RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Twilight 2000 Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-02-2008, 04:14 PM
LAW0306's Avatar
LAW0306 LAW0306 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 154
Default

Your correct Kato..

Maybe your home tv is not protected from emp but most of the industrial complex is ..once again trust me on this your open source is not as good as mine...


On division Cuba we had big arguments on this on the last board.

I look at things in logistics first. I'm an infantry guy but i know how things move. 150,000 guys in Iraq right now but only about 8,000 grunts.....thats why we have 100,000 PMC to be the real grunts.

Division cuba how do they leave the Island without the US. Navy blowing them away. we have by cannon and by our (DC Working Group Research) have at least a BB task group and a CV Battle group way too much fire power for the russians to move.

on the mexican advance we would level there country with nukes if they steped one foot across the boarder one foot. they would be gone mostly tactical stuff from ships off the coast T-LAMN most y and maybe some air delivered stuff . they would also have no way too support there advance with logistics. one or two NG divisions would eat them apart with there M48's ande M60" with mexico haveing no MBT-s.....


I just laugh at home when people protray us here in the US as weak or that we could be attacked so easy. yes there was 9-11 but try to do it now.. or 5 min after it happened and everything was shut down....
well i will now get off the soap box now ..
  #2  
Old 12-02-2008, 07:31 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,629
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Sorry for the thread drift on time lines, I was just bringing up that something really implausible (T2k division Cuba) can enhance gaming options.

As much as we may want realism any one of us can say history changed at any point. Maybe in some gaming world Kennedy survived and opened up China instead of Nixon. China might have had an additional 10 years to try to reach technological parity. And of course if we don't want to cover all the details on how things got where they are, there is always the standard response "A wizard did it"

As for the navy disparity, if those ultra fast torpedoes were ever able to carry a guidance system that could really be a rude awakening for the Naval force on the receiving end.

(my goodness I have added multiple new potential thread drift possibilities in my effort to end one)
  #3  
Old 12-02-2008, 08:05 PM
LAW0306's Avatar
LAW0306 LAW0306 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 154
Default

However I do welcome the feedback and you've given me a lot to think about in terms of active/reserve military at home.
Also China would have boosted its Navy during the build up but again I accept that this is probably an impossible amount of time to compete with the US Navy.
But again i am sorta counting on them to be in the Persian gulf and not on the west coast.



Very impossable amount of time since they have a brown water navy with no ampibios lift to speak of...they have no school to train officers at the higher levels or plan on how to use them...


They would have to make 30 aircraft carriers in 4 years with all the escort ships build the planes and missles and bombs train the pilots and crews... very impossable to do. same with russian navy..

thats why the premis of T2013 is off it should have been 2020 or 2025 just like how GDW put it off 10 to 15 year when they built there game...

its called force projection

also the us navy at one time has one of 10 CVN groups in the gulf and at the height of the war had 2 so there are still 8 left..plus the other 3 to 7 we could pull out of mouth balls in 6 months with there escort groups and the vets to man them sitting at home now. there is a spot on the port twin .50 for paul.........



As for the navy disparity, if those ultra fast torpedoes were ever able to carry a guidance system that could really be a rude awakening for the Naval force on the receiving end.

well most battles arnt fought with torpeados now its over the horizon fight 200 to 500 miles away with missles and there guidance...you have to get that close to hit me ..with our asw as good as it is well they wont get close...
  #4  
Old 12-03-2008, 07:04 AM
smokewolf's Avatar
smokewolf smokewolf is offline
Twilight: 2013 Baby
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 50
Send a message via MSN to smokewolf Send a message via Yahoo to smokewolf
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAW0306
Very impossable amount of time since they have a brown water navy with no ampibios lift to speak of...they have no school to train officers at the higher levels or plan on how to use them...
While I am not saying that China is a MAJOR sea-lift capable country. The statements that they have "no ampibios lift to speak of" and "or plan on how to use them" are false.

