Your Preferred T2K Timeline

[Sanjuro]

M Is that you
In the old days he'd have had the decency to defect! Christ I miss the Cold War...

[Nowhere Man 1966]

Though I wasn't around for the hollow army nor the 80's build up, I do kinda miss the bad old good days of the cold war- you kinda knew what to expect.

I'm 45 and I miss the Cold War, at least you know who was playing on what team along with other things of a political bent but I'll leave it at that for now. That said, there is a good writeup on TV Tropes about "Why We're Bummed Communism Fell."

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WhyWereBummedCommunismFell

[rcaf_777]

If I remember right that was the reason behind the Soviet attack in War Day by Whitley Streiber and James Kunetka as well - the US was starting to deploy an SDI system that would have rendered the Soviets almost totally (they felt) at Americas mercy. War Day is another book I'd highly recommend.

The US shuttle was destoryed in orbit whne they deployed a spider SDI system, I frist read WAR Day while working in Thialand, I found a copy in a High School Library where I was working, I think they made a another book nature end

[raketenjagdpanzer]

The US shuttle was destoryed in orbit whne they deployed a spider SDI system, I frist read WAR Day while working in Thialand, I found a copy in a High School Library where I was working, I think they made a another book nature end

Yeah, Nature's End which is like Warday but instead focuses on a sort of biological apocalypse rather than a nuclear one.

[95th Rifleman]

My group have taken to using the V1 timeline but moving it back a decade. Kick off is December '86 and our campaighns start in the summer of 1990.

It fits so much better.

[Fusilier]

My group have taken to using the V1 timeline but moving it back a decade. Kick off is December '86 and our campaighns start in the summer of 1990.

It fits so much better.

That sounds good. Pre-90s is where I like it too, not just for a better timeline, but for the nostalgia of the cold war.

[Adm.Lee]

My group have taken to using the V1 timeline but moving it back a decade. Kick off is December '86 and our campaighns start in the summer of 1990.

It fits so much better.

This idea is growing on me....

[stg58fal]

If I can find a group to play, 2013 with a little bit of modification/fleshing out of the background.

[DocSavage45B10]

I don't know if I personally have a favorite timeline, but the game I'm currently prepping to run has a homebrew timeline with a war kicking off in 2012/13 and play beginning in 2020.

I gotta say though, that I like the idea of a war kicking off in the 80s and play beginning in the 90s, that's very... period.

Wolverines!

[CDAT]

I would say kind of my own, as take what they put out and then update it a bit to try and have real life fit in to the game.

[.45cultist]

I've tried pushing dates back slightly, my preferred system is V2.2 with a slightly altered T2013 timeline. With speculation of a Chinese currency war in 2017 and adding TEOTWAWKI 2020 paranoia. I just roll the years forward a little. It gives me time to convert the civvie career stuff to V2.2.

[unkated]

I'm for the v1 Timeline

I have always been a fan of the v1 timeline for a few reasons:

1. The v1 time line (as projected forward from 1984) was clearly a fantasy, and not a terribly realistic projection (IMHO). Now, as such, it served its purpose of having a clash of arms using the large scale military units available in the mid-80s projected froward to the mid 90s.
   
2. For my money, the V2 and V2.2 times became increasing weak and unlikely. Do recall that amounts of the chaos and destruction in Poland and Germany (and elsewhere) were caused by conventional forces rolling over towns; it was not all casued by tac nukes. The conventional forces (actually) available in V2 and V2.2 from both the east and west lack the density to cause the kind of widespread destruction depicted in T2K. Neither side can put enough boots on the ground - especially not the CIS, and by 1995, the WP was gone. To my mind, the bear in V2 or V2.2 was too defanged to be that much of a threat.
   
3. I have trouble buying the state of the rest of the world in v2 or v2.2. The CIS lacked the resources to deliver widespread nukes to destroy oil or power resources 1995; certainly they had very little in the way of a functioning navy. The rest of the world would have found it easier to go on afterward, even with a tac-nuke walloping of the US.
   
