YaATW2KT: The Second Mexican-American War

[RN7]

FYI - an important consideration for V1 versus V2 versions of the game is the implementation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe

V1 has the Cold War continuing - so this treaty never occurs

V2 was published in 1990 and I dont think this treaty was part of it but I may be wrong

V2.2 as published in 1993 - and if it includes that treaty then you would have had a big draw down in vehicle stocks in Europe that would let countries like Mexico have a shot at armored vehicles, SPG's and other things that most likely they wouldnt have in V1

Example - Belgium kept ancient M44 SPG's in their emergency war stocks right up to the end of the Cold War and only finally disposed of them when the Treaty was signed along with M108's that had also been assigned to their war stocks - thus both vehicles are much more likely open to Mexico buying them in V2.2 than in V1

The invasion of the US by Mexico is in both versions - but all the canon material we have for that area (and if I am wrong please point it out) was V1 timing - but the Mexican Sourcebook was written in the V2.2 era - thus there is much more equipment available for a V2.2 game in terms of surplus from Europe versus in a V1 timeline

so the real question as to what the invasion force and the Mexican Army may have been is are we looking at a V1 timeline or a V2

Without going into personal preferences or the positives or negatives of V1, V2 and V2.2, I think stating which version you are referring to when discussing aspects of Twilight 2000 would prevent a lot of confusion. Mixing and matching details from very different timelines just doesn't work.

[Olefin]

Without going into personal preferences or the positives or negatives of V1, V2 and V2.2, I think stating which version you are referring to when discussing aspects of Twilight 2000 would prevent a lot of confusion. Mixing and matching details from very different timelines just doesn't work.

AMEN

[Raellus]

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v2 timelines.

v1.0 is the original, and the one I grew up with. I left the country in 1987 and didn't even know there was a second version until about ten years ago. I can't imagine why anyone whose originally exposure to T2K was with v1.0 would willingly use the v2 timelines.

IMHO, the timeline didn't need revamping. They should have declared it an alternative history game, instead of trying to rehash it around RL events. But, that's just me.

[Olefin]

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v2 timelines.

v1.0 is the original, and the one I grew up with. I left the country in 1987 and didn't even know there was a second version until about ten years ago. I can't imagine why anyone whose originally exposure to T2K was with v1.0 would willingly use the v2 timelines.

IMHO, the timeline didn't need revamping. They should have declared it an alternative history game, instead of trying to rehash it around RL events. But, that's just me.

and again

AMEN

need some kind of meme to go with the AMEN

[The Dark]

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v2 timelines.

v1.0 is the original, and the one I grew up with. I left the country in 1987 and didn't even know there was a second version until about ten years ago. I can't imagine why anyone whose originally exposure to T2K was with v1.0 would willingly use the v2 timelines.

IMHO, the timeline didn't need revamping. They should have declared it an alternative history game, instead of trying to rehash it around RL events. But, that's just me.

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v1 timeline (since my first copy was v2.2).

However, I suspect I'm one of the youngest members of this board, since I'm barely older than v1 and was 10 when v2.2 was released.

[Raellus]

I totally get it, Dark. It's like Star Wars. I love the originally trilogy and can't stand the prequels. My kids, however, love the prequels. It's about what you grew up with. I don't think that I would have rediscovered and reconnected with T2K if it weren't for simple nostalgia. Sometimes, your first love is your most enduring love.

[RN7]

I totally get it, Dark. It's like Star Wars. I love the originally trilogy and can't stand the prequels. My kids, however, love the prequels. It's about what you grew up with. I don't think that I would have rediscovered and reconnected with T2K if it weren't for simple nostalgia. Sometimes, your first love is your most enduring love.

Cant beat the Empire Strikes Back, just the best!

[Draq]

I avoid this issue by completely ignoring the v2 timelines.

v1.0 is the original, and the one I grew up with. I left the country in 1987 and didn't even know there was a second version until about ten years ago. I can't imagine why anyone whose originally exposure to T2K was with v1.0 would willingly use the v2 timelines.

IMHO, the timeline didn't need revamping. They should have declared it an alternative history game, instead of trying to rehash it around RL events. But, that's just me.

V1 has the setting and ambiance perfect. The system takes a bit of getting used to, but does the job

[Rainbow Six]

V1 has the setting and ambiance perfect. The system takes a bit of getting used to, but does the job

I think it's pretty common to combine the V1 timeline with the V2.2. rules. That's certainly been the case in any game I've played in - I can only one recall one PbP game that tried to use the V1 rules and it never got out of the blocks.

[The Dark]

V1 has the setting and ambiance perfect. The system takes a bit of getting used to, but does the job

It does take some getting used to having an 11-year-old Special Forces Weapon Specialist who weighs 100+ kilograms. It's extremely unlikely, but just barely possible to have EDU 1 and high enough other stats to get an extremely low MEB. With a MEB of 12 or less (again, lower is better), it's possible to get less than 1 year in combat. Per the age section, that means age is 1 (MEB) + 1 (EDU) + 8 + 1d6. Roll a 1, and the character's 11 years old. Since none of the service branches require EDU, they could roll Special Forces or Ranger, though they can't be anything higher than a Spec 4.

