RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-02-2018, 06:38 AM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,573
Exclamation T2K Korean Peninsula Sourcebook

Hey folks, my Twilight: 2000 Korean Peninsula Sourcebook is now on sale on DrivethruRPG. I hope you enjoy.

http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...n&test_epoch=0
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-02-2018, 10:42 AM
Draq Draq is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: texas
Posts: 328
Default

That's great! I'll have to get it asap
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-02-2018, 11:49 AM
Ewan Ewan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 30
Smile

Just bought it and had a quick look through it.
At first glance it's an excellent purchase at only 2.17 and a welcome addition to the new books that are coming out for Twilight 2000.
My next question is when is the next book coming out 😊
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-02-2018, 12:02 PM
WallShadow's Avatar
WallShadow WallShadow is offline
Ephemera of the Big Ka-Boom
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: near TMI
Posts: 555
Default

Already bought.
Next?
__________________
"Let's roll." Todd Beamer, aboard United Flight 93 over western Pennsylvania, September 11, 2001.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-02-2018, 01:41 PM
Silent Hunter UK Silent Hunter UK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 296
Default

Cool! Glad to see you've done a second one. I'll definitely be buying this!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-02-2018, 09:23 PM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 2,166
Default

Love the new sourcebook - and now we have three new books since last April. So much for a dead game! Congratulations! And I am working on new stuff - had some serious writers block but this new Sourcebook has me rev'd up and ready to go!!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-03-2018, 12:04 PM
Ewan Ewan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin View Post
And I am working on new stuff - had some serious writers block but this new Sourcebook has me rev'd up and ready to go!!
Any hints on what the new stuff may be
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-03-2018, 05:22 PM
cawest cawest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 60
Default

just got it. looking forward to reading it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-05-2018, 05:46 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,573
Default Thank You

Much thanks to all who have purchased the KPSB. I'm overwhelmed by the positive response. If there's anything else you would like to see in it, please let me know. Also, I am collecting errata, so if you notice a typo or bit of inaccurate info, the same goes. The really nice thing about DriveThruRPG PDFs is that they can be modified, and buyers receive the updated version free of charge.

Also, thanks to the folks here- especially those mentioned in the acknowledgment section- Chico, Paul Mulcahy, Tegyrius, Keys138, Rainbow6, Matt Wiser, and James Langham- for their contributions to the project. And finally, thank you, Olefin, for your encouragement and support of my work.
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-05-2018, 11:01 PM
stilleto69 stilleto69 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 57
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Much thanks to all who have purchased the KPSB. I'm overwhelmed by the positive response. If there's anything else you would like to see in it, please let me know. Also, I am collecting errata, so if you notice a typo or bit of inaccurate info, the same goes. The really nice thing about DriveThruRPG PDFs is that they can be modified, and buyers receive the updated version free of charge.

Also, thanks to the folks here- especially those mentioned in the acknowledgment section- Chico, Paul Mulcahy, Tegyrius, Keys138, Rainbow6, Matt Wiser, and James Langham- for their contributions to the project. And finally, thank you, Olefin, for your encouragement and support of my work.
Hi Rae,
First of all, GREAT WORK. I have just a couple of questions. 1) for US units deployed to ROK, did you mean the 163rd ACR, instead of the 116th, which was deployed to Germany. 2) Isn't the 25th Infantry Division (Light) called "Tropic Lightning"? and 3) Is there any possibility of including possible surviving OOBs for USAF/ROKAF forces as well as USN/ROKN forces? Anyways again, I just wanted to great work.

Last edited by stilleto69; 03-05-2018 at 11:03 PM. Reason: Additional questions added
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-06-2018, 07:44 AM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 2,166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Much thanks to all who have purchased the KPSB. I'm overwhelmed by the positive response. If there's anything else you would like to see in it, please let me know. Also, I am collecting errata, so if you notice a typo or bit of inaccurate info, the same goes. The really nice thing about DriveThruRPG PDFs is that they can be modified, and buyers receive the updated version free of charge.

Also, thanks to the folks here- especially those mentioned in the acknowledgment section- Chico, Paul Mulcahy, Tegyrius, Keys138, Rainbow6, Matt Wiser, and James Langham- for their contributions to the project. And finally, thank you, Olefin, for your encouragement and support of my work.
You are very welcome Raellus - love to have been of help. As you said I blazed the trail - very glad to see you now releasing even more and widening the path - hope others will join us.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-06-2018, 04:38 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stilleto69 View Post
Hi Rae,
First of all, GREAT WORK. I have just a couple of questions. 1) for US units deployed to ROK, did you mean the 163rd ACR, instead of the 116th, which was deployed to Germany. 2) Isn't the 25th Infantry Division (Light) called "Tropic Lightning"? and 3) Is there any possibility of including possible surviving OOBs for USAF/ROKAF forces as well as USN/ROKN forces? Anyways again, I just wanted to great work.
Thanks, Stilleto. I'm really pleased that you like it and appreciate your help in compiling errata.

