twilight2000-digest Thursday, June 11 1998 Volume 1998 : Number 026 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: French Navy in 2000 Re: French Navy in 2000 Re: French Navy in 2000 Story! Re: Story! Re: Story! Finns Rules Question Re: Rules Question Re: Rules Question Re: Story! Re: Rules Question Introduction Re: Introduction Re: Introduction Re: Rules Question Re: Rules Question Re: Introduction Re: Rules Question PBeMs Re: Rules Question Re: PBeMs Re: Rules Question Re: Rules Question Re: Rules Question Poland Re: Poland Re: Introduction Re: Rules Question Re: Rules Question Re: PBeMs Re: Rules Question ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 22:28:01 EDT From: Grimace997@aol.com Subject: Re: French Navy in 2000 I've got the Command, but I think it's worth the time, if you're willing to spend the time. Go for it! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:43:28 -0700 From: Karl Karlsson Subject: Re: French Navy in 2000 Sounds good. If you got the time to compile it. Brian K. Flood & Ann Marie Henke wrote: > Hey all, > > Just got done reading a COMMAND magazine that had a listing of the ships > available to the French Navy in the year 2000 -- real world. If I hear any > interest, I'll post the listing on this board...... > > Brian > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kenth Eriksson > To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM > Date: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 1:43 AM > Subject: Re: First mail! > > >Ronald: > >>I've just joined this list, and was sitting idle to see what was > >happening... which wasn't much... good thing you came along! > > > >Well... if everybody sits idly by, nothing happens right? > > > >>Have been running t2k from 88 and until 95 (ran out of players...).. > >Nowadays I'm running cp2020, and sitting as a player in Eon (Swedish > >fantasy system), and AD&D forgotten realms.. > > > >It seems that this problem is global. Losing T2k players, I mean.. > >Wouldn't it all just be alot easier if people with the same intrests > >shared the same country. ;-) > > > >>And dont you laugh at my mail adress.... > >>it's hill in ancent norwegian.... > > > >Why should I. We've got some stupid Swedish word too.. > > > >Kenth > > > >______________________________________________________ > >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 23:35:37 PDT From: "Kenth Eriksson" Subject: Re: French Navy in 2000 >Just got done reading a COMMAND magazine that had a listing of the ships >available to the French Navy in the year 2000 -- real world. If I hear any >interest, I'll post the listing on this board..... > Please do. If people don't want it on the list then just send it in private mail. But try the list first. Kenth ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 04:35:36 PDT From: "Kenth Eriksson" Subject: Story! Hi there! If someone should like to read a little story, I have one. I just wrote it and put it on my site as a first update. I will make many more I hope. But this is for starters. Go here if you want to read. http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/2749/index.html Sorry about the language(if it's bad) remeber; I'm Swedish. Kenth ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 22:47:45 +0200 From: Marcin Segit Subject: Re: Story! Hi all! Kenth Eriksson wrote: > If someone should like to read a little story, I have one. > I just wrote it and put it on my site as a first update. > I will make many more I hope. But this is for starters. > Go here if you want to read. I like it. IMO it's good but...too short! I'm waiting for more! Marcin - -- May the Force be with You - Luke Skywalker Marcin Segit ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 10:47:48 -0500 From: Tom Floyd Subject: Re: Story! I would like to read it. What's your site's address? Marcin Segit wrote: > Hi all! > > Kenth Eriksson wrote: > > > If someone should like to read a little story, I have one. > > I just wrote it and put it on my site as a first update. > > I will make many more I hope. But this is for starters. > > Go here if you want to read. > > I like it. IMO it's good but...too short! I'm waiting for more! > > Marcin > > -- > May the Force be with You > - Luke Skywalker > > Marcin Segit ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 16:31:56 EDT From: OrrinLadd@aol.com Subject: Finns Finns, where are the Finns? are you Finnish guys still on the list? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 19:54:15 EDT From: OrrinLadd@aol.com Subject: Rules Question I have a rules question for all of you out there. The qualifications for OCS state that characters with Intelligence and Education of 7+ may enter OCS. I interpret this as meaning Intelligence 7+ and Education 7+, but some people interpret this as meaning Intelligence + Education = 7+ what does everyone out there think? orrin ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 19:16:30 -0500 From: Tom Floyd Subject: Re: Rules Question - --------------63302A4D2F4D4351B7CCAAE8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm pretty sure it means a character has to have an intelligence and education of 7+ . At least that's the way I play it. OrrinLadd@aol.com wrote: > I have a rules question for all of you out there. > > The