twilight2000-digest Thursday, December 9 1999 Volume 1999 : Number 075 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: scorpion light tank. Re: Injecting some realism into T2K RE: Injecting some realism into T2K Re: Injecting some realism into T2K Re: Injecting some realism into T2K Re: scorpion light tank. Re: Fw: Prisoners Re: KvP-121 big ass hovercraft. Re: Injecting some realism into T2K Re: Injecting some realism into T2K Re: Fw: Prisoners Re: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. RE: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. Re: Injecting some realism into T2K RE: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. scorpion light tank Re: scorpion light tank. Re: scorpion light tank. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:49:10 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. -----Original Message----- From: Fugitivus To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com Date: Thursday, 9 December 1999 6:20 Subject: scorpion light tank. my gm has given us a scorpion light tank, but we have no stats for it. i was thinking of offering the stats for the m2 bradley as a subsitute. are they close enough do you guys think? regards aaron Couldn't be more different mate, I think the M2 Bradley weighs roughly twice as much and has far better armour. What system are you using and someone on the list is sure to have the stats. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:59:13 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K >Ever thought of just making it harder to get into >those areas you mentioned?. > >Think about it in real life. Getting into special forces >is like going through hell and back. Even then there is >no guarantee that your going to be accepted if you do >meet the criteria. > >If you made the criteria harder, maybe even including >a roll if the stat pre requisites are met. Also make sure >that the PC had to have military background first. Officers >require a higher roll to get in, or even a requirement for >leadership to be at a certain level. > >that's my 2 cents on the matter anyway. > >Ballistix Good point and it was in fact one of the first things I tried. The problem is if one guy gets a good roll for acceptance all the other guys look at his capable PC and think "I'm infantry and I don't get Observation?" I just don't think the PC generation reflects "The School of Hard Knocks" that war is, bad soldiers die quicker so logically the PCs must be good soldiers to live until 2000. I'm running a PbEM for 13 players, 11 of whom are infantry privates. The thing that makes it different is that the PCs are engaged in normal soldier type things, they worry about how good their new officer is because one bad order and they're all dead. With a party of Majors you can't even get an order. The PCs are concerned with food and sleep, not how cool their vehicles are etc. I recommend trying it out, don't dump your old PC's, just roll up a squad with an LT, sergeant and the rest privates but give them decent skills to reflect that they've been involved in the most intense learning experience ever endured. If you don't like it write it off to experience. Jims metric 2c *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 01:03:41 -0700 From: "Tom Opgenorth" Subject: RE: Injecting some realism into T2K I think the basic idea is that this is a game, so if a guy wants to play a special forces type, let him. As well, PC's are supposed to represent better-than-average people (IMHO), so it shouldn't be to much of a problem for a character to make it into special forces. Personally, I never really cared how many of my characters were special forces. I'd just scale up the scenarios to match their abilities. I've know some GM's to place limits on how many special forces types they will allow, and I guess it kind of make sense. After several years of casualties, guys like that are going to be pretty scarce. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com [mailto:owner-twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Ballistix Sent: November 30, 1999 11:55 AM To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K Importance: Low Ever thought of just making it harder to get into those areas you mentioned?. Think about it in real life. Getting into special forces is like going through hell and back. Even then there is no guarantee that your going to be accepted if you do meet the criteria. If you made the criteria harder, maybe even including a roll if the stat pre requisites are met. Also make sure that the PC had to have military background first. Officers require a higher roll to get in, or even a requirement for leadership to be at a certain level. that's my 2 cents on the matter anyway. Ballistix *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 03:46:37 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K At 06:59 PM 12/9/99 +1100, Jim & Peta Lawrie wrote: > > > Good point and it was in fact one of the first things I tried. The >problem is if one guy gets a good roll for acceptance all the other guys >look at his capable PC and think "I'm infantry and I don't get Observation?" >I just don't think the PC generation reflects "The School of Hard Knocks" >that war is, bad soldiers die quicker so logically the PCs must be good >soldiers to live until 2000. The 2nd edition rules don't produce realistic skills even for someone who hasn't been through a war. If you want realistic skill levels, use the 1st edition (or another system entirely, like GURPS)--mind you, it still isn't automatic that character will have realistic skills (the players have to take the effort to think through what skills a person would have), but it's at least possible. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 19:51:31 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K >The 2nd edition rules don't produce realistic skills even for someone who >hasn't been through a war. If you want realistic skill levels, use the 1st >edition (or another system entirely, like GURPS)--mind you, it still isn't >automatic that character will have realistic skills (the players have to >take the effort to think through what skills a person would have), but it's >at least possible. > >Scott Orr Right, I use Cyberpunk 2020. The combat is easier and far more lethal, a man with a 9mm pistol is to be feared and rightly so. More lethal combat encourages careful roleplaying, (evil snicker) Jim *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 03:54:36 -0500 From: "Fugitivus" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. we are using version 2.2. it is cool that we are getting the stuff but without any stats makes it hard. i have only seen pics of the scorpion and never any real info on it. thanks for your help aaron > Couldn't be more different mate, I think the M2 Bradley weighs roughly > twice as much and has far better armour. What system are you using and > someone on the list is sure to have the stats. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 01:23:33 -0800 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Fw: Prisoners Scott David Orr wrote: > At 12:33 AM 12/9/99 +1100, Jim & Peta Lawrie wrote: > > > >> Serving troops develop a grudging respect for the guy in the other > >>uniform and often have more in common with each other than they do between > >>even themselves and their own officers. Note that I don't include a certain > >>amount of physical beating, I'm talking murder and torture. Historically > >>even the Waffen SS and the Soviets took each other prisoner. > > Actually, my understanding was that, no, the Soviets wouldn't take SS > troops prisoner. > Yeh very few came back, dont remember the exact figures *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 01:26:27 -0800 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: KvP-121 big ass hovercraft. Fugitivus wrote: > thanks for the link. and to all who replied. your time is appreciated. > > aaron > > > Actually, Russia has the Zubr class hovercraft which is much > > larger than the Aist or Lebed, and which it is currently > > marketing. It can carry 3 full size MBTs or 8 BMPs. > > > > Here's a link: > > > > http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/zubr/index.html > > > > By the way if anyone knows of any web info on other hovercraft, > > please let us all know, > > > > Josh > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. All in one place. > > Yahoo! Shopping: http://shopping.yahoo.com > > > *************************************************************************** > > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to > majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com > > with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. > > > > Be warned. I used that hovercraft in my first campaign, the PCs saw it and it was like Christmas; they would have done anything to get it. Well they couldn't so they blew a big hole in it after about 5 seconds and it caught fire and everyone inside it died. It was rather disappointing, the whole encounter took no more than 3 minutes. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 01:32:19 -0800 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K Tom Opgenorth wrote: > I think the basic idea is that this is a game, so if a guy wants to play a > special forces type, let him. As well, PC's are supposed to represent > better-than-average people (IMHO), so it shouldn't be to much of a problem > for a character to make it into special forces. > > Personally, I never really cared how many of my characters were special > forces. I'd just scale up the scenarios to match their abilities. I've > know some GM's to place limits on how many special forces types they will > allow, and I guess it kind of make sense. After several years of > casualties, guys like that are going to be pretty scarce. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com > [mailto:owner-twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Ballistix > Sent: November 30, 1999 11:55 AM > To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com > Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K > Importance: Low > > Ever thought of just making it harder to get into > those areas you mentioned?. > > Think about it in real life. Getting into special forces > is like going through hell and back. Even then there is > no guarantee that your going to be accepted if you do > meet the criteria. > > If you made the criteria harder, maybe even including > a roll if the stat pre requisites are met. Also make sure > that the PC had to have military background first. Officers > require a higher roll to get in, or even a requirement for > leadership to be at a certain level. > > that's my 2 cents on the matter anyway. > > Ballistix > I think it really depends on the PCs. Only in my last campaign did the PCs prefer to be more mundane (I had to throw in some special forces NPCs to keep them alive, some of them were really pathetic). *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 04:03:12 +0800 From: "Ballistix" Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K I have to admit you have a good arguement there. Having spent time as an infantry soldier, I know there are a lot of skills that you get that aren't included. The skill listing you gave would then be ok. However you have to remember that not all armies are the same and then you would have to modify it somewhat. For example, the Australian army teaches all of it's soldiers to use all of it's infantry deployable weapons. This would be different to the way the US taught it's soldiers, relying on specialists to operate some if it's infantry deployable weapons. (ie grenadiers etc....also this may have changed since I last heard) I think you suggested that they get Hvy Wpns?....Soldiers don't necessarily get this kind of skill unless they do specialilst training. Speaking of which you may want to include a specialist option. Something along the likes of Pioneer - Demolitions, Small Craft Ops, Minor Construction skills, Minelaying Mine clearing skills. Motars & DFSW - Heavy Weapons, FO, Other indirect fire skills, some radio communication skills. Signals - Radio Communication Skills, cryptography Combat Medic - Basic Medical stuff Oh and the golden rule.....cheat As GM you can cheat :) Ballistix *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 09:08:25 PST From: "matthew henley" Subject: Re: Fw: Prisoners > >This may be true as a generalization, but I'd be careful with it: for >example, one group of U.S. units notorious for shooting prisoners was the >Ranger battalions operating on the Western Front (it had something to do >with revenge for something or other). I think that the point that is being made hear is that if a spicefic unit or army has a reputaton for turtring and exucuting prisners then thay will be very unlikley to receve quter from other units. Once you have a reputaton for this sort of thing you would have to expect to recive tretmant in kind from other units. >Scott Orr >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com >with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 09:48:44 PST From: "Brandon Cope" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. >From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" > my gm has given us a scorpion light tank, but we have no stats for it. i >was thinking of offering the stats for the m2 bradley as a subsitute. are >they close enough do you guys think? The LAV-75 is much closer (sort of). Personally, the GM shouldn't give you a vehicle he doesn't have stats for. For what it's worth, the Scorpion is a British 3-man [commander/loader, driver, gunner) light tank used for recce; it uses a 75mm cannon as it's main weapon (a virtually identicle vehicle, the Striker, has a 30mm cannon instead). The frontal armor is supposed to be proof against 20mm AP rounds, the sides HMG AP (14.5mm probably) rounds (or maybe it's just artillery shell splinters). 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@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 14:37:52 -0500 From: Rob Beck Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. At 09:48 am 12/9/99 PST, you wrote: >The LAV-75 is much closer (sort of). Personally, the GM shouldn't give you a >vehicle he doesn't have stats for. > >For what it's worth, the Scorpion is a British 3-man [commander/loader, >driver, gunner) light tank used for recce; it uses a 75mm cannon as it's >main weapon (a virtually identicle vehicle, the Striker, has a 30mm cannon >instead). The frontal armor is supposed to be proof against 20mm AP rounds, >the sides HMG AP (14.5mm probably) rounds (or maybe it's just artillery >shell splinters). > >A generous and sadistic GM, > >Brandon Cope Brandon's right with the crew, but the armament is a 76mm L5 Gun and a 7.62mm L43 CMG. The armor is roughly equivalent in quality to the French AMX-13, likely as tough as Brandon has said it is. And, just out of curiousity, why did he give you a vehicle like that? Rob. It might look like I'm doing nothing, but at the cellular level, I'm really quite busy. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 19:43:53 -0000 From: "Roger Stenning" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. Hi folks. Time to delurk for a moment... > For what it's worth, the Scorpion is a British 3-man [commander/loader, > driver, gunner) light tank used for recce; it uses a 75mm cannon as it's > main weapon (a virtually identicle vehicle, the Striker, has a 30mm cannon > instead). The frontal armor is supposed to be proof against 20mm AP rounds, > the sides HMG AP (14.5mm probably) rounds (or maybe it's just artillery > shell splinters). > > A generous and sadistic GM, > > Brandon Cope Scorpion comes in two flavours, the Scorpion CVR(T), 76mm main gun, Co-Ax 7.62mm GPMG as well, and the Scimitar LAFV (?), which replaces the 76mm gun with a 30mm rapid-fire Raden cannon. The Scorpion was used mostly by armoured cavalry units in the Light recon role, The Scimitar was used mostly by (IIRC) RAF Regiment air field defence troops, in the ground point defence role. Crewing on both is Driver, Loader/gunner, Commander/Gunner, and both versions were innovative enough to provide full CBW protection with positive pressure filtered air venting when sealed up. Nothing of that size, at that time, had that capability before. Both are pretty much out of service, now, although IIRC, there's still a few Scorps in service in the Army. All Scimitars in RAFR use were withdrawn, when the RAFR lost their armour squadrons. I know nothing about a 'striker' version, though. Hope this helps. Best regards, Roger Stenning Webmaster, the Impossible Scenarios Group www.the-isg.co.uk *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:20:19 -0700 From: "Tom Opgenorth" Subject: RE: scorpion light tank. Doesn't the NATO Vehicle Guide has stats for both the Scorpion and the Scimitar? I lost the original thread to this, but I could look it up when I get home if the original poster still interested. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com > [mailto:owner-twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Roger > Stenning > Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 12:44 > To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com > Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. > Importance: Low > > > Hi folks. Time to delurk for a moment... > > > For what it's worth, the Scorpion is a British 3-man > [commander/loader, > > driver, gunner) light tank used for recce; it uses a 75mm > cannon as it's > > main weapon (a virtually identicle vehicle, the Striker, > has a 30mm cannon > > instead). The frontal armor is supposed to be proof against 20mm AP > rounds, > > the sides HMG AP (14.5mm probably) rounds (or maybe it's > just artillery > > shell splinters). > > > > A generous and sadistic GM, > > > > Brandon Cope > > Scorpion comes in two flavours, the Scorpion CVR(T), 76mm > main gun, Co-Ax > 7.62mm GPMG as well, and the Scimitar LAFV (?), which > replaces the 76mm gun > with a 30mm rapid-fire Raden cannon. > > The Scorpion was used mostly by armoured cavalry units in the > Light recon > role, > The Scimitar was used mostly by (IIRC) RAF Regiment air field defence > troops, in the ground point defence role. > > Crewing on both is Driver, Loader/gunner, Commander/Gunner, and both > versions were innovative enough to provide full CBW > protection with positive > pressure filtered air venting when sealed up. Nothing of that > size, at that > time, had that capability before. > > Both are pretty much out of service, now, although IIRC, > there's still a few > Scorps in service in the Army. All Scimitars in RAFR use were > withdrawn, > when the RAFR lost their armour squadrons. > > I know nothing about a 'striker' version, though. > > Hope this helps. > > Best regards, > > Roger Stenning > Webmaster, > the Impossible Scenarios Group > www.the-isg.co.uk > > ************************************************************** > ************* > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to > majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com > with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. > *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 14:40:41 PST From: "Brandon Cope" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. >From: "Roger Stenning" > >Hi folks. Time to delurk for a moment... > >Scorpion comes in two flavours, the Scorpion CVR(T), 76mm main gun, Co-Ax >7.62mm GPMG as well, and the Scimitar LAFV (?), which replaces the 76mm gun >with a 30mm rapid-fire Raden cannon. I think there were some versions armed with a 90mm low-velocity gun. >Crewing on both is Driver, Loader/gunner, Commander/Gunner, and both >versions were innovative enough to provide full CBW protection with >positive >pressure filtered air venting when sealed up. Nothing of that size, at that >time, had that capability before. Hmmm, I thought the commander acted as loader for the main gun? > >I know nothing about a 'striker' version, though. I was thinking of the Scimitar. The Striker is a much more modified version (based on the Samson (?), the APC variant of the Scorpion). It has no turret, and the supertructure has been built up to hold a retractable launcher with 4 Swingfire ATGM launchers. 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@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 14:42:38 PST From: "Brandon Cope" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. >From: Rob Beck > >Brandon's right with the crew, but the armament is a 76mm L5 Gun and a >7.62mm L43 CMG. The armor is roughly equivalent in quality to the French >AMX-13, likely as tough as Brandon has said it is. And, just out of >curiousity, why did he give you a vehicle like that? I forgot about the Brits using 76mm guns ... Same gun as used on the Saladin armored car, wasn't it? 