Unrealistic/impossible/hard-to-believe aspects in the Twilight 2000 backstory

[unkated]

So many choices.....

As I have said, T2K in any version is an improbable series of events designed to provide an adventuring environment rather than to be a logical extension fo any min-80s reality.

But I have never understood why if CivGov had concerns for standing up to Milgov it would send IVth Corps to Yugoslavia post-TGM - (3 full divisions of troops) from the Northeast with vehicles, arms and ammo. 'Let's send a noticeable chunk of our military strength off to a corner of the globe where we cannot possible get anything back for doing so.'

Also, by any reasonable stretch of the imagination, I cannot see the complete destruction of the surface navy of the United States - too big, too spread out globally, and too good at defending themselves to be taken from the board. And it's not like they have to fight every Navy in the world - just the Soviets, who even at the height of the 80s could not manage a decent surface match in any given single theatre of operations, much less globally.

Uncle Ted

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Originally Posted by unkated

So many choices.....

As I have said, T2K in any version is an improbable series of events designed to provide an adventuring environment rather than to be a logical extension fo any min-80s reality.

But I have never understood why if CivGov had concerns for standing up to Milgov it would send IVth Corps to Yugoslavia post-TGM - (3 full divisions of troops) from the Northeast with vehicles, arms and ammo. 'Let's send a noticeable chunk of our military strength off to a corner of the globe where we cannot possible get anything back for doing so.'

Also, by any reasonable stretch of the imagination, I cannot see the complete destruction of the surface navy of the United States - too big, too spread out globally, and too good at defending themselves to be taken from the board. And it's not like they have to fight every Navy in the world - just the Soviets, who even at the height of the 80s could not manage a decent surface match in any given single theatre of operations, much less globally.

Uncle Ted

They've also got the US 7th Fleet being completely wiped out by the Italian Navy when CivGov tries to run a supply convoy to the noted Yugoslavian front.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

They've also got the US 7th Fleet being completely wiped out by the Italian Navy when CivGov tries to run a supply convoy to the noted Yugoslavian front.

Actually wasnt that the attempted supply run to the Turks?

Thats another reason - why send troops to Yugoslavia when you dont have a hope in heck of supplying them? Not when every ship you send has to run thru narrow waters off both Italy and Greece (both of whom are shooting at you). Only way it makes any sense is if both nations are still in NATO and still assisting you.

I cant see the commanders of those three divisions willingly getting on those ships knowing they were basically being thrown away to die with no hope of support - its one thing if they got sent off in July 1997 not expecting the US to get nuked. "Oh crap where are we going to get out supplies!"

They got sent over eight months later after it was pretty darn obvious that resupply was going to be nothing but fantasy.

[unkated]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Actually wasnt that the attempted supply run to the Turks?



Thats another reason - why send troops to Yugoslavia when you dont have a hope in heck of supplying them? Not when every ship you send has to run thru narrow waters off both Italy and Greece (both of whom are shooting at you). Only way it makes any sense is if both nations are still in NATO and still assisting you.

I cant see the commanders of those three divisions willingly getting on those ships knowing they were basically being thrown away to die with no hope of support - its one thing if they got sent off in July 1997 not expecting the US to get nuked. "Oh crap where are we going to get out supplies!"

They got sent over eight months later after it was pretty darn obvious that resupply was going to be nothing but fantasy.

I think what the 7th Fleet (um, isn't the 6th fleet the one in the Med, and the 7th is in the Pacific?) was doing depends entirely on which version of history you use.

I prefer the v1 history, written before Yugoslavia went to pieces; in that case, Yugo comes into the war on the side of NATO. Yugoslavia's resistance heartens Romania, and given them a non-invasive border.

V2 history includes Yugoslavia's (historic) break-up, so its not there as a single entity for the US to try to supply, I think. I'd have to check...

OTOH, how much does it matter?

Uncle Ted

[Olefin]

It only matters if you look at the logic of the game - and frankly a lot of US military and government officials had very little logic

if you want to design a game at least make it one where the US doesnt behave stupidly in order to have the scenario occur

i.e. throwing away three divisions uselesly to Yugoslavia when at the time they left the Mexicans were rampaging north thru the Southwest and then allowing a division that is supposed to go to Texas to stop said Mexicans not join the offensive thus dooming it tofailure

actually surprised that after seeing both those events that MilGov didnt do what probably would have been done in real life - declaring CivGov to be sabotaging the US war effort and allowing US citizens to be put under foreign rule by an enemy invader and taking out CivGov right there and then

and for the record I dont mind the US getting their butts kicked - hey it happens no matter how good you are - the guys on Wake were all professionals - and they lost - the USS Houston was a great ship and they went down anyway

what I do mind is acting stupidly in order to have the game work

having those divisions stop the Mexicans cold in order to show CivGov actually can protect the American people makes a hell of a lot more sense than sending them to Yugoslavia to somehow build up US morale while Texas and Los Angeles are falling to the Mexicans

[Adm.Lee]

I've always ignored the US divisions that went to Yugoslavia, myself.

