US Recovery Plan

[stilleto69]

Hi Guys,

Just remember if you don't like the large number of naval vessels, just ignore them. I personally have a much bigger US Navy surviving (13 carriers) survivng the war. Now, remember just because I say that 'survived' the war doesn't mean they're in the best of shape. So a GM can take what they like from the DC Group or leave it. As Law would say "It's your choice".

[seppun1]

Concerning the fleet, I have to agree that there is more ships available then what was reported. Perhaps they simply meant no longer combat operational and not destroyed. I think the lot of the examples in this report has shown that ships are being discovered, repaired and/or refueled. One good example was the missile destroyer that ran aground and now was protecting the oil facility in Iran.

What I am curious about is how the materials being recovered and produced in Iran and Africa will get back to the US. Are they taking the Pacific route Wouldn't shipments be passing through Australia since Operation Omega made an agreement of sorts If we want to consider 2300 history as canon, Australia and the US are partners of sorts. Maybe this help start the ground work on that partnership. What about Hawaii It wasn't really mentioned what and if anything was salvaged there. 2300 history section does mention that the Japanese had an extensive Merchant Marine that survived. Would Milgov being contracting their assets to ship men and materials back and forth If it is the Pacific route, how are they transporting through the rest of the US since the West Coast isn't secure.

The East Coast route: Well, going around Africa does seem to bring in the likely hood of more of a chance of Pirate attacks than anything. Wasn't there mention in the report that there was trade with South Africa If so, the route might be a little more safer than I thought.

How soon will the US be receiving the materials I think the Reset Book would be essential in getting services back up. It would make getting those power plants quicker in restarting (not having to rewire all the EMP damage as much) Plus, I am sure Princeton would be happy to get more computers for their research.

Anyway, I look forward to more details on see how the world picks itself back up.

[kato13]

Glad to have your input seppun1. Welcome aboard.

[Dog 6]

Thanks!

Thanks guys this is the best T2K work I've seen yet!

any ideas when we will get something about the west cost and do you guys have any OBO/TOE info as in whats left tanks bombers ships fighters Nukes

[kato13]

Thanks guys this is the best T2K work I've seen yet!

any ideas when we will get something about the west cost and do you guys have any OBO/TOE info as in whats left tanks bombers ships fighters Nukes

I don't want to speak for the DC group, but I believe that that stuff is coming.

This thread contains quite a bit more of their work.
Collected Works of the DC Group


More stuff here
Something new from the DC Writing Group. Hope you like it
DC Group Status/Comments (split from North California Locations)
Preview of Soviet Vehicle Guide 1.5

Plus quite a few comments spread throughout the site.

[Littlearmies]

And your statements about auxilary crews are pretty good. But the Navy would have those crews not actively onboard a vessel doing something onshore... it's quite possible that majority of MilGov management is currently being taken care of by USAF and USN personnel.

FEMA depots are located all over the place, set up to survive a nuclear exchange. The Allegany Uprising touches on one such locale. It's not hard to imagine that there are more out there waiting to be discovered.

When i did my CBR warfare training, they talked alot about the FEMA plans post-nuclear exchanges. While FEMA had the right to redistribute human resources, they where not allowed to mess with Department of Defense Personnel, past or present. Veterans and their dependents are technically off-limits to the FEMA relocations like i mentioned earlier. But with the MilGov/CivGov spilit this can possibly be thrown out the window depending on the local adminstrator/supervisors.

But surely a lot of those spare Navy crews and USAF personnel would have been based, by definition at US Navy port facilities or USAF bases - which would have been targets Even assuming they weren't nuked OR's without any specialist skill would have been given an M16 and a helmet and been assigned to base security or assisting the civil power roles in the immediate aftermath - the specialists would be doing whatever they could to help things get back, but without proper prior planning and pre-positioning of material (much of which could be affected by EMP) they probably couldn't get much done.

I also think you are overestimating FEMA - you only need to look at their miserable performance during Katrina to see that a sequence of major disasters spread across North America would totally overwhelm them. This story is from 2006 and highlights what a pig's ear their logistics planning is (and this after Katrina):

http://www.nachi.org/forum/f13/tons-food-spoiled-fema-ran-out-storage-space-15747/

Their bar code tracking systems aren't going to work with EMP screwing up the vast majority of electronics - you are going to have the situation where the first responders do not know what is in the warehouses or within each container within the warehouse. After several years of disaster relief I'd guess the cupboard would be bare as far as the vast majority of warehouses are concerned - you might have the odd forgotten jewel in the dust but those would be incredibly rare (and you would probably prise open the door to the facility to discover it contained thousands of copies of 1950's Civil Defence leaflets).

