Which edition do you play?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Ah ha!
Thanks for the explanation.

I'm familiar enough with the premise of the New Era edition, even have the main book, but as mentioned, I never played Traveller so many of the abbreviations, acronyms and such like escape me!

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Minor differences - hardly

A few sentences is all the difference. Yes, the later edition(s) added some information, and changed the situation in Korea, but when you look at the unit histories (not to mention most of the timeline) it's about 99% cut and pasted.

[Olefin]

As I said the differences in Vietnam, the Kuriles, Iran and France make the two timelines very different - also equipment as well - i.e. there goes the LAV-75 and the giraffe version of the M1

[pmulcahy11b]

I'm sort of in an interesting situation. The v2.3 rule set works best, but the V1 timeline works better than that contrived mess that GDW came up with for v2.2.

However...

My personal belief is that if IRL we go to a Twilight War world, it will happen sometime in the 2030-2035 timeline. (I refer to that time as the "bump in the road" -- If we can make past that, the future's probably good for another century.) I would advocate a new timeline, to go up to 2030 or so -- it's not far enough in the future that we can't project weapons and vehicle development, but more realistic than others posited here.

[ChalkLine]

I use a classless Cyberpunk 2020 modified with Twilight 2000 rules. I've adopted some version 2.2 skills and deleted or rationalised many cyberpunk skills.

I find the combat rules more realistic but quite (realistically) lethal. Players in my games find out that gung-ho individuals get hero's graves quite quickly. Due to the savage automatic fire rules and the fact that most of the player's body is unarmoured the players tend to become adept at 'fix-n'-fuck' tactics of suppressing and grenading the enemy. Fire combat is often quite wasteful of ammo, especially at short ranges.

I use a 'version one style' choose-what-you-like character generation system where everyone gets the same amount of skill points no matter what. This stops players seeking out terms in special forces for extra points and it means you don't have to do a term in support if you want to get scrounging. I also have a much lower rank table where nearly all players are privates for enlisted and lieutenants for officers, but you do occasionally get higher ranks. Rank and time in as I said has no effect on skills.

As for a setting I either play my own modified twilight 2000 (with tech up to 2010 to simulate the increased R&D and faster adoption time engendered by warfare) or present day that's become almost what I thought of as science fiction a few years back!

[guncrazy]

Straight 2.2 although I doubt we are doing it 100% correctly. Combat is a bit confusing.

[Legbreaker]

What do you find confusing about it? I've always seen it as rather straight forward, but then some of my other preferred systems can be somewhat....complex for beginners.

[swaghauler]

I play a HIGHLY MODIFIED version of the V2.2 rules with Traveller skill levels and a bunch of rules imported from the Mythras/Runequest system.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by ChalkLine

Players in my games find out that gung-ho individuals get hero's graves quite quickly. Due to the savage automatic fire rules and the fact that most of the player's body is unarmoured the players tend to become adept at 'fix-n'-fuck' tactics of suppressing and grenading the enemy. Fire combat is often quite wasteful of ammo, especially at short ranges.

As happens in reality...

[Antenna]

2.2 timline
My own Homebrew of houserules (deadly of course )

Antenna

[Nyrond24]

I use 2nd edition timeline with my own changes 2000 onwards, especially post Omega for the british army. In addition we use the millennium's end system, great firearms system and skills work very nicely too.