Forum

In Sweden's operational planning during the late Cold War, a number of scenarios were considered for how Swedish territory might become involved in a major war on the Continent, and how Sweden's response to these different scenarios would need to look. The planning was quite detailed; I remember participating in a number of training exercises based on some of those scenarios.
I seem to recall that at least some of these scenarios have been made public in a variety of papers and theses at Karlberg and whatnot ... there may even be a few books published on the subject by now.

Could someone perhaps comment on whether any of these "real life" scenarios has served as basis for the Swedish setting, or if the premise is entirely "home-brewed" by Fria Ligan?

A littttllle off-topic, but I'll just leave this little film I made here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95j_12VXKqA

So far I haven't gotten around to ever making the other episodes that would expand on the backstory, but it supposes a situation in which the Soviet Union has managed to bypass Finland in a silk gloves scenario, not unlike Crimea, to get directly at Sweden and Norway. Credible? Eh, sorta, maybe.

Ooh thanks for that mate! AJ 37's ... out of Luleå, interestingly? ... but that brings soo much nostalgia! Love those visuals ...still one of the coolest aircraft throughout aviation history, to my mind... Well done!

As for your scenario ... I agree; bearing in mind that the Soviet Union already had fought three separate wars against Finland earlier during the 20th century; lost two of them, and not brought the third one to a decisive victory either, one could easily surmise they'd be keen to bypass the place, lest they get their noses scratched a fourth time...

One other aspect worth bearing in mind ... if the Warsaw Pact never collapsed, then the massive Swedish stockpiles (beredskapslager) of critical supplies, stored in warehouse facilities and deep bunkers all over the country, wouldn't have been diminished and/or outright done away with, as was done following the end of the Cold War, further upon Sweden's entering the EU, and even further as a means for budgetary savings during the first decades of the millennium.

Apart from the reality of them obviously having to affect the premise of the Swedish setting - just for instance, seeking out such a stockpile, in the hopes of exploiting whatever is left (if anything) in it, could be an interesting adventure seed.

In context, it also bears noting that Sweden during the Cold War was very nearly 100% self sufficient on all vital foodstuffs, animal as well as vegetable - another factoid that certainly ought to affect the premise.
This self sufficiency was maintained through very deliberate policies as a vital part of Swedish national security, with agricultural subsidies that ensured it was possible to make a living from producing food even when the market normally wouldn't pay enough to cover the costs for domestic production.
Sweden felt itself forced to abolish this system of national subsidies upon entering the EU, subsequent to which this national self sufficiency has dropped to about 50%, and is still declining.
At the time, it was thought that with the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, who cares? However, the overt eagerness shown by the Kremlin of late to support its foreign policies though military means (Putin obviously has read Clausewitz), in conjunction with the effects on international trade seen with changes in the global political landscape, and most pronounced with the ongoing Zombie Apocalypse pandemic situation, has thrown a very harsh light on the wisdom of these reforms.

Another aspect I'm curious about concerning the background work on the Swedish setting is, what human resources is Fria Ligan drawing upon to make that, too, as correct as possible?

Regarding the game's Continental (i.e. USAREUR) setting, the game's marketing blurb tells us that "several active and retired servicemen from the U.S. military are assigned to the project as consultants," which of course sounds really promising!

The crucial question however is — will Fria Ligan be engaging similar resources for the Swedish setting (hoping that "servicemen" won't be equated with "conscripts", for Swedish intents and purposes)?

Another set of circumstances that reasonably must affect the whole Swedish setting is the fairly unique way — compared to much of the default USAREUR setting, anyway — Sweden's military readiness during the Cold War was structured.

First, there was the system of mandatory military service, which meant that pretty much the entire male population of the country (or as close to it as makes no difference — and a number of female volunteers) had spent 8-15 months receiving at least basic military training, and a fair proportion of those had received some level of command training, training in the Special Forces, and/or other more advanced military skills. Quite many continued after their conscription to reserve officer school; a kind of middle ground between full professional soldier and conscript.
Further, each service had their own volunteer organisations, where people could join more or less as a hobby, from the age of thirteen. As a consequence, you had thousands of school kids all over Sweden who were trained in the use of automatic weapons, and had been drilled in basics like overlapping fields of fire, fire-and-manoeuvre, and so forth.
In a scenario where the Cold War doesn't end, but the USSR instead moves towards a more aggressive post-Glasnost stance, it is not unlikely that the conscription system would have been extended to make female participation mandatory already in the early '90's, as it is now, when the system is slowly being reinstated.

