I.E.D's

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

I don't think this was true at all in a communist era Poland or elsewhere in the Warsaw Pact, so for most of the normal T2K European AO -- no.

But as Sith pointed out, the manufacturing base was there. Industry was there. And I as I stated in my reply to him, the IR door sensors and garage door openers were an example in lieu of a laundry list.

My comment was about the T2K setting, not the real world. Twilight era soldiers on the move equate to theft, "requisitioning" and various other quasi-legal or criminal interactions. On top of that, troops on the move in the Twilight era just don't have any real differential on disposable wealth, disposable stuff, etc., than the people they're driving by. Civilians wouldn't have any strong motivation to turn out and watch convoys go by, at least not the civilians who'd managed to survive into the year 2000.

That's one possible game-style. What if I don't run my game all Book of Eli-ish and instead run it more the Postman-ish or Jericho-ish with communities that aren't so xenophobic of outsiders? What if that group of PCs is treated like the "Marines" in the episode of Jericho where they roll into town with a tank? People don't necessarily know what you do and don't have and if you're rolling like most PC groups that I've seen, in some kind of vehicle, with automatic weapons and ammo for them, the natural assumption is that there is a difference in wealth levels of the two groups. Don't set yourself into the tunnel vision mindset that everyone knows this is and is not what other people will and won't have because you know the setting and the general party composition.

My recollection of the into to Free City of Krakow mentions how odd it is to see crowds of kids turning out to mob passing vehicles and such.

Never read it. I don't generally buy adventure modules for games and instead use the base setting and come up with my own details or go with a generic game (i.e., GURPS, etc.) and develop my own setting. When I do buy them, it's usually because they have new stat blocks of gear or updates or some such. In fact, I don't even have the Everytown supplement for my own game. When I do buy a world expanding work, I don't necessarily use all of it, especially if I don't agree with it or desire more or less realism for the purpose of my game.

Disregarding my personal preferences though, my understanding is that Free City of Krakow is a supplement for a very specific, localized geographic area? Not for all of Eastern Europe, much less Europe as a whole?
I don't take that as the intent for the game. I mean, if that's all there is, why even bother doing anything other than finding a cabin with good hunting/fishing and avoiding people for the rest of your days?

I'm not trying to offend you by contradicting you. I just don't think that soldier = marauder, even in the Twilight setting, especially amongst kids. I acknowledge that the setting acknowledges they exist and are common in the antagonists, but I also submit that the game would be pretty boring if there wasn't someone for your well-armed, well-supplied PC group to go up against and you wouldn't pay for a book full of fluffy bunnies. I also have a hard time believing that GDW intended for every soldier to equate to thief. Unfortunately, as I said, I didn't buy adventure supplements instead of IWotW and the vehicle guides, I can't refute that with citations.

[HorseSoldier]

But as Sith pointed out, the manufacturing base was there. Industry was there. And I as I stated in my reply to him, the IR door sensors and garage door openers were an example in lieu of a laundry list.

And I already mentioned the same sort of thing in the response you're taking issue with.

I'm not trying to offend you by contradicting you. I just don't think that soldier = marauder, even in the Twilight setting, especially amongst kids. I acknowledge that the setting acknowledges they exist and are common in the antagonists, but I also submit that the game would be pretty boring if there wasn't someone for your well-armed, well-supplied PC group to go up against and you wouldn't pay for a book full of fluffy bunnies. I also have a hard time believing that GDW intended for every soldier to equate to thief. Unfortunately, as I said, I didn't buy adventure supplements instead of IWotW and the vehicle guides, I can't refute that with citations.

No, I agree -- I was speaking specifically of T2K Central Europe in the Poland/Former DDR corridor, and other places with a similar scenario, where you've got hordes of troops from both sides marching back and forth, seizing supplies they need from local communities as necessary, and various bands of marauders who may look just like the loyal gov't troops also on the move. The various game supplements set in Europe call to mind the same chunk of the world during the 30 Years War, and I tend to think civilians who survive act similarly.

In that background, a specific unit (or group of PCs) may do things differently, but it's going to take proving it to the local populace to sell it. The default will remain "soldiers on the way, head for the hills and hide your daughters and canned goods" etc.

