I played Traveller: 2300 and 2300 as a teenager and have fond memories of fighting Kafers as a US Marine. That said, I recommend ditching France as the superpower. I would ditch the original WWIII timeline (or retcon it as my friends and I did when we played) anyway but that's another post. France staying out of a global nuclear war is already a suspect notion and even if you accept that, and accept that they were preeminent for 300 years, surely the Kafer War would have knocked them down a peg. It was clear from 2300 AD that France could not defend their possessions--you had all manners of nations coming to their aid. With the cream of their offworld possessions ravaged by war, surely they would suffer just as Great Britain did after World War II--destitute, ravaged by war, and with colonies demanding independence.
Colin: Ditch France
- Thread starter fact275
- Start date
Ponder this slightly revisionist history.
I don't think it was the fact that the French did stay out of the nuclear conflict, they just stayed out of the way of NATO's foolish adventurism and pandering to the Germans. So, for sure, France suffered but with the wholesale defections of Romania (by extension perhaps parts of Moldova) and Yugoslavia (which was never part of the Warsaw Pact [but the fact checkers at GDW were usually pretty bad]) it would have provided more than enough allies to offset France boycotting the show.
Keeping in mind that both the Soviets and Americans sought to wage Limited Nuclear War on the European continent focusing the bulk of their energies on China and Central Asia. Where it was said that the Chinese were blasted back to the Stone Age.
France was able to maintain its presence and lessen the permuability of its borders by organizing the humanitarian rescue of Europe by dispatching thousands of non combantants to the hotzones of Europe. Thereby, rising up to being a moral Superpower further jealiously guarding against German or American or Italian intrusion with nuclear weapons of its own.
So, whilst, France does not come out of the conflict unscathed it does come out as the biggest player on the block in Europe. Consolidating its position in a shattered Europe by asserting French hegemony over the reconstruction does alot toward building a viable Europe. With North America in ruins and there is not an alternative in Asia, France begins the long process of Empire building but through institutions not military or economic means.
As NATO falls apart with the departure of the Americans from the European theatre, France begins to exert elements of hard diplomacy to back up the soft in strategic areas. All this is taking place in a world of constantly shifting alliances and where most of the world's industrial capacity has been shattered.
Also, in a game more influenced by En Garde than Traveller. 2300AD with its attention paid to France is completely warranted. Imagine if you will an alternate world where French values, not, all that different from American values dominate. Not neccessarily a bad thing but a different thing - vivre la differance!
Plus, the whole thing about France is that it has so many different periods in which Republicism was vented by Empire then periods of Democracy puncuated by tyranny. This France makes an interesting place.
KEEP THE FRENCH.
I don't think it was the fact that the French did stay out of the nuclear conflict, they just stayed out of the way of NATO's foolish adventurism and pandering to the Germans. So, for sure, France suffered but with the wholesale defections of Romania (by extension perhaps parts of Moldova) and Yugoslavia (which was never part of the Warsaw Pact [but the fact checkers at GDW were usually pretty bad]) it would have provided more than enough allies to offset France boycotting the show.
Keeping in mind that both the Soviets and Americans sought to wage Limited Nuclear War on the European continent focusing the bulk of their energies on China and Central Asia. Where it was said that the Chinese were blasted back to the Stone Age.
France was able to maintain its presence and lessen the permuability of its borders by organizing the humanitarian rescue of Europe by dispatching thousands of non combantants to the hotzones of Europe. Thereby, rising up to being a moral Superpower further jealiously guarding against German or American or Italian intrusion with nuclear weapons of its own.
So, whilst, France does not come out of the conflict unscathed it does come out as the biggest player on the block in Europe. Consolidating its position in a shattered Europe by asserting French hegemony over the reconstruction does alot toward building a viable Europe. With North America in ruins and there is not an alternative in Asia, France begins the long process of Empire building but through institutions not military or economic means.
As NATO falls apart with the departure of the Americans from the European theatre, France begins to exert elements of hard diplomacy to back up the soft in strategic areas. All this is taking place in a world of constantly shifting alliances and where most of the world's industrial capacity has been shattered.
