/trailers, 1 SNAR-10 battlefield surveillance radar, 4 ACRV M1974-1 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/mt-lbu.htm) battery fire-control vehicle, 1 ACRV M1974-2 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/mt-lbu.htm) battalion fire-control vehicle.

SAM units: 16 launchers, 4 long-range surveillance radar, 4 battery control vehicle, 8 resupply Transloaders.



Motor-Rifle Division

One Headquarters company

Three Mechanised Rifle Regiments

Two tank regiments
One independent Tank battalion

Three 122mm SP artillery battalions
Two 152mm SP artillery battalions
Two 203mm SP artillery battalions
Two heavy mechanised mortar battalions
Two MRLS battalions
One towed 125mm AT gun battalion

Two short-range SAM battalions
Two mid-range SAM battalions
One long-range SAM battalion
Three AAA battalions

One reconnaissance company

One engineer battalion (320 engineers, 80 engineering vehicles)

One SSM battery (6 SS-26 TELARs, two ACRV M1974-1 control units)

One electronic warfare battalion

One helicopter attack regiment (24 helicopters)

One transport helicopter regiment (24 helicopters)

One airborne electronic warfare regiment (24 helicopters)

One Spetznaz platoon

Supply units***


224 T-94B (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=351247) MBTs

360 BMP-3M (http://www.army-technology.com/projects/bmp-3/) IFVs

48 2S1 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/2s1.htm) 122mm howitzers
32 2S19 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/2s19.htm) 152mm howitzers
32 2S7 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/2s7.htm) 203mm guns
32 2S4 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/2s4.htm) 240mm mechanised mortars
16 BM-22 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/9p140.htm) 220mm MRLS
16 BM-27 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/9a52.htm) 300mm MRLS
16 2A45 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/2a45.htm) 125mm ATG

32 SA-19 (2S6M) (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/2s6m.htm) SAM/AAA units*
32 SA-15 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-15.htm) SAM launchers*
16 SA-10 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/row/sa-10.htm) SAM launchers
48 ZSU-23-4V1 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/zsu-23-4.htm) SP AA guns

16 BRM (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/brm-1.htm) reconnaissance vehicles
16 BRDM-2RKh (http://www.sovietarmy.com/vehicles/brdm-2.html) NBC reconnaissance vehicles

120 MT-LB (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/mt-lb.htm) utility vehicles**
48 ACRV M1974-1 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/mt-lbu.htm) battery fire-control and command vehicles
12 ACRV M1974-2 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/mt-lbu.htm) battalion fire-control and command vehicles
2 ACRV M1974-3 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/mt-lbu.htm) division mobile command vehicles

11 SNAR-10 (http://www.aviapress.com/viewonekit.htm?ACE-72136) battlefield surveillance radars (fire-finder radars)
4 Tombstone engagement radars (SA-10)
4 Clam Shell (http://www.wonderland.org.nz/nw/clamshell_radar.htm) acquisition radars (SA-10)
4 Big Bird designation radars (SA-10)

10 MT-T (http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/traktors/mt-t.php?menu=history4.php) heavy tractors
10 MTU-72 (http://www.rbs.ru/exhibition/UralExpoArms/2000/MTU-72.htm) bridging tanks (http://tewton.narod.ru/texnica-2/mtu-72-2.jpg)
8 PMM-2 (http://www.galope.com/mike/eng1_info.htm) tracked amphibious bridging systems
8 MDK-3 (http://www.galope.com/mike/eng2_info.htm) ditching units
8 IMR-2 (http://www.galope.com/mike/eng3_info.htm) obstacle-clearing units
8 BAT-2 (http://www.galope.com/mike/eng3_info.htm) obstacle-clearing vehicles
4 IRM (http://www.galope.com/mike/eng3_info.htm) engineer reconnaissance vehicles
8 MTK-2 (http://www.galope.com/mike/eng3_info.htm) armoured mice-clearers
8 BREM-1 (http://www.armscontrol.ru/atmtc/Arms_systems/Land/Tanks/T-72/brem-1.jpg) tank-recovery vehicles
16 Ural-375 electronic warfare units (jamming and ESM)

6 SS-26 (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/theater/ss-26.htm) SRBMs

24 Mi-28N2 (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=336823) attack helicopters
24 Mi-18B (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=336823) general-purpose helicopters
24 Mi-17 (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/mi-17.htm) EW helicopters (jamming and ESM)

2,400 supply trucks in divisional tail (Ural-375, ZiL-131, GAZ-66)

* These units do not carry long-range surveillance radars. If they are being used for stationary defence, the command vehicle of each platoon is datalinked to the nearest long-range surveillance radar system.