[Legbreaker]

We know that several capitol ships had survived with the carriers operating in the middle east... So it's not that hard to believe that there might be more out there as well.

We know from canon sources that nine US warships surived. They are:
USS Belleau Wood supported by USS Nashville, USS Clark, USS Boone, USS Copeland, USS Salem, and USS Yorktown.
These ships are all located in the Persian Gulf and are unlikely to be leaving any time soon - they're needed by the western allies in Iran.

USS John Hancock which was the flagship for TF 34 (Operation Omega). Things must be pretty bad if a Destroyer was the best they could come up with for the flagship - they're not exactly designed for it and don't have a lot of free space.

USS Los Angeles from the Last Sub series.

So we have a total of nine operable ships plus the possibility of a few smaller escorts attached to TF 34. It is implied in Satelitte Down that there are no US naval assets left, although we can assume the ships above are likely to remain (less perhaps one or two due to enemy action/accident/wear and tear).

"The US Navy has by this time effectively ceased to exist. The navy had nothing left to deploy in the area where the satellite crashed."

Littlearmies, I believe you're spot on target with your comments. As much as we might wish to think we're ready for anything and that the various organisations tasked with disaster response are up to the job, it doesn't take more than a glance at what happened after Katrina - and that was just one tiny little area!

We need to imagine that scale of disaster, or worse over virtually the entire world, then add on a couple of years where there's been next to no progress towards significant recovery, AND all the stockpiles besides the odd one or two hidden away totally stripped bare.

In some ways the soldiers returning from Europe might actually be WORSE off - at least there they had more then 100kgs of equipment....

[chico20854]

Ok, a few thoughts. (I've been entertaining guests for the past week and am now just getting caught up).

On the availability of ships, it's a matter of numbers.

The world merchant fleet in 1996 consisted of about 86,000 vessels. About 5,000 of these were under Russian or Polish registry. So there are about 81,000 vessels trading when the war breaks out. The recovery plan requires about 100 merchantmen - 54 tankers and 43 cargo ships, or about one eighth of one percent of the prewar fleet.

So lets run the numbers for the losses to rise this high. First, assume half of the fleet is destroyed by civil unrest or caught in a port that was nuked. So the USSR needs to sink 40,000 ships. Assume that the Soviet navy had 40,000 torpedoes and missiles in their magazines or the ability to churn them out of their factories. Assume that every ship requires but one hit to sink it and that every weapon launched hits. The active phase of the naval war is one year - December 1996 to December 1997, and assume that Murmansk is undamaged in the Kola offensive and therefore able to fully support operations until December 1997. Assume that the Soviet Navy devotes its entire attack and cruise missile submarine force to sinking merchantmen (leaving its SSBNs unescorted, its naval bases unguarded, with no watchers on NATO SSBN bases, and not seeking out NATO carrier, amphib or surface groups), with no losses to NATO en route or by escorts, and that NATO keeps putting merchantmen on the North Atlantic or North Pacific, conveniently close to Soviet bases. Also assume that the USSR is able to find enough reservists to man 136 submarines brought out of mothballs, keeping in mind that most technical tasks aboard ships were performed by officers in the Soviet Navy.

So with these somewhat generous assumptions, each Soviet submarine (90 cruise missile boats and 310 attack boats) would have to sink 100 merchantmen in a one year period. What about surface raiders There were 401 seagoing surface combatants available, so again making all the same assumptions, that cuts the number of targets per submarine or surface ship to 50 per vessel.

By way of comparison, in 1942 the German U-boat fleet hit 1322 ships (with another 342 hit by surface and air attacks). The top U-boat ace, Otto Kretscmer, sank 35 ships in 11 months with U-99, before having his boat sank and being captured. 1153 German U-boats hit (not sank!) a total of 3478 Allied and neutral ships, just slightly over 3 each. (All figures from uboat.net), while 9 German merchant raiders sank a total of 142 ships (15 3/4 each, on average). Total allied merchant losses, worldwide, were 5150 ships, over six years of war.

So for the Soviet Navy to sink 50% of the world merchant fleet, given all the assumptions outlined above, it would have to be anywhere from 16 (each sub would have to sink 16 times as many ships as a WWII U-boat) to 48 (inflict eight times as many losses in one-sixth of the time) times more effective than the Axis powers in WWII. You can argue all day about apples and oranges, the differences between WWII and WWIII, but they aren't going to make up for these fundamental numbers. When push comes to shove, the Soviet Union doesn't have enough time, ships or torpedoes to sink enough shipping to make the recovery plan fail for lack of shipping.

