sort of, majors get companies. captain is 2ic. Lt colonels get Battalions, regimental colonels are either much higher ranking (general ranks) or honourary (the queen for example.)
this is because british regiments do not deploy as regiments.
Advertisement
by The UK in Exile » Wed Jan 11, 2012 3:06 pm
by Bunny Haven » Wed Jan 11, 2012 3:22 pm
The Amyclae wrote:Bunny Haven wrote:i'm going to rp my nation as very young and nation's military as a having a very large enlistment but strapped for cash and having very uneven rations per division and few vehicles. The vehicles will have been only recently purchased used from other nations looking to upgrade to better stuff.Enlisted personal will be divided between.
Army - 75%
Navy - 15%
Air-force - 5%
Special Ops - 5%
Army
1 M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS)
18 MOWAG Eagle 2 personal transport / patrol vessels
22 non-weaponized Simple Jeeps
Navy
1 Amphibious transport dock San Antonio class
4 small landing craft
2 anti ari fragate Horizon class
1 type 42 destoyrer - flagship
1 mutilpurposs corvette
12 fast patrol boats
Air-force
2 F-111F fighter bomber
5 Mirage III fighter / intercepter
any comments or suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
I'm not sure what you mean by a 'large enlistment.' When I think enlistment I think contracted/volunteer soldiers but you're so strapped for cash that you have a problem acquiring food. On the face of it that's quite the conundrum. If your nation's military budget is so lacking it has trouble purchasing the simplest supplies why would they keep accepting contracts, why would your people find it an acceptable economic avenue? Food for thought.
Also, five percent in the 'Special Ops' seems dreadfully high. Take the U.S. for instance. They have about 2.2 million in the armed forces, and about 60,000 are a part of Special Operations Command. That's less than .1%; you should revise that number downwards.
You should probably nix the San Antonio LPD; you don't need it.
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Wed Jan 11, 2012 5:48 pm
Bunny Haven wrote:i'm going to rp my nation as very young and nation's military as a having a very large enlistment but strapped for cash and having very uneven rations per division and few vehicles. The vehicles will have been only recently purchased used from other nations looking to upgrade to better stuff.Enlisted personal will be divided between.
Army - 75%
Navy - 15%
Air-force - 5%
Special Ops - 5%
Army
1 M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS)
18 MOWAG Eagle 2 personal transport / patrol vessels
22 non-weaponized Simple Jeeps
Navy
1 Amphibious transport dock San Antonio class
4 small landing craft
2 anti ari fragate Horizon class
1 type 42 destoyrer - flagship
1 mutilpurposs corvette
12 fast patrol boats
Air-force
2 F-111F fighter bomber
5 Mirage III fighter / intercepter
any comments or suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
by Nirvash Type TheEND » Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:46 pm
by Jagalonia » Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:50 pm
Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:• Flashlight.
• Chemlight.
• IFAK.
• Canteen Cup.
• Earplugs.
• Internal Communications Radio
• 70 ounces of water in a second hydration bladder.
• Two Meals, Ready to Eat (MREs).
• Poncho and/or Bivy Sack.
• Poncho liner.
• Undershirt.
• Spare batteries.
• Two pair of socks.
• Polypropylene or silk long sleeve undershirt.
• Rifle Cleaning Kit.
• E-Tool.
• Personal hygiene kit.
• Sling rope with two snap links.• Camouflage Uniform with Infrared Tape on left sleeve (1”x1”).
• Flag Patch
• Combat Boots.
• Dog Tags.
• ID Card.
• Undershirt.
• Socks.
• Tactical gloves.
• IR Night Vision Monocular Device.
• Boonie Hat.
• Rigger belt.
• Notebook and pen.
• Watch.
• Knee and elbow pads.
• Goggles or Glasses.
• Folding Knife/Multi-tool.
• 64 ounces of water in two 1-quart canteens.
• 100 ounces of water in a hydration bladder.
• Casualty and witness cards.
• Flex cuffs.
That look about right for a light combat loadout? I left out the weapons and ammo.
Tokyoni wrote:Hitler's mustache looks weird. Adam Smith was a drunken fatass. There, I've just pwned fascism and capitalism by such "logic".
Edlichbury wrote:OOC: If Knootoss can claim alcohol is a biological weapon, I can claim sentient Milk-People.
Senestrum wrote:Russians took the maximum allowable missile performances from the ABM treaty as design goals.
lolz ensued
by Nirvash Type TheEND » Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:52 pm
Jagalonia wrote:Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:• Flashlight.
• Chemlight.
• IFAK.
• Canteen Cup.
• Earplugs.