4. I am completely ignorant of the 2013 timeline. However, if it does start later than 1995, there are a raft of issues that crop up that would require a raft of additions - computers, cell phones, telecom networks (national and international, partial or local internets), military vehicles had major upgrades in electronic targeting systems in the last 20 years, a raft of other personal electronic possibilities, military and civilian. Sticking to the original timeline avoids a raft of these issues.

Certainly, I have a few issues with the v1 timeline, and any number of questions about how and when to branch off of real-world history. But on the whole, I'd rather stick with it than go to something else.

Uncle Ted

[Raellus]

I've already gone on record many times here professing my adoration for the original v1.0 timeline. As a late Cold War kid just falling in love with military science and history, the first Twilight 2000 backstory really rang true. In hindsight, it doesn't hold up quite as well, but if one looks at it as alternative history, it still works well enough.

That said, Rainbow Six and I have been working on a more modern, near-future version set in the mid-to-late 2020s. It takes into account actual history since 1984 or so and current events right up to today's headlines. An updated version also allows us to include actual current military tech, some of which is even cooler than what the creators of the original game predicted, as well as nifty gear projected for service entry during the next decade-and-a-half. The one issue I'm finding with this approach is that events in the real world are happening so thick and fast that the "backstory" is constantly evolving in response. Every time I feel pretty confident in what we've written, something happens that necessitates adjustments/changes. I'm worried that we can't ever really get ahead of what's going on today. Still, it's a fun- and kind of scary- pastime.

-

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Interesting read there Raellus. I'm definitely keen to read what you and Rainbow Six have cooked up (and I reckon many others here would be too!)
Out of curiousity, can you explain anything more or give some hints about major events (maybe in a specific thread perhaps)

I'm interested to see how China plays out in any updated timeline because I tend to see them as a believable future (fictional) enemy. Although they haven't shown much belligerence in the real world, there are certainly signs that they might take it further. For example, there's been a slew of Chinese "advice" to Australia to watch itself in regards to our ties to the USA and also to Japan.

China has also been trying to curry favour with many island nations in the Pacific with gifts of roadworks, building projects, vehicles and even passenger/freight aircraft. The overall view is that they are seeking alternate sources for fishing and minerals but the "other" talk claims that this foreign aid is specifically to help them open a friendly (as in "totally Chinese controlled") naval base. That coupled with their recent advances in making a more professional and technologically updated military gives some good avenues for game-world speculation.


Further reading: -

Chinese "advice" to Australia (note that the dates are from 2012 onwards so it's not something that has just "popped up" of late)

http://www.the-american-interest.com/blog/2012/05/26/game-of-thrones-turns-sicilian-chinese-general-taunts-australia/

http://www.theage.com.au/national/china-warns-on-usaustralian-ties-20120606-1zwp0.html

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/chinese-general-ominously-warns-australia-not-to-side-with-the-us-tiger-2013-1

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/shun-us-tiger-and-japanese-wolf-chinese-colonel-warns-20130122-2d52d.html

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/latest/former-chinese-commander-warns-australia-on-japan-ties/story-e6frg90f-1226988270076nk=c7121f91343ce48860e6ebb0e096c832

http://www.theasanforum.org/australias-relations-with-china-in-turbulence/

China in the Pacific

http://www.lowyinstitute.org/issues/chinese-foreign-aid

http://pacificpolicy.org/blog/2012/06/07/patriot-games-island-voices-in-a-sea-of-contest/

https://www.aspi.org.au/publications/our-near-abroad-australia-and-pacific-islands-regionalism

http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2011-04/real-game-changers-pacific-basin

http://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/chinese-assistance-pacific-agency-effectiveness-and-role-pacific-island-governments

http://www.lowyinstitute.org/news-and-media/press-releases/china-not-challenging-australias-dominance-pacific-islands-says-new-lowy-institute-analysis

http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/2014/09/17/Chinese-navy-peace-ark-soft-power-win-in-the-Pacific.aspx

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2013/s3759160.htm

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-14/brissenden-rise-of-china-in-the-south-pacific/4686328

[Raellus]

Thanks, SSC. We're currently at work on the European war chapters but we'll be returning to Asia shortly. Once Rainbow's back from holiday, we'll be able- hopefully- to start publishing some of the 2030 "history".