As for naval losses, we've tried to error on the side of heavy, but again we have to be realistic. The USN sends 150 nuclear subs to sea during the war - for there to be none left in service is just beyond believable. Even on V-E day, with Germany overrun, the Kriegsmarine had 43 U-boats at sea, and 232 scuttled in harbor, with overall loss rates during the war of slightly over 65 percent. I would argue, instead, that the modules may present a view that is intended to convince the PCs of the importance of their mission and the desperate lack of resources Milgov faces. For example, the PCs are told that Corpus Christi is the last sub available and that it is vital to recover it. A more accurate statement would probably be that Milgov had lost control of Corpus Christi and that it was vital that the UBF be prevented from controlling it, regardless of the size of the USN submarine fleet. (Likewise, the occasional "loose nuke" adventure is more oriented on regaining control of the weapon rather than restoring a nuclear capability - if the US had fired off all 15,000+ strategic and theater warheads we wouldn't be playing T2k, we'd be playing Gamma World.) The PCs likely aren't told the whole truth, whether or not the security clearance system is still intact, as they're headed "outside the wire" and may not ever return.

The limited crew available to man Corpus Christi reflects the demands Milgov has on valuable human resources - it is sent to sea with the minimum crew needed to sail her. Likewise, John Hancock may have been used as the flagship for TF 34 because that was all that was needed - with a minimal naval threat there was no need to send a cruiser, with its higher demands of crew, fuel and rare spare parts. The USN doesn't want to send a LST with a 225 man crew to drop the PCs off in Baja California, so they go in a leaky rust bucket pleasure boat. Sailboats and sailing ships are valuable assets that Milgov troops should grab - sure. To me, this points to prudent use of scarce resources rather than the destruction of over 575 naval combatants. (Again, by comparison USN combatant losses worldwide during WWII was 345 ships). I am not implying that the USN is able to put all these ships to sea - but they exist, can be made seaworthy, and a crew for some of them scratched together from those serving ashore. In fact, many of them remain at anchor simply because there is nothing useful for them to do at sea and their operation is a drain on resources.

On the more general subject of resources: Prior to Operation Omega much of Milgov's limited resources were devoted to supporting a war on three fronts. Practically, this support was mostly nominal, but even "a trickle" of replacements, equipped with mortars turned out from machine shops, trained and deployed to Europe a year after the nuclear attacks, is a lot of resources spent (How many of your PC's have a time in combat of less than 36 months That means post-nuclear exchange replacements!). The end of active combat operations allows this flow of resources to be spent on reconstruction rather than wasted on foreign battlefields. The trickle of resources flowing back to the US from CENTCOM is by no means enough to restore life in America to anything resembling pre-war (CENTCOM sends an average of 120,000 barrels of oil a day to CONUS, versus pre-war consumption of 18.5 million barrels - about 4%). Instead, when combined with a plan and troops willing and able to execute a plan, it presents an opportunity to restart things a little bit at a time. I would argue that the biggest asset the US Army Europe vets bring with them is the will and ability to organize things, hence the disagreement between CINCLANT and CINCEUR. I don't believe that Milgov went to the trouble to organize and execute Operation Omega so that there would be another 50,000 armed individuals wandering North America witnessing its decline to the Middle Ages.

As to some of the more specific points:

Construction equipment: as Fighting Flamingo mentioned, most of the equipment for the Seebees and engineer battalions comes from state and local transportation departments and construction companies. Many of these assets would have spent the past few years sitting and rusting, in areas abandoned by any authority with the resources or will to use them (such as the DC and Baltimore street gangs that run the Delmarva peninsula prior to III Corps arrival). Sure, they'll need some maintenance, but not every 63H (Heavy wheeled vehicle mechanic) that was transferred to the infantry was KIA. Replacement seals are some of the "high priority spares" sent back from CENTCOM, probably as sheets of synthetic rubber to be cut as needed, while other parts can be cannibalized or manufactured by machine shops (the same ones that had been producing mortars or aboard ship).

