v4 Rules & Mechanics Discussion

[Spartan-117]

Speaking of - that's one great thing about the new edition. In the back they have 1e and 2e conversion guides, so we don't have to rely on them to do the work of some of this.

Very nice. I glanced over them but since they aren't applicable at this point, I didn't explore them in depth. I do have myriad v1 and 2.2 character in text files, so being able to convert will be useful for me later on.

[Olefin]

Very nice. I glanced over them but since they aren't applicable at this point, I didn't explore them in depth. I do have myriad v1 and 2.2 character in text files, so being able to convert will be useful for me later on.

Except the conversion guides dont offer what is needed for playing the other nation's militaries characters unless they are basically saying that its all the same as V1 and V2.2

If thats true then why even detail out the American forces - they have been massively covered in earlier guides.

[Raellus]

Simple Fix

Serious question- how hard would it be to generate an American military PC and then do some gear and backstory adjustments and call him a UK military PC Or US to German Or Polish to Czech

-

[Ewan]

Serious question- how hard would it be to generate an American military PC and then do some gear and backstory adjustments and call him a UK military PC Or US to German Or Polish to Czech

-

Honest answer probably not hard, just convert the US military rank to the equivalent nationality (this might help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranks_...rmies_enlisted)

The book gives you the G3 and SLR (FN FAL) but you don't have the SA80. You also have some British and German vehicles which could be used.

[Olefin]

Serious question- how hard would it be to generate an American military PC and then do some gear and backstory adjustments and call him a UK military PC Or US to German Or Polish to Czech

-

If you are an experienced GM or player and have the old V2.2 guide and the British sourcebook and have the NATO and Warsaw Pact books you can do it without a lot of effort.

But if you are a brand new player and GM - ie the so called target audience to bring lots of new people on board - pretty damn hard unless you want to do a lot of research on ranks, weapons, equipment, vehicles and other things.

Its one thing if you are an old hand and have all the older books - its quite another if all you have is the Beta - which lacks basically just about everything to do the job right - unless you dont mind a half ass not even close to reality

[Olefin]

FYI check out the comments on the Beta - the UK players are not happy

So basically Tomas ignored one of the biggest group of existing players that there are

And his comments earlier to me that I posted shows he has no concept of what role the UK played in NATO - ie he created the Soviet Sea Lion to give UK characters something to do - excuse me Ever heard of the British Army contribution to NATO

[Amagi]

Imagination has always been used by players and GMs alike.

Serious question- how hard would it be to generate an American military PC and then do some gear and backstory adjustments and call him a UK military PC Or US to German Or Polish to Czech

The vision.

"The first edition of Twilight: 2000 was an iconic game for me back in the '80s, and we are humbled and honored to work with Marc Miller and Game Designers' Workshop to bring a new edition to life. The original game was really ahead of its time. Our goal is to build on the amazing sandbox survival gameplay and develop it further, making it more accessible using the tools of modern game design,"*says lead game designer Tomas H$renstam

.

Build on and develop.

Serious question: did it

[Olefin]

Imagination has always been used by players and GMs alike.



The vision.

.

Build on and develop.

Serious question: did it

Serious answer - no it didnt - the old game included the whole world and information on all the countries in Europe except for a few exceptions - like Italy for instance - this one ignores most of NATO most of the Eastern European countries and is rife with contradictions

Like no way home for players and no supplies - but then the USN still has a significant number of operational ships in the seas around Europe - last I heard you can pack a bunch of troops or supplies in ships like destroyers - the Japanese and British did it quite well in WWII as did the Germans. Did these guys even take a simple course in history - heard of Dunkirk or the Tokyo Express or the German invasion of Norway

We had a name for work like this - its called shoddy.

[Olefin]

Honest answer probably not hard, just convert the US military rank to the equivalent nationality (this might help https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranks_...rmies_enlisted)

The book gives you the G3 and SLR (FN FAL) but you don't have the SA80. You also have some British and German vehicles which could be used.

Yup you can create a half ass character that doesnt have the right equipment, with no background for their army, navy and Air Force - but good luck doing that with the Dutch, the French, the Turks, the Belgians, etc.. since they were basically ignored.

The reality is - why should we This is basic game design and also basic business sense. You are trying to appeal to a worldwide audience and then you limit your characters to four nations

Lets be honest - any actual game designer who ignores so much of the target audience is either being lazy or ignorant or both. And I have done this before myself for my module. I gave people enough information to build Kenyan, Rwandan and LRA characters as well as Somali and PARA. It didnt take long - I used the V2.2 book and some basic research.

I could have put all the information in the Players Manual that was needed for all the different countries in about two days of work and that would include ranks, background, weapons, vehicles you name it. They had months to do this - and didnt. I did it for my module and so did Raellus on his. And we arent paid game designers. They were paid to make a good game with all the info needed - and its not going to add a ton of pages to do it. So yes they have a bottom line - and ignoring a lot of potential customers is a pretty stupid way to run a business. Not when the work needed to properly appeal to them takes so little time.

And frankly FL needs to be called to task on this and have a lot of us say we gave you our money - either deliver on your promises and do a good job or give the money back and call it a day. Its going to take a lot of work by them to fix a screwed up product later after they have turned off a lot of people. It may mean they only make 20 percent profit off the money they raised instead of 22 percent. Its worth it - go ask Coke and Ford and Schlitz about what screwed up product releases can do for the bottom line.