According to the Wiki entry:

China currently maintains an inventory of smaller vessels with limited sea lift capacity. The recent construction of large dock landing ships indicates the shift toward blue water operations. The Yuzhou class LPD represents a major step forward in the Chinese plan for a blue water navy.

Classes of ships

Amphibious Transport Dock (LPD)

* 1 Type 071 Yuzhao class

Landing Ship Tank (LST)

* 7 Type 072 Yukan class
* 9 Type 072II Yuting I class
* 9 Type 072III Yuting II class (+ more building)

Landing Ship Medium (LSM)

* ~31 Type 079 Yuliang class
* 13 Type 074 Yuhai (Wuhu-A) class
* 3 Type 073 I/II/III class
* 11 Type 073 IV Yunshu class

Landing Craft (Mechanized/Personnel/Utility/Vehicle)

* 100 Type 271 Yupen class
* 200~300 Type 067 Yunnan class
* 30+ Type 068/069 Yuch'in class
* 10+ NEW Yubei class twin hull high capacity LCU

Troop Transports

* 4 Qiongsha class

Hospital Ships

* 2 Qiongsha class

Additional Sea Lift

* Large numbers of reserved and retired landing ships and craft.
* In wartime, can utilize civilian transport ships of various types.
* Several small air cushion LCVPs that serve from LSTs.
* Air Force and Army services operate their own amphibious assets.
* Naval and Army helicopters operating from ships or land bases.


The People's Liberation Navy - Doctrine at
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...n-doctrine.htm
is a pretty good read on the modern Chinese mindset as well.

Also http://www.sinodefence.com has some very good information on it as well.



Quote:
Originally Posted by LAW0306
well most battles arnt fought with torpeados now its over the horizon fight 200 to 500 miles away with missles and there guidance...you have to get that close to hit me ..with our asw as good as it is well they wont get close...
A Chinese submarine managed to sneak up undetected on a U.S. aircraft carrier battle group and came within firing range of its torpedoes and missiles. The sub in question is a e Type 039 submarine, Song class, diesel-electric submarine.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-121539-3317r/

Then there is the USS Cole, USS Tripoli or USS Princeton. All of which were attacked up close and personal. The Cole by terrorists and the other two were mined during the first Gulf War.

While I'm not saying anything negative about our fine navy, I am saying that we aren't as invulnerable or indestructible as you're trying to make them out to be.



[Edited for restraint]
__________________
Keith Taylor

Last edited by smokewolf; 12-03-2008 at 08:05 AM.
  #5  
Old 12-03-2008, 07:28 AM
Targan's Avatar
Targan Targan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,729
Default

Oh yeah, this is going to be really productive, I can tell...

I think there is just going to have to be a couple of big ole plates of "lets just agree to disagree" served up.

Just my opinion.
__________________
"It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli
  #6  
Old 12-03-2008, 07:52 AM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,629
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan
I think there is just going to have to be a couple of big ole plates of "lets just agree to disagree" served up.
Targan is right.

Time lines are something which everyone is going to see different.

Some will do classic cold war (My first love)

Some will do a cold war that continued beyond 2000 (higher tech would make it really interesting)

Some will do real world up to a point (I personally think Sept 11th would be a good divergence point)

Some will start the divergence from today (as it may give it a longer term relevance)

Others will come up with something wonderfully creative which I would never think of.

None of these choices are the "right" choice for every one.

Last edited by kato13; 12-03-2008 at 09:16 AM.
  #7  
Old 12-03-2008, 09:34 AM
TiggerCCW UK's Avatar
TiggerCCW UK TiggerCCW UK is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland
Posts: 663
Default

I've said it before and I'll say it again - if what you have in your game world works for you, then it is right. In my own campaign my players are more concerned about staying alive, salvaging weapons and equipment, making/acquiring fuel etc to worry about the big picture, so I can mess around with timelines etc as much as I like.