Other vehicles: The troops that return from Europe are mostly light infantry, with limited numbers of CUCVs, HMMWVs and converted civilian vehicles. As I noted in "European Veterans Return Home": The light infantry battalions received the few 120mm mortars and most of the other heavy weapons that were available. The combat engineer battalions were equipped with civilian construction equipment and support equipment - compressors, dump trucks and the like, given the dearth of combat-capable heavy equipment. The MP battalions were the main motorized combat force, using a variety of light wheeled vehicles (the odd HMMWV, requisitioned civilian pickup trucks converted to mount machineguns) and armored cars (mostly former bank armored cars but also including a hodgepodge of former police vehicles, Department of Energy armored cars and vehicles in the ports that were awaiting embarkation for the war zones). The support battalion provided transportation (using school buses, delivery trucks and horse-drawn wagons). VII Corps fields two battalions of mechanized troops, with equipment drawn from an existing corps in the Deep South.

The nine ships listed in canon: Obviously, I don't agree that these are the only ships left available to the USN. They are the only ones that GDW intended a group of PCs to encounter. As for the ships in CENTCOM, Legbreaker, you state "These ships are all located in the Persian Gulf and are unlikely to be leaving any time soon - they're needed by the western allies in Iran." They're ships, mobile by design (obviously), and what do you think they're doing in Iran after the end of the war there (Or even during the war) There aren't any Soviet ships running around the Persian Gulf! As for enemy action, who's still out there Barrikada

I agree that the scale of the destruction is massive and that the available resources overall are scarce. What this plan posits is a slow, targeted recovery, starting in a handful of small areas, that will take decades to restore life to a semblance of its prewar state. The end of combat operations allows the limited resources available to Milgov to be directed to the reconstruction that had been put off by the need to run the remnants of the war.

As for the ability of organizations to cope, I agree that by 2000 FEMA and pretty much all the disaster relief organizations would be ineffective, but that things would have stabilized on a local level - if they hadn't, things would have collapsed, and casualties would be far higher than the 50% in canon. Keep in mind that Katrina in some ways is a poor model of the ability of the US as a whole to respond to a disaster in T2k. First, New Orleans and Louisiana were (and are) spectacularly poorly governed - look into their police department before the hurricane struck, a bunch of scum and drug dealers in uniform. Second, by Thanksgiving Day the US has been under the threat of nuclear war for almost a year and had several panics, giving people and authorities time to plan, stockpile and practice. Milgov and the European veterans provide the means to pull these local stabilized areas together and make use of the specialist knowledge that each one may have - maybe some of the evacuees from urban areas, working on farms, are US Navy veterans, electrical engineers, tug boat crewmen, petroleum geologists or even airship assembly techs. In the context of a county-sized area these people would be useless, but when a Milgov civil affairs team comes by looking for these kinds of experts are beyond valuable.

As for the scale of damage, again remember that civilian casualties are 52%. That leaves, for example, 175,000 electrical engineers in the US. It won't be hard to find a dozen to reopen the electrical engineering department at Princeton. There is no basis to argue that every USAF and USN base was struck in the exchange or that there was a high-altitude EMP strike that shut down the entire US. (Localized EMP damage, however, is widespread, and the electrical grid was shut down to protect generating capacity and limit the spread of EMP damage, plus the fossil fuel plants ran out of fuel in many cases.) The specialist personnel might very well have spent the past 2 years on base security, some getting killed in the process, but when the part they've needed for 2 years shows up on an airship from Colorado or there's fuel for the aircraft again they're back to work.

A lot of this recovery plan depends on is a change of scale of how we look at the world of T2k. What may be impossible for a group of PCs to accomplish is easier for a cantonment to do, and when multiple cantonments coordinate and have a trickle of fuel to move vital things with the impossible becomes much easier to do. A tanker truck of fuel is an impossibly large cache for 8 individuals but only 20 minutes of fuel for a single 20MW electrical plant.

[Legbreaker]

Firstly, yes, only 5,000 of the 1996 merchant fleet is of Russian or Polish registry.
But how many of the 81,000 remaining are available solely for the USA to use

There's a LOT of countries in the world with a merchant fleet and you can bet they're not about to let another country just TAKE them! Even US flagged privately owned shipping isn't necessarily going to be made available to the US government and military. Even less of these ships will be found near US controlled areas once they start being requisitioned!

There's absolutely no need for the Soviets to destroy even a small percentage of the world fleet, just those few which are US controlled. And of course that doesn't even take into account the psychological effects on privately owned shipping - what captain, let alone the company which owns the ships, is likely to sail into a war zone Standard insurance stops the moment a ship enters into a combat area, and you can bet that war coverage isn't going to be cheap!