Second, there is the dispersal of strategic assets. All military equipment, from uniforms and boots to tanks and howitzers, were dispersed all around the country, and stored in mobilisation stockpiles (mobförråd) at somewhere between 5,000-10,000 different secret, strategically chosen locations; camouflaged as barns, industrial warehouses, etc. During mobilisation these would act as mobilisation centres, and all "active" conscripts would be issued orders telling them where to report to receive all their equipment and join their unit. A single battalion might mobilise at ten different locations, one for each company — miles apart from one another, making sure that even if one or two stockpiles had been compromised and destroyed, most of the battalion would still be able to activate.
This meant the country was able to mobilise the greater part of its military within a matter of hours if there had been advance warning; within a few days if not.
The air force was similarly dispersed. All aircraft in Swedish service — from fighters to transport — had STOL capability, needing only a few hundred meters of straight asphalt to operate. In case of mobilisation, the regular air bases would be abandoned, and all operations would move out to the hundreds of prepared airstrips hidden in plain sight in the country road network as simple stretches of road, all over the map.
Likewise, the C2 structure was dispersed into dozens of deep bedrock bunkers (hair short of NORAD-grade) all around the country. The stockpiles of strategic consumables I've addressed in an earlier post.
Another aspect of this is the tens of thousands of small arms caches (vapenkasuner). These were basically anonymous — but massive — safes and vaults where weapons and ammunition were stored. They could look like a power distribution centre in the middle of a forest or on an industrial estate or anywhere, but they were literally everywhere.

The Home Guard militia (hemvärnet) is another aspect of all this. A significant number of people all over the country were entrusted with keeping full military-grade weapons and equipment at home at all times, in order to be able to go out anytime, at literally a moment's notice, to secure and defend key installations, such as the aforementioned mobilisation centres/stockpiles, infrastructure, communication nodes, power distribution, etc, should the country's threat level rise to where it was deemed necessary — e.g. pending imminent mobilisation.

Most Swedish adults were given a “wartime assignment” (krigsplacering), either in whatever unit they had been trained for during their conscription, or with their regular jobs keeping vital functions of society running, or in the home guard, etc., where they were mandated to report in case of mobilisation.

All of these functions were also rehearsed regularly at different levels, every few years culminating in large-scale joint training exercises (totalförsvarsövning) that would incorporate several functions and levels in society.


In a very real sense, Sweden's military readiness during the Cold War was overlaid over all aspects of the civilian society in ways that are difficult to understand today, even — or perhaps particularly — for us living in the country. But it all boils down to that had there been a war, Sweden would, for all its small size, have been a tough nut to crack. Not quite so tough as Finland of course — on whose experiences against Soviet Russia much of the Swedish stance was based, and whose systems for conscription etc were fairly similar — but I do believe the country's resilience would have been remarkable.

Come to think of it — in many ways, the dispersal of both heavy and light weaponry in caches all around the country most closely resembles the situation in former Yugoslavia. One of the reasons why the civil war there turned out so particularly bloody was the relative ease with which all sides could arm themselves.
That would lead me to conclude that the Twilight: 2000 scenario in Sweden would probably still, a few years into the war, be quite ... lively. Not so much an "aftermath", but still quite an active theatre of operations.


Any way you look at it though, if it's to make sense, I do not believe the alternate Swedish setting can be anything like a mere "re-skin" of the default Central European/USAREUR setting, using the same basic content, just switching names and using a different map, somewhat akin to the alternate American setting in Loop and Flood.

It'll take a bit more effort than that to make it good ... and a fair bit more to really make it shine.

Looking at the work-in-progress Swedish map posted on the Kickstarter page, you can see various towns and cities that are marked out as (more or less) intact, and others that are marked out as devastated, whether due to extensive battles taking place, or, presumably, due to nuclear strikes (massive carpet bombing is not a realistic scenario for warfare in 1997).
(I suspect that reducing a town like Jönköping or Skövde substantially to rubble would take more than a single 20kt tactical nuke though...)

Anyway, it seems to me (the image's resolution sets some limits, I'm afraid) that a great number of towns of various sizes in Västergötland are shown as rubble, while in Östergötland and most other parts of the map, towns seem essentially intact.
These might of course just be place holders for the WIP, but let us for the moment assume that what has been put on the map is supposed to be there.

I try to see some kind of pattern to this, or find some consistency with anticipated operational patterns for Soviet invasion scenarios ... but I must confess, it has me struggling.
The greatest destruction seemingly befalling Western Sweden, while the East seems substantially unaffected, would suggest a scenario where Pact troops advance through Germany and Denmark and invade Sweden from the West Coast.
But this scenario would not then have been supported by a landing on the East Coast? And that Tibro — a town with little military significance — is ruined, while Karlsborg — a town a bit further down the road from Tibro, with a major military presence in an Airborne Ranger and Special Forces Regiment, an Air Force base, a Signal Corps, a number of administrative HQ's... (reasonably assuming that the Post-Cold War cutbacks didn't occur) — is not seems ... mostly random to me (apart from both towns being misplaced on the map).

Irrespective of whether what we now see on the map is final or not (which it probably isn't) — this does raise a question: what will the patterns of devastation shown on the Swedish setting's map be based on?

Meaning, the scenario that creates that destruction — what are its assumptions, and what information are these built on?
I can't help but think that the factor's I've highlighted in previous posts on this thread reasonably should affect the evolution of any such scenario (reason why the systems were created in the first place) — how are they reflected here?

Looking at the work-in-progress Swedish map posted on the Kickstarter page, you can see various towns and cities that are marked out as (more or less) intact, and others that are marked out as devastated, whether due to extensive battles taking place, or, presumably, due to nuclear strikes (massive carpet bombing is not a realistic scenario for warfare in 1997).
(I suspect that reducing a town like Jönköping or Skövde substantially to rubble would take more than a single 20kt tactical nuke though...)