qualifications for OCS state that characters with Intelligence and > Education of 7+ may enter OCS. I interpret this as meaning Intelligence 7+ > and Education 7+, but some people interpret this as meaning Intelligence + > Education = 7+ > > what does everyone out there think? > > orrin - --------------63302A4D2F4D4351B7CCAAE8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm pretty sure it means a character has to have an intelligence and education of 7+ . At least that's the way I play it. OrrinLadd@aol.com wrote: I have a rules question for all of you out there. The qualifications for OCS state that characters with Intelligence and Education of 7+ may enter OCS. I interpret this as meaning Intelligence 7+ and Education 7+, but some people interpret this as meaning Intelligence + Education = 7+ what does everyone out there think? orrin - --------------63302A4D2F4D4351B7CCAAE8-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 23:04:24 EDT From: Grimace997@aol.com Subject: Re: Rules Question In a message dated 98-06-10 20:25:23 EDT, you write: << > The qualifications for OCS state that characters with Intelligence and > Education of 7+ may enter OCS. I interpret this as meaning Intelligence 7+ > and Education 7+, but some people interpret this as meaning Intelligence + > Education = 7+ > > what does everyone out there think? > >> I would also say that they need both Intelligence AND Education to have at least a 7 in order to join. It would be too easy the other way, as a person would only need a 3 in one, and a 4 in the other. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 22:55:10 PDT From: "Kenth Eriksson" Subject: Re: Story! Tom Floyd wrote: >I would like to read it. What's your site's address? http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/2749/ If it was mine you were wondring about. Kenth ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 23:04:30 PDT From: "Kenth Eriksson" Subject: Re: Rules Question Orrin Ladd wrote: >I have a rules question for all of you out there. > >The qualifications for OCS state that characters with Intelligence and >Education of 7+ may enter OCS. I interpret this as meaning Intelligence 7+ >and Education 7+, but some people interpret this as meaning Intelligence + >Education = 7+ > >what does everyone out there think? I think it means Intelligence 7+ AND Education 7+. Otherwise there would be too many officer's running around. ;-) Kenth ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:04:30 +0300 (EEST) From: Janne Kalmari Subject: Introduction Hi! I am Janne Kalmari, a finnish student of maths and a proud owner of Twilight 2000 role playing game :-) I have played some ten years or so and more than half of it i've got the Twilight as one of my main games. I have both the 1st and the 2nd edition rules and i use the 2nd edition with some changes that make combat much more deadly. I also have Merc:2000 and have gm:d Dark Conspiracy, but the basic twilight is my favourite of these. At the moment i am not running an active tw2000 campaign, and my Harn and DC campaigns keep me busy (and studies too, i suppose), but i'm carefully planning my next campaign. It's not very detailed yet, but i thought of starting the campaign on U.S.Army bootcamp, from where the characters would eventually get sent to frontlines in Poland and have to fight the real war before they get cut off near Kalisz. I have a million questions concerning the training and US combat tactics, but it can wait. Ok, i guess that's enough of me for now. So, anyone there living near Jyvaskyla and needing more players??? Well, i guess not, anyway, i joined this list yesterday, and i'm looking forward on seeing some intelligent life on this list. (I trust on you guys ;-) - -Terv. Janne ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 05:25:20 EDT From: Grimace997@aol.com Subject: Re: Introduction In a message dated 98-06-11 05:20:47 EDT, you write: << Ok, i guess that's enough of me for now. So, anyone there living near Jyvaskyla and needing more players??? Well, i guess not, anyway, i joined this list yesterday, and i'm looking forward on seeing some intelligent life on this list. (I trust on you guys ;-) -Terv. Janne >> Hoo boy, you're asking for a lot aren't you? It seems this list has become rather quiet over the last couple months. Here's hoping you get the intelligent life you wished for! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 03:57:15 PDT From: "Kenth Eriksson" Subject: Re: Introduction Janne Kalmari wrote: >Hi! > >I am Janne Kalmari, a finnish student of maths and a proud owner of >Twilight 2000 role playing game :-) > >I have played some ten years or so and more than half of it i've got the >Twilight as one of my main games. I have both the 1st and the 2nd edition >rules and i use the 2nd edition with some changes that make combat much >more deadly. I also have Merc:2000 and have gm:d Dark Conspiracy, but the >basic twilight is my favourite of these. > >At the moment i am not running an active tw2000 campaign, and my Harn and >DC campaigns keep me busy (and studies too, i suppose), but i'm carefully >planning my next campaign. It's not very detailed yet, but i thought of >starting the campaign on U.S.Army bootcamp, from where the characters >would eventually get sent to frontlines in Poland and have to fight the >real war before they get cut off near Kalisz. I have a million questions >concerning the training and US combat tactics, but it can wait. > >Ok, i guess that's enough of me for now. > >So, anyone there living near Jyvaskyla and needing more players??? >Well, i guess not, anyway, i joined this list yesterday, and i'm looking >forward on seeing some intelligent life on this list. (I trust on you guys >;-) > > > >-Terv. Janne Hi Janne! Hej(om du förstår svenska)! Welcome to the list. It's always nice to meet one's nieghbours. I'm from Sweden. Ask any questions you want, and at least I'll try to answer what I can. It's amazing what we can accomplish together. 