Therefore, the number of Soviet ships, subs, planes, missiles, etc isn't all that important - as long as they can make a significant dent anyway.

Since you bring up WWII and the U-boats, Britian was almost brought to it's knees with just that relatively "small" amount of damage inflicted upon it. I believe surrender was just a matter of weeks, if not days away at one point.
In T2K it's not just one country being supported by shipping, but virtually all of western Europe. The demands are therefore so much greater as are the effects of lossing just a handful of freighters.

As a more modern example, take a look at the Falklands war in the early 80's. The loss of one supply ship, the Atlantic Conveyor I believe it was called, almost crippled the British effort. For most of the war they had just one Chinook helicopter and hundreds if not thousands of tonnes of vital war material was lost to the sea. Yes the British still won, but it was MUCH harder than it would have been otherwise.

Yes, it's possible, even probable that more than nine warships still exist, but refering back to canon material, it states by 2001, the navy "effectively ceased to exist".
It's probable that the Persian Gulf fleet still existed in 2001, perhaps, as I've previously indicated less a ship or two, but elsewhere in the world the navy may amount to nothing more than a badly damaged corvette, minesweeper, or LST or two. Once again we refer to canon in that the last major fleet was shattered even BEFORE nukes were used in China.

How could this happen we ask Does it really matter about the specifics The Soviets could have been more effective than expected, or key crewmembers aboard each ship were KGB sleepers, or perhaps it was just mishandling of the ships in battle, or even navigational errors. Regardless, a world with more than a handful of warships on either side of the war is a totally different world to that of Twilight:2000.

The Corpus Christi is a good example of the situation. Yes there may well be a number of crew still alive, but how many could be found in the short period of time available before sailing, and even if they were found, how many a) would be willing to embark on such a potentially dangerous mission in a ship which is barely seaworthy, and b) could they even be brought to port in time Remember transportation networks of any sort are a distant memory - little more than a dream three years after the nukes.

I may be wrong, but it is my belief that resupply effectively ceased sometime in 1998, except for CIVGOVs support in the Balkans. Therefore, the return of European forces is likely to create a drain on available resources rather than easing the burden. At least in Europe units were effectively responsible for feeding themselves.

As far as I am aware, no heavy equipment, not even light vehicles were returned from Europe as far as Canon goes. Those vehicles in the US where the troops disembarked are likely to be long gone, taken by looters, damaged by EMP, engines seized, stripped of parts (specifically lubricants and fuel) or generally in very poor condition. The sudden influx of tens of thousands of troops, even spread across the eastern seaboard, is likely to tax to the limit the resources still remaining, especially when one considers that it's this very area that's contributed greatest to the last stages of the war.

Some preperations for receiving the troops is sure to have been made, but this would probably only consist of stripping the land bare for a hundred miles or so. Very little production of extra equipment, and especially food, would be possible.
It is highly likely that many returning troops would simply be discharged, pointed westward and given a shove. Only the specialists would be retained.

Horses are also likely to be in short supply (see the earlier threads on this topic to see why).

Although canon states 52% casualties, it is probable that a large percentage of these would be city dwellers. After the nukes, those cities not glowing craters would be greatly effected by EMP, lack of electricity and fuel oil, heating and cooking gas, etc. Food distribution networks would fall apart within days, riots empty the shops in hours and medical facilities swamped.

Out in the countryside survival is more likely, especially in areas where homes produced their own food, etc.

Cities also hold the greatest concentration of skilled labour. It's cities where most of the vitally needed skill sets can be found - engineers, doctors, scientists, even mechanics (somebodies got to change the oil for all those soft city slickers).

So, while 52% might be a reasonable figure nationally, chances are that amongst these skilled people, the casualty rate might be as high, or even greater than 90%.

Twilight:2000 is a game. It's set on the premise of global catastrophy. It may not be an accurate representation of what would truely have happened should Germany have invaded Poland, etc, but it's a damn good RPG setting. We shouldn't be trying to pull it apart, but rather be working to justify why it is the way it is.

[Targan]

Yes, it's possible, even probable that more than nine warships still exist, but refering back to canon material, it states by 2001, the navy "effectively ceased to exist".
It's probable that the Persian Gulf fleet still existed in 2001, perhaps, as I've previously indicated less a ship or two, but elsewhere in the world the navy may amount to nothing more than a badly damaged corvette, minesweeper, or LST or two. Once again we refer to canon in that the last major fleet was shattered even BEFORE nukes were used in China.