This does not mean that is a universal situation the world over, though -- in some places the military will represent potential stability in a crazy world, rather than locusts coming through.

[Webstral]

If one wants to stick to a definition of IED as essentially a roadside device with command detonation, then IED have a place in Twilight: 2000, but a limited one in comparison to other possible definitions. If we define IED as all manner of improvised explosives, to include home made mines, rockets, grenade, shaped charges, etc., the IED are ubiquitous.

The same principles that are used to create EFP (explosively formed projectiles) are used in all manner of shaped charges. Some further refinement is necessary, but the principles are the same. While a roadside device certainly has its place, we should expect to see a rapid evolution to other shaped charge applications, such as anti-armor mines, anti-armor grenades, and all manner of HEAT warhead projectors.

Fabrication of such devices will tend to favor warlords and more "legitimate" governments over marauders. If maruaders are essentially bandits operating with semi-permanent bases or no bases, then they probably won't have the manufacturing capacity to fabricate explosive devices. This isn't to say that marauders couldn't acquire IED by a variety of means.

Webstral

[jester]

I disagreee Web. Some of the more successful bombers in our time have been single persons or small cells operating on their ownl. From Theodore Kazinsky and a good number of the IRA bombers to McVeih to some of the folks operating in the ME, and of course durring the 80s with the countless groups of terrorist groups sponsored by the Soviets and militant Arab states.

It also has been used by lone actors or small cells not just in Iraq, but also in several other resistance movements throughout history <mostly the 20th Century of course> To get ideas, one just needs to check the history books for such actions and operatives.

In essance though, there are just three main means of detonation, Chemical, Electrical and Mechanical. You just need to vary how you use them. And, it is just limited by the human imagination, so if you give it time, such things and variations will come to mind.

In the T2K context I can see one or two old soldiers who have found a home, an know they can't take on a sizable military force so they don't. They just submit.....on the surface. But at night, the roads are mined, bombs are left here there and everywhere. Or they just rig the woods in and around their town as a defense.

I can see something akin to the Willie E. Coyote where they set an elaborate string of tripwires and pressure devices engage an enemy patrol and flee, getting them to follow. They set the traps so they avoid tripping them but their persuers, well they end up with half their force out from the assorted mines and boobytraps.

It is a force equalizer that was used with success in Indo China in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s in A-Stan by the Russians, in Iraq and A-Stan by the Indig and in Africa and Latin America durring their coup de jour.

I mean, something akin to a claymore has the potential to nuetralize a much larger force than those using it, as well as it being known becomes an area denial weapon so even when its element of surporise is lost it still remains effective. And, then there is the phsycological value, if it is known to be an area it has a certain demoralizing effect. And that goes if there are weapons or not there.

Remember, the weapons don't even have to be detonated or emplaced for that matter to be effective.

And then we have the various mines used by the Finns durring The Winter War, or the Germans with the shoe mine. Very simple designs.

[Raellus]

I think one has to look at the context in which I.E.D.s have been used in recent times. They are mostly a weapon for asymetric warfare, being used by forces that are overmatched in terms of battlefield technology. They're really a tool of guerilla warfare and terrorism.

In the Twilight War, neither of the major combatants in Europe would have much of a technology advantage over the other. I'm not sure that conventional forces c. 2000 would feel the need to resort to such weapons.

I.E.D.s are also used in areas with very fluid or no front lines. They are often deployed in densely populated urban areas (i.e. Bagdhad) or remote rural areas (i.e. Afghanistan). In these places, the man triggering the device- often dressed as a civilian- can escape by disappearing into the nearest neighborhood or rugged terrain. With allied ROEs very sensitive about causing civilian casualties, the victim's options for counterattack are fairly limited. Although the fronts in Europe c.2000 are somewhat fluid with large gaps between cantonments, I think it would be more difficult for troops to cart around heavy I.E.D.s, detonate them, and escape detection and destruction.

So, I think I.E.D.s, especially roadside bombs, would be fairly rare in most theaters in the Twilight War. I can see them being used more frequently as command-detonated mines, like Claymores.

That said, in my PbP, the PCs rigged some I.E.D.s out of blocks of TNT and a 120mm mortar bomb to use in ambushing "Baron" Czarny's D-30 convoy. In effect, the PCs were acting as guerillas/partisans against a better equipped, more numerous, essentially conventional military force.

