Where is the M88A1 in the game?

[Olefin]

Always wondered why the M88A1 isnt mentioned in the game. While it onlyh has an onboard 50 cal MG for weapons, it can carry anti-tank missiles, has a ton of engineering equipment on board that is tailor made for multiple scenarios in the game, can recover wrecked equipment and tanks and is about as dependable a vehicle as the military ever fielded.

And having one with you is about the best way to make sure that the other vehicles you have can be repaired when they break down.

And if you look at the scenarios I can literally see the Krakow government paying you a lot to buy that vehicle off of you or for the rental of its services.

[Raellus]

I agree. The M88 would be a fun atypical vehicle to campaign with. I think the developers ommitted it because it's not really a combat-oriented AFV and they were trying to save room in their rather thin vehicle guides for combat or cargo optimized vehicles.

[Tegyrius]

I always wanted to do an ARV/AEV supplement for 2013. Ah well.

- C.

[Panther Al]

Well, You do have the German ARV in the NATO book, so at least there is one out there.


And yes: I always tried to scam a way into getting one for those very reasons.

[Medic]

I always wanted to do an ARV/AEV supplement for 2013. Ah well.

- C.

Well, at least there is the M88 in the 2013 rules...

[Tegyrius]

Well, You do have the German ARV in the NATO book, so at least there is one out there.

If we're talking 2.0/2.2, the M88A1 does appear in the ACVH, too. Page 39.

Well, at least there is the M88 in the 2013 rules...

Yep. And I statted out two or three others in the Czech Republic vehicle sourcebook.

- C.

[Olefin]

I will check out the Czech guide - didnt realize it was in there.

I havent looked at the 2013 game - have to do that - we played the original version and to me that is the game.

[Medic]

I will check out the Czech guide - didnt realize it was in there.

I havent looked at the 2013 game - have to do that - we played the original version and to me that is the game.

I strongly advice you do. I'm one of the 2013 buffs here while some others on the forum were actually in the team that wrote the whole shebang.

[Panther Al]

If we're talking 2.0/2.2, the M88A1 does appear in the ACVH, too. Page 39.



Yep. And I statted out two or three others in the Czech Republic vehicle sourcebook.

- C.

True enough. :)

But the Leo is *better* looking. :)

[Tegyrius]

I will check out the Czech guide - didnt realize it was in there.

The M88A1 is in the core book (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/58794/T2013--Twilight%3A-2013-Core-Rules). Czech Your Engine (link in my sig file) has stats for the BREM-2 and a couple of AEVs.

(Disclaimer: DriveThruRPG link provided for convenience only. I get no cut of Far Future's sales.)

- C.

[Legbreaker]

ARV's could be a prime target for enemy action. Taking one out will have a massive impact on the ability of the rest of the unit it supports to maintain itself in action. By 2000 they're therefore likely to be in very short supply with most heavy haulage and recovery being carried out by ex-civilian vehicles.

[Targan]

As the years went by and I accumulated more and more books on military hardware of the 1980s/1990s I would happily include RL vehicles in the game that weren't covered in the books. It's no big deal. Pretty easy to stat them up if you have stats for a similar vehicles and you have all the RL specs available.

[Raellus]

ARV's could be a prime target for enemy action. Taking one out will have a massive impact on the ability of the rest of the unit it supports to maintain itself in action. By 2000 they're therefore likely to be in very short supply with most heavy haulage and recovery being carried out by ex-civilian vehicles.

For the reason given, ARV's would probably operate behind friendly lines, once the battlefield was relatively secure. I don't see them being employed under fire very often. I don't know for sure, but I'm pretty sure that's accepted tactical doctrine as far as ARVs goes.

[Panther Al]

ARV's could be a prime target for enemy action. Taking one out will have a massive impact on the ability of the rest of the unit it supports to maintain itself in action. By 2000 they're therefore likely to be in very short supply with most heavy haulage and recovery being carried out by ex-civilian vehicles.

While that would be perfectly true for the bulk of the war, but as they became rarer and rarer, I would imagine it would shift to less wreck, and more catch when they are seen on the battlefield. Especially in the last year or less.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

While that would be perfectly true for the bulk of the war, but as they became rarer and rarer, I would imagine it would shift to less wreck, and more catch when they are seen on the battlefield. Especially in the last year or less.

Agreed; by 2000 (and beyond) a "Tank" = "anything with some armor we can put guns on".

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/95/Aau_m88_2.jpg/320px-Aau_m88_2.jpg

[Legbreaker]

While that would be perfectly true for the bulk of the war, but as they became rarer and rarer, I would imagine it would shift to less wreck, and more catch when they are seen on the battlefield. Especially in the last year or less.

I was thinking they'd be a prime target of opportunity for helicopters and ground attack aircraft rather than many being lost to direct action by AFVs and infantry. It's just another method of screwing with the enemies supply lines and support services, thereby bringing the fighting units to a grinding halt.

[Olefin]

Considering how many M88's there were in the US Army and USMC and how critical they were to operations I dont imagine they are all gone. And like I said people like King Julian and the "gentlemen" running Krakow would have loved to have gotten one. And just imagine how nice a mini-scenario you can do about finding one that can be "obtained" from a village or marauder group - as in "boy wouldnt it be great if we could get a vehicle that could drag that M1 tank out of the bog it got stuck in".

And considering its a rolling machine shop and crane in one package its a very nice vehicle to have on your side.

