LUCASWILLEN05

I think someone said that it was mentioned in the briefing.Commanders who ignore their orders also lose batles. Just look what happened to Custer at the Little Big Horn. He was ordered t wait for Terry bwefore attacking the Indian camp. Then ghe compounded the error of disobeying his orders (following his briefing) which, as every military history buff knows resulted in a military disaster. If Spizenhund did not read he briefing and that briefing indicaed that Russuian reinforcements were coming. particularly from a given direction then he committed an error rather like the one Custer committed in that he disobeyed his orders or failed to take adequate precautions. We will reconvene at Spitzenhund's Court Martial hearing! Don't worry, just kidding!

It yhas also been said that the board edges arwe not flank and rear protection. That is the crux of the mter. Maybe the way the scenario was designed was not entirely fair in that in did not give sufficient warning of the time/location that enemy reserves would appeaer. I agree with that point hough I would also agree that sometmes the enemy can and des arrive at a time or place that was not expected. Military intelligence is not absolute even with satellite, air and UAV survaillnce. Thtinformation has to get back to, in this case brigade and divisional HQ. The scenario designer might not have anticipated what happened. Or he could have made a decison to do it this way to simulate an intelligence failure at brigade or divisional HQ. So actually it cold be argued that the enemy succesfully achieved surprise above and beyond what was expected because the local commander had over committed his forces and had nt kept a reserve. Anfd that iss that,.

That was my thinking also. Whether Russia would want to add to a growing list of enemies bt taking action against a Swedish humannitarian evacuation of refugees is doubtful. It would be most unwise politically to say the least. They would havve begun the conflict as a limited war and would prefer to keep it as a limited war against NATO. The Russians, in this hypothesis only went into the Baltic states to relieve their Kaliningrad base from NATO siege and a possible assult by NATO forces with whom Russia is at war anyway, And since the Baltic States are NATO members they re in a state of war vis a vis Russia. Hence a Russian military attck is completely justified politically and brings mlitary and political gains t Russia. If Russia attacks quickly, as soon as the first clashes with NATO begin and before NATO can reinforce the Baltic States the operation can be successfully implemented within a matter of days with a minimum of difficulty. At the same time they relieve and reinforce Kaliningrad From the positionss just taken Russia can directly threaten to invade Poland. Consequently NATO forces that might otherwise have gonre to Ukraine must go to defending Poland in the first instance and the to liberating the Baltic States. Which helps Russia more easily achieve its' objectives in Ukraine. So. looking at it from a Russian General Staff perspective a quick Baltic States operation makes a great deal of sense. And, from a Kremlin perspive it makes a great deal of political sense as well. Ether the Baltivc States can be negotiated ack for further NATO pokllitica cosessuions (eg Ukraine drops its move towards NATO members and the Baltic States leave NATO in which case the Russians pull out of the Baltic States and the non Russin majority areas f Ukraine. Alternatively Russia could just annex the Batlic States. So, in the context of the CMBS scenario perspective a supporting Baltic States offensive makes a lot of political and military sense for Russia even though the downside is an escalation and widening of the conflict. Snce hey are already at war with NATO this escalation will not be a prticularly large one. It might even convince Belorussia to join the war on the Russian side which opens up Western Ukrine o a strike from the north, turning the flsank of NATO forces defending the line of the River Dnieper. Such a move might well win the war for Russia.

