Twilight 2000, Ver 1, 2 or 2.2

[Tricky]

2.2 rocks

quick to generate Characters for new and experanced players it also gives them an instant history.

it is also easy for a new player to grasp while giving others room to move.

the game grows with the players unlike alot of other game systems where you have to know everthing to start with.

But basicly i just love it and i will contiue to introduce new players to this system untill my 2.2 books full apart or i can get a reproduction of them.
thanks guys
tricky out

 

[ecalupig]

My group started out on V 1.0 then converted our characters to V 2.0 when it came out. We weren't terribly satisfied with the switch however and were pretty nostalgic about V 1.0, quirks and all. I think someone got their hands on V 2.2 when it came out. By then we'd switched to GURPS for majority of the games we'd run, converting various existing characters and campaigns.

As an aside, relating to Kaladorn's comment on coolness under fire. GURPS WWII sourcebook actually has an campaign option wherein combat degrades the combat efficiency of the characters in the long run. "Thousand yard stare" anyone?

 

[kaladorn]

Yep, that's part of it. They've found that soldiers who've seen enough action are very good at the soldierly minutae (getting in cover, picking good positions, firing effectively when they want to) but they're also well aware of how mortal they are, of how many buddies they've lost, and of how likely they are to be killed. And of course, often they are tired and under the emotional pressures (unrelieved) of having watched friends die beside them.

But this is all really tough stuff to model in a game, except by GM imagination and description, and it isn't exactly terribly heroic either.

 

[Uncle Bob]

There was a study done in WWII of American company commanders on who they felt were their most valuable enlisted men and NCOs. The "most valuable" EM averaged about 6 weeks of combat, with very few over 2 months. The most valuable NCOs averaged about 3 months in combat, suggesting a valuable soldier does not fatigue after 8 weeks, but he gets promoted.

Veterans do have a sense of their own mortality. They also know their best chance for survival depends decisive, timely, action by themselves and their comrades.

Battle fatigue comes from a number of causes, but not strictly days of combat. Unit casualties, loss of sleep, physical discomfort (hunger, thirst, cold), and frustration, all contribute.

 

[DaveChase]

Veteran soldiers with lots of battle time also have a tendancy to react the same way each time to certain stimuli. In pure combat situation this is good to absoultely nessecary. In other situations it can cause mistakes (deaths) and/or extreme frustration of the soldier (and those around them) because they do not understand why that action(s) are inappropriate.

Some soldiers who love the 'field' and are very good at doing their jobs ('Not dieing for his country but make that other poor bastard die for his.') can adjust fairly well back to 'normal life'. But once in a while enough stress or certain situations will cause them to revert/react like they did in battle/field.

It can get very scary to those who do not know what is going on.

I haven't seen any game show you that kind of reality. And I am very thankful for that.

Dave

 

[Sgt Biggles]

Originally posted by DaveChase:
I haven't seen any game show you that kind of reality. And I am very thankful for that.

This presents an interesting thought. Why do we love to play war games? There are several vets who are regular posters on these boards. Those who have "Been there, done that and have the scars." We have seen the horror of combat and the effects on civilians and their lives. Yet we play.

I suppose it might have something to do with being able to experience the rush without the consequences, or being able to put the war away, kick back, drink something cold and watch TV.

My son-in-law is bound for Iraq this month and we have played several nights of T2K, but our games have taken on a training aspect. I have used RPGs to train soldiers and cops in formal settings as well. (and got a commendation from the unit commander for original thinking. hehe) I bet several of you have similar stories.

So why do we play??

 

[DaveChase]

I play for the social interaction and the fun of the silly things that we do during our 'alternate lives'.

I play miniature games and even though we are killing units, the games are usually fun because we are trying to out strategize the other person or just doing things that are plan silly.

I even play paintball and in that GAME I have done things that I would never, ever do in real life. Why, because it is a game. I do get a rush out of the physical effort and it is fun to 'punch someone who can get up and walk away after we are done'.
But my most hated shot is the face shot. The is no denying to yourself or anyone else that you have been eliminated (killed).

I remember learning how to play WW3 from a person that taught soldiers how to sand box for REFORGER (this is during the high of the cold war and I was not yet in service/military).
No one wanted to play the Russians because it was not cool, so I volunteered (I had only played the Micro Armour game twice before). So the day before the trainer (Gary Mills) briefed me on the Russians mission, tactics and strenghts plus all the equipment that I would control. (I had the entire Russian force for that game) 2 Regiments BMP, 1 Regiment Tanks, plus air support.

Next day I am playing and the US forces launch a first strike against my units with their full air assests because they figured I would control the skies after a few turns and they did not want to loose any planes

After the strike I had 5 BMP left out of the 1st regiment. I freaked out. Not because I was losing but because I had screwed up and killed 1,000s of my own people. After about 1/2 hour with Gary's help of talking to me, I came back and won the battle (6 hours later).
Looking back now, that person that freaked out over those deaths on a sand table seems locked away behind a door.

I stay sane today because games are GAMES, and you play and lose by the rules/fun of the GAME.

Life does not allow you reload your saved game, drink healing potions and regenerate dead bodies back to life.

Games can teach you about life and possibly prepare mentally for it. Life teaches how to live, if you survive it long enough.

(Can some one please get me off this soap box? I am running out of Dr Pepper.

Dave

 

[kaladorn]

Little lead soldiers get up and come back to fight the next battle, and you don't have to explain to their widows how your incompetence got them slain...

And in a game, you can leap out of cover, throw a grenade, zig-zag across the open firing bursts as you trot, take out half the enemy at a swipe, engage the other half in hand-to-hand and beat them down with your vibro-katana and reflex-augmentation.... and in real life, you'd get up from cover, and a rain of randomly fired bullets would blow you to heck.... games are much more fun.

And they are a good way to work out the competitive or combative instinct, as long as you keep it within the rules and show good sportsmanship.

Frankly, I sometimes wish ALL wars were fought on tabletops.

 

[flykiller]

So why do we play??

probably has something to do with puzzle solving, combined with the typical bloodlust men exhibit every few decades when they blow each other up just for the fun of it.