Also, in a game more influenced by En Garde than Traveller. 2300AD with its attention paid to France is completely warranted. Imagine if you will an alternate world where French values, not, all that different from American values dominate. Not neccessarily a bad thing but a different thing - vivre la differance!
Plus, the whole thing about France is that it has so many different periods in which Republicism was vented by Empire then periods of Democracy puncuated by tyranny. This France makes an interesting place.
KEEP THE FRENCH.
Border Reiver
SOC-14 1K
NO NO NO NO
Part of the great background was having France as THE superpower, corrupt and decadent, permeating the trade lanes with its insidious protectionism, held in check by its ESA partners. It was also nice to have countries that were promoted up into prominence...Brazil; Azania; Manchuria, Texas, Australia and others.
KEEP THE FRENCH
Part of the great background was having France as THE superpower, corrupt and decadent, permeating the trade lanes with its insidious protectionism, held in check by its ESA partners. It was also nice to have countries that were promoted up into prominence...Brazil; Azania; Manchuria, Texas, Australia and others.
KEEP THE FRENCH
imported_Doctor_Rob
SOC-5
Who would you have as the superpower - and why?
A great attraction to the background is having the French as the superpower - as the previous post says, if nothing else, it adds greatly to the 'feel' of the game.
I'd be VERY sad to see the French superpower dismissed in an arbitrary way.
A great attraction to the background is having the French as the superpower - as the previous post says, if nothing else, it adds greatly to the 'feel' of the game.
I'd be VERY sad to see the French superpower dismissed in an arbitrary way.
France is still the superpower. France still holds some very important colonies, and the French Empire on Earth still has access to many important resources, including people.
In any case, the background, including France's preeminence, are NOT things that I can change, even if I wanted to. 2320 is a licensed property, not my own. I can make certain adjustments and clarifications, but I can't change anything crucial.
In any case, the background, including France's preeminence, are NOT things that I can change, even if I wanted to. 2320 is a licensed property, not my own. I can make certain adjustments and clarifications, but I can't change anything crucial.
Commander Jameson
SOC-3
The plausibility (or otherwise) of France's emerging from WW3 as sole superpower is beside the point. The background is clearly inspired by late nineteenth-century Europe. [e.g. "War of German reunification" = Franco-Prussian War; the (laughably American) view of a pre-eminent aristocracy in Britain; etc.]
If France's pre-eminence is supposed to be explained because it stays out of WW3, how do you then explain the rise of Germany and the Ukraine, both of which were utterly devastated? Or the failure of Japan to emerge as a more significant power?
I know GDW claimed the background emerged from a strategy game, but any such game giving rise to French pre-eminence must have been seriously flawed (or its outcome prejudiced to reflect the authors' evident inspiration by the C19th).
From today's standpoint one could imagine the superpowers of 2300 as India and China (or even parts thereof, with populations in the hundreds of millions), and possibly some sort of US-led anglosphere alliance.
But, after all, in 1605 the Dutch, Spanish and Swedes were still European great powers, only to have sunk to the 2nd or 3rd division by 1905 or 2005 (no offence to readers from those nations!). History can take all sorts of weird turns. If the late nineteenth century floats your boat, you might as well go with it.
[Using this login til Yutani gets fixed.]
If France's pre-eminence is supposed to be explained because it stays out of WW3, how do you then explain the rise of Germany and the Ukraine, both of which were utterly devastated? Or the failure of Japan to emerge as a more significant power?
I know GDW claimed the background emerged from a strategy game, but any such game giving rise to French pre-eminence must have been seriously flawed (or its outcome prejudiced to reflect the authors' evident inspiration by the C19th).
From today's standpoint one could imagine the superpowers of 2300 as India and China (or even parts thereof, with populations in the hundreds of millions), and possibly some sort of US-led anglosphere alliance.
But, after all, in 1605 the Dutch, Spanish and Swedes were still European great powers, only to have sunk to the 2nd or 3rd division by 1905 or 2005 (no offence to readers from those nations!). History can take all sorts of weird turns. If the late nineteenth century floats your boat, you might as well go with it.
[Using this login til Yutani gets fixed.]
Hey, are we 3rd division? I though it was fifth. 