** These are also used as tractors for the towed ATG battalion.

*** Supply units includes all divisional resupply trucks, artillery tractors etc. not listed under individual units.

(This is a little out-of-date, with some old kit, but you get the idea. I decided to add "supply units" as a generic term, since although they're organised as mechanised infantry units, they don't have any specific roles (i.e. there are no refuelling battalions, repair battalions etc.))

Good thread. Sticky.

Interesting ORBAT there, DPUO. Might as well add mine, which is based on American models but with several chances to allow it to possess a greater firepower through artillery and air defence, along with a modest reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering (such as ELINT) capability. The model also reflects the centralization on mobility abnd maneuver warfare as opposed to numbers and large-scale attrition warfare. In total, it has about 21,000 personnel, though only a small fraction (a few thousand) are actual combat personnel.

Normally in an Omzian Group Army, two of these divisions joins up with two Armoured Divisions and an Armoured Cavalry Regiment to form a mechanized corps.

Standard Omzian Mechanized Infantry Division
Organization
1x Headquarters
2x Mechanized Infantry Brigades (ea. w/ 2x Mech Inf Battalions and 1x Armoured Battalion)
1x Armoured Brigade (1x Mech Inf Battalion and 2x Armoured Battalion)
1x Artillery Brigade (3x 155mm SPG Battalion, 1x 227mm MLRS Battalion, 1x 122mm MLRS Battalion)
1x Aviation Brigade (2x Attack Helicopter Battalions, 1x Utility Helicopter Battalion, 1x Scout Squadron)
1x Air Defence Brigade (2x Front AD Battalions, 1x Medium AD Battalion, 1x Heavy AD Battalion)
1x Engineering Brigade (3x Engineer Battalions)
1x Support Brigade & Command

1x Assault Gun Battalion
1x Recoilless Rifle Battalion
1x Anti-Tank Battalion
1x Signal Battalion
1x Reconnaissance Company
1x Chemical Company
1x Electronic Warfare Company
1x Military Intelligence Battalion
1x Armed Police Company
1x Special Forces Platoon

Major Combat Units
259x M17 Reiter MBT
416x Nova Cat IFV/CFV/FISTV
58x Whitewolf 105mm Assault Guns
58x MUTM-AT (Ostrich ATGM)
58x Ontos II 106mm Recoilless Rifle Vehicles
48x AH-27A Peregrine
16x RAH-98 Seminole

54x Cavalier 155mm SPG
18x 227mm MLRS
18x 122mm MLRS
60x 120mm Self-Propelled Mortars (Modified Nova Cat Chassis)

48x Coelion SPAAG
24x Slingshot Short Range AD Vehicles
54x MUTM-AD (Avenger)
36x MUTM-MAD (Basalisk Missile)
24x Vespa TELARs

Nice posts DPUO and Omz!

*bump* with the possibility of adding a piece on logistical matters.

This is good, actually. I KNEW there was something like this floating around, I just couldn't find the damn thing. Are you sure this is linked from your 'useful links' in the II Consolidation Sticky? If not, it might be a useful addition.

One thing: would something about pay scales be of any use? I'm having a hellish time working it out for me, and it might be of general interest and use.

One thing: would something about pay scales be of any use? I'm having a hellish time working it out for me, and it might be of general interest and use.If you or anyone else has something that's useful, feel free to post it!

I'd have to guess at what would be considered a good payscale for the various levels of my military.

Hey, Sarz... nice work on this one.

I go away for a while... and sense returns to the boards. There's a dark irony in here somewhere...

Logistics for the Rest of Us

Rather than go into great detail into logistical matters and doctrines and tread ground that's already amply been covered by The Evil Overlord or The Macabees, I figured I could provide a quick and dirty example of some of the pratfalls that would befall a military that doesn't pay attention to logistical matters that seem trivial to RPers who aren't Tom Clancy wannabes or military experts.

Besides the obvious issue that hundreds of thousands of combat or support units have to eat and have to receive supplies, one issue that I notice with many RPers (and I've recently been guilty of this and may still be guilty of this in some respects) is the use of several different types of ships or weapons or combat vehicles that all serve the same or similar roles. What's the problem with oohing and aahing over both Soviet Bloc's ST-37 Mekhev MBT or Praetonia's IPO-145 Phalanx MBT and ordering both? Well, there's nothing wrong with being impressed with both designs enough to want to integrate both into your military since both can be used for different roles and both have different strengths. However, the more types of vehicles you use, the more your engineers and repair techs -- and, most importantly, your rank-and-file soldiers or sailors or airmen -- have to learn about the functions of each and how to repair each one. Then there's the matter of delivery of parts, ammunition, electronics, etc. to more than one type of unit. In the real world of the military, it can lead to confusion or frustration at best and major losses to a combat unit that's slowed down because they don't have enough of a particular part in stock. It's best if you have one main battle tank per army (though if you have armies that serve different roles, you may have each army use a different tank as long as it's standardised) because then you can have the right parts in the right place at the right time. It makes it a lot easier for your techies to fix a tank if they see the same tank over and over again than it would be if they see 10 different varities of main battle tank. That's a good reason to standardise by using the same air superiority fighter or warship classes throughout your military.

