twilight2000-digest Saturday, 31 August 1996 Volume 1996 : Number 018 The following topics are covered in this digest: 1. Shooting full auto 2. Re: The Nordic countries&Finland 3. Re: Baltics & Nordic countries 4. Re: STR in combat 5. Re: Shooting full auto 6. New vs. old guns 7. Re: Shooting full auto 8. Re: Shooting full auto 9. Support Materials 10. RE: Full Auto 11. Re: Support Materials 12. Re: Baltics & Nordic countries 13. Re: ideas 14. Re: ideas 15. Re: Support Materials 16. TW2K PBEM 17. Foraging 18. RE: Full Auto 19. Re: Baltics & Nordic countries 20. Re: Foraging ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matti Aistrich Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:38:04 +0300 (EET DST) Subject: Shooting full auto On Sat, 24 Aug 1996, Jeremy S Menefee wrote: > I disagree. IMHO, Full auto really IS impossible to control, and is > mostly used to keep heads down, or spray a rushing squad. In full auto, > you really ARE less likely to hit the main target, but as well, you are > likely to hit _something_, so it works will facing concentrated troops. > I could be wrong , but that's been my experience with full-auto. > > >And I guess you already know about changing the automatic fire rules > >so > >that skill means something instead of just luck. > I agree with you that full auto is not the best way to hit someone. However, I disagree with the game that it would be purely a matter of luck. I have some (albeit little) experience in this as well, as I have shot the Finnish version of the AK full auto -- although I agree with you fully that short bursts are a lot better way to go. Because of this, I have made up a set of rules in which the skill of the shooter affects, to a little degree, the number you have to get on the d6s you roll to see if you hit anything. There are at least two other versions of the same idea as well, and I seem to recall that one of them is by GDW. - --------------------------------------------- : Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : : only just : : : good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : - --------------------------------------------- - -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ - ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 09:51:47 EDT Subject: Re: The Nordic countries&Finland Well Matti, I haven't really decided what way to go yet with the PBeM... that's mostly up to the characters anyway. But if you have any background material not covered in the V2.2 boxed, like rank structure, um.. military situation, etc. then I'd be interested to hear it. I'll run with some of it, I'm sure! - -Jeremy Menefee Semper Fidelis On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:32:38 +0300 (EET DST) Matti Aistrich writes: >On Sat, 24 Aug 1996 a_hertz@post4.tele.dk wrote: > >> >Wanna know what we've got in Finland? >> > >> Sure it will be nice >> >So what are you thinking of letting people know about Denmark, and >what >do you want to know about Finland? > >--------------------------------------------- >: Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : >: only just : : >: good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : >--------------------------------------------- >-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >Version: 3.1 >GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- >X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ >------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 09:51:47 EDT Subject: Re: Baltics & Nordic countries On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 11:42:04 +0300 (EET DST) Matti Aistrich writes: >Remotely related to this subject, I've always been surprised that none >of >the groups I've GM'ed T2K to have decided to stay around Kalisz and >snipe >away at the Russians... everyone's been in a real hurry to leave the >place behind and never look back... I've had this happen with I guess >4 >or 5 different player groups! Same here. Always been fascinated by the idea, though. (Finnish marauders on skiss A LA James Bond!! > >BTW, if you're new to the list, there actually is an official >sourcebook >available on the Nordic countries, plus an adventure book which takes >the >characters away from Poland via the Nordic countries (at least it's >supposed to... :-) )... the only bad thing is, that these books happen >to >be in Finnish... ;-) > >As they are officially approved by GDW, it MIGHT be that Tantalus >would >have some rights to the books -- or would be interested in buying them > >from the Finnish publisher or writers (one of which I happened to be >in >the Army with). In that case, I would be interested in translating >them. Ohpleaseohpleaseohplease - -Jeremy Menefee > >--------------------------------------------- >: Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : >: only just : : >: good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : >--------------------------------------------- >-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >Version: 3.1 >GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- >X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ >------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 09:51:47 EDT Subject: Re: STR in combat Hmm.. interesting line of thinking! How 'bout something like this... As I am not using the