4e What happened to the rest of the world?

[Heffe]

Has anyone managed to put together a possible (and cohesive) world-wide 4e timeline yet

I've asked twice now on the forums about whether FL plans to detail out the rest of the world (in terms of nuke strike locations, military unit cohesion, nation-state impacts, etc.), and both times FL has been pretty cagey in their responses. Their most recent response was this:

In the upcoming expansions, they will most likely focus (when it comes to setting) on things connected to operation reset like Poland and Sweden.

Which leaves just an entire world with no description of what's going on. The Ref manual talks about a few key countries, but largely the world is left for Refs to create as they see fit. So I'm curious to see if anyone has put together a cohesive timeline of events happening elsewhere around the globe (even if it disrupts FL's official timeline).

Thanks!

[unipus]

No, but it does seem clear that implied background is sort of part of their plan. I don't have an issue with that, exactly. It works better in other genres, but it's still not a terrible move (especially after the reaction their timeline got). It frees up others to answer the questions as they'd like. I had to do so for Poland and it was more satisfying and worked better for me.

[Heffe]

Well, if it's not been done by the community yet, is there any interest amongst users of this forum to build a default timeline for the community I'd love to help put it together and can PM any efforts (on top of contributing ideas/writing), but this doesn't seem like the kind of project to take on alone, especially not when there's so much valuable insight from the community members here. If anyone is interested in working on something like that (or even leading the endeavor - I'm open to whatever), let me know

[Spartan-117]

Remember that movie where the first 90 minutes is a recap about everything that happens all over the globe, then the last 30 minutes is about stuff that happens to a group of 4-8 dudes who don't have enough fuel/resources/etc. to get a days drive away from their starting location

Yeah, me either...

[Raellus]

I've been tinkering a bit since the box set arrived.

China: ally or adversary of the USSR

-

[unipus]

I'd be inclined to say... neither China's approach to soft power has worked out pretty well for them and I'd definitely see them trying to stay out of WW3. If they managed to pull that off, then to some extent they are the only superpower on Earth now. Counterargument: they would never develop to that level since they too would face a pretty complete economic collapse, along with possible food production problems, and the odd bit of fallout. I could see them trying to keep the good times rolling and becoming a broken regional empire with a series of unending wars across SE Asia.

[Rainbow Six]

I think for me the challenge is that youre unlikely to ever get any sort of consensus on what a default timeline would look like - theres going to be too many differing opinions and in the absence of anything published theres nothing to settle any disagreements.

[Ursus Maior]

I've been tinkering a bit since the box set arrived.

China: ally or adversary of the USSR

-

I have them as a cautious ally of the USSR after the Taiwan Street Crisis of the Mid-Nineties. Basically a "we got a common enemy in the US", after war almost went hot over Taiwan. This might include an actual attack of some sorts on a USN carrier in 1996, putting it out of action for several months, probably USS Independence, but USS Nimitz would hurt more, obviously.

The latter scenario, a near-loss of a carrier, would make the US pivot to Asia at least temporarily and probably end after an attack of retribution by US Navy aircraft and ship/sub launched cruise missiles on major naval installations, e. g. HudongZhonghua Shipbuilding at Shanghai. Zhonghua yards were building amphibious landings ships at the time, so this would set back any build-up in PLAN invasion forces.

After that, cooler heads could prevail, as both sides lick their wounds, but China buys even more hardware from the USSR than it did historically from the Russians. The Chinese, of course, don't want to grow to attached to a resurgent, revisionist USSR, but play along for a year or so. Once the balloon goes up in Europe, China pulls the plug on most forms of cooperation, except economical ties, which remain largely intact despite pressure by Western nations.

It might be an interesting twist that this pressure ultimately could lead to China switching sides. Since it's the USSR that starts the nuclear spiral in 4E, trying to limit NATO breakthroughs in the European, mostly Polish, front, China would immediately step away from any remains of an alliance. Open condemnation would be the only thing to get NATO's bullseye from Beijing, Shanghai and Dalian. A possible economical alliance in 1998 between the West and China might keep parts of the West alive with China delivering food and basic industrial goods.

