|
Post by Lordof on Jun 16, 2004 2:13:57 GMT -5
Ok i see your point, but i think that just creating a rough guide to what a generic IG Regiment would look like first is the best idea.
So the simplest way, i think, would be just to first of all rough out the command heirarchy and then add in numbers and explanations about things, such as attatched units etc, later.
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jun 21, 2004 16:29:46 GMT -5
I've just read Brusilov's article (finally) and I must say, I like it. In fact, I press it to my heart as a likely truth.
On battalions; Like Brusilov says, the Imperial Guard is a sledgehammer, not a scalpel. Regiments might be unwieldy, but that's the point.
On divisions; If Andy Hoare says battle-groups (from the concept of Kampf-gruppen or whatever), then battle-groups it is. We could go and spend hours contemplating a whole new system with divisions and whatnot, but I consider that a waste of time when Andy Hoare explicitly says that they're working with the concept of battle-groups. Whatever idea we may think of may be more realistic, but I'm here to make the 40k universe more coherent, not less. Defying GW on the matter seems counter-productive.
Maybe I've missed the point of the discussion now.
Generic IG regiment. Sounds like a good idea. I would, but I don't have enough knowledge of military organisation. Perhaps we should invite Brusilov to the ASP forum to discuss these matters, just as we've invited the esteemed Lord Fenric to discuss Eldar?
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jun 22, 2004 0:10:30 GMT -5
...Perhaps we should invite Brusilov to the ASP forum to discuss these matters... Last time that I spoke to Brussie he was going to build a balkanised world for the Anargo sector... somewhere. I haven't managed to corner him since, however.
|
|
Raider
Scribe
The Anti-Christ
Posts: 53
|
Post by Raider on Jun 26, 2004 12:55:37 GMT -5
One immediate concern I have is at what level does the ability to "write cheques" come in.
In other words, who can decide that the Imperial Guard will attack Planets 1,2,3 and allow the enemy to temporarily overrun 4 etc.etc. And more importantly who can authorise campaigns that go across sector boundaries.
|
|
|
Post by Brusilov on Jun 29, 2004 6:05:01 GMT -5
I'm here, this is my first post on the ASP forums I don't hope to reach my Portent post count anytime soon (not as many opportunities for spamming ;D ) I am indeed building a somewhat balkanised world (I might get into more details later) behind closed doors and once I have a first draft of the history, political structure, religions (note the plural)... that I find satisfactory I shall post it in the relevant forum. Anyway, back on topic. First of all Kage, I advocate for the division or brigade to be the pivotal level of IG structure, not the batallion (that exists also in my theory, see Tactica Imperium 3 when it's published ) which is a structure below that of regiment. I'd be keen on working on the structure of the Departmento Munitorum at the sectorial and even sub-sectorial level (as I consider the IG does not extend beyond the regimental level, anything higher is the exclusive realm of the Munitorum). That'd also be a good topic for a future Tactica Imperium article
|
|
Raider
Scribe
The Anti-Christ
Posts: 53
|
Post by Raider on Jun 29, 2004 13:10:57 GMT -5
I personnally feel that the Departmento Munitorum is the High Command of the Imperial Guard, not a seperate organisation.
You've got my agreement that the brigade /division is the lowest formation that could actually be used independently in offense. I can see Independent Infantry Regiments being used in defence.
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jun 29, 2004 21:38:28 GMT -5
Raider - that's plausible...
In such a vast theatre of operations, your high command can just as easily be a beaurocratic operation, as its contact with the enemy is nonexistant, it exists only to direct its forces to where their intervention is required.
|
|
|
Post by Brusilov on Jun 30, 2004 6:17:39 GMT -5
The Munitorum is not so much a separate organisation, simply is the Imperial Guard is in fact the fighting branch of a larger organisation, called the Departmento Munitorum (at least IMO).
Indeed the Munitorum deals with strategic issues, such as preparing plans of invasion, making sure troops are fed, clothed and armed (with ammo and fuel for their vehicles).
It is clear however that the Munitorum is somewhat seperate from the IG. IG concerns itself solely with the fighting (and planning at a tactical level). The Munitorum deals with logistics, strategy... In that sense the Imperial Guard is a semi-autonomous part of the Departmento Munitorum. The two are not seperate, the IG is subordinated to the Munitorum
|
|
Raider
Scribe
The Anti-Christ
Posts: 53
|
Post by Raider on Jun 30, 2004 14:16:07 GMT -5
Hmm I see. So basically we agree its one organisation, we just disagree on the name of the organisation.
Departmento Munitorum deals with Logistics, as well as strategy on a Subsector and above level, while the Guard deals with combat on a planetary level and below.
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jun 30, 2004 21:22:13 GMT -5
Pretty much. Basically, the Munitorum doesn't even have any consideration of combat psychology, local mood or anything else that a modern command system might take into account, for them it's just a numbers game of saving the most important locations first.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 1, 2004 3:00:11 GMT -5
The Munitorum deals with logistics, strategy... I have to ask: Is it really strategy or is it policy? CELS' Edit; Or is it politics?
|
|
|
Post by Brusilov on Jul 1, 2004 4:59:43 GMT -5
Well considering anything with a rank above that of colonel is a Munitorum officer in my mind, the Munitorum also deals with operations at a planetary or lower level (but that might just be me).
As to whether the Munitorum deals with policy or strategy, I would argue both. Deciding to attack this town instead of this own can be considered a political act. As Clausewitz said (and this was often mis-interpretated): "war is the continuation of politics through other means." But the Munitorum does not (as in real life) the supreme political power, it carries out the orders of the High Lords and that of the Lord Commander Militant (again a political position).
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jul 1, 2004 11:36:26 GMT -5
I'm not entirely sure that anyone above the rank of Colonel is an officer of the departmento munitorium (sorry about using the full name; I find that it leads to a lack of confusion since 40k allows for the same name to be used and mean completely different things!)... I would agree that their position is as much based upon political influence as well as their military ability (and indeed, cynically leaning more towards the former than the later).
I'm not overtly fond of a strict demarcation between 'those in the know' (i.e. the competent) and the the faceless bureacracy. Yes, there is definitely an element of that in there, but it is not the sum of all things... In many ways one can find it analogous to the creation of a 'Rogue Trader'...
|
|
|
Post by Brusilov on Jul 2, 2004 5:36:02 GMT -5
Well, I tried to make a clear cut distinction as the IG Strategic Command is part of the Departmento Munitorum and not of the IG proper. While this includes staff officers, personally I consider all general officers are members of the Munitorum to prevent too strong bonds between troops and them to exist and as such avoid situations where the corruption of the top would lead to the rebellion of the rank and file.
Had I my 2nd Ed. and 3rd Ed. Codices on hand I'd quote them to prove my point but they're packed away as I am moving tomorrow.
Colonels still have to deal with troopers on a daily basis although they don't know them all by name. Generals are completely removed from such things (especially in the Imperium). They direct battles most often through holo-displays away from the battle. I'm not saying they're not competent but to them guardsmen are nothing more than numbers on a map. However in Tactica Imperium 3, I'll make quite clear that some IG officers climb through the ranks, train as staff officers and become part of the Strategic Command. Those are officers that care most about their soldiers and often lead from the front instead of the safety of their bunker.
|
|
Raider
Scribe
The Anti-Christ
Posts: 53
|
Post by Raider on Jul 2, 2004 11:28:04 GMT -5
I dont think that saying "some" High Command Officers can up through the rank is going far enough. Every Lord General would have started their careers as a Lieutenant (in either the PDF or the IG) and worked their way up from there.
|
|