regular recoil rules, and as I am using an average of STR and AGL for fire-fights, I suppose that characters wearing their rucksacks really should get a negative mod to their AGL. This will, of course, effect everything about combat for that character making it much more wise to ditch the pack in combat (and making an ambush that much more deadly ) Maybe I'm just blind, but could someone tell me what the "new vs. old gun problem" is? (I know I'm going to feel silly when I hear the answer ) - -Jeremy Menefee On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 11:36:14 +0300 (EET DST) Matti Aistrich writes: >On Sat, 24 Aug 1996, Jeremy S Menefee wrote: >Yes, that would be very logical and will lessen the >importance of STR, although not by very much... for instance, you've >still got the problems of having the shooting skills under STR, and >that of >new guns vs. old ones. BTW, one way to work around the new vs. old >guns >problem would be to start dishing out carrying penalties earlier than >what the limits would be in the rules, giving a clear penalty for >carrying heavy guns. Makes the characters drop their rucksacks when >they >get into a fight :-) > >AGL has to do as we don't have dexterity in T2K... > >--------------------------------------------- >: Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : >: only just : : >: good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : >--------------------------------------------- >-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >Version: 3.1 >GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- >X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ >------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > > ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 09:51:47 EDT Subject: Re: Shooting full auto Well, all I have these days is the V2.2 boxed, so if GDW put one out, I don't have it. Anyone? _Please!_ show me what you came up with! Note, I said _less_ likely, not "blind luck" with full auto. I suppose there's gotta be a zillion ideas out there on how to improve fire combat. Comments? Ideas? Suggestions? - -Jeremy Menefee Semper Fidelis On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:38:04 +0300 (EET DST) Matti Aistrich writes: >On Sat, 24 Aug 1996, Jeremy S Menefee wrote: > >> I disagree. IMHO, Full auto really IS impossible to control, and is >> mostly used to keep heads down, or spray a rushing squad. In full >auto, >> you really ARE less likely to hit the main target, but as well, you >are >> likely to hit _something_, so it works will facing concentrated >troops. >> I could be wrong , but that's been my experience with full-auto. >> >> >And I guess you already know about changing the automatic fire >rules >> >so >> >that skill means something instead of just luck. >> >I agree with you that full auto is not the best way to hit someone. >However, I disagree with the game that it would be purely a matter of >luck. I have some (albeit little) experience in this as well, as I >have >shot the Finnish version of the AK full auto -- although I agree with >you >fully that short bursts are a lot better way to go. Because of this, I >have >made up a set of rules in which the skill of the shooter affects, to a > >little degree, the number you have to get on the d6s you roll to see >if >you hit anything. There are at least two other versions of the same >idea >as well, and I seem to recall that one of them is by GDW. > > >--------------------------------------------- >: Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : >: only just : : >: good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : >--------------------------------------------- >-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >Version: 3.1 >GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- >X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ >------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > ------------------------------ From: Matti Aistrich Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 18:54:53 +0300 (EET DST) Subject: New vs. old guns On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, Jeremy S Menefee wrote: > As I am not using the regular recoil rules, and as I am using an > average of STR and AGL for fire-fights, I suppose that characters wearing > their rucksacks really should get a negative mod to their AGL. This > will, of course, effect everything about combat for that character making > it much more wise to ditch the pack in combat (and making an ambush that > much more deadly ) Now we are getting into an area that will work OK in a PBeM (if you decide to even care about such things instead of going for a more "movie like" action series) but will probably be too cumbersome in normal play. > Maybe I'm just blind, but could someone tell me what the "new vs. > old gun problem" is? (I know I'm going to feel silly when I hear the > answer ) Sorry, I guess I should have said it more clearly. There is a tendency for players to be ruleplayers and to pick the older versions of weapons because they are heavier, resulting in less recoil. It's a question of balancing the additional weight with additional firepower (as most of the time ROF, clip size, etc. are the same), and can at times lead to really complex calculations by the players. You'll see me prove my point when you see the character I have for the PBeM. :-) - --------------------------------------------- : Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : : only just : : : good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : - --------------------------------------------- - -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ - ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ------------------------------ From: Matti Aistrich Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 12:23:18 +0300 (EET DST) Subject: Re: Shooting full auto On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, Jeremy S Menefee wrote: > Well, all I have these days is the V2.2 boxed, so if GDW put one out, I > don't have it. Anyone? _Please!