Anyway. I don't find the background that unplausible and the idea that it came from a strategic game isn't that strange. You design the game to mimic the starting conditions during the 19 century, and then the best player happened to be playing France (and was backed by certain designer goals).
The French are cool.
Anyway. I don't find the background that unplausible and the idea that it came from a strategic game isn't that strange. You design the game to mimic the starting conditions during the 19 century, and then the best player happened to be playing France (and was backed by certain designer goals).
The French are cool.
Don't get me wrong, I loved Twilight and I loved 2300. But I was 16-20 when I played them and my notions of politics, history, and the military were not as well defined as they are now when I am 34. I was a military minded kid playing those games; I have since been an Air Force historian. I don't think I could suspend disbelief any longer to play such a game. If you all can, my best wishes. That said, to Colin, I probably will buy 2320 just to read.
GDW's "Grand Game" was totally flawed--I think everyone can see that. Even my old GM who was not the most pro-American guy, thought that whoever played the US Milgov/Civgov roles botched it badly for the USA to have permanently lost Texas and the southwestern United States. If you read the 2300 Earth sourcebook, it implies that Guam and Saipan were lost to the Japanese as well.
This is not American sour grapes though. Once Traveller:2300 did not sell and it became the US Marines 24/7, that was good enough for me. My favorite part of the system was Star Cruiser and the French Navy, with the exception of the Suffren class, sucked. The Kennedys were the best in the game and it irritated my friend who played the Kafers to no end. I could sit back and shoot SIM-14s at him all down and outrun whatever he could do in return.
I admit I am not a Francophile. If 2300 had made Great Britain the prominent nation, I probably would have loved it.
I am just saying that there are many 2300 devotees who 1) did not buy France as pre-eminent and/or 2) did not *want* to buy France as pre-eminent.
With respect to a previous post, I cannot see France taking on a humanitarian role, at least not by current evidence. This is the same nation that sided with the Hutus in Rwanda, at least until it was clear they were slaughtering half their country.
Had they remained neutral in a limited nuclear war, it is likely France's economy would have collapsed from the collapse of international trade. It's clear from recent events in the real world that racial tensions would have boiled over in this climate of fear. It would have been everything for the French just to hold on to their country, never mind foreign adventures or European cleanup.
I also cannot see African nations signing up for colonialism--World War Three or not. For most of those populations there, whether Europe and North America had destroyed themselves or not would make little difference to the suffering they already live with.
Colin, you make a good point about copyrights. But you can make lemonade from old lemons.
1. Show France to be on the decline. As I wrote before, this was already clear from their inability to lead humankind against the Kafers. If I remember my "history" right, it was a German admiral who got the human fleet off its butt and defeated the Kafers in the Aurore system and then got the Marines to go free the Arcturus station. Real-life marketing reasons or not, it was surely the American Marines who began taking a lead role in ground combat.
2. I love the post which said that it was more realistic to show China, India, and an English-speaking conglomeration. The latter could be quite interesting as it might have factions from Scandinavian nations, Holland, Singapore, or other nations that do not speak English as a primary language but use it as a lingua franca.
3. One thing that 2300 botched was Great Britain's ties to France. I have travelled extensively in the UK and I can tell you that whatever their politicians might say about EU unity, the common man and woman retain a historic suspicion of the continent. That suspicion goes back over 1000 years. After a WWIII, this would only heighten. Also, it never made sense for there to be an American-Australian arm without the British. America and Britain have over 300 years of shared history. That is not likely to change. Most science fiction universes that retain nation always lump Britain and America together. 2300 didn't and it stands out.
4. Prop up the Aussies. We're told how Australia is America's great ally. Okay, fair enough, very realistic as both nations have fought in nearly every war together in the last 80 years. But the Australians get the short shrift in the game. We get an automatic shotgun here, a few colonial descriptions--that is it. Again, no offense to the Francophiles--you're going to sell more books if you appeal to the American players (the USA and its allies) than concentrate on France ad infinitum.
GDW's "Grand Game" was totally flawed--I think everyone can see that. Even my old GM who was not the most pro-American guy, thought that whoever played the US Milgov/Civgov roles botched it badly for the USA to have permanently lost Texas and the southwestern United States. If you read the 2300 Earth sourcebook, it implies that Guam and Saipan were lost to the Japanese as well.