One area that I see debated from time to time and I've seen people have very different opinions on the subject is whether or not to use multirole aircraft or warships. Some people espouse multirole ships for the sake of efficiency, perhaps arguing that 10 ships could do the task of 30 ships if they're designed for anti-submarine, anti-aircraft and anti-ship functions. However, there's an old saying that goes, "jack of all trades, master of none." Multirole ships or fighters can perform all the functions required, but don't do any of them particularly well since they don't have the equipment or personnel needed to do any of the roles exceptionally well. Let's take a frigate that's designed to serve as both anti-submarine and anti-aircraft. Instead of having the most sophisticated submarine hunting electronics there are, the frigate might have to sacrifice that for a general suite to allow for including equipment for aircraft detection. More to the point, instead of a layout with plenty of torpedoes for submarine combat, it'll have to carry fewer torpedoes for the job since it will also have to carry anti-aircraft munitions, thus taking up the space it otherwise could use for torpedoes. That's why I use specialist ships instead of multi-role vessels. They do what they're called on to do well.

While it is more ideal to use only a few number of types of ground vehicles (such as tanks) instead of a vast mix of a hundred different tank types, it is also important to note that flexibility is as paramount as logistics. When using multiple tank types (as I do), it is best to design brigades and divisions around the tank type so that the tank can be used to the best if its ability, not the reverse. Similarily, it is also important to note that it is best to have one tank type in smaller units such as brigades and divisions, while one or two additional types can be incorporated in corps or army-type formations. I personally operate 8 tank types (each dedicated to a specific type of unit), but only three are really used in the majority of my army units, and I never give a division more than one type of tanks. At the same time, perhaps what's more important is commonality in ammunitions - considering that a wide array of different cannon and machine gun calibres will pose problems.

EDIT - Another thing to consider is attrition replacement. When you suffer losses in terms of vehicles, it is crucial that replacements will be readily available. In a major war, when you are playing with an army that buys its equipment, don't simply buy the equipment you need - buy the equipment you need plus additional replacement units that is reserved or "mothballed" in peacetime, but can be made immediately available during wartime. If you plan to incorporate 6000 tanks into your divisions, don't buy 6000; buy 10,000. Unlike what people may perceive, making a huge order as a way to replace your losses isn't the way to do it - prepare beforehand.
For me, while I do buy a lot of ground equipment, I almost always buy two times the number of what I need. Why? Simple reason. You won't have to worry too much if there's a lot of attrition and losses going on.

While it is more ideal to use only a few number of types of ground vehicles (such as tanks) instead of a vast mix of a hundred different tank types, it is also important to note that flexibility is as paramount as logistics.Good point Omz, and one I only glossed over in my mini-rant on logistics. When I did my first draft of my army's Order of Battle, I had two MBT types listed in regular use, though the tanks filled different roles and each army had its own depending on the army's role. That's how I was using both the Mekhev and the Phalanx as MBTs (with my Jaguars sprinkled in other places) and not confusing the heck out of my corps of engineers.

I've got other tank designs that I'll use for specified roles (the Cheetah as a light tank and a new tank design Prae and I are working on for air drops), but it won't be a confusing mess.

EDIT: And EXCELLENT point about attrition replacement. Many, many people don't do this. I actually have over 5,000 ships in my Navy, but during peacetime, I only deploy roughly 1,000 of them and I keep 4,000 in reserve. I also rotate several of them depending on which units need refits so that I'm not unduly stressing particular ships and neglecting others. I can at least double my available fleet immediately via executive order upon the advent of hostilities. Other ships may take some time to be prepared or given emergency refits, but being capable of rapid expansion is vital.

Omz222: You know thats what I do when I buy things. But someone told me that wasn't a good idea because they would decay in storage or something along that lines. I think it was Sarzonia when I bought more ships then needed. Little traitor ;) Just Kidding.

Sarzonia: If you want, I'm currently reformatting my entire army and I can post my ORBAT like Omz and DPUO did, if you want. But good job overall, this should help a lot as it has helped me plenty.