I was referring to Spitzenhund. And I am speaking as a mlitary history buff and as a wargamer of 25 years experience in both computer, miniature and boardgame experience. Look. the point I have been trying to get accrss to you is this. In the real world your flanks and rear are most definatelty NOT safe. A fact that has been demonstrated, probably thousands of times to military history. This is a n established fact. It does not matter a jot whether we are talking abot the Battle of Kadesh or the Battle of the Karbala Gap. Or anything in between. At Kadesh Ramses II was taken bby surprise because ghhe neglected flank and rear securuity allowing the Hittites to attack him n flank and rear while the Egyptian army was in column of march (i,e not prepared for battle. Likewise, at Karballa Gap the Iraqis lost (ok they would probably have lost in any case) because they failed to anticipte the correct direction of 3rd Infantry Divsion's arttack. If you study military history, even as a ghobby, as I do, then you are going to learn some lessns about tctics and warfare. Spitzenhund made the mistake of thinking that the map edge secures your flanks and rear. And he clearly over committed his forces. The guy committed a couple of tacticical mistakes which I have been tryng to explain to him. If someone was to explain to me how I can better employ my air defences (which is where I know full well I went wrong n my game today) I would not be claiming that what happened was "unrealistic" I know l hat it was very ealistc. I know from some on line researcjh that the modern US military has paid less attetion to air defence han it should. And I know I failed to deploy my air defences to give proper defensive coverage against air attack. I paid the price for that mistake, just as Spitzenhund paid the price for his. But I acknowlege nd recognise my mistake. Spitzenhund might not and instead blames the scenario designer, When in fact his screen print at the start ofthe thread clearly shows the position indicating a tactical error. His comments in fact suppot this hypohesis. I have read enough about howe the US military trains (eg Bolgere's books on experences at the National Training Centre) to understand that unit commanders often commit misakes like this on the trainin ground. They will very likely be hauled over the coals for errors like this for excel;lent prfessional reasons - so they won't foul up in combat. I suggest you ask any military professional. particularly one who has done the job for real in combat and you will likely find the answer is similsar to what I have been sayiing. Anyway, I have spent more than enough tme on this today and I real;ly could not be bothered to continue with ssomething that risks becoming a flame war so I suggest this would be a good place to call a halt.

Posted Today, 04:16 PM agusto, on 08 Feb 2015 - 8:56 PM, said: A scenario does not need a patch. It just needs whoever designed it t make a change. In this case maybe using the reinforcement buttons to provide warnings as was suggested earlier in the day. But, like I said, sometimes things like this happen in the real world, and, as I ointed out there are plenty of historical examples. Spitzenhund it seems to me that you regard this as a game where the map edge delineates the edge of the world and that makes your flanks and rear safwe. Unfortunately, in the real world your flanks and rear most certainly are not safe. If you overcommit your forces to an atack, as for example JKutuzov did at Austerltz you may not be in position to respond fast enough (or sometimes at all) You learned a harsh lesson about real world warfare today in your game. As I did inmy game today. My advice to you is to take those experiences and learn from them so you won't make the same error again and thus become a beter tactician .

Just goes to show what happenswhen gamer makes a mistake. In this case it looks to me like he over committed his forces, in this case throwing everyhing into the attack. The scenario designers cannot be expected to legiislate for tactical blunders. You pver commit your force and fail to keep reserves then you are going to be taken by surprise. Which is what most likely happened in this instance. If the briefing hinted at the possibility that reinforcements were on the way and likely to be comuinng from a certain direction and someone does not read that, forgets or ignores the advice then a military disaster is on the cards. Which is clearly what happened here. In the real world that kind of thing could get a commander relieved of his command and reassigned to a position on the staff preferably in a role where a foul up won't do too much damage. A foulup here does not end military careers, nor does it get a lot of people killed. You probably lost the game but, if you learn the lesson you do better next time. I lost a game today because I negleccted my air defencce cover, ggot a Combat Team into a Hind Kill Zone and lost a lot of men and vehicles. As a reult of this my attack bogged down. Result a minor US defeat because I also recognised when to quit instead of pressing a clearly failed attack.I think I understand where and why I went wrong and consider it a valuable learning experience for next time. Hopefully Spitzenhund can learn a lesson from his defeat. And others can learn from both his mistakes and mine. Lessons of this thread 1 Don't over commit your force too quickly 2 Maintain flank, rear and air security 3 Read the scenario briefing 4 Anticipate that unexpected situations are going to occur and may happen with little or no warning. Be prepared 5 Scenario developers may need to think about clearer warnings regarrding approach of unexpected enemy reindforcements (unless they wish to simulate an intelligence failure or surprise attack) using both he briefing and the reinforcement buttons t provide relevant messages Maybe that did not happen in this scenario, maybe not intentonally however.