This is not American sour grapes though. Once Traveller:2300 did not sell and it became the US Marines 24/7, that was good enough for me. My favorite part of the system was Star Cruiser and the French Navy, with the exception of the Suffren class, sucked. The Kennedys were the best in the game and it irritated my friend who played the Kafers to no end. I could sit back and shoot SIM-14s at him all down and outrun whatever he could do in return.
I admit I am not a Francophile. If 2300 had made Great Britain the prominent nation, I probably would have loved it.
I am just saying that there are many 2300 devotees who 1) did not buy France as pre-eminent and/or 2) did not *want* to buy France as pre-eminent.
With respect to a previous post, I cannot see France taking on a humanitarian role, at least not by current evidence. This is the same nation that sided with the Hutus in Rwanda, at least until it was clear they were slaughtering half their country.
Had they remained neutral in a limited nuclear war, it is likely France's economy would have collapsed from the collapse of international trade. It's clear from recent events in the real world that racial tensions would have boiled over in this climate of fear. It would have been everything for the French just to hold on to their country, never mind foreign adventures or European cleanup.
I also cannot see African nations signing up for colonialism--World War Three or not. For most of those populations there, whether Europe and North America had destroyed themselves or not would make little difference to the suffering they already live with.
Colin, you make a good point about copyrights. But you can make lemonade from old lemons.
1. Show France to be on the decline. As I wrote before, this was already clear from their inability to lead humankind against the Kafers. If I remember my "history" right, it was a German admiral who got the human fleet off its butt and defeated the Kafers in the Aurore system and then got the Marines to go free the Arcturus station. Real-life marketing reasons or not, it was surely the American Marines who began taking a lead role in ground combat.
2. I love the post which said that it was more realistic to show China, India, and an English-speaking conglomeration. The latter could be quite interesting as it might have factions from Scandinavian nations, Holland, Singapore, or other nations that do not speak English as a primary language but use it as a lingua franca.
3. One thing that 2300 botched was Great Britain's ties to France. I have travelled extensively in the UK and I can tell you that whatever their politicians might say about EU unity, the common man and woman retain a historic suspicion of the continent. That suspicion goes back over 1000 years. After a WWIII, this would only heighten. Also, it never made sense for there to be an American-Australian arm without the British. America and Britain have over 300 years of shared history. That is not likely to change. Most science fiction universes that retain nation always lump Britain and America together. 2300 didn't and it stands out.
4. Prop up the Aussies. We're told how Australia is America's great ally. Okay, fair enough, very realistic as both nations have fought in nearly every war together in the last 80 years. But the Australians get the short shrift in the game. We get an automatic shotgun here, a few colonial descriptions--that is it. Again, no offense to the Francophiles--you're going to sell more books if you appeal to the American players (the USA and its allies) than concentrate on France ad infinitum.
I think that having France as The Old Guard is good - having non-American nations out there is useful - but, like fact says, there should be room for the rest.
(The idea of France being in decline is spot on, but there's gotta be more: after all, who's replacing it [among the humans, anyways]?)
(The idea of France being in decline is spot on, but there's gotta be more: after all, who's replacing it [among the humans, anyways]?)
No question about it. France has been an imperialist nation like no other. They have committed grave humanitarian errors and played realpolitik like the bad boys of the world. I merely present a conjecture on how these fabrics can be woven into the 2320AD universe. Given the relative importance of NGOs, QUANGOs, IGOs and France being home to a number of them in the present day perhaps in the alternative universe that we call 2320AD they find a home in post Twilight France.
Plus, this is Science Fiction, we are able to postulate a little different world than what current exists, are we not?
Also, we can always assume in light of Twilight War, a major rethink and bid at grandeur could be attempted. No European nation would be willing accept French troops but French doctors (sans Frontiers), Engineers, teachers and other professionals would seem relatively benign. However, the soft power underlies a longer term strategy.
The anarchy in the postwar era would have been huge. Only thing that saved them was the preservation of more statist led growth in which France has done in the past whilst turning inward toward convitality production. Read Gorz's, Farewell to the Working Class (the last chapters), if possible the original French version is more powerful.