1.) Thanks. I had it right in the OOB's, but not in the history section. I've fixed it.

2.) Yes. I double-checked and I've referred to it as such consistently throughout so I'm not sure what you mean.

3.) By OOB's for the AF's, do you mean squadron numbers, aircraft, etc.? I did mention a few USN ships by name on the naval side (see the entry on Chinhae in the gazetteer). One ROKNAV vessel is mentioned in the section on the Waegu (pirates).

I'll need to do some more research and crunch some numbers, but I can probably oblige with more complete AF and naval orbats.
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-06-2018, 06:49 PM
stilleto69 stilleto69 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 57
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Thanks, Stilleto. I'm really pleased that you like it and appreciate your help in compiling errata.

1.) Thanks. I had it right in the OOB's, but not in the history section. I've fixed it.

2.) Yes. I double-checked and I've referred to it as such consistently throughout so I'm not sure what you mean.

3.) By OOB's for the AF's, do you mean squadron numbers, aircraft, etc.? I did mention a few USN ships by name on the naval side (see the entry on Chinhae in the gazetteer). One ROKNAV vessel is mentioned in the section on the Waegu (pirates).

I'll need to do some more research and crunch some numbers, but I can probably oblige with more complete AF and naval orbats.
No problem Rae,
I was just wondering about the OOBs because I'm working (as RL will let me) on Vehicle Guides for both the USAF and USN, and I just wanted to be consistent. My little bit of OCD . Oh, the thing about the 25th ID (L) was how it looked in the history section, don't worry about it, again it's the OCD in me.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-06-2018, 08:22 PM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 2,166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus View Post
Thanks, Stilleto. I'm really pleased that you like it and appreciate your help in compiling errata.

1.) Thanks. I had it right in the OOB's, but not in the history section. I've fixed it.

2.) Yes. I double-checked and I've referred to it as such consistently throughout so I'm not sure what you mean.

3.) By OOB's for the AF's, do you mean squadron numbers, aircraft, etc.? I did mention a few USN ships by name on the naval side (see the entry on Chinhae in the gazetteer). One ROKNAV vessel is mentioned in the section on the Waegu (pirates).

I'll need to do some more research and crunch some numbers, but I can probably oblige with more complete AF and naval orbats.
One place to get an idea for possible remaining aircraft would be to use the RDF as a guide - shows just how hard the fighting was and how few aircraft are still operational - but here with fuel so short there are probably more operational planes left than there is fuel. One thing to look into for naval planes would be the fate of any carriers in the area - even if they were sunk or heavily damaged you would figure some aircraft would have survived.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-06-2018, 08:45 PM
mpipes mpipes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 158
Default

Raellus,

Just a few comments that may not be quite publicly available base on my knowledge of the USAF and deployment plans in the late 80s.

51st at Osan had one F-16C squadrons assigned (36th). May have had a second F-16 squadron Their was a detachment of 6-8 F-15C always deployed from Japan. There was a ANG F-16C squadron that was supposed to augment the 51st if war broke out. Planning was pretty much set to evacuate the wing south to use an auxiliary airfield that are all over the highway system.

F-4E 479th at Taegu was subordinate unit.

A-10 squadron (25th FS) presently assigned was actually located at Suwon.

Airbases heavily defended by multiple Vulcan PIVD towed trailer in revetments. Probably 15-30 along the flightline manned by ROK. Two Patriot batteries were installed in 90s for Osan. I think Taegu still had HAWKS.

At least one F-15C squadron and Marine F-18A/C units were slated to bed down.

8th Fighter Wing had two F-16C squadrons assigned (35th and 80th). A third ANG F-16C squadron was supposed to deploy. F-111s and F-117s were supposed to deploy. F-4E wing from Philippines was also to arrive (nuclear mission). I was convinced we would get UK Tornados and Australian F-18s and F-111s.
ROK 111th FS operated F-5As (converted to F-16C).

Airbase heavily defended by multiple Vulcan PIVD towed trailer in revetments. Probably 15-30 along the flightline manned by ROK. HAWK battery and I think a ROK operated NIKE HERCULES battery nearby. Two battalions of ROK infantry defended the perimeter. While I was there, a NK commando team was spotted at the seawall and shotup. At least two blood trails were found and part of a rubber suit recovered.

PM me if want to discuss further.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-07-2018, 09:10 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,573
Default

Thanks for info, Mpipes.
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-08-2018, 10:32 AM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,834
Default

I bought it, but haven't had a chance to read it yet. I'll comment once I do that.
__________________
All that stuff we know -- what if we're wrong? --Science Channel

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-08-2018, 08:20 PM
mpipes mpipes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 158
Default

There were also supposed to be extensive Stinger teams available. Those were going to be deployed all over base. My guess also is that we would get Patriot PAC3s flown in for SCUD defense.