I would not be surprised if there were. The Russians are just as challenging to play as the US. And even Red versus Red /9eg a defeated Russia falls into a civil war in 2018. Maybe BF could even expand the dates to cover that

If you go into an area of dense terrain, a viillage or a wood for instance and you failed to take adequate security precautions like for example conducting a quick recon of the area then walk smack bang into an ambush you probably deserve all you got. t might not be grenade range but it probably will be a very close range kill zone. And if they appear from off map, maybe there was a balka (the lcal term for a ravine) or a wood. It is not n the map so is not in your unit's operating area. The enemy however is not going to co-perate with you. There are all sorts of ways something like this might happen in real world combat. You may not luike it and you may not like what whoever designed that particular scenasrio did. But things like that happen in real world combat frm time to time. Sure, it isn't fai but then, WAR IS NOT FAIR If you had been beter prepared by holding a mobile reserve you would have been better placed to react to this unexpected crisis by redeploying swiftly as soon as you became aware of the theat. Something far easier to do witbh the reserves than forces in contact and in the wrong place for the changed situation. Learn frm misakes like this rather than complaining how "unfair" the stuation was. A unfair stuation created, in part because you committed all your forces early on instead of folowing sound military principles such as keeping a reserve.

Ken, yes. Scenario briefing hints would be nice. ~Or warnings given of the approach of enemy forces approaching. Often that would happen in ther real world. But smetimes the boys and girls in Military Intelligence just miss something or the enemy does something unexpected in the wider tactical and operational environment. Sometimes your pickets are destroyed before they can report in or they just fail to spot the enemy approach. Maybe they were in the wrng place r looking the wrong way. Sometimes commanders just get suerprised. It has happened on countless occasions throughout military history. That's why we have flank and rear security considerations. And, as I found out today, air defence positioning is of great importance. In this game you step into the combat boots of a Combat Team or Battalion Commander. These ssues are what goes with that pay grade. It is your job to anticipate whaat the enemy might do and to be ready for the contingency even with little or no warning. That is the nature of the beast. This game in particular teaches some very harsh lessons about real war and, indeed, so it should

There are plenty of examples from mlitary history where things like that happen. Including recent military history. During the 2003 iraq War there were several instances where US forces were surprised by Iraqi forces who were not where they were thought to be. This even happened during the 1991 Kuwait War. To me that is what the scenario in question simulates. Now you appea to think that anything off board should not be a concern. Well here is another newsflash for youy. The real world battlefeld DOES NOT work that way. It is in fact a very chaotic place Friendly and enemy forces are manouvering and fighting all over the place. NOT JUST the small part of t our particular game represents This particular scenario illustrates that reality very sharply. You don't like that. Tough luck. Learn to live with the reality of the real battlefield as simulated in the game Please assemble for the "practical" in the vicinity f the Russian - Ukranian border. And note what I said about the issue of poor US air defences. I made the mistake of making inadequate use of the Stingers I did have by positioning them poorly. And movinfg an entire Combat Team into what turned about to be a Hind Gunship killing zone. I don't get upset about that. I messed up. I will try to learn from that mistake and do better next time by not making the same mistake again/ Just as you might learn from the mistake of failing to anticipate the unexpected time and place that enemy reserves arrived. Sure, youy are upset about that. It does seem unfair in terms of the game. But like I keep telling you life and war is just NOT fair sometimes. You need to realise that. Learn that sometimes the unexpected will happen. Then maybe you will be better placed to deal with it. A harsh lesson it may be. But real war is the harshest and most unforgiving envcironment. Moderrn war particularly so