'Til next time. Buh-buy! Kenth ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 21:57:41 -0400 From: "Who me?" Subject: Re: Rules Question This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01BD94BA.CA6E5C20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm new to the list, but I'd like to offer my opinion. For the longest time, I have interpreted that rule as meaning the = character needed both an education and intelligence score of 7+. Lately, I have thought that this is a little odd. Although the military = does look for above average personnel to enter into OCS, it does in = reality accept those members of the lower ranks that would make good = field leaders. There are cases of uneducated men being accepted into = OCS based solely on their potential as leaders, and not because they are = overly intelligent or have an educated background. I have begun to think that a character should have an education and = intelligence combined score of 7+ for these reasons. It would seem to = me in theory to make more sense. Even a military school graduate only = needs a 6+ education score, and if you take the ROTC option of the = Undergraduate University Education Career you only need a 5 or better = education score. Graduate University needs both education and = intelligence 7+, and I fail to understand how this Education Career and = OCS compare in ranking. Just my thoughts on the matter. - ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01BD94BA.CA6E5C20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm new to the list, but I'd like to = offer my=20 opinion. For the longest time, I have = interpreted that=20 rule as meaning the character needed both an education and intelligence = score of=20 7+. Lately, I have thought that this is = a little=20 odd. Although the military does look for above average personnel = to enter=20 into OCS, it does in reality accept those members of the lower ranks = that would=20 make good field leaders. There are cases of uneducated men being = accepted=20 into OCS based solely on their potential as leaders, and not because = they are=20 overly intelligent or have an educated background. I have begun to think that a = character should=20 have an education and intelligence combined score of 7+ for these=20 reasons. It would seem to me in theory to make more sense. = Even a=20 military school graduate only needs a 6+ education score, and if you = take the=20 ROTC option of the Undergraduate University Education Career you only = need a 5=20 or better education score. Graduate University needs both = education and=20 intelligence 7+, and I fail to understand how this Education Career and = OCS=20 compare in ranking. Just my thoughts on the=20 matter. - ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01BD94BA.CA6E5C20-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 06:11:55 -0700 From: Jeremy Menefee Subject: Re: Rules Question I have always required my players to have both attributes at 7+ in my games. Grimace997@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 98-06-10 20:25:23 EDT, you write: > > << > > The qualifications for OCS state that characters with Intelligence and > > Education of 7+ may enter OCS. I interpret this as meaning Intelligence 7+ > > and Education 7+, but some people interpret this as meaning Intelligence + > > Education = 7+ > > > > what does everyone out there think? > > >> > > I would also say that they need both Intelligence AND Education to have at > least a 7 in order to join. It would be too easy the other way, as a person > would only need a 3 in one, and a 4 in the other. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 06:19:23 -0700 From: Jeremy Menefee Subject: Re: Introduction Janne - I am a former United States Marine. I would be happy to answer any questions you have about tactics and training of United States Marines. I would also be happy to answer questions about training and tactics in other branches of the U.S. military, but I don't think members of those branches would be flattered ;-) - -Jeremy Menefee Semper Fidelis Janne Kalmari wrote: > I have a million questions concerning the training and US combat tactics... > > -Terv. Janne ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 06:31:57 -0700 From: Jeremy Menefee Subject: Re: Rules Question - --------------0D7E44C8AAF2BB06E76A4B6D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have never seen any branch of the military take an uneducated man off the street and send him to OCS. I scored the highest my recruiter had ever seen on my ASVAB test, but still went in enlisted. What you are referring to is the practice of taking *already enlisted* military personnel who have displayed remarkable leadership traits *while on active duty*, and sending them to OCS. This is, of course, not really dealt with in the character creation rules. In play a character could have a field promotion, but that's not really what we are talking about. Thus, I feel the 7+ AND 7+ interpretation is correct. However, there should be room for "Mustangs" (what we Marines call officers who used to be enlisted) in character creation. How about an additional rule, then? Say, if you roll max for Promotion roll (or perhaps twice in a row?), then you would have the option of going to OCS on your next term. Thoughts? - -Jeremy Menefee Semper Fidelis Who me? wrote: > Lately, I have thought that this is a little odd. Although the > military does look for above average personnel to enter into OCS, it > does in reality accept those members of the lower ranks that would > make good field leaders. There are cases of uneducated men being > accepted into OCS based solely on their potential as leaders, and not > because they are overly intelligent or have an educated > background.Just my thoughts on the matter. - --------------0D7E44C8AAF2BB06E76A4B6D Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have never seen any branch of the military take an uneducated man off the street and send him to OCS. I scored the highest my recruiter had ever seen on my ASVAB test, but still went in enlisted. What you are referring to is the practice of taking *already enlisted* military personnel who have displayed remarkable leadership traits *while on active duty*, and sending them to OCS. This is, of course, not really dealt with in the character creation rules. In play a character could have a field promotion, but that's not really what we are talking about. Thus, I feel the 7+ AND 7+ interpretation is correct. However, there should be room for "Mustangs" (what we Marines call officers who used to be enlisted) in character creation. How about an additional rule, then? Say, if you roll max for Promotion roll (or perhaps twice in a row?), then you would have the option of going to OCS on your next term. Thoughts? -Jeremy Menefee Semper Fidelis Who me? wrote: Lately, I have thought that this is a little odd. Although the military does look for above average personnel to enter into OCS, it does in reality accept those members of the lower ranks that would make good field leaders. There are cases of uneducated men being accepted into OCS based solely on their potential as leaders, and not because they are overly intelligent or have an educated background.Just my thoughts on the matter. - --------------0D7E44C8AAF2BB06E76A4B6D-- ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 06:35:01 -0700 From: Jeremy Menefee Subject: PBeMs Is anyone out there currently running PBeM campaigns? - -Jeremy M. Semper Fidelis ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 21:37:40 -0400 From: bell029@ibm.net Subject: Re: Rules Question Jeremy Menefee wrote: > > I have never seen any branch of the military take an uneducated man > off the street and send him to OCS. I scored the highest my recruiter > had ever seen on my ASVAB test, but still went in enlisted. What you > are referring to is the practice of taking *already enlisted* military > personnel who have displayed remarkable leadership traits *while on > active duty*, and sending them to OCS. > > This is, of course, not really dealt with in the character creation > rules. In play a character could have a field promotion, but that's > not really what we are talking about. Thus, I feel the 7+ AND 7+ > interpretation is correct. > > However, there should be room for "Mustangs" (what we Marines call > officers who used to be enlisted) in character creation. How about an > additional rule, then? Say, if you roll max for Promotion roll (or > perhaps twice in a row?), then you would have the option of going to > OCS on your next term. > > Thoughts? > > -Jeremy Menefee > Semper Fidelis > > Who me? wrote: > > Lately, I have thought that this is a little odd. Although > the military does look for above average personnel to enter > into OCS, it does in reality accept those members of the > lower ranks that would make good field leaders. There are > cases of uneducated men being accepted into OCS based solely > on their potential as leaders, and not because they are > overly intelligent or have an educated background.Just my > thoughts on the matter. > > Are you referring to situations during wartime, such as NCO's receiving commissions to occupy vacnacies at the platoon and company level? Such practices wre QUite common in WW2, Korea and Vietnam. Audie Murphy is one case in point. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 06:57:08 PDT From: "Kenth Eriksson" Subject: Re: PBeMs Jeremy Menefee wrote: >Is anyone out there currently running PBeM campaigns? I'm not currently running one. But I will in a short while. I haven't given the word on recruiting yet. But I might as well. I'm looking for 6-8 players. I'm going to write the synopsis tonight, to you Americans that should be sometime about noon. And then I'll post it on: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/2749/ tomorrow morning(night American time). I'm in Sweden you see. So read it through, give it some though. And join up if ya want to. It going to be a bit different than running around Poland in an APC, that much I guarantee. If you decide to join up after reading about it on the site. Just send me an e-mail. So I can send you character sheets and info to you. Like I said I'm looking for 6-8 players so there's not a whole lotta room. IOW first in first pick. Kenth ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 07:09:00 -0700 From: Jeremy Menefee Subject: Re: Rules Question bell029@ibm.net wrote: > Jeremy Menefee wrote: > > > > I have never seen any branch of the military take an uneducated man > > off the street and send him to OCS. I scored the highest my recruiter > > had ever seen on my ASVAB test, but still went in enlisted. What you > > are referring to is the practice of taking *already enlisted* military > > personnel who have displayed remarkable leadership traits *while on > > active duty*, and sending them to OCS. > > > > This is, of course, not really dealt with in the character creation > > rules. In play a character could have a field promotion, but that's > > not really what we are talking about. Thus, I feel the 7+ AND 7+ > > interpretation is correct. > > > > However, there should be room for "Mustangs" (what we Marines call > > officers who used to be enlisted) in character creation. How about an > > additional rule, then? Say, if you roll max for Promotion roll (or > > perhaps twice in a row?), then you would have the option of going to > > OCS on your next term. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > -Jeremy Menefee > > Semper Fidelis > > Are you referring to situations during wartime, such as NCO's receiving > commissions to occupy vacnacies at the platoon and company level? Such > practices wre QUite common in WW2, Korea and Vietnam. Audie Murphy is > one case in point. Yes and no. That is a field promotion. There have been *rare* cases where enlisted personnel are sent to OCS during peacetime. Such almost happened to me (though I was not in the combat arms as though of by other branches), until I was injured and discharged (ugh). However, to keep from having too many officers, perhaps we could limit the roll I ask about above to only the War Term? Or perhaps require one max Promotion Roll during the War Term, two in a row (exceedingly rare!) before war breaks out? Hope I answered your question, sorry to ask more questions ;-) - -Jeremy Menefee Semper Fidelis ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 07:07:18 PDT From: "Kenth Eriksson" Subject: Re: Rules Question Who me? wrote: >I'm new to the list, but I'd like to offer my opinion. > >For the longest time, I have interpreted that rule as meaning the = >character needed both an education and intelligence score of 7+. > >Lately, I have thought that this is a little odd. Although the >military does look for above average personnel to enter into OCS, it >does in reality accept those members of the lower ranks that would >make good field leaders. There are cases of uneducated men being >accepted into OCS based solely on their potential as leaders, and not >because they are overly intelligent or have an educated background. > >I have begun to think that a character should have an education and >intelligence combined score of 7+ for these reasons. It would seem >to me in theory to make more sense. Even a military school graduate >only needs a 6+ education score, and if you take the ROTC option of >the Undergraduate University Education Career you only need a 5 or >better education score. Graduate University needs both education and >intelligence 7+, and I fail to understand how this Education Career >and OCS compare in ranking. > >Just my thoughts on the matter. IMO..,It's easier to enter Mliltary Academy than OCS. After all isn't OCS something you choose in enlistment and I would think the military would have greater selection to OCS. On the other hand Military Academy, like West Point and stuff is like a school, a university. Ok..Not your average UCLA but still a school. And if you're rich enough you can send your kid through any school. Shouldn't this apply to the Military Academys too, after all they need funding too. Which all means if you're rich you can get a fairly "dumb" kid through West Point.(I'm not a military man, and a Swede. So I might be wrong. Don't flame me, just tell me so.) This would indicate that officers in movies like Aliens. Would have gone to Military Academy or ROTC. Since they make all these stupid things. And the Corporal ends up saving the entire platoon. ;-) Anyways...That's my thoughts on the matter. Kenth ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 07:42:51 -0700 From: Jeremy Menefee Subject: Re: Rules Question Interesting question. Having never been an ocifer, I wouldn't know. Can anyone out there set the record straight? - I'd sure like to know for reference. Too lazy to search for answers myself :-) - -Jeremy M. Semper Fidelis Kenth Eriksson wrote: > IMO..,It's easier to enter Mliltary Academy than OCS. After all isn't > OCS something you choose in enlistment and I would think the military > would have greater selection to OCS. > > On the other hand Military Academy, like West Point and stuff is like a > school, a university. Ok..Not your average UCLA but still a school. And > if you're rich enough you can send your kid through any school. > Shouldn't this apply to the Military Academys too, after all they need > funding too. Which all means if you're rich you can get a fairly "dumb" > kid through West Point.(I'm not a military man, and a Swede. So I might > be wrong. Don't flame me, just tell me so.) > > This would indicate that officers in movies like Aliens. Would have gone > to Military Academy or ROTC. Since they make all these stupid things. > And the Corporal ends up saving the entire platoon. ;-) > > Anyways...That's my thoughts on the matter. > > Kenth > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:02:36 +0200 From: Marcin Segit Subject: Poland Hi all! I'm from Poland and I wonder how much you know about my country which is TW2K main theatre /at least in the rulebook/. I'm talking about town maps, geography more detailed than in usual geography atlas and similar things. I'm just curious... Marcin - -- May the Force be with You - Luke Skywalker Marcin Segit ICQ# 13274376 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:16:52 -0800 From: Anthony Kim Subject: Re: Poland Marcin Segit wrote: > > Hi all! > > I'm from Poland and I wonder how much you know about my country which is > TW2K main theatre /at least in the rulebook/. I'm talking about town > maps, geography more detailed than in usual geography atlas and similar > things. > I'm just curious... Well, me personally, I learned a lot from play T2K 1st edition in high school. Learning about places such as Krakow, Kalisz (of course), etc. I can say with confidence that I'm the only non-Polish person in my area that can point to Nowy Huta on a map. :) - -Tony Kim ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 10:23:12 -0800 From: Anthony Kim Subject: Re: Introduction Janne Kalmari wrote: > real war before they get cut off near Kalisz. I have a million questions > concerning the training and US combat tactics, but it can wait. > > Ok, i guess that's enough of me for now. Hi! I mostly lurk on this list myself, but it's always good to see someone new here. If you want to find US Army publications, one place you can look is the Army Doctrine and Training Digital Library at: http://www.atsc-army.org/atdls.html Some publications are restricted access, but surprisingly many are open to the public. - -Tony Kim ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:42:19 -0500 From: Tom Floyd Subject: Re: Rules Question Kenth, After 20 years in the military (Ret. U.S. Navy), I have to admit that you have a point concerning the actions of some Officers. But, as far as the military academies go, they're pretty hard to get into. Unless someone in your family is a graduate, you have a very slim chance of being selected. And these schools are not easy by any means. By the way, while serving in Iceland, I had some very enjoyable trips to Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finnland. Great countries!!!!!!!! Kenth Eriksson wrote: > Who me? wrote: > >I'm new to the list, but I'd like to offer my opinion. > > > >For the longest time, I have interpreted that rule as meaning the = > >character needed both an education and intelligence score of 7+. > > > >Lately, I have thought that this is a little odd. Although the > >military does look for above average personnel to enter into OCS, it > >does in reality accept those members of the lower ranks that would > >make good field leaders. There are cases of uneducated men being > >accepted into OCS based solely on their potential as leaders, and not > >because they are overly intelligent or have an educated background. > > > >I have begun to think that a character should have an education and > >intelligence combined score of 7+ for these reasons. It would seem > >to me in theory to make more sense. Even a military school graduate > >only needs a 6+ education score, and if you take the ROTC option of > >the Undergraduate University Education Career you only need a 5 or > >better education score. Graduate University needs both education and > >intelligence 7+, and I fail to understand how this Education Career > >and OCS compare in ranking. > > > >Just my thoughts on the matter. > > IMO..,It's easier to enter Mliltary Academy than OCS. After all isn't > OCS something you choose in enlistment and I would think the military > would have greater selection to OCS. > > On the other hand Military Academy, like West Point and stuff is like a > school, a university. Ok..Not your average UCLA but still a school. And > if you're rich enough you can send your kid through any school. > Shouldn't this apply to the Military Academys too, after all they need > funding too. Which all means if you're rich you can get a fairly "dumb" > kid through West Point.(I'm not a military man, and a Swede. So I might > be wrong. Don't flame me, just tell me so.) > > This would indicate that officers in movies like Aliens. Would have gone > to Military Academy or ROTC. Since they make all these stupid things. > And the Corporal ends up saving the entire platoon. ;-) > > Anyways...That's my thoughts on the matter. > > Kenth > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 14:02:46 -0500 From: Tom Floyd Subject: Re: Rules Question - --------------18D7523396080A283DA28868 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The biggest reason that you only need a 5 or better if you've had ROTC is because that takes into account the fact that you have already had military training. Same thing goes for military school. Who me? wrote: > I'm new to the list, but I'd like to offer my opinion. For the > longest time, I have interpreted that rule as meaning the character > needed both an education and intelligence score of 7+. Lately, I have > thought that this is a little odd. Although the military does look > for above average personnel to enter into OCS, it does in reality > accept those members of the lower ranks that would make good field > leaders. There are cases of uneducated men being accepted into OCS > based solely on their potential as leaders, and not because they are > overly intelligent or have an educated background. I have begun to > think that a character should have an education and intelligence > combined score of 7+ for these reasons. It would seem to me in > theory to make more sense. Even a military school graduate only needs > a 6+ education score, and if you take the ROTC option of the > Undergraduate University Education Career you only need a 5 or better > education score. Graduate University needs both education and > intelligence 7+, and I fail to understand how this Education Career > and OCS compare in ranking. Just my thoughts on the matter. - --------------18D7523396080A283DA28868 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The biggest reason that you only need a 5 or better if you've had ROTC is because that takes into account the fact that you have already had military training. Same thing goes for military school. Who me? wrote: I'm new to the list, but I'd like to offer my opinion. For the longest time, I have interpreted that rule as meaning the character needed both an education and intelligence score of 7+. Lately, I have thought that this is a little odd. Although the military does look for above average personnel to enter into OCS, it does in reality accept those members of the lower ranks that would make good field leaders. There are cases of uneducated men being accepted into OCS based solely on their potential as leaders, and not because they are overly intelligent or have an educated background. I have begun to think that a character should have an education and intelligence combined score of 7+ for these reasons. It would seem to me in theory to make more sense. Even a military school graduate only needs a 6+ education score, and if you take the ROTC option of the Undergraduate University Education Career you only need a 5 or better education score. Graduate University needs both education and intelligence 7+, and I fail to understand how this Education Career and OCS compare in ranking. Just my thoughts on the matter. - --------------18D7523396080A283DA28868-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:42:43 +1200 From: "NaT" Subject: Re: PBeMs Hi I am currently running a PBEM game, it is only in it's second term however,visit my site for more info. NaT percival@ihug.co.nz Nathaniel Bacchus http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~percival - -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Menefee To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM Date: Friday, 12 June 1998 01:39 Subject: PBeMs >Is anyone out there currently running PBeM campaigns? > >-Jeremy M. >Semper Fidelis > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 18:27:21 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rules Question At 09:57 PM 6/10/98 -0400, Who me? wrote: > I'm new to the list, but I'd like to offer my opinion. For the >longest time, I have interpreted that rule as meaning the character needed >both an education and intelligence score of 7+. >There are cases of uneducated men being accepted into OCS based solely on >their potential as leaders, and not because they are overly intelligent or >have an educated background. Graduate University needs both education and >intelligence 7+, and I fail to understand how this Education Career and OCS >compare in ranking. >Just my thoughts on the matter. Remember that your Education score is the score you have _when_the_character_starts_play_. That means that if you've got any post-secondary (e.g., university) education, you likely got it during one or more of the terms you roll up. And it should be noted that officers that go to OCS are required to get college degree if they don't already have them. That being said, I don't know why an OCS graduate would have more education than a military academy or OCS graduate, except maybe to reflect the fact that such a character would probably be a quick learner, which would be why he was chosen for OCS in the first place. This might also explain why a military academy character has a higher minimum education than an ROTC character (the alternative interpretation being that regular colleges aren't on the whole as good as the service academies, which I would be suspicious of, but don't know for sure :). Scott Orr ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1998 #26 ************************************