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@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 09:59:57 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K - -----Original Message----- From: Ballistix To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com Date: Friday, 10 December 1999 12:03 Subject: Re: Injecting some realism into T2K >I have to admit you have a good arguement there. Having spent time >as an infantry soldier, I know there are a lot of skills that you get that >aren't included. The skill listing you gave would then be ok. However >you have to remember that not all armies are the same and then you >would have to modify it somewhat. For example, the Australian army >teaches all of it's soldiers to use all of it's infantry deployable weapons. You got me there, I'm Australian. >This would be different to the way the US taught it's soldiers, relying >on specialists to operate some if it's infantry deployable weapons. >(ie grenadiers etc....also this may have changed since I last heard) > >I think you suggested that they get Hvy Wpns?....Soldiers don't necessarily >get this kind of skill unless they do specialilst training. I think there is an argument for the troops picking up skill in grenade launchers and rocket launchers as time goes on as the availability of artillery decreases. I think the lads would start carrying their own bunkerbusters and if you can't use the gear in T2K your a liability. Speaking of >which >you may want to include a specialist option. Something along the likes of >Ballistix I think these are all pretty well covered in the PC generation rules, in fact the game is Very good for specialists. Note that I'm not recommending Munchkinism here, I'm advocating that players experience army life. In my campaigns elites such as Rangers are seen as "guys who think they're better" and are the favourite target for bar fights (go for 2-1 odds) and spec for are never seen at all. I'm nearing completion for my website that'll have the rules for the cuberpunk conversion for t2k, it includes a lot of specialist skills such as Biological Weapons, Chemical Weapons, Communications, etc. Jim. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:56:49 +1300 From: "Gray, Raymond" Subject: RE: scorpion light tank. From memory there is a whole slew of variants based on the Scorpion chassis. Incl a missle system based variant which I believe is the aforementioned striker. The NZ Army had a bunch (around 16 I think) of scorpions that they bought in the early eighties, they were all obsolete and decomissioned in the early nineties, not a very long life span when compared to the M113 which still has welded over bullet holes from H-cal mgun fire in Vietnam. Ray - -----Original Message----- From: Brandon Cope [mailto:copeab@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, 10 December 1999 11:43 To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. >From: Rob Beck > >Brandon's right with the crew, but the armament is a 76mm L5 Gun and a >7.62mm L43 CMG. The armor is roughly equivalent in quality to the French >AMX-13, likely as tough as Brandon has said it is. And, just out of >curiousity, why did he give you a vehicle like that? I forgot about the Brits using 76mm guns ... Same gun as used on the Saladin armored car, wasn't it? 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@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 23:56:56 -0000 From: "Mark OIiver" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. - -----Original Message----- From: Roger Stenning <<< Scorpion comes in two flavours, the Scorpion CVR(T), 76mm main gun, Co-Ax 7.62mm GPMG as well, and the Scimitar LAFV (?), which replaces the 76mm gun with a 30mm rapid-fire Raden cannon. >>> Nice to see someone else confirm the vehicles names. <<< I know nothing about a 'striker' version, though. >>> Thinking back there was a british AFV, which may well have been based upon the Scorpion chasis, that was armed with anti-tank missiles in place of a turret. I don't think it went into service but was definately made. I'm sure it was the reciever of the 'Striker' name. Regards, Mark *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 23:53:44 -0000 From: "Mark OIiver" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. <<< a virtually identicle vehicle, the Striker, has a 30mm cannon instead >>> The twin to the Scorpion is called the Scimitar. As I recall a few examples (maybe even as few as two of each type ?) served in the Falklands and proved to be relatively useful though the boggy terrain posed a few problems. Just my little contribution. Regards, Mark. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 11:40:56 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. . ><<< a virtually identicle vehicle, the Striker, has a 30mm cannon instead >The twin to the Scorpion is called the Scimitar. >As I recall a few examples (maybe even as few as two of each type ?) served >in the Falklands and proved to be relatively useful though the boggy terrain >posed a few problems. >Mark. One of those Falklands Scimitar's has a "Kill" on an Argentine Jet, a skyhawk made a low level attack attack run and the Scimitar was up on a hill and put about three or four 30mm into the jet. Not bad when you consider that the Rarden 30mm cannon mounted on the Scimitar has five round clips. The best thing about the Scorpion/Scimitar is their amazingly low ground pressure, less than a walking man in some situations. They have a good chance of not setting off pressure fuzed anti tank mines, a good thing because the vehicle is so light an anti personnel mine can throw a track easily. Version 1 Stats FV-101 Scorpion Price $70,000 (S/R), RF +20, Armament 76mm gun, 7.62mm MG, Ammo 42x76mm, Tr Move 170/150, Com Move 60/50, Fuel Cap 390 L, Fuel Cons 156 L, Fuel Type G,(D),A, Load 600kg, Veh Weight 7tons, Crew 3, Mnt 12. The armour shouldn't be to hard to work out, try using the BMD. The gun is very similiar to the gun mounted on the BMP-1. Jim. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:05:22 -0500 From: "Fugitivus" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. to tell you the truth i have absolutly no idea. we are playing a small merc outfit, 12 members 3 are pc's he gave me the equipment list and we have a 10ton truck and the scorpion as transport. why he chose it i don't know. some of his scenarios are really good but he is a little clueless with equipment. we didn't have stats for the damn thing. thanks for the stats by the way that was very very helpful. i know that there are some so-120's and 4 t-72 running around so at the moment i have hidden the truck and tank and have no immediate plans to go running around the countryside in a tanks equivalant of a volkswagon. i may use it for recon if i know i can get out. but we would last about a second if we run into anything large. there is a fuel convoy of 3 trucks and a bmp moving up so i may use it and try and ambush them. aaron >And, just out of > curiousity, why did he give you a vehicle like that? *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 20:22:42 -0500 From: "Fugitivus" Subject: scorpion light tank This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01BF4283.25BDADC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable thanks to all who replied. the info has been very useful and i am = sure that i now have lots more info than the gm. that could be a good = thing :) regards aaron - ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01BF4283.25BDADC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable thanks to all who = replied. the=20 info has been very useful and i am sure that i now have lots more info = than the=20 gm. that could be a good thing :) regards aaron - ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01BF4283.25BDADC0-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:24:59 +1100 From: "Jim & Peta Lawrie" Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. > i know that there are some so-120's and 4 t-72 running around so at the >moment i have hidden the truck and tank and have no immediate plans to go >running around the countryside in a tanks equivalant of a volkswagon. i may >use it for recon if i know i can get out. but we would last about a second >if we run into anything large. > there is a fuel convoy of 3 trucks and a bmp moving up so i may use it >and try and ambush them. It would do well against infantry in the support role as long as they don't have RPG's. An RPG will turn it inside out. They excell at local fire support, thats what the Brits used them for in the Falklands and they can go places normal tanks and APC/IFVs can't because of their amazing ground pressure. Places like along creek beds that'll bog anything is just a task roll for the Scorpion, make sure your ref knows that feature of them. We played a RV campaign with a Scorpion and a Sheridan, in street fighting a 'la Oddball their short barrels are a plus too! Jim. (Lover of light tanks) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 18:02:30 -0800 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: scorpion light tank. Jim & Peta Lawrie wrote: > . > > ><<< a virtually identicle vehicle, the Striker, has a 30mm cannon instead > >The twin to the Scorpion is called the Scimitar. > >As I recall a few examples (maybe even as few as two of each type ?) served > >in the Falklands and proved to be relatively useful though the boggy > terrain > >posed a few problems. > >Mark. > > One of those Falklands Scimitar's has a "Kill" on an Argentine Jet, a > skyhawk made a low level attack attack run and the Scimitar was up on a hill > and put about three or four 30mm into the jet. Not bad when you consider > that the Rarden 30mm cannon mounted on the Scimitar has five round clips. > The best thing about the Scorpion/Scimitar is their amazingly low ground > pressure, less than a walking man in some situations. They have a good > chance of not setting off pressure fuzed anti tank mines, a good thing > because the vehicle is so light an anti personnel mine can throw a track > easily. > > Version 1 Stats > FV-101 Scorpion > Price $70,000 (S/R), RF +20, Armament 76mm gun, 7.62mm MG, Ammo 42x76mm, Tr > Move 170/150, Com Move 60/50, Fuel Cap 390 L, Fuel Cons 156 L, Fuel Type > G,(D),A, Load 600kg, Veh Weight 7tons, Crew 3, Mnt 12. > The armour shouldn't be to hard to work out, try using the BMD. The gun > is very similiar to the gun mounted on the BMP-1. > Jim. yah hehe I'm adding it to my vehicle pages right now :) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1999 #75 ************************************