That far south, the pilots did not think any MiGs could survive to Kunsan. But we were worried like hell about chemical SCUDS blanketing the base and surrounding area.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-08-2018, 08:28 PM
mpipes mpipes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 158
Default

Just as an aside....all air forces are going to have a lot of grounded aircraft.....not just for lack of fuel but also parts, repair, and maintenance issues. Take Germany at the end of WWII; they still had a LOT of aircraft surviving but not that many serviceable airframes. You can find photos showing dozens of serviceable and/or lightly damaged aircraft sitting idle around airfields. For example, you can't take off if the tires are so bad you'ld crash on landing

Last edited by mpipes; 03-08-2018 at 08:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-08-2018, 08:56 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,573
Default

My first draft had the KPA hitting Kunsan with SCUDs carrying chemical warheads, but decided that the North Koreans wouldn't want to risk U.S. nuclear retaliation, so had them limit their chem attacks to ROK positions around Munsan.

Another reason that the Luftwaffe was unable to get may aircraft off the ground in the last few months of the war is because of 8th AF's bombing of German synthetic oil plants. If the Allies had shifted from bombing area targets to German oil production earlier, it likely could have shortened the war by a few weeks, at least. And German pilot attrition was unsustainably high. With little fuel for training, inexperienced replacements were easy prey for Allied fighter jocks.
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-08-2018, 09:06 PM
mpipes mpipes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 158
Default

Yeah, that was the hope. But look at what happened in Desert Storm. Command kept wanting proof/confirmation....positive sniffer alerts, positive chem paper, dead birds on the ground, dead live stock on the ground, and expended warheads found not good enough. After all that BS, I finally realized that whatever our stated policy, chem use WAS NOT going to trigger a nuclear response. I still hope I'm wrong, but if we just sit back, the DPRK will just keep blanketing the airbases with nerve and other agents.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-08-2018, 09:42 PM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,834
Default

Something most people don't know is Seoul and Pyongyang are actually so close together, they are within artillery rocket range of each other.
__________________
All that stuff we know -- what if we're wrong? --Science Channel

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-09-2018, 09:16 AM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,166
Default

Just bought your sourcebook Raellus. Very enjoyable read, Korea really needed to be covered!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-10-2018, 04:51 PM
swaghauler swaghauler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: PA
Posts: 853
Default

Nice Job Man!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-10-2018, 09:02 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,573
Default

Thanks, fellas. I'm really glad that you're enjoying it.
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-11-2018, 08:27 PM
StainlessSteelCynic's Avatar
StainlessSteelCynic StainlessSteelCynic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,604
Default

Just bought it and had a very quick look through. If you want some more detail on Australian (and possibly New Zealand) units/equipment/etc. I'm quite happy to help. For example, I served in an Aussie armoured recce regiment when they were still equipped with M113 tracks (they have changed to wheeled recce vehicles now - sometime in the mid-2000s I seem to recall)

As an aside and as a bit of colour, the Australian Army had been massively under-equipped with cold weather gear since the 1960s. The official stance was that there wasn't sufficient need for extreme cold weather gear in Australia or in the jungles in which we would most likely be fighting (outside the country), therefore it was not issued.
During the 2000s deployments in Afghanistan, the Aussie SAS borrowed cold weather gear from their US counterparts until they could get appropriate gear supplied from Australia.

I can very well imagine the same scenario happening with winter in Korea and the Aussies borrowing cold weather clothing from their ROK/NZ/UK/US allies until (or if) proper gear was supplied from home.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-11-2018, 10:51 PM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,473
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic View Post
I can very well imagine the same scenario happening with winter in Korea and the Aussies borrowing cold weather clothing from their ROK/NZ/UK/US allies until (or if) proper gear was supplied from home.
I reckon the NZ military would be well-placed to assist, as you say.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-16-2018, 09:31 PM
Olefin Olefin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Greencastle, PA
Posts: 2,166
Default

Love seeing the 28th ANZUK Brigade in the Sourcebook - I would say that settles the question of whether or not the Australians contributed a decent sized force to Korea - considering the size of the Australian military its a pretty good sized force - and great to see New Zealand as well

1st Infantry Battalion, Royal Australia Regiment (Australia)
1st Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment (New Zealand)
1 x Regiment, Royal Australian Artillery (L119 Field Gun)
1 x Field Engineer Regiment, Royal Australian Engineers
1 x Recon Squadron (Australia) (M113)
Medical / Logistics (multi national but primarily Australia / NZ)
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-17-2018, 08:37 AM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,834
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan View Post
I reckon the NZ military would be well-placed to assist, as you say.
One Team Spirit, Danish and British battalions participated, but I never actually saw them. They were, however, on the (unclassified) operations reports.
__________________
All that stuff we know -- what if we're wrong? --Science Channel

Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-24-2018, 03:09 PM
Silent Hunter UK Silent Hunter UK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 296
Default

I see your book is #9 on "Most Popular Under $5". Well done!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.