Of course trying not to get munched by zombies is taking a fair bit of their attention as well.....
  #8  
Old 12-03-2008, 02:48 PM
LAW0306's Avatar
LAW0306 LAW0306 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 154
Default

smoke you are a true amature ..... Have you ever been abourd a navy ship..at sea at war???

One LPD and some small ships that are for landing close too the beach thats what you come back with????

you also come back with the wifes tale about the diesel sub sneaking up on a CVN group?? Look to the sky just before you die says a good song...P-3s track and find all enemey subs i wont get into classified stuff but trust me we know were there at and can kill them at will ...why do you think they rammed our p3 over there coast?????

I wont talk here on this site anymore.... the 2013 guys have come here and taken over and i dont wish to play in there pool....chico will continue to publish our stuff but i dont wish to fight over things rookies just dont know about..this causes trouble and i dont wont to be the cause of it. the twilight world is too small and the people too good for there to be problems that i will not be the cause of...if any wish to contact me chico has my number call at anytime and i will help the best i can...


I just dont understand why the 2013 crowd could not keep to there site about there game and leave this site for T2K?
  #9  
Old 12-03-2008, 03:08 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,629
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Law I don't like name calling. I understand there is bad blood but I am someone who likes to listen to many conflicting opinions, I am not going to silence anyone.

The T2013 people post things of interest to many of our users. Looking at the front page of this forum about half of the threads would apply to both games.

Right now I expect they are mostly providing basic information for the users here who might have an interest in purchasing their game. I don't even think it has an economic motive as what are they going to gain, 25 new customers as we only have 85 members and half were already going to purchase. They simply want to share what they did. Sure you have opinions and they in most cases very well formed but you have to get over the fact the T2013 is a reality and they are going to be around.

If this forum ever becomes dominated by 2013 related material I will do something like giving them another sub forum. They have a website for that so I don't expect it to get that far.

Last edited by kato13; 12-03-2008 at 03:17 PM.
  #10  
Old 12-03-2008, 04:44 PM
Snake Eyes's Avatar
Snake Eyes Snake Eyes is offline
[Armchair Commando]
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Walnut Creek
Posts: 203
Send a message via MSN to Snake Eyes Send a message via Yahoo to Snake Eyes
Default

Maybe I'm being naieve, but I'd like to think that all of us are equally welcome in both places no matter which version or variant of the game we're using. If that's no longer the case, I suppose I can fall back to the 2013 boards. That was my original plan anyway when RPGHost tanked, but Kato has done such a great job rallying the core group of quality fans here I felt it would be a disservice for us to ostracize ourselves.

I've been a member of "this" community in its various incarnations since 1996 or '97 back when it was still the WebRPG Town Hall bulletin board. Except for a couple flame wars circa 2000/01 - at least one of which I may have started - that caused the various eGroups/Yahoo! mailing lists to split after MPGN went under I don't think I've ever seen folks jumping on each other's shit as much as I have around here the last few weeks.

I mean seriously, the general incivility of the whole timeline holy war aside, what is there possibly to be gained by maintaining all this antagonism and subdividing an already tiny community even further?
__________________


  #11  
Old 12-03-2008, 04:50 PM
pmulcahy11b's Avatar
pmulcahy11b pmulcahy11b is offline
The Stat Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 4,345
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake Eyes
Maybe I'm being naieve, but I'd like to think that all of us are equally welcome in both places no matter which version or variant of the game we're using. If that's no longer the case, I suppose I can fall back to the 2013 boards. That was my original plan anyway when RPGHost tanked, but Kato has done such a great job rallying the core group of quality fans here I felt it would be a disservice for us to ostracize ourselves.

I've been a member of "this" community in its various incarnations since 1996 or '97 back when it was still the WebRPG Town Hall bulletin board. Except for a couple flame wars circa 2000/01 - at least one of which I may have started - that caused the various eGroups/Yahoo! mailing lists to split after MPGN went under I don't think I've ever seen folks jumping on each other's shit as much as I have around here the last few weeks.