Anyway, it seems to me (the image's resolution sets some limits, I'm afraid) that a great number of towns of various sizes in Västergötland are shown as rubble, while in Östergötland and most other parts of the map, towns seem essentially intact.
These might of course just be place holders for the WIP, but let us for the moment assume that what has been put on the map is supposed to be there.

I try to see some kind of pattern to this, or find some consistency with anticipated operational patterns for Soviet invasion scenarios ... but I must confess, it has me struggling.
The greatest destruction seemingly befalling Western Sweden, while the East seems substantially unaffected, would suggest a scenario where Pact troops advance through Germany and Denmark and invade Sweden from the West Coast.
But this scenario would not then have been supported by a landing on the East Coast? And that Tibro — a town with little military significance — is ruined, while Karlsborg — a town a bit further down the road from Tibro, with a major military presence in an Airborne Ranger and Special Forces Regiment, an Air Force base, a Signal Corps, a number of administrative HQ's... (reasonably assuming that the Post-Cold War cutbacks didn't occur) — is not seems ... mostly random to me (apart from both towns being misplaced on the map).

Irrespective of whether what we now see on the map is final or not (which it probably isn't) — this does raise a question: what will the patterns of devastation shown on the Swedish setting's map be based on?

Meaning, the scenario that creates that destruction — what are its assumptions, and what information are these built on?
I can't help but think that the factor's I've highlighted in previous posts on this thread reasonably should affect the evolution of any such scenario (reason why the systems were created in the first place) — how are they reflected here?

An interesting question. Following with great interest.

As of my experiences with Free League games, the settings is what draws me in and makes me keep playing these games over others. To do a a fantasy setting, and doing it good enough to stand out in comparison to other games or media is really well done. Which they, in my opinion, have aced. However, I'd imagine a lot of the potential buyers of this particular product has some insight or interest in the plausible scenario you're talking about, and it might outright break the setting of the game if this is just hand waved. To do a near future or near past setting is arguable harder than a fantasy setting due to the fact people tend to have some insight in events, plans, politics, technology and doctrines which would come in play here.

This example in particular could be a result of the Bear rushing through most part of the country, taking vast areals of land with relative ease, leaving cities unharmed. The razed cities could be a result of years of fighting trying to reclaim the land and the Bear using the scorched earth tactics when falling back. Maybe. Anyways, I hope this is described in the scenarios. I do agree on Karlsborg vs Tibro though...

This example in particular could be a result of the Bear rushing through most part of the country, taking vast areals of land with relative ease, leaving cities unharmed. The razed cities could be a result of years of fighting trying to reclaim the land and the Bear using the scorched earth tactics when falling back. Maybe. Anyways, I hope this is described in the scenarios.

.
Yeah ... but for them to be able to just rush through the Eastern counties, they would need to have been able to take Swedish command entirely by surprise — had they met mobilised forces upon landing, with the Air Force and Navy intercepting them during crossing, they would hardly have been able to just breeze through the landscape...
Such an out-of-the-blue surprise scenario would have to entail no build-up of tension causing Sweden to escalate the threat level; no preceding intelligence of ships and landing craft being loaded for invasion, causing Sweden to mobilise; no warnings; no indications — allowing the Russians to freely cross the Baltic Sea, establish a bridgehead undisturbed, and land troops without being accosted. And for my own part, I can't really such a scenario being terribly realistic.

As you say, let's hope the scenario gives us the background...

But I'd like to understand what kind assumptions and information the scenario is based on. Is it a home-brew, or is it based on something more ... real? And on how thorough a groundwork?

So in the 'Cold war continues' scenario, with no cuts to the (West) German army, there likely wouldn't be any surplus Leo A4s.(Hence no such vehicle as Strv 121)
What options would have been able in that case?
Retaining the Strv103?
Upgrades to the Centurion/Strv104?
Early acquisition of the Strv 122?
Other?

The Strv 121 (almost baseline Leopard 2A4) were bought in 1994 from former Bundeswehr stock. In an alternate universe, where the 1991 Soviet August Coup would have succeeded, it is unlikely that the Bundeswehr would have freed up any Leopard 2 for foreign sales. But production of Leopard 2 (then only in the A4 variant) ceased in 1992. Had the Swedish government decided to buy the Leopard 2 not in 1993, but a bit earlier (e. g. in response to resurgent aggressions by the USSR), it might have been able to buy newly built Leopard 2A4 in 1993 or 1994.

This deal would have been similar to the one the Swiss Army got, when they bought the Leopard 2A4 as Panzer 87. Though the Swiss got A4 from the fifth production batch and Sweden would have been able to by the latest, eighth batch. Essentially, the Leopard 2A4 became the new Leopard 1 or "euro tank" as numerous NATO and EU allies bought A4, A5 and A6 models from 1994 (Sweden), 1996 (Austria), 1997 (Denmark) until the 2000s. Then international customers, mainly from Asia, started buying Leopards like crazy.