Omz222: You know thats what I do when I buy things. But someone told me that wasn't a good idea because they would decay in storage or something along that lines.
OOC: Indeed, that applies to certain units (for example, guided missiles especially have this problem), while other units will be affected in a much lesser degree; however, it's better to get prepared than to be not prepared.

I am definitely book marking this stuff.

Sarzonia makes a good point about mechanics and the like, but as he hasn't been in the military there's something he isn't aware of. Let's say that in your military the Military Occupation Specialty for a mechanic is an 81 series, and that a tank mechanic is an 81A. If you have more than one type of tank, the IPO-145 mechanics might be 81A1T and the ST-37 mechanics might be 81A2T. So, no, you aren't going to have techs who will learn from the getgo how to maintain two types of tanks, they'll sub-specialize in whatever their unit uses and if in the future they move to a unit that uses the other tank, they'll learn that as well.

Tag. Looking good!

OOC: Nice thread.

Let's say that in your military the Military Occupation Specialty for a mechanic is an 81 series, and that a tank mechanic is an 81A. If you have more than one type of tank, the IPO-145 mechanics might be 81A1T and the ST-37 mechanics might be 81A2T.Good point, but I'd venture to say that since the IPO-145 and the ST-37 are made by different countries, they'd have different electonics sets and I'd think it'd be likely that they'd be different enough to require fairly extensive relearning for a MOS who's used to the Mekhev to switch over to the Phalanx and vice versa.

The electronics issue can be a challenge for reasons as major as whether or not a tank employs millimetric wave rardar or as minor as whether it's the red button or the orange button to fire the main gun. If someone's switching from a ST-29 to a ST-37, I can see your point a bit differently because the unit was manufactured in the same country.

Of course, the US Army doesn't use an Abrams in one unit, a Leopard SA-6 in other units and a Challenger II in still other units, which was the basis for my comments about logistics as they apply to NationStates.

Special Forces do a lot more than simply disrupt enemy supply lines and communication, they can also be used to train the local population to fight against regular forces and support your own regular units in the field, espeicaly when handling POWs. SF can really make up their own roleplay within a conflict and although smaller compared to tons of tank brigades and infantry divisions, they can be just as strong a roleplay and just as fun.

[To a certain extent, I can kind of see your point. However, keep in mind we're talking about mechanics. Yes, nowadays their job is pretty sophisticated, but they still don't have to know more than what systems do what and how to test them to make sure they aren't interfereing with what needs to be fixed. And how to replace them if they do.

Further, complex electronic matters are usually the purview of a warrant officer and the design of electronics doesn't vary as much as you seem to believe, function most certainly doesn't.]

OoC: Very very helpful, Sarzonia. I've been wondering how to create a military and now I know how. Kudos to you! :)

Thanks for the comments.

And that's a good point that a good number of people don't seem to recognise Aequatio. Some do (Pantera during my war against him, for instance), but others usually get the disrupt communications idea in their heads when they think of special ops.

And I have to defer to your greater experience on military matters. It still stands to reason that you don't use seven or eight different varieties of MBT in the same army or corps with different weapons calibres for each one. That seems to be the biggest mistake that new players make.

Yes, using several different MBTs for no other reason than because you can is a logistics headache waiting to happen. However, I would argue that having a handful of different tanks (no more than three or four) for specific purposes and placed in specific units can be not only tolerable, bue easily manageable if your logistics is set up correctly.

Not to turn this into a tank logistics debate or anything; but would you agree that doing just that complicates the logistic chain unecessarily.

Say you have a very good logistic chain supplying spare parts, ammo and fuel for your 3 or 4 different tank units. Now, if the war doesn't go according to plan, any number of things could happen:

Supply chains are compromised or even halted completely by enemy harassment.
One unit is decimated in a tank battle, and needs ten times as many supplies as the two or three others.
All three units take moderate to heavy casualties, both in damaged and totally destroyed tanks.


Either of these will mean that one or more units will receive insufficient logistic support because of the total sum of their special requirements; halting or maybe even crippling your tank force.

1) Then you're fucked anyway, don't matter if your nation owns not a single tank.

2) Okay, so what? That's why you manufacture ready reserve stocks, that way you're covered if things go badly.

3) That happen in war. The answer is this: the unit is no longer an effective fighting force, because if it loses that many tanks you can bet it's also lost a lot of everything else. Pull the unit to the rear until you can bring it back up to strength or you have to commit it to battle.

Dont know why some guys still think swordmen and catapults can defeat Special Ops 5.56mm commandos and Titanium armored tanks ;) , thanks for all the info, byt the way, what's the average of money I need to hold a 3 million men modern army?