Of course, this might draw the ire of Moscow, leading to a few nukes flying towards China as well.

One big mystery I haven't solved in that thread of thinking is Hong Kong, though. Would the British handover the city state on 1 July 1997, if the war broke out just before and China has become an obvious ally of the USSR We know US and Soviet forces clash for the first time in Western Poland (Poznan) on 6 June 1997, but no date is given for the actual invasion of Poland. Personally, I'd reason that Poland can hardly defend itself against the USSR for more than two weeks. So, if the attack came in late May, China has about two weeks to turn its back on the USSR, before the US and other NATO members start attacking Soviet forces and China gets into the cross-hairs as well.

[Rainbow Six]

One big mystery I haven't solved in that thread of thinking is Hong Kong, though. Would the British handover the city state on 1 July 1997, if the war broke out just before and China has become an obvious ally of the USSR

I don't really think there would be any alternative. The handover had been agreed and I don't think that the British Government of that time would want to go back on an international agreement it had signed.

However even if that was the case I rather doubt that there would have been much the British Government could have done to stop the Chinese occupying Hong Kong - in the 1980's / 1990's the HK garrison was a reinforced Brigade, and it was gradually reduced in strength prior to handover so trying to hold on to the Colony and oppose a Chinese invasion would have been a fool's errand that would have caused the needless loss of many lives.

So I don't really see the British Government trying / wanting to delay the handover. If it was scheduled for five years down the line then maybe I could see it happening, but not when we're only weeks out.

[Ursus Maior]

I don't see this going off the table either, but their would be diplomatic upheavals visible at least. Imagine a close(-ish) ally of one of two opponents getting surprised by its allied state going to war on a "business partner" it wants something really badly from. China would be in a less than optimal position all the while the UK is gearing up for war. No one wants to escalate, but only 15 years earlier, the UK sailed half across the world and beat the Argentinians on a commodity far less valuable than Hong Kong.

The UK might actually work together with the US to push China into the right direction over this, which is away from the USSR. All sides would want that by then, but China might feel that "just doing the right thing" isn't easy to communicate internally. So, they happily (though grudgingly inward) agree to break the alliance with the USSR over getting back Hong Kong. Of course, that's not what everyone tells the press or the Soviets. Officially, Hong Kong is just resolved as was planned, but below that is the layer of Chinese-Western trust-building over the Hong Kong-Soviet matter. Everyone gets what they want, except the USSR.

[Rainbow Six]

Both countries have signed a legally binding treaty to return HK to Chinese Sovereignty so I dont really follow why there would be diplomatic upheavals if that happens.

To my mind the upheavals would only occur if that didnt happen and I cant see any reason why it wouldnt. In the overall scheme of things I see it as no more than a brief footnote, at least in the v4 timeline ('the former British Crown Colony of Hong Kong was returned to Chinese sovereignty as planned at midnight on the 30th of June 1997').

(V1 where China is two years into war against the Soviets is a different matter altogether - I've previously written at length about why I think the UK would retain control of HK in V1)

[Heffe]

I think for me the challenge is that youre unlikely to ever get any sort of consensus on what a default timeline would look like - theres going to be too many differing opinions and in the absence of anything published theres nothing to settle any disagreements.

Perhaps not, but it may yet be worth a shot. Something to consider is that players and Refs will continue to release modules for 4e as time goes on. Those player-made modules will be created regardless, and each module that comes out will be creating its own miniature version of the timeline. If there's a way to come up with a default universal timeline ahead of a lot of the modules, it could help to ensure that they all (or at least many of them) maintain at least some measure of consistency when it comes to the descriptions of their relative areas. Otherwise, and this is my fear, there will end up just being no consistent timeline at all, and all of the unofficial modules will just be utter chaos in terms of their level of consistency within the larger T2k narrative.