Agreed. I argue that we should try to make any amendments to remaining forces etc fit canon, not try to make canon fit with sweeping changes to remaining forces that are being proposed. Having large numbers of US warships cruising around in 2001 in the T2K universe just doesn't fit with the spirit and the "feel" of what the original designers of T2K gave us. If the reasons that the designers gave for the fleet being destroyed aren't good enough, find additional reasons, not just say that there are heaps more warships. How is it that MilGov does not utterly dominate CivGov and all its remaining enemies if it has such a huge post-war fleet available It just doesn't sit well with me.

[simonmark6]

Can piracy exist in Traveller

This is a really interesting debate and whilst I have no wish to talk about the specifics, I do have several on topic things to comment on.

1) I'd like to thank Chico and the DC working group for their work and dedication to the game. Their ideas are thought-provoking and interesting and I have enjoyed reading them.
2) Instead of comparing their work to canon, why not read it as one group's take on what might have happened, an alternative history for the alternative history if you will. It certainly doesn't fit with my view of the Twilight Universe (should we start saying IMTU), but if it makes for a good game for anyone, who cares
3) We can argue logistics and semantics all day and bring up whatever figures we like, but no one is going to convince the other that they ae wrong and that's because both sides are right. We are debating a speculative timeline to speculative fiction, it's more nebulous than debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
4) Maybe we should have an IMTU (In my Twilight Universe) thread where people can share and enjoy the idiosincracies of other people's gaming worlds.
5) In my opinion, fun and a good game trumps reality every time. Go with what's most fun for you and don't sweat the other details.

[Targan]

But in many ways the DC Working Group ARE trying to stick with canon, if they weren't I wouldn't be so interested in their work. I had the impression when they first started working on their project that the idea was to fill in the blanks and clean up errors that the original GDW team made (most likely the result of the GDW team not having access to the kind of knowledge and resources that the DC Group have today). I don't blame them for being very proud of the US military and I don't blame them for having a hard time thinking of how the USA could possibly lose as much combat power as they supposedly did in the Twilight War. The thing is though that if the US military has as much power by 2001 as the DC Working Group is suggesting it does, how does the US end up playing second fiddle to France for the next 300 years

[Legbreaker]

Well said there Targan.

I too thought originally the DC group would be simply filling in the blanks, but as time goes by it seems more and more as if the whole war history is being totally rewritten to fit their own perceptions of "what should be".

This is not to denegrate what they're doing - far from it. It just makes me upset when it's seen by some as canon when it's clearly not. Rerunning the entire war as a wargame just to see what might really have happened is definately not in the spirit of the game to me. Take what's there and expand on it, find ways to explain it, not throw it away and start again.

If we wanted to play in a world where the US military still exists as a viable organisation and the world could be rebuilt relatively easily, we'd be playing Merc...

[kato13]

I think everyone has to wait and see the results of the work. Then take the pieces you like. In reviewing canon some people focus on the warship count, others on the ~50% causality rate. For example I don't do the milgov/civgov split because at a 50% rate mathematically the senate should be able to be reconstituted (by surviving governors or lt governors) and therefore approval of new Cabinet members is possible.

This is my choice and I in no way expect everyone to agree with me, but it follows the logic to which i subscribe.

[Targan]

1) I'd like to thank Chico and the DC working group for their work and dedication to the game. Their ideas are thought-provoking and interesting and I have enjoyed reading them.

Please understand, I consider myself a fan of the DC Working Group's work and I have enormous respect for the individual members. I know I have a big post count here but members who have been here from the start will know that there are many threads which I never make a comment on because they don't interest me or I don't feel I have a contribution to make to the discussion. I wouldn't be commenting in this thread if I didn't care about its contents.

2) Instead of comparing their work to canon, why not read it as one group's take on what might have happened, an alternative history for the alternative history if you will. It certainly doesn't fit with my view of the Twilight Universe (should we start saying IMTU), but if it makes for a good game for anyone, who cares

It is because the DC Working Group generally sticks to canon (and often flesh out canon in areas that was sparce) that I love their work. The increased numbers of USN ships that have been posited are the only thing that I've found discomfort with in their work so far.

3) We can argue logistics and semantics all day and bring up whatever figures we like, but no one is going to convince the other that they ae wrong and that's because both sides are right. We are debating a speculative timeline to speculative fiction, it's more nebulous than debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

The DC Working Group has requested feedback many times. I don't think my comments on their work have been disrespectful or even unduly negative. Most of my comments about their work have been effusively positive.