Racial tensions in the current period are also due to France's restructuring to accommodate that very global market. A more autonomous and autarkic France would have more leeway. The funny thing about war is that it also refashions citizenship; no doubt the Twilight War will do the same. Not saying groups like Front Nationale will not try exploiting it but France also has a long history of tolerance and acceptance and broadening citizenship.
Africa as the Earth sourcebook makes clear was a battleground for several nations to gain ascendance but none were able to gain a serious role of leader. Again, France as a moral leader (does not matter how true it...just how it sells) comes and saves the day. Being part of the metropolitan France is very different then being part of any other Empire, as anyone who goes to the French Departments in the Caribbean knows. It is a matter of pride and also benefits outweigh disadvantages when compared to one's neighbours...go to St. Martin/St. Maarten to see the contrast.
Point by point here:
1> One of the section headings in the Background chapter is called "The Decline of France". That being said, France is still the only superpower. They only lost one actual colony, and gained another. Personnel losses were high, but France should be able to rebuild it's colonies within a generation. The French government takes a long view.
2> In 2300/2320, China is a divided nation. Manchuria has the resources, and technology, but not the population, while China and Canton lack the tech base and resources, but have lots of people (yes, Manchuria's population got changed). India is in even worse shape, with over a dozen small nations. This situation is starting to change, with many nations starting to come together behind (I forget the name of the region...)
3> I push towards more of a Britain - Canada - Commonwealth sort of thing. As for the Britain-France thing, rack it up to realpolitik, I suppose. However, by this point, France has kept the peace, and ensured prosperity, for most of Europe and a good chunk of Africa. Perhaps attitudes changed.
4> There is some of this, too, like how a joint Aussie-Ukrainian force liberated Novoya Kiyev, but keep in mind that Australia is not a major power, sitting squarely in Tier 3. Given their status, they already get a fair bit of attention.
2320AD does show the US to be an up-and-coming power, with Fracne on the decline but still very tough. Manchuria is the second-most powerful nation in the game, with vast colonial holdings, and is still on the ascendent.
1> One of the section headings in the Background chapter is called "The Decline of France". That being said, France is still the only superpower. They only lost one actual colony, and gained another. Personnel losses were high, but France should be able to rebuild it's colonies within a generation. The French government takes a long view.
2> In 2300/2320, China is a divided nation. Manchuria has the resources, and technology, but not the population, while China and Canton lack the tech base and resources, but have lots of people (yes, Manchuria's population got changed). India is in even worse shape, with over a dozen small nations. This situation is starting to change, with many nations starting to come together behind (I forget the name of the region...)
3> I push towards more of a Britain - Canada - Commonwealth sort of thing. As for the Britain-France thing, rack it up to realpolitik, I suppose. However, by this point, France has kept the peace, and ensured prosperity, for most of Europe and a good chunk of Africa. Perhaps attitudes changed.
4> There is some of this, too, like how a joint Aussie-Ukrainian force liberated Novoya Kiyev, but keep in mind that Australia is not a major power, sitting squarely in Tier 3. Given their status, they already get a fair bit of attention.
2320AD does show the US to be an up-and-coming power, with Fracne on the decline but still very tough. Manchuria is the second-most powerful nation in the game, with vast colonial holdings, and is still on the ascendent.
Colin, I appreciate your replies.
I suppose I want to reiterate for "realistic" science fiction (a short detour--most sci-fi writers are not into realism and that is why I am not a sci-fi fan), one should not discount hundreds or thousands of years of history.
My point about England and France is that no matter what occurs, you're not going to have such a massive shift of sentiment amongst the populace.
Yes Germany and France have close ties today, despite three wars in the preceding 130 years. And surely Frankish and Germanic tribes fought. But there was not as long a history of consistent animosity as say the English have had with France. When you consider that goes back to 1066 (or even earlier), then 300 years from 2005 is surely not going to change things, nuclear war or not.
Now if the game was 4320 a.d., then you could do all sorts of politics and say whatever you wanted.