I just made the mistake of neglecting my AA overwatch and found out what a Hind or two will do to a US Combat Team. Do you hear me complainng about how "unfair" that was? No, not a bit of it. I had stinger teams. I was aware of the possibiliy of a Russian air threat. I did not sufficiently prrovide AA mssle cover for my advance. I was caught in a Russian helicopter engagement area. I aid the price for my mistake. Next time I will know better and will try to avoid making he same mistake again. This game/simulation teaches some very harsh lessons about the devestating nature of modern conventional wrfare betwenn two roughly similar armies. Thankfully this s just a gaming simulation and we can make every mistake in the book. Nobdy dies, There are no sad widows and orphans. The fate of nations does not really depend on what happens in our computer battle game/simulation. In a real war of course lessons like this would be learned the hard way and the inevitable mistakes would be paid for in ral lives. And real combat on the modern battlefield is even more unforgiving of mistakes than anything n the past. That is a lessn we would do well to understand as we play this game. And, if it teaches us that much it will hav succeeded in at least one of its' aims.

Yes, US air defences do seem to be a weakness. Apparently this is a concern in the real world as well.In recent wars the US has had everything their own way in the air and so neglected tactical AA defences in paticular. I have just found out (the hard way) what happens when Hinds catch a combat team in open terrain. It really is not a pretty sight Next time I will have learned to pay more attention to AA overwatch and more carefully consider how I position my stingers Some of these scenarios arre just downright evil and I increasingly suspec the most evil were designed by ACTUAL military professionals/ Great work guys!

Listen Things like this happen in the real world. I am sure you have had situations happen in the work place where something nasty happens that you did not expect. If you are a professional, which I am sure you are, do you bitch and moan about it? No, of course youy don't. You deal with the crisis. Then you work out what went wrong and why the crisis happened. You learn from your mistakes. And that is the poin I am making here. This kind of thing DOES HAPPEN in modern war and it happens frequently in history. Doesn't matter qwhether it is the Battle of Kadesh or the Battle of the Karbala Gap. And it can happen to any commandr at any level. Look at youur military history. Ramses II was surprised by the Hittites at the battle of Kadesh. Frederick the Great was surprised by the Austrians at Hocchkirch. Napoleon was surprised by the unexpected arrival of the Prussians at Waterloo. The commander of theTawakana Division was surprised when the VII Corps arrived from an unexpected direction earlier than the Iraqis expected. And, during the 2003 War the Iraqis were frequently surprised. Sometimes even US forces were taken by surprise. The point I am making is that commanders AT ALL LEVELS have to be ready for the unexpecterd, In war we have friction - the enemy also has a say in what happens. Now I am not saying that a scenario should not give you some warning that something lke this MIGHT happen. Maybe thuis scenario does give you a hint and it was missed - in which case you deserve everything you get. Or maybe the scenario designer wanted a surprise attack and gave no warniing. Unfair in game terms? Probably? But war, like rel life is often NOT fair. Live wih it and, like I said, learn to expect the unexpected. What do I do if the enemy attacjks my right flank or rear at this point? Maybe recon (ground. air, UAV) missed that enemy force. Maybe the UAV sent to recon the area was shot down, crashed or just didn't find anything. Maybe the enemy moved tha force nto position later. Intel is never as complete as we would like. And this is not the open deserts of Kuwait and Southern Iraq. It is European terrain. Close. villages, woods. That sot of thing.So yes, it is quite possible that particular force was just missed. Fog of War you see! And a good commander has t take the issues of friction, the unexpected and he fog of war into account. If he does nt it will come back and bite him. Probably at the worst possible moment. Just look what happened to Napoleon at Waterloo/ He failed to adequately consider that the Prussians might march accross from Wavre. Napoleon thought Grouchy would keep the Prussians occupied. Napoleon turned out to be wrong and failed to plan sufficiciently for that contngency. Which cost him he battle, the campaign and his throne. That force was one the scenario designer wanted to use as part of this battle and he obvuiously wanted to catch the unwary. Which is exactly what happened here. A mistake was made by the gamer in failing to expect the unexpected and he suffered the consequences of the mistake. You think that modern technology will always identify all enemy forces that might affect a mission. NEWSFLASH - IT DOESN'T. For example just look at the famous deep helicopter raid during the Iraq War and how it met unexpected enemy forces that weren't supposed to be there1 If you have a good plan and anticipate unexpected developments then your plan is likely to better survive the impact of battle. I am quite sure that any military professionals on this forum will tell you pretty much the same thing that I am telling you. Learn from your mistakes. Next time anticipate better. Particularly if this is the first time you play ed a particular scenario. I agree the scenario designer played a nasty, dirty trick. But in real war that is just what a competent enemy is going to do.