On a related note, I wonder what I.E.D.s would be called in the Twilight War as it's my understanding that the term was coined quite recently (i.e. after the 2003 invasion of Iraq). What would the T2K acronym be?

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by Raellus

On a related note, I wonder what I.E.D.s would be called in the Twilight War as it's my understanding that the term was coined quite recently (i.e. after the 2003 invasion of Iraq). What would the T2K acronym be?

The unpretentious name for one is boobytrap.

However, that doesn't sound as menacing in a news report as an improvised explosive device or as military in those circles (frex., hook and loop fasteners instead of velcro, slide fastener instead of zipper, etc.).

[Sith]

Originally Posted by Raellus

On a related note, I wonder what I.E.D.s would be called in the Twilight War as it's my understanding that the term was coined quite recently (i.e. after the 2003 invasion of Iraq). What would the T2K acronym be?

They would be called IEDs. The term was first coined by the British in Northern Ireland.

[Eddie]

Originally Posted by Sith

They would be called IEDs. The term was first coined by the British in Northern Ireland.

Interesting. I didn't know that little piece of trivia.

[Sith]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I think one has to look at the context in which I.E.D.s have been used in recent times. They are mostly a weapon for asymetric warfare, being used by forces that are overmatched in terms of battlefield technology. They're really a tool of guerilla warfare and terrorism.

In the Twilight War, neither of the major combatants in Europe would have much of a technology advantage over the other. I'm not sure that conventional forces c. 2000 would feel the need to resort to such weapons.

No and Yes.

The IED is a full spectrum weapon that has many advantages that conventional mines do not.

You are correct that neither of the major combatants would use them. It did not fit the NATO or WP conventional battlefield philosophies of the day. With that being said, I would think that NATO would begin to use them in the last two years of the T2K timeline. The British would have the resident knowledge and low supplies would provide the necessity.

[HorseSoldier]

Originally Posted by Sith

You are correct that neither of the major combatants would use them. It did not fit the NATO or WP conventional battlefield philosophies of the day. With that being said, I would think that NATO would begin to use them in the last two years of the T2K timeline. The British would have the resident knowledge and low supplies would provide the necessity.

I would expect that after the nuclear exchange, both sides would begin using them at a local level, as reliable supplies of AT and AP mines started drying up.

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by jester

I disagreee Web.

In general, fair enough. I’ve been slumming at NPR.org lately, so I’m pleased you didn’t label me, insult my intelligence, or question my patriotism for having a different idea.

Originally Posted by jester

Some of the more successful bombers in our time have been single persons or small cells operating on their ownl. From Theodore Kazinsky and a good number of the IRA bombers to McVeih to some of the folks operating in the ME, and of course durring the 80s with the countless groups of terrorist groups sponsored by the Soviets and militant Arab states.

No contest on these points, but by 2000 in the Twilight: 2000 timeline, the world is a very different place. Supplies of everything except hunger and violence are short. Loners in their cabins are easy prey for hungry men with rifles and shotguns. The entire social organization that gives logic to and enables the modus operendi of the bombers has been drastically altered. This is not to say that the IRA bombers won’t find themselves in steady employ. It does mean that the support mechanisms that enable solitary bomb builders to practice their craft prior to the war have disappeared.

Originally Posted by jester

In the T2K context I can see one or two old soldiers who have found a home, an know they can't take on a sizable military force so they don't. They just submit.....on the surface. But at night, the roads are mined, bombs are left here there and everywhere. Or they just rig the woods in and around their town as a defense.

My assertion is not that “one or two old soldiers” could not set up explosives-oriented defenses in the location of their choice (note that I specifically mentioned mines, albeit anti-armor mines). In your example, these soldiers are operating as part of a town. Somebody is feeding them and providing security while they work on their explosives. Who is that somebody? It’s the local government, be it the mayor and militia or the warlord and his troops, or whatever. With more of the population than ever producing food, the decision to produce explosives is a deliberate one necessitating food, materials, tools, and security. Although some marauder groups will be able to meet these requirements, warlords and governments have a distinct advantage.


Webstral