[Targan]

I don't believe it says in any of the books that there are no M88A1s left in the world. Ok, so they weren't mentioned in any of the vehicle guides or base rule books. Neither were lots of other vehicles that existed at the time. Put 'em in. As I said in an earlier post, if you have the RL stats it's not very hard to stat them up.

[Legbreaker]

I agree that there's bound to be a few engineering vehicles floating about, but given they were in a relatively low proportion compared to the number of tanks, and most tank Divisions are lucky to have a dozen tanks by 2000...

[Tegyrius]

Yes, ARVs and AEVs will be rare, but rare != extinct. The FV-180 is in the NATO CVH, which admits only 141 of them were built. This suggests that at least one is still in existence and can be owned or encountered by PCs.

As a GM, I would be delighted if my players told me they wanted an engineering or recovery vehicle over a tank or IFV. That's a clear message that they're planning to think outside the proverbial armored box rather than going for straight combat power, and players who do that are more likely to entertain me.

IMO, one of this forum's great weaknesses is that we too often get fixated on verisimilitude (and combat stats) at the expense of storytelling.

- C.

[Tegyrius]

What are the community's thoughts on PC groups having an armored recovery vehicle or combat engineer vehicle rather than a combat vehicle? I've always thought such an arrangement was more interesting than "oh, another team with an Abrams Giraffe" because it trades combat power for utility. At the same time, there's still enough armor on most of these designs to make them proof against small arms fire, if not light autocannon. Combine that with the capacity to pintle-mount anything up to a HMG/AGL/ATGM makes them able to function as rolling bunkers, so long as the crew doesn't get overconfident.

Opinions? Has anyone ever actually had one of these attached to a PC group? If so, what design was it and how'd it work out?

- C.

[Raellus]

I've often thought that an ARV of some sort would make for a really interesting PC vehicle, but my current campaign hasn't provided too many opportunities for my players to encounter one. I've toyed with the idea of starting up an Escape from Kalisz campaign where one of the PCs' vehicles is an ARV, most likely an M88 with some supplemental armor and an extra MG or two. I think it would be an interesting PC ride because, in addition to a decent mobility boost (over boots, at least), it would provide good protection from small arms fire and shrapnel, and it's M2HB would give the PCs good offensive capabilities against bunkers and light armor. At the same time, it's not going to give the group an overwhelming advantage over enemy forces, and the party is going to have to worry about fuel and maintenance. It's sort of a "tweener" vehicle- better than nothing but not as formidable as an Abrams or a Bradley or something along those lines. This, to me, would be more interesting to play with than an MBT or IFV.

[kcdusk]

Combat Engineer vehicles or extending through to cranes for example, should give PCs more ability to "rebuild" the world (ie fixing things). So i think these vehicles could re-focus the game away from combat and more into "moving forward".

Defending such a vehicle, or whatever project it was working on (such as a bridge or armour shop), should open up enough possibilities for action. Or sourcing building materials from nearby (or not so near by!) should provide little story arcs to base around PCs using CEVs.

I've never had PCs use them. But have considered having NPCs use them (ie PCs pass by them).

I hear what your saying about them being a "twiner" vehicle.

[Tegyrius]

I've often thought that an ARV of some sort would make for a really interesting PC vehicle, but my current campaign hasn't provided too many opportunities for my players to encounter one.

Which is okay with me. We're in a different situation there, and moving off the Queen would fundamentally change that game's flavor. Also, we don't really have the skill set to take full advantage of one.

At the same time, it's not going to give the group an overwhelming advantage over enemy forces, and the party is going to have to worry about fuel and maintenance. It's sort of a "tweener" vehicle- better than nothing but not as formidable as an Abrams or a Bradley or something along those lines. This, to me, would be more interesting to play with than an MBT or IFV.

That's a lot of my thinking, yeah. The limitations of the platform would keep the group from getting too aggressive, and they'd still have all the logistical headaches associated with a big thirsty tank engine. At the same time, it's more practical outside a fight than an M113A3 ACCV or the equivalent - which is really what we're talking about when we look at its combat capability.

Combat Engineer vehicles or extending through to cranes for example, should give PCs more ability to "rebuild" the world (ie fixing things). So i think these vehicles could re-focus the game away from combat and more into "moving forward".

Defending such a vehicle, or whatever project it was working on (such as a bridge or armour shop), should open up enough possibilities for action. Or sourcing building materials from nearby (or not so near by!) should provide little story arcs to base around PCs using CEVs.

And that's the other half of their appeal for me. I like stories about putting (a little piece of) the world back together.

- C.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

An M88 would be an incredible starting vehicle for a party. There's enough room to live in the freaking thing, it's a rolling machine shop, can recover other armored vehicles, act as a pillbox (but never, ever pretend to be a tank!) - it is just such a cool ride!

[Targan]

*NOTE* I've merged the thread ARVs and CEVs into this thread.

[Olefin]

In my original campaign the GM had us "liberate" an M88A1 from a Russian engineering company that we attacked. It wasnt in the best shape but we got it to keep going till we got to the US Cav troop that was in The Black Madonna module and left it with them, where they used it as a repair vehicle to help keep their vehicles working. When we got to the States we did a mission where we did guard duty for two M88's that were rebuilding an important bridge after New America force's blew it near Harper's Ferry.

An M88A2 would make a great player vehicle - and they can carry AT-4's and can mount either a .50 or a Mk19, giving them a good amount of firepower.

And I can just imagine what they could do with such a vehicle if they can get it to Krakow or to Silesia - both areas offer a lot of ways clever players could really use it there as a money maker and a way to be offered long term steady employment.