• Internal Communications Radio
• 70 ounces of water in a second hydration bladder.
• Two Meals, Ready to Eat (MREs).
• Poncho and/or Bivy Sack.
• Poncho liner.
• Undershirt.
• Spare batteries.
• Two pair of socks.
• Polypropylene or silk long sleeve undershirt.
• Rifle Cleaning Kit.
• E-Tool.
• Personal hygiene kit.
• Sling rope with two snap links.• Camouflage Uniform with Infrared Tape on left sleeve (1”x1”).
• Flag Patch
• Combat Boots.
• Dog Tags.
• ID Card.
• Undershirt.
• Socks.
• Tactical gloves.
• IR Night Vision Monocular Device.
• Boonie Hat.
• Rigger belt.
• Notebook and pen.
• Watch.
• Knee and elbow pads.
• Goggles or Glasses.
• Folding Knife/Multi-tool.
• 64 ounces of water in two 1-quart canteens.
• 100 ounces of water in a hydration bladder.
• Casualty and witness cards.
• Flex cuffs.
That look about right for a light combat loadout? I left out the weapons and ammo.
I didn't give this a full look-through, but I sure as hell aren't carrying 2 cantines ontop of a camelback. Drop one of them. I suggest keeping the camelback.
by Jagalonia » Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:03 pm
Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:Jagalonia wrote:I didn't give this a full look-through, but I sure as hell aren't carrying 2 cantines ontop of a camelback. Drop one of them. I suggest keeping the camelback.
Actually you're right. I modeled this after America's Iraq loadout so there probably isn't a need for that much water in a temperate forest area.
Tokyoni wrote:Hitler's mustache looks weird. Adam Smith was a drunken fatass. There, I've just pwned fascism and capitalism by such "logic".
Edlichbury wrote:OOC: If Knootoss can claim alcohol is a biological weapon, I can claim sentient Milk-People.
Senestrum wrote:Russians took the maximum allowable missile performances from the ABM treaty as design goals.
lolz ensued
by Nirvash Type TheEND » Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:05 pm
Jagalonia wrote:Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:Actually you're right. I modeled this after America's Iraq loadout so there probably isn't a need for that much water in a temperate forest area.
I still don't understand why people post loadouts here, they're dependant entirely on the weather, and enviroment...
by Jagalonia » Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:07 pm
Tokyoni wrote:Hitler's mustache looks weird. Adam Smith was a drunken fatass. There, I've just pwned fascism and capitalism by such "logic".
Edlichbury wrote:OOC: If Knootoss can claim alcohol is a biological weapon, I can claim sentient Milk-People.
Senestrum wrote:Russians took the maximum allowable missile performances from the ABM treaty as design goals.
lolz ensued
by Nirvash Type TheEND » Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:10 pm
I plan on creating one for Temperate (forests, plains, highlands), Desert, Arctic, Mountain, and Jungle. It's going to take a while, but I want every meticulous detail of my military on paper. So to speak anyway.Jagalonia wrote:Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:This is only one loadout. More specifically it's my general purpose combat load that I'm going to use as model for my other loadouts.
The difference in loadouts can be imense though, you're not going to have near the same equipment between desert, arctic, or even jungle operations.
by Jagalonia » Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:12 pm
Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:I plan on creating one for Temperate (forests, plains, highlands), Desert, Arctic, Mountain, and Jungle. It's going to take a while, but I want every meticulous detail of my military on paper. So to speak anyway.Jagalonia wrote:The difference in loadouts can be imense though, you're not going to have near the same equipment between desert, arctic, or even jungle operations.
Tokyoni wrote:Hitler's mustache looks weird. Adam Smith was a drunken fatass. There, I've just pwned fascism and capitalism by such "logic".
Edlichbury wrote:OOC: If Knootoss can claim alcohol is a biological weapon, I can claim sentient Milk-People.
Senestrum wrote:Russians took the maximum allowable missile performances from the ABM treaty as design goals.
lolz ensued
by Nirvash Type TheEND » Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:17 pm
by Jagalonia » Wed Jan 11, 2012 7:24 pm
Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:Jagalonia wrote:That sounds like too much work...lol.
That's just baseline infantry. Then you've got snipers, designated marksman, AT units, Squad automatic, Dismounted units, special operations divisions, my as-of-yet unnamed super soldier program. Right now my factbook and combat doctrine are unorganized emaciated messes. They don't have nearly as much info as I want and it's not as neat as I'd like.
Factbook
CD Open to suggestions from anyone and everyone.
Tokyoni wrote:Hitler's mustache looks weird. Adam Smith was a drunken fatass. There, I've just pwned fascism and capitalism by such "logic".