I found a thing online--some old Challenge(r)(?) article about Clarke's Star and a British outpost in the American Arm. This seems to be a GDW attempt at redressing its tearing of the Anglophone world asunder. Perhaps 2320 AD can continue this. Apparenlty the American Arm is expanding with brown dwarfs so perhaps the Brits can say enough of the French ESA and go along with their historic allies.
I suppose I want to reiterate for "realistic" science fiction (a short detour--most sci-fi writers are not into realism and that is why I am not a sci-fi fan), one should not discount hundreds or thousands of years of history.
My point about England and France is that no matter what occurs, you're not going to have such a massive shift of sentiment amongst the populace.
Yes Germany and France have close ties today, despite three wars in the preceding 130 years. And surely Frankish and Germanic tribes fought. But there was not as long a history of consistent animosity as say the English have had with France. When you consider that goes back to 1066 (or even earlier), then 300 years from 2005 is surely not going to change things, nuclear war or not.
Now if the game was 4320 a.d., then you could do all sorts of politics and say whatever you wanted.
I found a thing online--some old Challenge(r)(?) article about Clarke's Star and a British outpost in the American Arm. This seems to be a GDW attempt at redressing its tearing of the Anglophone world asunder. Perhaps 2320 AD can continue this. Apparenlty the American Arm is expanding with brown dwarfs so perhaps the Brits can say enough of the French ESA and go along with their historic allies.
As I have suggested that the Anglo dominance comes to an end. Not so much as French dominance, but through the creation of Pax Europa which extension of the French Peace that was set out in the BENELUX and Northern Italy in the aftermath of the Twilight War. It did make attempts at reaching out to the governments in Bonn & Berlin but lacking the capacity to make a formalized linkage they relied upon quiet diplomacy of spilting the German Lander and reaching out to the traditional German libenstraum - Eastern Europe. I can testify that France is very popular throughout Central & Eastern Europe as its cultural influence is enormous.
Well, at least half of the Anglo-French difficulties in the last millenia have been caused by English adventurism.
I like a powerful France. It is different. And being a smug, cynically arrogant, corrupt superpower historically fits France like a comfortable suit of clothes.
I like a powerful France. It is different. And being a smug, cynically arrogant, corrupt superpower historically fits France like a comfortable suit of clothes.
Commander Jameson
SOC-3
The key point is, as Colin has said, 2320 cannot change the 2300 history canon for real-life business reasons.
That said, the combination of WW3 and 300 years of elapsed history means, in effect, pretty much anything goes; so if you want to, you can rationalise the emergence of France as near-superpower (or as they might say, hyperpuissance...), as various posters above show.
Even so, I agree with fact275 that I personally, starting with a blank slate, would prefer something a little more plausible given current geo-political realities. Particularly as realism is a strongpoint of the setting otherwise (e.g. surely some of the best aliens in SF, period). But it's not an option for Colin in 2320 AD. And the setting as is has its own, weird charm...
That said, the combination of WW3 and 300 years of elapsed history means, in effect, pretty much anything goes; so if you want to, you can rationalise the emergence of France as near-superpower (or as they might say, hyperpuissance...), as various posters above show.
Even so, I agree with fact275 that I personally, starting with a blank slate, would prefer something a little more plausible given current geo-political realities. Particularly as realism is a strongpoint of the setting otherwise (e.g. surely some of the best aliens in SF, period). But it's not an option for Colin in 2320 AD. And the setting as is has its own, weird charm...
Obviously there are those who are pro-France or francophile and to each his own. My purpose is not to disparage the current (or future!) France.
Ultimately, when we played we pretty much ignored France. The beauty of the game system was that the universe was vast enough...I remember only one time in ourKafer War campaign that we dealt with the French and that was the Mission Arcturus module. We played British, American, and Japanese characters. To each his own.
Colin cannot change what came before. But he can get the Brits back in the American Arm where they belong.
Ultimately, when we played we pretty much ignored France. The beauty of the game system was that the universe was vast enough...I remember only one time in ourKafer War campaign that we dealt with the French and that was the Mission Arcturus module. We played British, American, and Japanese characters. To each his own.
Colin cannot change what came before. But he can get the Brits back in the American Arm where they belong.
Similar threads