[Tegyrius]

This is the same problem faced by every other game line whose publisher has opened up the option of fan publications for sale. Ultimately, it's on the community (which extends far beyond this forum) to discuss whose work is good and whose work is crap, and to make that known through ratings, reviews, and forum threads. Then it's on the referee and the table to decide what their T2k universe is.

Having seen several vicious urinary Olympiads over the canon status of various fan works, I have little faith that a timeline consensus can or will emerge from any source other than the publisher. And even that will meet harsh criticism, if not outright rejection, from portions of the fan community.

- C.

[Raellus]

Free League didn't seem very receptive to community input regarding its Alpha & Beta Europe timelines, so I'm not sure if they would be open making a community-made global timeline official. As it now stands, it's up to each individual Ref to do their own world-building, beyond NW Europe. Even if FL does release some sort of official global timeline- with or without community input- it's still ultimately up to up to individual Refs.

That said, creating a global timeline is a fun thought exercise, and if some Refs decide to use it, then it's a worthwhile one as well.

In the timeline that I've been tinkering with, the USSR's survival/revival is predicated, in part, on close economic ties with the PRC. The Soviets sell energy to the Chinese, to fuel the latter's rapid economic growth; they also sell weapons to the Chinese, who have been essentially cut off from western sources after the Tiananmen Square massacre. This infusion of hard currency from China keeps the Soviet economy afloat, and helps keep the Soviet military in fighting shape until WW3 begins.

With the USA engaged in a full-scale conventional war in Europe, and a fresh infusion of current gen Soviet-made weaponry, China decides that the time is right to retake Taiwan. They gamble that the US won't intervene militarily. The PRC also encourages the DPRK to attempt a reunification-by-force with the ROK, giving the US something else to worry about/deal with.

So the T2k 4e relationship between the USSR and PRC is kind of like the Axis "alliance" of WW2- the Germans and Japanese were nominal allies, with the same enemies, but did not really coordinate strategic operations.

I can also see the relationship souring when the Soviets stop shipping oil and gas to the PRC (because they need it for total war).

-

[Heffe]

To be clear, I wouldn't expect FL to ever accept a fan-made timeline as canon - I was only thinking about it from the standpoint of someone interested in making modules, but being hesitant to jump in with an ill-defined strategic picture of what's happening elsewhere on the planet.

With our current knowledge of Mexico's military capabilities, and the earlier timelines' approach to a Mexican invasion being wholly unrealistic, I think the PRC joining with Russia makes a lot of sense to help keep things balanced. Were that to happen, keeping with the Axis/Allies model I would see the following alliances form up and fall apart as the war continued.

Allies:
Europe and the Americas:
Existing NATO countries

Australia + New Zealand

Asia:
Japan
South Korea
Taiwan
Philippines
The Kingdom ()
UAE ()
Israel
Egypt ()

Axis:
Europe and the Americas:
PACT countries
Cuba
Venezuela

Asia:
PRC
North Korea
Iran
Syria

Mostly I'd expect India and Pakistan to be having their own little war between them. Israel would no doubt be a flash point that could break allied alliances in the middle east.

Otherwise, I'm at a bit of a loss wrt to the rest of southeast Asia, Africa, and South America.

I do think it would be neat to continue the tradition of the US splitting into a MilGov and a CivGov, and the concept of New America was great (awful faction, but interesting storytelling. I also like the idea of an invasion into the US, albeit I just don't think Mexico would have what it takes. Perhaps a new alliance of nations in Central/South America Or alternatively, China and Russia team up to invade across Alaska and down through the PNW

edit: This is all super high-level of course. The devil is always in the details. Also, please humor me if I've made any glaring errors in judgment. While I feel like I have a good understanding of foreign policy these days, I was a teenager in the 90s, so I'm likely to make some mistakes.