Because, in the REAL WORLD the unexpected is a RISK that must be anticipated. As ?I see it he failed to anticipate the contingency that something like this could happen by committing all of his force to an attack without thinking about what he would do if something happened that he did not expect or anticipate. If you look at what real world commanders do one important task is just that, planning for the unexpected. This is of course a computer simulation game, obviusly not he real thing. But to succeed you have to think about what would be done in the REAL WoRLd. in this case on a real battlefield. For example, if you read Into the Storm by Tom Clancy and General Fred Franks (Franks was the commander of US VII Corps during Operation Desert Storm) you will find somethig called FRAGPLANS (Fragmentory Plans) mentioned quite a lot. These are contingency plans to be used during the course of a military operation if certain things happen. Such as, in this case, the unexpected appearence (in time and place) of an enemy force. Spitzenhund failed (or at least suffered heavy casualties) because he failed to anticipate this particular contingency. There is no shame in that. Even the greatest cmmanders in military history lost battles for that reason. Napoleon lost Waterloo in large part because he failed to anticipate Blucher;s arrival n his right flank. Just be glad that this is only a computer game/simulation and the fates of men and nations don't depend on the outcome of our computer game hobby battle. And, like I said, you are going to be around to learn from your mistake, an opportunity you might not get in the real world. This is why the military train so hard. If you were in the military you can foul up in training. It is OK. You get a bollocking from your CO. But you probably won't make that mistake next time. And "next time" could actually be on a real battlefield,. I suspect that some of the scenarios might well have been designed by actual military professionals who have acually done the job for real and might well have don so in combat. Scenarios should give is a good ansd realistic gaming challenge. Within this context we should be prepared to anticipate the unexpected from some of our more tricksy scenario designers

Yes. One of my stingers just downed a Russian helicopter. Type unknown but probably a Hind which, shortly before, destroyed a Bradley. I heard it whupping about and the APS on a nearby M1A2 knocked down what I think was an ATGM. Nothing else hostile, as far as I know was in the area so it had to be a Russian helicopter. Brought a Stinger Team forward from the nearby wood line where I had concealed them. Within a minute or so the helicopter returned for another pass, The Stinger Fired and I got an "Aircraft Destroyed " message Scratch one Hind! Oooorah!

I understand that perfectly well. Maybe it is unfair if it happens wihout any warning in the scenario brief or using another metod. Sometimes it happens that way in real lfe either on the batlefield or for that matter in any work place environment. Maybe your boss, a colleague or a custome lands an unexpeected crisis on you. You are probably not happy about it. You could bitch and moan about how unfair it is that this was dumped on you. Or you can adopt a "can do" attitude and get on with dwealing with the problem as best you can. In the game situation you had the best part of a BMP company and a couple of tanks arrive at a time and place you did not anticipte. Arguably, in the realworld a Combat Team Commander (or any other commander for that matter should have anticipaed the contingency. You didn't. You committed all your forces to the attack and you got blind sided by a surprise attack/ambush. Sure, you can cry about how unfair that was but, newsflash WAR ISN'T FAIR!!! Had you held a reserve instead of committing yur entire force early maybe you would have been ready to counter the surprise enemy move. Hopefully you just learned a useful lesson about battlefield realities and tactics. You won't make the same mistake nex time. And you made the mistake on a computer game simulation, not inactual combat. In the real world you would either be dead, seriously wounded, a POW (as would be many of the men and women under your leadership) If you escaped that you might very well be relieved of your command for your mistake.