The whole Italians-and-Greeks switching sides seemed farfetched to me, at least as much as the Mexican invasion of the USA. Maybe one of these events happening, but all three? Italy or Greece trying to sit the war out and joining France in a 3rd bloc seemed more like it to me. Actually attacking the NATO Med. Fleets seemed pretty dumb, but not as dumb as invading Austria and Southern Germany.

I was a college freshman in 1986-87, and there was a Greek kid in my dorm. He told me the Greeks were occasionally working up for a war with the Turks, with Constantinople as the objective. I played that with both Gulf Strike (VG) and Third World War: Southern Front (GDW), it was a fair match without NATO getting involved on either side.

(sidebar: Someday, in a WWII alternate game, I'd like to try a Greek-Italian alliance vs. Turkey someday. Say, in 1938 or '39 or even '40, instead of Italy attacking Greece. I have all of GDW's Europa series, so the OBs are available.)

[Olefin]

Italy would have been much better off saying she was invoking her treaty with Greece but instead doing it by pulling out of NATO and supply Greece with weapons - then they and France both end up coming out relatively intact (they still get nuked but not as bad like France)

Getting those three divisions to Yugoslavia wouldnt have made any sense by 1998 for another reason - by then that country had ceased to exist - frankly the only military reason you could see them being sent to the Med would have been either an operation to grab Sicily from Italy or to possibly land in Turkey to support the Turks against the Russians and Bulgarians - if Italy had even a small fleet and air force left they would have made those convoys pay so badly I doubt there would have been a viable force left to make the landing

Like that alternate WWII scenario with Italy and Greece teaming up against Turkey - or alternatively against Yugoslavia - especially since Italy could offer the Greeks a free hand to annex Macedonia in exchange for Italy taking over the Croatian and Slovenian areas of the country that were part of the old Roman Empire - and the Greeks werent exactly buddy buddy with the Brits prior to the Italian invasion of Greece

[Matt Wiser]

The Mexican invasion of the Southwest and the invasion of Alaska were too far, even for me. In one of the numerous threads discussing the former, I mentioned that General Cummings would have unleashed some SAC elements on Mexico's supply and transportation hubs in Mexico, with instant sunshine.

If you dig up the Naval stuff I did, that should tell you how much I thought of GDW's treatment of the USN. And those were the ships I listed as active. I didn't list ships that were in port somewhere, either needing fuel or repairs to get home, unless it was something like one of the battleships. I did list the fate of the carriers, though.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Olefin

if you want to design a game at least make it one where the US doesnt behave stupidly in order to have the scenario occur

Because the US never behaves stupidly? Every country's government has behaved stupidly at one time or another, mine included.

[Rainbow Six]

Whilst I don't disagree that the US Divisions going to Yugoslavia doesn't appear to be a logical / sensible decision, I think it has been discussed on this forum before and a viewpoint was put forward that Civgov took the decision from a purely political point of view as a counter to Milgov, who at the time were sending reinforcements to Germany.

If I recall correctly, the proposed logic was that Civgov needed to show that it still had the capability to send troops to Europe as a way of scoring political points against Milgov as both are claiming to be the legitimate Government of the US and if one did send troops overseas and the other didn't, that would weaken the standing of the one that didn't.

That said, looking at this this morning, I'm not sure if there's an anomaly? I'm at work, so don't have access to any materials other than what I can source online, so am going off this timeline

http://www.d20.demon.nl/t2k/t2ktime.html

That states that the 76th and 80th Divisions are sent to Yugoslavia in October of 1998 (specifically late October inthe case of the 76th)

Same timeline then states that the split between US Governments took place on 19th April 1999, i.e. six months after those two Divisions were sent to Yugoslavia.

So if that's correct, it was only the 42nd Division that was specifically sent by Civgov - the other two Divisions were sent before the split, so presumably declared for Civgov at some point after 19th April 1999, at which point they were already in theatre. Or have I missed something (or is that timeline wrong)?

There are a whole host of things that if you study them in any sort of detail don't make sense, but they are what makes Twilight 2000 what it is. On this occasion I think it's simply a plot device to give those who might want to play a Balkans campaign with US player characters, in the same way that the RDF Sourcebook put Israeli units on the ground in Iran (which to me is about as plausible as Scotland winning the next World Cup) so that you could play Israeli PC's in an RDF campaign.

