Idea for starting a campaign

[weswood]

With enough imagination, anything can work. I like it because the PC's already know each other and don't have to go through that awkward " Hi, I'm Dave, and I ....."

[M-Type]

Originally Posted by weswood

With enough imagination, anything can work. I like it because the PC's already know each other and don't have to go through that awkward " Hi, I'm Dave, and I ....."

Yeah. And most of the people who'd probably playing would know each other too, so they can keep that 'relationship' going. And it would definitely make role-playing better because they won't be afraid to get angry at each other

I might select one of them at random to be the Tank Commander, then he can assign who will be what crewman. That'll add a solid party leader, and will also add some tension at the beginning, at least if someone wanted to be the Voice of the people and didn't get it.

First session mutiny? Time to factor bullet ricochets inside a tank hull...

I also figure that it will avoid the (IMO) costly "buy-stuff with our money" phase. They'll just have the standard stuff the average Tanker would get. 'Nuff said. They can steal/scavenge/buy anything else they want.

EDIT: I could also tweak the alternate history to add Desert Storm, so the players could be veteran tankers from that campaign.

Originally Posted by avantman42

Sounds like a good idea to me, as long as the players are happy to create characters that will work as a tank crew.

That'd be a problem, but I'd be letting them choose their first couple terms themselves, as long as they join the Armor arm before war breaks out.

That or I'd give them all the skills 2 periods of the Armor Arm would give them, and they'd have points or something to choose the rest, barring the 10 limit.

Damn. Now I just want to run this as a PBP to start playing it...

[Raellus]

I think it can definitely work. Here are a couple more things to think about.

The loader position could get boring for whichever player gets assigned that role. You should probably think about how to make loader a more interesting RP job.

Do you think your players will enjoy armored warfare? I can see how it could be a lot of fun, but players will not have as much freedom of initiative to plot and execute their own combat actions as they would if they were playing foot sloggers. They might not like the limitations. Combat encounters could get repetitive fast. You'll really have to be on top of your game to keep it fresh and interesting.

You don't need to add GW1 to your background unless you really want to. By the summer of 2000 pretty much every tank crew is going to be a veteran one. Plus, blasting Iraqis in the open desert and fighting Soviets in central Europe are kind of apples and oranges. But this is your T2KU, so tweak it however you prefer.

If you haven't read Team Yankee by Harold Coyle, I'd recommend it. It's got a lot of potential to be helpful to a GM running a tanker-based game.

[weswood]

Originally Posted by M-Type

I also figure that it will avoid the (IMO) costly "buy-stuff with our money" phase. They'll just have the standard stuff the average Tanker would get. 'Nuff said. They can steal/scavenge/buy anything else they want.

I like that. I have an Issue Equipment List I made up and anything else they want, they have to be able to pack on thier back.

[M-Type]

Originally Posted by weswood

I like that. I have an Issue Equipment List I made up and anything else they want, they have to be able to pack on thier back.

Keeps them from sitting there for 20 minutes planning out their inventory and amount of money left. Not that that isn't fun in the right scenario.

But since they'd still be in the military at start, the only thing they'd get is their issued gear and maybe a souvenir for their tank.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I agree with pretty much everything that's been said but would just like to add the following regarding NPCs,

Have the PCs as the most important crew members of the tank and make the other positions for NPCs like the Loader example given before. So maybe you8 have just two PCs and then 2 NPCs in the tank.

But...

Give them two or maybe even three tanks if you have enough Players. Then they have to co-ordinate with the other tanks during attacks and movement etc. etc. I've seen this work quite well because the tank while it's run by two or three Players, ends up being treated like a single entity. The Players spend a lot of time working out things with each others tank crew - you let the Players worry about managing the tanks and so you end up with less to manage about the tanks.

This can be particularly impactful when some of the tanks get damaged and they then have to start sacrificing parts from one to keep another running and so on. Or they have to redistribute the ammo or fuel. Or worse, when one tank has to be abandoned and then suddenly you have one or two extra people to stick inside the working tanks.

[M-Type]

In reading the in-depth T2000 timeline here, I'd love to do something in Alaska.

Every 5 RL minutes, "Roll to evade frostbite!!""Roll to evade feral wolves!""Frostbite again!"

That'd be great. For me as the GM at least.

[Legbreaker]

The city of Lodz was the immediate aim of the US 5th ID, they were driven back westwards to Kalisz by the sudden arrival of all those extra Soviet and Polish units. Most of the 5th never even saw Kalisz with the 256th Brigade being overrun before Divisional HQ reached the town.

Many encounters in T2K are not with armoured opponents. With a machinegun added to the loaders hatch, they can participate just as much in combat as the gunner (coaxial machinegun) and commander. The PC driver should be asked to make fairly regular driving rolls when in motion to reflect their ability to read the terrain, keep the vehicle in cover while also allowing the weapons guns to be brought to bear. Can be quite a stressful time for them if they get it wrong and everyone's yelling at them to a) get them out of the line of fire or b) get them into a position where they can shoot back!

Desert Storm is touched on in the 2.x timelines. http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=3109

[Marc]

Hi to everyone, after some time away from this forum.

M-Type, perhaps you will find this link of your interest. Some top-down counters for your Abrams:

http://www.juniorgeneral.org/JClick.php?UID=368

It's only an example. The site has more top-down counters for every period. Just take a look in the "modern section".

http://www.juniorgeneral.org/load.php?Period=10

I've used them in some of our last games, printing, plasticizing and cutting them. The same site contains trees, buildings, troops,... ´

I think one important thing to bear in mind when gamming a vehicle based scenario is the practical problem to manage distances,speeds and times. Depending of the situation, you will find yourself changing from a “battlefield mode” (large distances and/or speeds) to the more usual (in rpg terms), “personal mode”. Even these two game scales are possible at the same time. If you are able to manage this problem in a fluent way, I’m sure your players will enjoy a great gaming session.

I agree with the post of StainlessSteelCynic if you are thinking to run a vehicle-based game. Not taking decisions is frustrating for the players. It’s a usual problem in some situations when the game group is acting as a crew of any vehicle in any setting.It's a good idea to consider to give them responsibility positions in one or more vehicles. Of course, it implies more difficulties for the referee!!

[M-Type]

I love Junior General! They have paper models for every imaginable era.

Leg: Adding a gun would definitely allow the Loader to do something, and I agree with the rolls for the different spots.

I figured the driver would be making rolls for navigating, the Commander would be shouting orders and spotting enemies, the Loader would be loading (and firing the MG), and the gunner would be...gunning :P

I'd probably throw a few mechanic skills at someone (maybe the all-powerful Loader?) so that they don't just sit there if they break down.

Any maybe, if the GM is willing, the 'light at the end of the tunnel' can be the Middle East front, where the oil 'flows like water'!!

Well, that's at least what the nice man from CENTCOM will tell them.