And don't forget ATGMs have a minimum arming range which means, if launched too close to the target they won't arm and therefore won't damage the target. The real world soldiers using the equipment will, having been trained on the equipment. know this and therefore will fire at a suitable range. Which is why you got that "minimum range" message. As others have said of course the Abrams can be a diffcult tank to destroy. However, as Hezbollah demonstrated in 2006 even the most modern MBTs can be knocked out with cunning tactics.

Except of course in the published situation war has already broken out between Russia and NATO, hence a Russian invasion is very much on the cards. And the Russians are going to want to invade quickly beefore NATO canrush reinforcements to he Baltic States. Kalingrad of course provides the perfect excuse or Moscow to invade. And, as already indicated they are going to have to go via the Baltic States unless they are going to volate Belorussian neutrality. And it could take tm to get Belorussian agreement for Russian troop access. And, if Beloussia does give such approval it will effectively be at war with NATO very quckly Even with the base gamme we can have US units being diverted from Ukraine to help defend the Baltic States and, when we get he relevant modules published European troos as well. Certainly BF could do TOEs for the Baltic States even though their armies don't amount to much. Also of course Belorussia as a Russian ally (or a possible NATO ally) In fact, in the NATO win branch we might even have Belorussia switch sides at somepoint. A bit like 3rd Shock Army does in Hackett's World War 3 By the way, if the Swedes fear the Russians invading the Baltc States could such a move convince Stockholm to join the war?

Giving the player a warning of enemy reinforcements can be done. In one of the published scenarios the designer made use of the frieendly reinforcements button to give just such a warning. It was a little disconcerting at first because I hd never seen the reinforcement function used like that before. But then I though abbout t and realised what a clever design approach this was,

Bear in mind that your battle is not he only action going on iin the area of the particular battle you are gaming. In reality this may very well be only a part of a much larger battle. It may well be that the enemy flank marched that force arund the battle you are in. Maybe they found the seam between your battalion and the neighbouring unit. Maybe they had a hidden force in an ambush positionThat is not your fault of course. Blame it on the brigade/divisional commander off map or on insufficient recon.. Or perhaps it was simply the fog of war.Was there perhaps smething in the scenario briefing that qwarned you of this possibility? Remember,, this kind of thing can and does happen in the real world. During the 1991 Gulf War for example the mericains caught the entire Tawkalna Republican Guard Division facing the wrong way! In your game situation something like that went wrong due to the mistake of another commander on your side or a clever enemy manouvre. and, unfortunately you are the commander whose flank or rear got attacked. This is not "teleportatio" It is the consequence of an off map manouvre by another force, not yet involved in the battle. If, instead of being the victim of this in a scenario would you still regard it as "unfair" or would you smile in satisfaction knowing you might benefit from this. In another scenario the boot culd very well be on your foot instead However, as the boot is on the enemy's foot this time you are now going to have to find a way to deal with it however unfair you think it might be. In fact try not to vew it as "unfair" at all. Instead regard it as a tactical challenge. Take a look at the tactical situation you are now in as a result of this surprise attack and work out what you need to do to meet the crisis. If you failed to anticipate the possibility of a surprise enemy attack on your flank or rear then I am afraid you only have yourself to blame for your losses. Like I said, sometimes the unexpected happens in war and commanders who are not ready for that suffer the consequences. Just as you did. Thankfully, this time it is not real war and there are no pixilated widows and orphans, In short live with it, learn from your mistakes and, next time, anticipate the possibility of the unexpected. OK

They would try to relieve the place using forces from the Western Military District, in particular 6th Army from around St Petersburg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Military_District It might be neccessary to redeploy some reserve units from the Ukranan Front which takes some pressure off the Ukranian and NATO forces there. Where things get really interesting is if Belorussia came into the war on Russia's side as their army, while not that large does occupy a strategic central position from where offensives could be mounted into he Baltic States. into Western Ukrine or even into Poland. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Military_District This would, if nothing else, disrupt NATO operaions in Ukraine and thus be helpful to Russia at least in the short term, diverting much needed NATO reserves north. Hence he Baltic Staes operation would be a good strategic diversion for the Russians and oe that stands an excellent chance of occuying the Baltic Sttes which can be negotiated back for other cocessions or annexed.