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by Targan

Because the US never behaves stupidly? Every country's government has behaved stupidly at one time or another, mine included.

Oh and Targan I never said the US never behaves stupidly - but frankly the US leadership in the game, especially CivGov is close to treasonously stupid - MilGov sent a hell of a lot of troops to fight the Mexicans and Russians in the Southwest

CivGov didnt send anyone and talked one division out of joining the 5th Army when they tried to clear out Texas

Thats not stupid - thats STUPID

and no politician trying to score political points says "screw the citizens of CA, AZ, NM, LA, OK and TX - we got better things to do in Yugoslavia"

[unkated]

Originally Posted by Olefin

It only matters if you look at the logic of the game - and frankly a lot of US military and government officials had very little logic

if you want to design a game at least make it one where the US doesnt behave stupidly in order to have the scenario occur

Ah, I think you misunderstand me. The part that doesn't matter was whether the US 7th Fleet was on its way to the Adriatic or to Turkey when it was destroyed by the Italians.

In either case, sending a resupply through a small area (Tyrrhenian Sea/Sicily Strait) where an enemy has significant air and sea assets is idiotic.

The supply issue is another good case of stupidity. Since WW2, most modern militaries (including the US) has been well aware of the importance of logistics, especially for force projection. Troops that cannot be supplied with food, ammo, and fuel are wasted, as they will soon be unable to defend themselves. If they cannot be supported, the troops are NOT sent. At least in Germany, ammo is plentiful since NATO standardized ammo, and it was stockpiled. Not much NATO ammo available in Yugoslavia; deployment requires a supply route, and there is not a secure route available.

(But logistics also leads to my problems with the Mexican/Texican affair - after its initial attack, the Soviets will run low on ammo that cannot be supplied by the Mexicans or US sources.)

Similarly, the Soviet invasion of Alaska, while producing an interesting gaming environment (perhaps), is a pointless waste of Soviet strength. More sensible would have been to assault the North Slope (only) to seize the oil production facilities. Let the Americans stretch their logistics lines to counter attack. What else in Alaska has easily gathered resources immediately useful to the Soviet war effort?

Now, T2K reminds me of Game of Thrones. By the time I got halfway through the third book, I was getting a little annoyed of every character in a leadership position always selecting a path that would lead to the most self-destructive result!

Uncle Ted

[Olefin]

Completely agree with you Ted on both points

CivGov sending those three divisions always made me scratch my head - especially how did they get them there? To get to Yugoslavia means you have to sail thru the Med and past Italy and Greece into very restricted waters - and somehow do this after the USN has been basically destroyed? Especially considering the collection of ships they probably were able to gather by then would have been easy prey for both nations.


Plus you send three divisions to Europe when you have the Mexican Army invading Texas, California and the Southwest? So your own country is under atack by a foreign nation and you send a tank heavy unit like the 42nd to Yugoslavia instead of Texas? Let alone later help torpedo the 5th Army's attack into Texas by having turncoat units join you to avoid having to head to Texas?

Frankly thats the act of a treasonous govt in the pay of the Mexicans not the act of any US Govt.

As for the destruction of the USN - no way that could happen - ok sure maybe if the Russians and Chinese and just about every other navy in the world attacked us. But we have the UK, German, Danish, Norwegian, Canadian, Israeli, Egyptian (US Ally back then remember), Turkish, Romanian, East German and Chinese fleets on our side against a combo of Russia, Greece, Italy and Poland and lose the whole fleet?

Short on fuel and spare parts is one thing - but sunk is totally different.

Have said this before - there is a big difference in how the canon is perceived versus reality. Sure the US took huge casualties when they attacked in the north - but having your fleet shattered versus having it sunk are two totally different things.

The Japanese had their last major fleet in being shattered at Leyte - and they still had over a hundred ships and submarines afloat afterward including major fleet units like battleships, heavy cruisers and carriers - what they didnt have was the ability to control huge areas of the ocean anymore

So having the last major NATO fleet in being shattered doesnt mean that just about every ship got sunk - it means that what they have left cant control the oceans like it used to

And just as a point of reference - the US Pacific Fleet and Chinese fleet put together would have been easily able to handle what the Soviets had in the Pacific and IO

What could really be the reason the USN isnt the force it used to be, besides fuel and spare parts, could be munitions. Take your typical destroyer or cruiser and remove all the missiles (factories arent running so they have shot out their supply) and what do you have left - usually a single gun. Not exactly a ship I want to take into harms way.