_ show me what you came up with! > > Note, I said _less_ likely, not "blind luck" with full auto. I suppose > there's gotta be a zillion ideas out there on how to improve fire combat. > Comments? Ideas? Suggestions? OK, I made a mistake. I'm just wondering why the dozens of lurkers in this list didn't come out and yell "wrong! wrong!" In version 2.0, the full auto rules were completely based on luck (and strength, to some extent). Roll this many dice, all sixes are hits. Some people, myself and my Twilight GM included, made new versions of this system. GDW changed the auto rules to something better in version 2.2, making the hits dependent on your skill at extreme (?) range. So that's the GDW version, which I believe I first encountered in the Challenge magazine, the screen, or some other supplement. That and the fact that I played Twilight mainly when it was under the 1st edition and the 2.0 edition led to my mistakes. Sorry. - --------------------------------------------- : Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : : only just : : : good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : - --------------------------------------------- - -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ - ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ------------------------------ From: Darryl Adams Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 16:53:45 +1000 Subject: Re: Shooting full auto On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, Matti Aistrich wrote: > > In version 2.0, the full auto rules were completely based on luck (and > strength, to some extent). Roll this many dice, all sixes are hits. Some > people, myself and my Twilight GM included, made new versions of this system. I loved this rule. The Spray and Pray method was realistic and achieved what it was suppose to do, to represent suspression fire. Skill is not an issue here, all you are doing is makeing shure the bad guy does not fire at you. The skill based approach bites. (IMHO). > Darryl Adams dtadams@ar.com.au "But as a Mistral employee once told me, Your only as good as your fans" TISM : Play Mistral for Me ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 20:51:25 EDT Subject: Support Materials Does anyone know if it is still possible to get TW2K material? Where from? - -Jeremy Menefee ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 20:51:25 EDT Subject: RE: Full Auto Well, to a point I agree that spray and pray is realistic (and was certainly the objective with the M249 training I got in the Corps), but I do NOT believe S&P has anyeffect on single bursts. Even with the weakest individual, if they have a good aim and/or proper sight adjustment, they WILL hit on the first shot or burst. Muzzle climb is more of a gradual thing. It is with the subsequent bursts, or full-auto, that this becomes a problem. It is this problem which I think most adds to the innacuracy of the combat rules (though using STR alone adds to the problem. I use an average of STR and AGL, plus skill, to find the total Asset.) Comments? - -Jeremy Menefee Semper Fidelis ------------------------------ From: a_hertz@post4.tele.dk (Hertz, Anders) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 12:24:30 +0100 Subject: Re: Support Materials At 20.51 28-08-1996 EDT, you wrote: >Does anyone know if it is still possible to get TW2K material? Where >from? > I know our local dealer has some. I think it's a question about examine the stores, or call a lot of other stores/mail order places..they might have something left. Bought the MERC:2000 and Special Operration quite cheap. Anders ------------------------------ From: "Mark Bull" Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 15:59:42 -0600 Subject: Re: Baltics & Nordic countries > BTW, if you're new to the list, there actually is an official sourcebook > available on the Nordic countries, plus an adventure book which takes the > characters away from Poland via the Nordic countries (at least it's > supposed to... :-) )... the only bad thing is, that these books happen to > be in Finnish... ;-) > > As they are officially approved by GDW, it MIGHT be that Tantalus would > have some rights to the books -- or would be interested in buying them > from the Finnish publisher or writers (one of which I happened to be in > the Army with). In that case, I would be interested in translating them. These would be great, if they could be translated. I wish I worked at Tantalus so I could try to get this ball rolling. I love Twilight 2000. ------------------------------ From: "Mark Bull" Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 15:55:52 -0600 Subject: Re: ideas > I agree, step-by-step MODULES would have been good. As an experienced > player, I loved the odules I did have as they were very open-ended, but > new players often feel more comfortable with the guidance (and older > players sometimes need a kick in the butt too ). But I still feel, > both as a player and a GM, that the adventure-less source book would have > been welcome additions. I also agree. The adventures they came out with were pretty good, but if they could have also included a step-by-step adventure in the middle of it. Having information on the areas around the adventure was a great idea, in case players get sidetracked. Having to make up every conversation for every NPC isn't something a lot of GM's are good at though. And I think the adventures should all have been in Europe, where the game starts and takes place. Detailed sourcebooks on other areas would have been fine, but an adventure for another part of the world is going to have a more limited audience and therefore not sell as well. I have GM's TW2K for years with several different gaming groups, and we played in Central Poland for the most part, and it seemed the groups all fell apart when we left that area. I didn't have much information on any other area of the world, so I didn't do as good as a GM. There's enough stuff going on in Central Poland to keep anyone busy for years of gaming. And I didn't think Merc 2000 was a great idea, but they didn't support it with any adventures except those 2-4 pages ones included in the sourcebooks. The movie Navy Seals was great inspiration for the game as a GM, but without entire armies lurking on the other side of the mountain range, it gets really old real fast. It becomes Shadowrun without the magic and cyberware. I think Tantalus should stick to TW2K, but if they have no plans to re-publish the game, I have to wonder why the hell they wanted the rights to it. I mean, the new edition of Traveller from Imperium Games is already on the shelf and here this great game is limited to a mailing list. I'll bet there's hundreds of stories from the vets out there that could be altered to work in the TW2K universe, and would make great adventures or at least short stories to boost the GM's creativity. I'm not a vet and don't have any military experience, but I wouldn't mind doing something to help put the game back onto the shelves of stores. ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 18:48:06 EDT Subject: Re: ideas I think the best bet would have been as I mentioned before, the detailed source-book idea. Adventure modules (continuing in the open-ended tradition of publishers past) could be written in abundance, with all the background material and major NPCs of that module being presented in the sourcvebooks. I personally would find more use for the sourcebooks than the modules, but you can see how this could lead to a very detailed campaign universe, with lots of modules whose space is taken up by fresh ideas, rather than simple (and I do mean simple) background stuff. I guess I'm a fanatic on this idea :) - -Jeremy Menefee On Thu, 29 Aug 1996 15:55:52 -0600 "Mark Bull" writes: >> I agree, step-by-step MODULES would have been good. As an >>experienced >> player, I loved the odules I did have as they were very open-ended, >>but >> new players often feel more comfortable with the guidance (and older >> players sometimes need a kick in the butt too ). But I still >>feel, >> both as a player and a GM, that the adventure-less source book would >>have >> been welcome additions. > >I also agree. The adventures they came out with were pretty good, but >if >they could have also included a step-by-step adventure in the middle >of it. > Having information on the areas around the adventure was a great >idea, in >case players get sidetracked. Having to make up every conversation >for >every NPC isn't something a lot of GM's are good at though. And I >think >the adventures should all have been in Europe, where the game starts >and >takes place. Detailed sourcebooks on other areas would have been >fine, but >an adventure for another part of the world is going to have a more >limited >audience and therefore not sell as well. > >I have GM's TW2K for years with several different gaming groups, and >we >played in Central Poland for the most part, and it seemed the groups >all >fell apart when we left that area. I didn't have much information on >any >other area of the world, so I didn't do as good as a GM. There's >enough >stuff going on in Central Poland to keep anyone busy for years of >gaming. > >And I didn't think Merc 2000 was a great idea, but they didn't support >it >with any adventures except those 2-4 pages ones included in the >sourcebooks. The movie Navy Seals was great inspiration for the game >as a >GM, but without entire armies lurking on the other side of the >mountain >range, it gets really old real fast. It becomes Shadowrun without the >magic and cyberware. > >I think Tantalus should stick to TW2K, but if they have no plans to >re-publish the game, I have to wonder why the hell they wanted the >rights >to it. I mean, the new edition of Traveller from Imperium Games is >already >on the shelf and here this great game is