I mean seriously, the general incivility of the whole timeline holy war aside, what is there possibly to be gained by maintaining all this antagonism and subdividing an already tiny community even further?
I'll agree to that -- this is definitely out of character for our group. Even when there's disagreements, there's usually a good explanation for the disagreement with a lot of facts -- or at least an agreement to disagree and go on to something else. This is not like us.
  #12  
Old 12-03-2008, 08:01 PM
chico20854's Avatar
chico20854 chico20854 is offline
Your Friendly 92Y20!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Washington, DC area
Posts: 1,824
Default

I have to agree with Kato, these timeline arguments are pretty useless, unnecessarily divisive and at this point unlikely to result in anything positive.

The v1 timeline had a bunch of stuff that was fantastical at the time - Belgium, Italy and Greece leaving NATO, the drought, a West German, independent invasion of the DDR, a moderate and pro-western Iran, the destruction of the combined NATO navies, etc. We've had almost 25 years to grow comfortable with those ideas, and have decided to toss a handful of them out as just too unrealistic, and kept some because they make the story work better. Many of us grew up during the 80s, with Reagan on the TV talking about the evil empire, Soldier of Fortune magazine covering the Contras and Mujaheddin fighting the commies, Red Dawn and the rest (check the birth-year thread), so we're Cold Warriors at heart and at the time the v1 timeline came out we didn't have any real military experience, so we accept more or less the v1 canon.

The 2013 timeline, which I have not yet read beyond the teasers that have appeared over the last few years, has a number of fantasy elements in it. Over the years, we as a group have had a number of discussions like this thread started out as, of what could cause a breakdown of civilization of a scale equal to the one described in v1. We've discussed terrorism gone wild, rouge nations, environmental meltdown, economic collapse - the gamut of suvivalist paranoid wet dreams. The 2013 guys have put a lot of work into developing one that they have been able to agree on, put their own money into publishing and have committed to support further expansions of. It's different from what I would have written if I was given that job, but that's fine and I'm glad that they did - anything that brings new people into the Twilight community is good IMHO. That timeline may be harder for us to accept, partly because we in many ways are old Cold Warriors, have more experience and knowledge under our belts, or just disagree.

At this point, I think arguing with what 93 Games has published is pretty futile - they have too much time and money invested and at this point it is a "done deal". If you want to use their timeline, go for it. If you want to use the 2013 rules to play the v1 timeline, great. If you don't want to send them any money and keep playing the same game that's been around since 1984, fine! I hope that we can continue to have a civilized discussion of how to flesh out the various timelines or alternative, home-grown timelines (like the Twilight:1964 or various 2020 and so on that different folks in the community have come up over the years).

As you are well aware, I've got a lot of time and effort invested in the expanded v1 timeline we've been working on for the past couple of years. We've got a lot more to write, and I'm planning to keep that effort going. I hope that folks here enjoy what we come up with, but that they also at least give a friendly welcome and usual level of respect to all the members, old and new, no matter which timeline they use.
__________________
I love the smell of napalm in the morning. You know, one time we had a hill bombed, for 12 hours. When it was all over, I walked up. We didn't find one of 'em, not one stinkin' body. The smell, you know that gasoline smell, the whole hill. Smelled like... victory. Someday this war's gonna end...
  #13  
Old 12-03-2008, 08:52 PM
Tegyrius's Avatar
Tegyrius Tegyrius is offline
This Sourcebook Kills Fascists
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chico20854
I have to agree with Kato, these timeline arguments are pretty useless, unnecessarily divisive and at this point unlikely to result in anything positive.
Enhh. You know what they say about arguing on the internet...