[Raellus]

Grieving

I've been giving the discussion on this thread a lot of thought. I realized that some people in the community are literally grieving T2k. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross' 5 Stages of Grieving are...

1. Denial: "They can't be doing this to T2k!"
2. Anger: "Those duplicitous so-and-sos ruined my beloved T2k!"
3. Bargaining: "I could accept v4 if X,Y, & Z were changed to my liking."
4. Depression: "T2k is forever ruined. It'll never be good again."
5. Acceptance: "v4 is what it is. It's not for me, but I hope others enjoy it. Maybe I can even cherry pick a couple of pieces I do like. Or not. Anyway, I've still got v1-2.2/2013, so life goes on."

I can understand why some of those who had some personal connection to v4 (i.e. consulting, playtesting, what-have-you) may have extra cause to be bitter. Being ignored and cast aside must have hurt.

I realize that the grieving process is different for everyone. It may take others longer to move through the various phases. I moved on to stage 5 a long time ago, but it's unfair of me to expect others to hurry up and get there.

What seems pointless to me is spending so much time and energy trying to convince others that there is no Phase 5, and camping out in Phases 1-4. But again, it's unfair of me to expect others to grieve just like me.

I think now that I was wrong to try to push people to move past 1-4. That seems to have entrenched some folks even deeper in those unpleasant phases.

If some of you need to continue to vent, go ahead. I hope that you can do so with the intent of moving through the denial, anger, bargaining, and depression stages to get to a place of peace.

-

[Olefin]

I've been giving the discussion on this thread a lot of thought. I realized that some people in the community are literally grieving T2k. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross' 5 Stages of Grieving are...

1. Denial: "They can't be doing this to T2k!"
2. Anger: "Those duplicitous so-and-sos ruined my beloved T2k!"
3. Bargaining: "I could accept v4 if X,Y, & Z were changed to my liking."
4. Depression: "T2k is forever ruined. It'll never be good again."
5. Acceptance: "v4 is what it is. It's not for me, but I hope others enjoy it. Maybe I can even cherry pick a couple of pieces I do like. Or not. Anyway, I've still got v1-2.2/2013, so life goes on."

I can understand why some of those who had some personal connection to v4 (i.e. consulting, playtesting, what-have-you) may have extra cause to be bitter. Being ignored and cast aside must have hurt.

I realize that the grieving process is different for everyone. It may take others longer to move through the various phases. I moved on to stage 5 a long time ago, but it's unfair of me to expect others to hurry up and get there.

What seems pointless to me is spending so much time and energy trying to convince others that there is no Phase 5, and camping out in Phases 1-4.

I think now that I was wrong to try to push people to move past 1-4. That seems to have entrenched some folks even deeper in those phases.

If some of you need to continue to vent, go ahead. I hope that you can do so with the intent of moving through the denial, anger, bargaining, and depression stages to get to a place of peace.

-

I am not grieving at all - the new version is shoddy and slapdash and an insult to many of the long term gamers. As for acceptance - ha ha ha ha ha. Go tell that bullcrap about the stages of grieving to Coca Cola when they introducted New Coke - the people who tried this tact at Coke all got fired and they brought back Classic Coke and saved the company

[Olefin]

So back to reality after the little jog into psychiatry

How do you fix the Players Manual - you dont have to describe every armed force and nationality that is in the world. You have a base play area that is Poland, Sweden, northern Czechoslovakia, eastern Germany, Denmark, Norway, Finland and western Russia

So what do you need to add to make the PM complete for the base set up

One page blurbs describing the Germans, British, Dutch, Czechs, Danes, Belgians, Finnish and Norwegian armed forces and how to create their characters. Dont need a huge background just the basic info that that was given about the other four.

Add equipment for each army including their self propelled artillery and recon vehicles

Then add a simple one to at most two page general concept, as was done in the V2.2 to describe the Hungarians, French, Romanians, Turks, and other nations that might be there but who wont be described in detail for now.

Now you have the armed forces detailed that you would 100 percent meet in the areas desribed in the setup and havent ignore anyone.

And it would take less than a dozen pages and two days to do it.

[Lurken]

Serious question- how hard would it be to generate an American military PC and then do some gear and backstory adjustments and call him a UK military PC Or US to German Or Polish to Czech

-

Quite easily enough. As people have pointed out. Each GM could guesstimate the practical differences in gear, vehicles, basic training, what sort of training each route should have and so on. It is what made v2 fun, each country had various variants, good and bad.

But this is not Bethesda, that is expected to release incomplete games that are later fixed with mods. I mean, it's Bethesda.

If it is easy, then we should be able to expect it in the base game Especially for the featured countries, at least

[Olefin]

Quite easily enough. As people have pointed out. Each GM could guesstimate the practical differences in gear, vehicles, basic training, what sort of training each route should have and so on. It is what made v2 fun, each country had various variants, good and bad.

But this is not Bethesda, that is expected to release incomplete games that are later fixed with mods. I mean, it's Bethesda.

If it is easy, then we should be able to expect it in the base game Especially for the featured countries, at least

Hell yes it should be expected - especially from a company that has all the base material to do it.

And Frank Frey and James Langham as consultants

[Raellus]

Choose Your Own Adventure

I don't want to be accused (again) of trying to stifle free speech, but this thread is kind of a dumpster fire now, and the discussion has drifted miles from the thread's original, stated purpose.

How would y'all feel about separate threads about v4- one dedicated to complaining (where folks that so choose can trash it all they like) and another for only constructive discussion re rules, setting, etc.

-