This is why you need something called a RESERVE. If something unexpected happens you need fresh troops to deal with the unexpected. If you did not keep a reserve you are in trouble and you may have to redeploy units in contact already. Spitzenhund, you might consider it "unfair" but in reality war. like life, is not fair. If you encounter a sitution you did not expect then,, unfortunately, war is hell. You are going to have to use your tactical skills to deal with the challenge as best you can. As this is only a simulation game, not the real thing, you get to live to fight anotherday and you hopefully learned from your mistake and will apply the lesson to future battles.

If Belarus gives free passage to Russian forces then Belarus will very quickly find itself at war with NATO The thing about Kaliingrad is that it could be used to attack NATO supply lines and reinforcements coming through Poland/ Yes, NATO brobably responds besieging or blockading the Oblast. But how does that look to Moscow? Do they interpret this as the buildup for a NATIO attack? From Moscoew's perspective NATO may well try to sieze the area. And remember, we are talking about the Headquartes of the Baltic Fleet here and a very important naval base. And the loss of Russan prestige if they lost it. Maybe post war NATO might agree to negotiate it back to Russia but why hand NATO such an important negotiaing chip in the irst place, certainly not without trying o relieve the place? Andd Russia could actully gain a lot if, o the way, they were to occuy the Baltic States. Kalingrad is the perfect excuse to do this.

Setbacks against the Russian seperatists, the effects of poor funding which likely to effect training and morale, among other things such as equipment maintainance. On the other hnd, s you say the Ukranian army is defending its' own turf which gives them a patriotic boost. However this will be eroded by early setbacks. If the war can be turned around Ukranian morale will increase. However, with high csualties qualitative improvements in comba experience amd leadership might not change very much during the course of the war. Russia might lose some of it's earlier edge if only through loss of experienced leadership and morale could take a battering with high casualties and falling morale, certainly if things go badly.

Now here's a tricky question. Kaliningrad. It is the base of the Russian Baltic Fleet which is headquartered there. On top of that there are the Chertakhovsk, Donskoye and Kalingrad Chkalovskair bases. Presumeably, when NATO and Russia go to war in June 2017 the very least that will happen is a NATO siege/blockade of the Oblast. The Oblast is of course considered Russian territory. NATO would have to take some sort of military action against military installations in he Oblast which might b used to strike NATO forces moving through Poland on the way to the Ukranian battlefields.Russia, at the very least would fear a ground attack on this important base and would have to take military action to avoid the probable loss of this vital strategc prize, the loss of which would be a stunning propoganda victory for NATO to say bnothing of the militqary impact. Now, the question is, what does Russia do about this? To relieve the siege of the Oblast would require sending troops. Assuming Belorussia to be neutral Russian forces could not go through that country. Hence, Russia would have to open a seond front by invading the Baltic States. at the very least Latvia and Lithuania. Probably Estonia would be invaded for good measure as this could not be left as a NATO bridgehead behind Russian lines.Occupying the Baltic States also, from Putin's standpoint "liberates" the Russian minorities in those states. NATO of course cannot allow the Baltic States, NATO members to fall to Russia so mmust send troops n to defend them opening action in a secondary theatre. In he meantime Belrussia is stuck in the middlwe of a very hot war and will likely have to choose oneside or the other before at least one side invades. All of which escalates and widens the conflict significntly to say the least http://www.ibtimes.com/poland-lithuania-wary-kaliningrad-being-base-next-move-russia-1561963