Quote:
The 2013 timeline, which I have not yet read beyond the teasers that have appeared over the last few years, has a number of fantasy elements in it. Over the years, we as a group have had a number of discussions like this thread started out as, of what could cause a breakdown of civilization of a scale equal to the one described in v1. We've discussed terrorism gone wild, rouge nations, environmental meltdown, economic collapse - the gamut of suvivalist paranoid wet dreams. The 2013 guys have put a lot of work into developing one that they have been able to agree on, put their own money into publishing and have committed to support further expansions of. It's different from what I would have written if I was given that job, but that's fine and I'm glad that they did - anything that brings new people into the Twilight community is good IMHO. That timeline may be harder for us to accept, partly because we in many ways are old Cold Warriors, have more experience and knowledge under our belts, or just disagree.
I think one of the fundamental points of contention here (in a general sense, not just Chico's statements) is whether anything called "Twilight" reasonably can be set in the aftermath of anything but a Cold War gone hot.

Quote:
At this point, I think arguing with what 93 Games has published is pretty futile - they have too much time and money invested and at this point it is a "done deal". If you want to use their timeline, go for it. If you want to use the 2013 rules to play the v1 timeline, great. If you don't want to send them any money and keep playing the same game that's been around since 1984, fine!
Well, I'll admit that I'd like to get paid sometime soon, but none of us have ever threatened to kick in people's doors and take their previous editions away. That's really more of a FASA thing.

- C.
__________________
Clayton A. Oliver Occasional RPG Freelancer Since 1996

Author of The Pacific Northwest, coauthor of Tara Romaneasca, creator of several other free Twilight: 2000 and Twilight: 2013 resources, and curator of an intermittent gaming blog.

It rarely takes more than a page to recognize that you're in the presence of someone who can write, but it only takes a sentence to know you're dealing with someone who can't.
- Josh Olson
  #14  
Old 12-03-2008, 08:58 PM
Spoe Spoe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAW0306
One LPD and some small ships that are for landing close too the beach thats what you come back with????
Yeah, I pointed that out at one point in the time line discussions. The PLAN jus doesn't have the sealift capability for what he's calling for it to do.

Quote:
why do you think they rammed our p3 over there coast?????
You mean the EP-3 that has nothing to do with ASW except as it may pick up in its SIGINT role?

Look, I've my issues with the TW2013 time line and think it's probably the weak link of the product, especially from the grognard's perspective. That said, the system itself is quite nice. It's a good product on the whole and is certainly compatible with any TW-themed setting material you want to throw its way.

Why not try being polite or at least show some basis for your personal dislike for the team other than some vague statement that you and your team were told to "pound sand". I've not heard of you prior to a few days back and the reaction you describe doesn't sound anything like the Smokewolf or Tegyrius we've been working with these past couple years.
  #15  
Old 12-03-2008, 09:05 PM
LAW0306's Avatar
LAW0306 LAW0306 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 154
Default

did you not get the hint dont talk to me or about me. I gave you all places and time's to come and talk in person leave it at that. If you dont know what a EP-3's missions are then you are a fool also . there is a reason they are part of the patrol wing. we will leave it at that....you set the bar for the 93 staff....


LEAVE ME ALONE
  #16  
Old 12-03-2008, 09:16 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,629
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default Sorry guys this thread is locked.

I have to end this thread.

Split out elements which had no negativity.
This thread is over. You may only copy text which you have written in this thread, otherwise it is off limits.

Last edited by kato13; 12-03-2008 at 10:41 PM.
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Twilight Today or Twilight 2009 if you will... General Pain Twilight 2000 Forum 17 06-27-2009 04:22 PM
T2K Today Raellus Twilight 2000 Forum 88 01-13-2009 09:51 AM
Unpleasantness(Split from Combat Tactics and Strategies) LOCKED copeab Twilight 2000 Forum 15 12-28-2008 02:13 PM
How would it go wrong TODAY? (reopened - play nice) Haven Twilight 2000 Forum 49 12-04-2008 02:11 AM
Chernobyl Status Today (1 point for twilight) kato13 Twilight 2000 Forum 0 09-10-2008 05:04 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.