Edlichbury wrote:OOC: If Knootoss can claim alcohol is a biological weapon, I can claim sentient Milk-People.
Senestrum wrote:Russians took the maximum allowable missile performances from the ABM treaty as design goals.
lolz ensued
by Sevvania » Wed Jan 11, 2012 8:39 pm
by The Grand World Order » Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:03 pm
Bafuria wrote:America is spending only 5% and despite having a relatively poor welfare system it is dealing with a budget crisis.
by The Amyclae » Wed Jan 11, 2012 10:55 pm
Sevvania wrote:Military installations.
Namely forts. I need them. More specifically, functions for them. There are five major forts in Sevvania, and I have nothing more in-depth than "They're forts."
So, what could these forts be used for?
i.e. One of these forts is a training ground/federal depository.
by The UK in Exile » Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:01 pm
The Amyclae wrote:Sevvania wrote:Military installations.
Namely forts. I need them. More specifically, functions for them. There are five major forts in Sevvania, and I have nothing more in-depth than "They're forts."
So, what could these forts be used for?
i.e. One of these forts is a training ground/federal depository.
What could modern forts be used for... Target practice, perhaps? It worked smashingly for the French at Dien Bien Phu.
by Allanea » Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:20 pm
The Amyclae wrote:Sevvania wrote:Military installations.
Namely forts. I need them. More specifically, functions for them. There are five major forts in Sevvania, and I have nothing more in-depth than "They're forts."
So, what could these forts be used for?
i.e. One of these forts is a training ground/federal depository.
What could modern forts be used for... Target practice, perhaps? It worked smashingly for the French at Dien Bien Phu.
by Sevvania » Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:09 am
by Sevvania » Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:11 am
Sevvania wrote:I suppose they'd be more along the lines of modern "forts," being found within Sevvania itself, rather than the traditional sense of the word. Like Fort Knox, I suppose, but not quite to that degree. Maybe more of a military installation than a true fort.
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:31 am
The Amyclae wrote:Sevvania wrote:Military installations.
Namely forts. I need them. More specifically, functions for them. There are five major forts in Sevvania, and I have nothing more in-depth than "They're forts."
So, what could these forts be used for?
i.e. One of these forts is a training ground/federal depository.
What could modern forts be used for... Target practice, perhaps? It worked smashingly for the French at Dien Bien Phu.
by The Amyclae » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:21 am
Allanea wrote:The Amyclae wrote:What could modern forts be used for... Target practice, perhaps? It worked smashingly for the French at Dien Bien Phu.
A great example. French casualties were between 1600a and 2200 dead, while Vietnamese casualties were between 4,000 and 22,000.
But there are far better examples of the use of fortifications in defense. The Battle for Damansky Island seems more appropriate here, or the Soviet regiment (whose name I cannot off-hand remember) that held its fort for 900 days of constant Mujahedin attacks in Afghanistan.
by The Reliquary » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:23 am
The Amyclae wrote:Allanea wrote:
A great example. French casualties were between 1600a and 2200 dead, while Vietnamese casualties were between 4,000 and 22,000.
But there are far better examples of the use of fortifications in defense. The Battle for Damansky Island seems more appropriate here, or the Soviet regiment (whose name I cannot off-hand remember) that held its fort for 900 days of constant Mujahedin attacks in Afghanistan.
Ah, right, since the French were able to kill more Vietnamese than the other way around, it must've been a victory; right? It must have been something other than one of France's most crushing defeats of the 20th Century! That thinking worked so well for Westmoreland.
Seriously, I don't know what you guys are all smoking. Forts are dead. Army manuals haven't incorporated the use of of them in... Almost a century now.
Someone feel free to correct me, but the last field manual that addressed the issue of fortifications was from '85 and even then it's merely entitled 'survivability.' Defensive fortifications are seen as a tactical advantage, and there is literally no inclination to turn back the clock to strategic emplacements.
Link
by The Amyclae » Thu Jan 12, 2012 9:26 am
The Reliquary wrote:The Amyclae wrote:
Ah, right, since the French were able to kill more Vietnamese than the other way around, it must've been a victory; right? It must have been something other than one of France's most crushing defeats of the 20th Century! That thinking worked so well for Westmoreland.
Seriously, I don't know what you guys are all smoking. Forts are dead. Army manuals haven't incorporated the use of of them in... Almost a century now.
Someone feel free to correct me, but the last field manual that addressed the issue of fortifications was from '85 and even then it's merely entitled 'survivability.' Defensive fortifications are seen as a tactical advantage, and there is literally no inclination to turn back the clock to strategic emplacements.
Link
What is an FOB/Platoon 'house' if it isn't a fort?
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement