twilight2000-digest Monday, February 8 1999 Volume 1999 : Number 010 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: BTR-T Re: AA guns on tanks? Re: Re: BTR-T Re: China and Japan. Re: [none] [none] Re: Re: AA guns on tanks? Y2K in T2K (?) Re: [none] FAQ? (Testing the Water) Cybernetics? Re: Re: Y2K in T2K (?) Re: Topics and TW2K Re: Y2K in T2K (?) Re: Y2K in T2K (?) Re: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 22:09:15 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: Re: BTR-T Can "ALLWAYS" use new toys :-) - -----Original Message----- From: Albert Behnke To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM Date: Friday, February 05, 1999 7:18 PM Subject: BTR-T >I was doing some reading and came across a Russian vehicle called the >BTR-T. I don't remember seeing this discussed on the list, so I figured >I'd bring it up. > >It is a supposedly new vehicle that is designed as an engineer assault >vehicle. It was developed as a result of lessons learned in Chechnya (the >need for more heavily armored APCs). > >A quick description of the BTR-T. It is a T-55 hull with the turret >removed. The turret is replaced by a small one man turret (similar to the >BMP-2, if I remember correctly) with a 30mm cannon. The crew was 3 plus 5 >dismounts. > >I don't have the magazine with me, but can get it monday if anyone would >like more specific details. > >I remember some more details about it, so if you have a specific question >ask. I plan on putting it on my website eventually. > > > Al > http://www.gamepla.net/t2kbem/ > >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line >'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 22:14:33 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: Re: AA guns on tanks? If a picture exists then make it up? Like the stuff at; http://pages.prodigy.net/loonz857/t2k/t2k.htm Like I said before, we can always use new toys. Loonz - -----Original Message----- From: Brandon Cope To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM Date: Saturday, February 06, 1999 11:19 AM Subject: AA guns on tanks? >I'm sure this has been brought up before (but, as I'm new to the >list)... > >Several months ago a TV show on armored vehicles included shots from an >arms show. One of the AFV's was a T-72 (?) with a lengthened turret, >which had a forward firing, independantly elevating 20mm (?) cannon on >each side of the rear of the turret. Each cannon was capable of high >(AA) elevation, but I doubt if such a system would be accurate enough to >engage a helicopter, much less a ground attack plane. Obviously, it >could also be used against ground targets. > >Does anyone have any more information on this odd tank? If it wasn't a >dead-end design, I doubt that many were built (or standard tanks >refitted). > >a generous and sadistic GM, > >Brandon Cope > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line >'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 20:12:42 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Cook Subject: Re: I like it, because Russia would probably lose ground fairly rapidly, and without the forces to pull a conventional Stalingrad, they'd be forced to use tactical nukes to turn the tide. Now the country that no one, including me has mentioned up until now is Japan. With their economy in shambles, they need something to prop it back up. They're probably willing to try just about anything. Actually, I read last week that they were issuing free vouchers to some of their citizens in a desperate effort to prop up consumer spending. Anyways, what if they were to join forces with China? Japan has the technology and still has a lot of economic clout. China has the resources and manpower. Now I know all about the scars that China still bears from the Second World War at the hands of the Japanese, but business is business. Together, they could take on Russia, and Siberia is too handsome a target to ignore. It would take several years to build up and update China's forces, and the partnership would be in secret of course, since Japan would technically be violating it's own constitution, but it is a fairly realistic threat. They would probably hope for a fairly limited conflict, perhaps try something political to isolate Russia globally, or perhaps try to divide Russia internally, in hopes of avoiding the use of nukes. At any rate, China has nukes of her own, so Russia would have to beware of that too. I wouldn't be surprised if Japan developed her own too, just in case. (yes, I know all about the scars of Hiroshima, but if they kept them secret from their public, then that wouldn't matter). It might not even be the japanese gov't that instigates this. This is right out of Tom Clancy's Debt of Honor, but the power of the major Japanese Corporations makes them a logical threat as well. For this all to work, they'd have to reduce American influence in the Pacific, but if that were successful, they'd have free reign, until Russia brought nukes into the fray. I'm sure there's political problems that I've missed with this scenario, but I'm just saying it's not completely unfeasible. Comments? - ---Loonz wrote: > > A scenario should thought with Russia defending it's self. Everybody hates them, and their too weak to instigate a conflict. > Perhaps a conflagration due too a terrorist attack or some thing? > Thought? > > Loonz >
A scenario should thought with Russia defending it's self. Everybody hates them, and their too weak to instigate a conflict. Perhaps a conflagration due too a terrorist attack or some thing? Thought? Loonz _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 23:19:58 -0500 (EST) From: Albert Behnke Subject: Re: BTR-T I'll work on it and will send a message to the list when I've posted it. I'll also put a similar concept vehicle up (based on the M1 Abrams hull). Al Behnke www.gamepla.net/t2kbem/ On Sun, 7 Feb 1999, Loonz wrote: > Can "ALLWAYS" use new toys :-) > *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 23:20:12 EST From: Grimace997@aol.com Subject: Re: China and Japan. In a message dated 99-02-07 23:13:35 EST, you write: << Anyways, what if they were to join forces with China? Japan has the technology and still has a lot of economic clout. China has the resources and manpower. Now I know all about the scars that China still bears from the Second World War at the hands of the Japanese, but business is business. Together, they could take on Russia, and Siberia is too handsome a target to ignore. It would take several years to build up and update China's forces, and the partnership would be in secret of course, since Japan would technically be violating it's own constitution, but it is a fairly realistic threat. >> I can't even begin to envision Japan and China fighting side by side. Their conflicts have existed for a very long time, and I can't see them setting it all aside just so that Japan could "stabilize" it's economy. I more realistic approach would be that Japan starts to rebuild its military, wanting to regain territory to help expand its resources and provide more living space for its inhabitants. This would put them back into contention with China, though, and that is kind of away from the topic of either country going to war with Russia. Just my opinions. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 07 Feb 1999 21:41:25 -0700 From: Rogue09 Subject: Re: Loonz wrote: > > I link every site that has "ANY" T2K content at all. and Tantalus is > at the bottom of every page. I update this page atleast weekly. > Also note, the page may move in a month or two so watch this list and > webrpg for details. > > http://pages.prodigy.net/loonz857/t2k/t2k.htm > > Loonz I thought I should mention this, I know Saul Basgin who runs a VERY good site for Twilgiht:2000; the site will be expiring this year-anyone who wants to take over the reigns of responsibility might want to contact him...As for my site-I'm still learning... T.R. (wapahani) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 23:41:33 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: [none] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BE52F3.65311A80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 99-02-07 23:13:35 EST, you write: << Anyways, what if they were to join forces with China? Japan has the technology and still has a lot of economic clout. China has the resources and manpower. Now I know all about the scars that China still bears from the Second World War at the hands of the Japanese, but business is business. Together, they could take on Russia, and Siberia is too handsome a target to ignore. It would take several years to build up and update China's forces, and the partnership would be in secret of course, since Japan would technically be violating it's own constitution, but it is a fairly realistic threat. >> I can't even begin to envision Japan and China fighting side by side. = Their conflicts have existed for a very long time, and I can't see them = setting it all aside just so that Japan could "stabilize" it's economy. I more = realistic approach would be that Japan starts to rebuild its military, wanting to = regain territory to help expand its resources and provide more living space for = its inhabitants. This would put them back into contention with China, = though, and that is kind of away from the topic of either country going to war with Russia. =20 Just my opinions. I also can't imagine Japan going in with China,=20 During one all nighter we came up with a nuclear accident in North = Korea, followed by a series of rapid assassinations of the leadership. = This eventually leads to a reunion of Korea, which had the Japanese ear = already (coincidence?). The Nippon-Korean group was shielded by treaty of a US treaty. Some how = the Sino-Russian war spilled into Korea and that was an excuse too grab = land by the Koreans with Japanese backing. Loose but could be tooled? Loonz - ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BE52F3.65311A80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a message dated 99-02-07 23:13:35 EST, you = write: <<=20 Anyways, what if they were to join forces with China? Japan has=20 the technology and still has a lot of economic clout. China has=20 the resources and manpower. Now I know all about the scars that=20 China still bears from the Second World War at the hands of the=20 Japanese, but business is business. Together, they could take on = Russia,=20 and Siberia is too handsome a target to ignore. It would take = several=20 years to build up and update China's forces, and the partnership = would be in=20 secret of course, since Japan would technically be violating it's own = constitution, but it is a fairly realistic threat. >> I = can't=20 even begin to envision Japan and China fighting side by side. =20 Their conflicts have existed for a very long time, and I can't see = them=20 setting it all aside just so that Japan could "stabilize" = it's=20 economy. I more realistic approach would be that Japan starts = to=20 rebuild its military, wanting to regain territory to help expand its=20 resources and provide more living space for its inhabitants. = This would=20 put them back into contention with China, though, and that is kind of = away=20 from the topic of either country going to war with Russia. = Just=20 my opinions. I also can't imagine Japan going in = with China,=20 During one all nighter we came up with a nuclear = accident in=20 North Korea, followed by a series of rapid assassinations of the=20 leadership. This eventually leads to a reunion of Korea, which had = the=20 Japanese ear already (coincidence?). The Nippon-Korean group was shielded by treaty of a = US=20 treaty. Some how the Sino-Russian war spilled into Korea and that = was an=20 excuse too grab land by the Koreans with Japanese backing. Loose but could be tooled? Loonz - ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BE52F3.65311A80-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 23:58:27 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: [none] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE52F5.C1DE7780 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One more note before I quit posting today; I just returned from a road trip and spoke too developers who where = designing "boxes" for the COHMV or Cab over Humvee. They appear to be = getting fielded so ya might wanna integrate them? http://pages.prodigy.net/loonz857/t2k/m998a4.htm Loonz - ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE52F5.C1DE7780 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One more note before I quit posting=20 today; I just returned from a road trip and = spoke too=20 developers who where designing "boxes" for the COHMV or Cab = over=20 Humvee. They appear to be getting fielded so ya might wanna = integrate=20 them? http://pages.pr= odigy.net/loonz857/t2k/m998a4.htm Loonz - ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE52F5.C1DE7780-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 00:18:28 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: At 08:12 PM 2/7/99 -0800, Michael Cook wrote: > >It might not even be the japanese gov't that instigates this. This is >right out of Tom Clancy's Debt of Honor, but the power of the major >Japanese Corporations makes them a logical threat as well. I think you've got some good ideas, but I'd be very careful about taking stuff from that book--Clancy's stuff about how Japanese politics work is complete and total rubbish. It's true that government is (in many ways) corrupt (or at least it has been, change has been occuring), but the idea that ther are a bunch of corporate heads who get together and decide policy is just laughable: what influence they have with politicians is used to get favorable policies for their companies and nothing beyond that. And the politicians are definitely on top, not mere puppets. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 09:05:03 PST From: "Brandon Cope" Subject: Re: AA guns on tanks? >From: Chris Callahan >> arms show. One of the AFV's was a T-72 (?) with a lengthened turret, >> which had a forward firing, independantly elevating 20mm (?) cannon on >> each side of the rear of the turret. Each cannon was capable of high >> (AA) elevation, > >The only thing I can come up with is a vehicle called the "2S6 Tunguska" >(1996 Jane's Tank Recognition Guide). This is referred to as the >ZSO-30-4 in the T2k v2.2 rulebook. > [vehicle description deleted] No, it was an MBT (and it was a Russian tank -- though it may not have been a Russian modification). The show did picture the vehicle on the move and (I think) showing the light cannons being elevated and depressed. I really wish I had taped the show, or at least taken notes... A generous and sadistic GM, Brandon Cope ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 09:25:50 PST From: "Brandon Cope" Subject: Y2K in T2K (?) I hope this isn't beating a dead horse, but... Given the state of the world in the mid 90's in T2K (especially by 1996 in the 2nd Edition), I doubt if the Y2K problem would have been fixed by 2000 (indeed, if you listen to late-night talk radio now, all current efforts will fall woefully short). Granted, by the standards of the T2K world, having all/most/many of the surviving computers go belly-up on January 1, 2000 just doesn't seem to rank high on a nuked world. In the "official" setting, it would be an annoyance at best. OTOH, assume that no strategic nukes were used in the war, but fixing the Y2K bug gets ignored (or just underfunded). When computers start crashing, there _are_ significant problems across the world. Maybe a few ICBMs (say 10% of those in T2K) get launched by failing computer systems, while the other nukes in the inventory can no longer be fired. You still end up with a world in pretty bad shape (not as bad as the "official" setting). Okay, this is a little far-fetched, but it makes more sense than Germany invading Poland (everybody knows they'd invade Belgium. Then France...). A generous and sadistic GM, Brandon Cope ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 13:12:49 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Cook Subject: Re: I wasn't suggesting that the corporations control the government, rather that their losses from the economic freefall to could severely undermine the government's grip on power and force it to take decisive action, or else that they very possibly have the ability to take action on their own, free from government oversight. Many members of government (especially young radical ones) might welcome military actions, and the younger they are, the more likely they would be to reach an agreement with China. Michael Cook - ---Scott David Orr wrote: > > I think you've got some good ideas, but I'd be very careful about taking > stuff from that book--Clancy's stuff about how Japanese politics work is > complete and total rubbish. It's true that government is (in many ways) > corrupt (or at least it has been, change has been occuring), but the idea > that ther are a bunch of corporate heads who get together and decide policy > is just laughable: what influence they have with politicians is used to > get favorable policies for their companies and nothing beyond that. And > the politicians are definitely on top, not mere puppets. > > Scott Orr > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line > 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 16:57:26 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: [none] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE5384.1ADC8280 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If someone said a weapon accepted "standard mil spec AR style magazine", = would they be speaking of a M-16 or nato mag? Thanx Loonz - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE5384.1ADC8280 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If someone said a weapon accepted = "standard mil=20 spec AR style magazine", would they be speaking of a M-16 or = nato=20 mag? Thanx Loonz - ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01BE5384.1ADC8280-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 14:44:35 -0800 From: Snake Eyes Subject: FAQ? (Testing the Water) Assume I have about 28 megs of webspace to fill and lots of time on my hands. Further assume I want to post a comprehensive T2K FAQ. What kinds of questions, answers and other stuff would you as a player (or referee) want to see there? House Rules? Rule Clarifications? Timeline? Development History & Related Products? Weapons Conversion Formulae? Product List (with summaries & reviews)? Campaign Resources? Books & Movies? Challenge Magazine & Eternal Soldier Archive? Ownership Status & Copyright Info? I realize that much of this info is covered elsewhere on the web, so this endeavor may result in some redundancy. I don't want to step on any toes; I'll give credit to contributors and elsewhere it is due. Is there any interest in this kind of central repository of T2K-related info, or would I be wasting my time? I'll still probably do it for my own benefit, but I'd like some input before I take the plunge. I'm looking at the Shadowrun FAQ < http://shadowrun.html.com/shadowfaq/Shad2FAQ.html > and "One Man's Views of 2300 AD" < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Zone/9331/index.html > as pretty well-formated examples of what I'm aiming to accomplish. My ISP also allows chat rooms & message boards, if there is any desire for yet another venue of communication. Thanks in advance for your support and criticism. You can respond (or flame me) on the list, or personally at < snake.eyes@worldnet.att.net >. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 14:45:54 -0800 From: Snake Eyes Subject: Cybernetics? Has anyone else used the GDW House System’s cyber rules (from _Fire, Fusion & Steel_) in a Twilight-type campaign? I know it veers off from reality pretty rapidly, but I found that with tweaks to the background and timeline, it adds a whole new element to the post-apocalypse survival theme. Characters have to scrounge for their own spare parts in addition to food & ammo. Implants can become more of a burden then they are worth as you screw with the PC’s charisma, health, and sanity. Any thoughts? *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 16:05:48 -0700 From: Rogue09 Subject: Re: Loonz wrote: > > If someone said a weapon accepted "standard mil spec AR style > magazine", would they be speaking of a M-16 or nato mag? > Thanx > Loonz UGH...this could go many ways...technically most of our NATO allies are supposed to use STANAG magazines (or in other words our 30 round M-16 mags)... But some countries (Germany) have decided not to go that route...so I would have to know which weapon your refering to... T.R. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 18:02:33 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Y2K in T2K (?) At 09:25 AM 2/8/99 PST, Brandon Cope wrote: >Okay, this is a little far-fetched, but it makes more sense than Germany >invading Poland (everybody knows they'd invade Belgium. Then France...). > Hey, remember that not only did they invade Poland both times they invaded Belgium, but the second time they invaded Poland first. :) Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 18:14:30 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: Re: Olympic arms OA-98 pistol - -----Original Message----- From: Rogue09 To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM Date: Monday, February 08, 1999 6:08 PM Subject: Re: >Loonz wrote: >> >> If someone said a weapon accepted "standard mil spec AR style >> magazine", would they be speaking of a M-16 or nato mag? >> Thanx >> Loonz > >UGH...this could go many ways...technically most of our NATO allies are >supposed to use STANAG magazines (or in other words our 30 round M-16 >mags)... But some countries (Germany) have decided not to go that >route...so I would have to know which weapon your refering to... > >T.R. >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line >'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 16:34:18 -0500 From: "Chuck Mandus" Subject: Topics and TW2K > How every intresting topic in this list change to something not so > intresting topic? > As I know this list topic is twilight 2000 rolegame, but real topics are > something else. > There have been some intresting mails which are not relative for TW2000. > But, as example, are these > writings really important or relative for TW2000 rolegaming? Well, I think there is a lot of relevance to topics that are not related to TW2K or just touch the game barely. TW2K is almost a unique game that takes place in the world that we know, or could have been, not in some distant, magical past nor the distant SF future. It is part of the world as we know it and experienced it from say the 1970's to now. Being born in 1966 and experiencing such a world, I think that's why I'm attracted to the game. TW2K is one of the best RPG's systems around IMHO. It could be used in a Dark Conspiracy or Merc: 2000 world in which, in my opinion, we are headed to. I've been playing since 1984 or so. Sure, it's not perfect, I need to add and modify some skills to round it out but the gaming system is a lot better than the games from TSR. You could take the system, do a spy game, to a mercenary type game, a police detective game, just about anything. When I ran my games, I had the characters live their lives with jobs, families, hobbies, etc. all in the while preparing for WWIII which I never let them know when it will occur. I'd just go on with general happenings as things got worse so I'd keep them thinking that the next day, it will happen to keep them on their toes until I lowered the boom on them. I think topics ranging from political developments day from the death of King Hussein to the state of our military to UFO's, Y2K, the space race, firearms, history, alternate history, and so on are relevant to the game in which they could provide good fodder for the refs in their games. Topics here, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I might just skim over a few messages while I archive other ones. TW2K is also unique where we could hold various discussions like a virtual "think tank" on various world events, military, and other, sometimes esoteric topics of general interests to where any of us could use as plots or subplots. I checked various other RPG webrings to the point where they are so dry that the big topic is "what die should I roll" or "what do the rules say." TW2K is a vibrant game and I think this helps keep it alive. I for example use ham radio as part of my plots, being that I ran a game based on civilian survivalists, based on my ham radio experience. Just my thoughts. Chuck DE KA3WRW (I'm a ham radio operator.) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 16:42:09 -0500 From: "Chuck Mandus" Subject: Re: Y2K in T2K (?) > OTOH, assume that no strategic nukes were used in the war, but fixing > the Y2K bug gets ignored (or just underfunded). When computers start > crashing, there _are_ significant problems across the world. Maybe a few > ICBMs (say 10% of those in T2K) get launched by failing computer > systems, while the other nukes in the inventory can no longer be fired. > You still end up with a world in pretty bad shape (not as bad as the > "official" setting). > > Okay, this is a little far-fetched, but it makes more sense than Germany > invading Poland (everybody knows they'd invade Belgium. Then France...). Sounds as good of a scenario as any. Accidental launch of a nuclear missile(s) have been a fear for a long time. Ever read the book (1962) or see the movie "Fail-safe" (1964) where a flock of bombers got permission to go into the USSR due to a part in the computer failing? The bombers enter Soviet airspace and our President gets the Soviets online so they can both work together to stop the bombers. Their efforts fail and the succeed in destroying Moscow so in return, we had to blow up New York City. Y2K would be a good reason for a plot. I have mentioned this before but in 1974, there was a UFO reported over the Minuteman missile fields in North Dakota and this was supposedly caused the computer to countdown to the launch of these missiles only to be stopped in the last few minutes remaining. A similar case happened in the USSR in 1982. Another movie I remember seeing, I can't remember the title, it was made in 1977 where Charles Durning was President where he faced a problem of a renegade group of servicemen, terrorists, whatever, took over a missile silo and had 10 missiles under their control and would launch unless their demands were met. I personally think Y2K is way overblown. It still would make a good scenario though, I could still be wrong about it. Chuck DE KA3WRW *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 16:24:23 -0800 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Y2K in T2K (?) Y2K == quick way for "consultants" to make $$$. Guess the media needs something to take the place of nuclear holocaust with the absence of the cold war, and it works out well for those entrepreneurs insuring every computer, cell phone, microwave, and vibrator is y2k compliant so on Jan 1, 2000 the computers don't crash and the force-feedback joysticks don't go mad and strangle their users. Brandon Cope wrote: > I hope this isn't beating a dead horse, but... > > Given the state of the world in the mid 90's in T2K (especially by 1996 > in the 2nd Edition), I doubt if the Y2K problem would have been fixed by > 2000 (indeed, if you listen to late-night talk radio now, all current > efforts will fall woefully short). Granted, by the standards of the T2K > world, having all/most/many of the surviving computers go belly-up on > January 1, 2000 just doesn't seem to rank high on a nuked world. In the > "official" setting, it would be an annoyance at best. > > OTOH, assume that no strategic nukes were used in the war, but fixing > the Y2K bug gets ignored (or just underfunded). When computers start > crashing, there _are_ significant problems across the world. Maybe a few > ICBMs (say 10% of those in T2K) get launched by failing computer > systems, while the other nukes in the inventory can no longer be fired. > You still end up with a world in pretty bad shape (not as bad as the > "official" setting). The idea of nukes getting fired off because of a date change is ludicrous. Its about as serious as saying "the nukes will think its 1900 and they didn't exist in 1900 so they will blow themselves up." Maybe a good plot for a Saturday morning episode of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (or whatever is on now), but otherwise worth only a chuckle. > > Okay, this is a little far-fetched, but it makes more sense than Germany > invading Poland (everybody knows they'd invade Belgium. Then France...). > Yes, I rank it about as likely as a giant green lizard walking out of the Pacific and smashing downtown Tokyo. > > A generous and sadistic GM, > > Brandon Cope > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com I apologize for my sarcastic tone, it comes from reading so many things about y2k (being involved with computers I'm fed up with y2k) that are as absurd as my insurance company's insistence that my car was totaled and should be "scrapped" (auctioned off in reality of course) when the rear passenger door got pounded in (leaving the window stuck fully up); the position of the window affected the operation of the engine as much as the date is likely to make your flashlights go dim, your electric toothbrush go nuts and rip out your teeth, your floor waxer stop waxing, your toaster unable to toast bread, your can opener unable to open cans or either stop a nuclear warhead from being used as a weapon or make it explode because it suddenly realizes there is something wrong because its 1900... I presume... *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 18:44:28 -0700 From: Rogue09 Subject: Re: Loonz wrote: > > Olympic arms OA-98 pistol > Right, this one I've seen... It takes the standard M-16 20 or 30 round box magazines.... T.R. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1999 #10 ************************************