limited to a mailing list. >I'll >bet there's hundreds of stories from the vets out there that could be >altered to work in the TW2K universe, and would make great adventures >or at >least short stories to boost the GM's creativity. I'm not a vet and >don't >have any military experience, but I wouldn't mind doing something to >help >put the game back onto the shelves of stores. > > ------------------------------ From: "Mark Bull" Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:11:33 -0600 Subject: Re: Support Materials > Does anyone know if it is still possible to get TW2K material? Where > from? > > -Jeremy Menefee I work in a store in Casper, Wyoming, and we still have some of the supplements and several used adventures from the first edition. Most of the supplements are new and from the newer edition. If you are interested, let me know and I can give you a list of what we have. ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 20:48:18 EDT Subject: TW2K PBEM Thanks! My T2k game is now full, thanks in part to people on this list! If you'd like to be a LURKER on my game, E-mail me at "twilight-2000@juno.com" with a subject line of "LURK". Again, thanks everyone. - -Jeremy Menefee ------------------------------ From: jeremy14@juno.com (Jeremy S Menefee) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 23:51:03 EDT Subject: Foraging Hey guys, Do any of you find the foraging rules to be a pain? Are there any variants you have come up with? If not, how do YOU implement them? Does anyone disregard them? HAHAHAH this list will live in spite of you all!! Muahhahahahah! - -Jeremy Menefee Semper Fidelis ------------------------------ From: Matti Aistrich Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:08:12 +0300 (EET DST) Subject: RE: Full Auto On Wed, 28 Aug 1996, Jeremy S Menefee wrote: > do NOT believe S&P has anyeffect on single bursts. Even with the weakest > individual, if they have a good aim and/or proper sight adjustment, they > WILL hit on the first shot or burst. Muzzle climb is more of a gradual > thing. It is with the subsequent bursts, or full-auto, that this becomes > a problem. > > It is this problem which I think most adds to the innacuracy of the > combat rules (though using STR alone adds to the problem. I use an > average of STR and AGL, plus skill, to find the total Asset.) Then in T2K, wouldn't the easiest solution be to discard the recoil from the first burst altogether, and start counting only from the second one on? That's they way its done in many other games (or was it this way in T2K as well -- am not 100% sure it wasn't?) - --------------------------------------------- : Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : : only just : : : good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : - --------------------------------------------- - -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ - ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ------------------------------ From: Matti Aistrich Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:13:11 +0300 (EET DST) Subject: Re: Baltics & Nordic countries On Thu, 29 Aug 1996, Mark Bull wrote: > > BTW, if you're new to the list, there actually is an official sourcebook > > available on the Nordic countries, plus an adventure book which takes the > > characters away from Poland via the Nordic countries (at least it's > > > > As they are officially approved by GDW, it MIGHT be that Tantalus would > > have some rights to the books -- or would be interested in buying them > > These would be great, if they could be translated. I wish I worked at > Tantalus so I could try to get this ball rolling. I love Twilight 2000. Well, we have no comments from Tantalus yet on this subject: are they interested or not? Doing anything about it? Thinking about it? In need of more info? - --------------------------------------------- : Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : : only just : : : good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : - --------------------------------------------- - -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ - ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ------------------------------ From: Matti Aistrich Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 16:26:42 +0300 (EET DST) Subject: Re: Foraging On Fri, 30 Aug 1996, Jeremy S Menefee wrote: > > Do any of you find the foraging rules to be a pain? Are there any > variants you have come up with? If not, how do YOU implement them? Does > anyone disregard them? > Yes, the foraging rules are a pain, if you bother to use them step-by-step. However, most of the time characters forage they stay in one place for a longer time, distilling what they forage, etc. Therefore, it's easiest to just come up with an average number that represent what the whole group can be expected to come up per day, and use that throughout. - --------------------------------------------- : Perfect is : Matti M. Aistrich : : only just : : : good enough! : aistrich@kyyppari.hkkk.fi : - --------------------------------------------- - -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GB d+(++) s-:+ a- C+ W+ w PS+ PE++ Y+ t--- X- R++ tv+ b+ D++ G e++>+++ h-- y+++ - ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1996 #18 ************************************