Edit: Being fair, though, 2.2 has its own problems. IIRC, elephants are as common as sniper rifles for Warsaw Pact characters, which suggests a rather bizarre alternate universe with a secret Siberian elephant-breeding program to...uh...have heavy draft animals in case of a nuclear war

[Olefin]

FYI found some interesting information on the BDX armored personnel carrier that in real life Mexico bought from Belgium. They may actually be a real contender for a canon APC. They were originally designed by Timoney Technology as the Mark IV and VI for the Irish Army and then licensed for manufacture by Beherman Demoen in Belgium as the BDX.

The production of the BDX was completed in 1981 in Belgium and they were delivered from 1978-1981. There was a supposed to be a follow ons, including a 6x6 version of the Timoney Mk V and a new vehicle made by Vickers called the Valkyr but neither ever went anywhere (for one reason there was the big draw down in global purchasing due to armies reducing in size). Only two Valkyr's were ever delivered both to Kuwait before the invasion.

I could see in V1 the Valkyr going into production as the improved BDX and then seeing Belgium making the older version available for export. Or alternatively Mexico buying them new as their APC since export orders was one of the big reasons for it being developed.

link to the information on the vehicle - https://www.forecastinternational.co...cfmARC_ID=1190

[Olefin]

One other idea might be that they buy more VCR-TT from France and that is the canon APC instead of the VAB. I.e. they had already bought 48 of various versions in reality by the mid-80's and that vehicle was a pure export only vehicle. Meaning that in a V1 world they wouldnt have to rely on vehicles that might not have been surplused as they were in the real world.

And the VCR-TT is definitely a good match for them for an APC - i.e. they would already have spare parts, manuals, etc. and familiarity with the vehicle

and there is a version of it that could definitely help the Mexicans with US armor - i.e. there was a tank-destroyer version of the VCR/TT, designated the VCR/TH, fitted with an antitank missile turret for launching the HOT wire guided ATGM (antitank guided missile).

The VCR/TH mounts four HOT missiles on the turret ready to fire with ten reloads inside the vehicle.

The other interesting fact is that there was a less expensive version of the VCR/TH with the MCT copula that fired the MILAN. No one ever ordered it but it sounds tailor made for Mexico

So have Mexico order 100-150 plus of the standard version plus a couple of dozen tank-destroyer versions in say 1992-1993 timing to add to the 48 they had already and bingo - you have the canon APC (but with it being the VCR-TT instead of the VAB) for the mech and cav units and they can use the other APC's they already had spread out thru their infantry brigades

so a good possibility or not really

[The Dark]

The VCR was unpopular because of its expense, but I could see Mexico acquiring a few more because it's mechanically very similar to the ERC-90. Since they use MILAN but not HOT, they'd would probably go with the Milan version if they picked an ATM launcher. Possibly the Armored Reconnaissance Regiments use the VCR, since they're the units with the ERCs, while other units use less expensive APCs

[pmulcahy11b]

they could roll Special Forces or Ranger, though they can't be anything higher than a Spec 4.

Edit:

The Rangers will take any rank, even an E-none out of AIT, but the Special Forces will only take an SP4 if he's "promotable" (ie, has already the OK from his superiors and has been before the promotion board). Of course, this will all fall by the wayside in a T2K timeline (any of them).

[Olefin]

The VCR was unpopular because of its expense, but I could see Mexico acquiring a few more because it's mechanically very similar to the ERC-90. Since they use MILAN but not HOT, they'd would probably go with the Milan version if they picked an ATM launcher. Possibly the Armored Reconnaissance Regiments use the VCR, since they're the units with the ERCs, while other units use less expensive APCs

Now that makes a lot of sense - i.e. would mean logistics, support, maintenance issues reduced accordingly - so lets say you use the canon numbers of 34 APC per regiment for the three cav regiments and the two recon regiments attached to the mech brigades - thats a total of 170 - meaning they would need to buy around 120 or so - not that big a number considering the numbers of ERC-90 they bought mid-80s'

I looked at prices I found and it appears the VCR-TT is about 20-25% less in cost than the VAB depending on options but I couldnt find an apples to apples comparison with the same US year dollars

VCR-TT Unit Price. In equivalent 2003 United States dollars, the
unit price of the base Vhicule de Combat Roues 6x6
vehicle is $327,600; for the 4x4 version, the price is
$287,900. The unit price for the TT2 version is
$333,400, and the newest Vhicule de Combat
Roues-2 has a projected unit price of $352,000.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfmDACH_RECNO=398

VAB - Price Range. In 2009 U.S. dollars, the 6x6 VAB
Improved reportedly maintains a unit price of $397,000.

https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfmDACH_RECNO=106