Scandavian>> I'm not sure you're following me, or us for that matter.

We're not only talking worst case here. You say that a well-planned logistics system can have three different tank brigades running smoothly. I agree, if you'll agree that it requires more resources than usual.

Now, let's say they all take light casualties. Your brigades remain combat operational, but are sucking your armouries' teat big time. This is a drain, and if further problems arise, you will have to pull all units off the front line, while the soviet army you're fighting, the one that's using nothing but T-34's with new guns in 'em, roll merrily on to your capital.

You seem to think that drawbacks don't happen in war. My point is, when they do, your well-planned support structure will be forced to commandeer many resources, as opposed to a force that uses just one tank model or two similar ones.

[Um, I've been in the military, have you? We had the importance of logistics pouded into our heads from day one, especially accountability of equipment and personel. So no, I don't necessarily agree that's the case. A logistics corp shaped around your army's specific requirements will perform no better and no worse than any other properly organized logistics corp in any other army, just because you happen to use more than one type of tank won't really negetively affect the resources taken up. An example to highlight my point:

Army A has 120,000 MBTs of the M1A2SEP type. Obviously, given that this tank weighs in at 72 tons and uses a jet turbine for an engine, it uses a lot of resources. However, this army's logistics corp is designed properly we can assume minus any deliberate disruption of the supply chain there will be no major inefficiencies.

Army B has 80,000 MBTs of an unspecified 80 ton type and 40,000 MBTs of an unspecified 90 ton type. While it would be safe to assume that Army B will consume more resources than Army A in the operation of its MBTs, that will simply be because larger tanks usually require more resources, not because of the inefficiencies you seem to believe are inherent in operating more than one tank.]

Well, that's getting off the hook rather easy, as the tanks are unspecified.

There is inherently inefficiency in operating two or more tank types PROVIDED they need different types of spare parts. Of course a tank force with different tanks that use the same ammonition, armour, engine parts and so on will not be markedly more inefficient than one with just one tank type.

The logistics issue as it relates to a great many NS players and their tendency to buy the latest cool looking MBT that I was getting at is not realising that you not only have eight different varieties of MBT, but you find out that one uses a 120 mm ETC gun, the other one uses a 135 mm smoothbore, one uses a 125 mm ETC gun, etc. You have to carry weapons for all those calibres, and there is where your problem lies.

If, say, Soviet Bloc's Mekhev MBT and Praetonia's Phalanx MBT use the same calibre of main gun (which I *think* they do), most of the differences in those two designs lie in the combat doctrines of the players. For instance, Praetonia's design has modular armour to make it easier to repair. Soviet Bloc's is NOT modular to strengthen the armour.

I use those examples because they're the main inspirations behind my Z-34 Bonham. While my IC preference is to use my own equipment whenever possible, if I used both the Mekhev and the Phalanx in addition to my own tanks, I'd still likely need only one size of weapon for the main gun.

Also, you have to remember that different combat vehicles have strengths and weaknesses that can't all be covered in one design. The player-designed tanks above would be excellent in the sort of combat they're designed for, but they're not all-purpose weapons. You'd have a very hard time airlifting them into combat theatre and they wouldn't be used for delivering personnel to the mission objective. That's why you have IFVs and APCs. You also might have a light tank for airdrop capabilities to support an airborne division and/or undertake reconnaissance missions. You might use a medium tank to have something you can manufacture quickly and flood your enemy with more tanks than they can handle, like what the U.S. did with the Sherman medium tanks against German tanks that outclassed them in every way.

I'll end this post because I've rambled on far too long about a subject that's not exactly my expertise (at least if you can call player knowledge of combat "expertise"), but I guess what's happened here is that I've come around a bit to Scandavian States's way of thinking...

[Tiastan, I said unspecified because there's a shitload of them in NS, take your pick. Now, if I were to have used my M-3 Arbitor and M-4 Adjudicator as examples, it would have only served to highlight my point. Both are practically the same tank, the M-4 is just a tad simpler in the weapons department and focuses more on packing a big punch in its main gun; the perfect tank for opening up holes. The M-3 is your run of the mill MBT, it's good for manuever warfare and rolling up enemies on their exposed flanks, which is why it sees more service than the M-4. I've also designed a medium battle tank for a light cav division I'm considering, it shares a great deal of commonality of parts, at a guess I would say 60-80%. I'm also in the process of designing a family of vehicles based off each tank, everything from IFVs all the way to SAM vehicles.

What we've been engaged in is a debate between two differing doctrines. Both can, and do, work so long as you configure your army for them.]

Since a couple of players have asked for help, I figured I'd bump this thread.