Fria Ligans forum

that last line means the Soviets have won and destroyed EIGHT FULL NATO Corps

No, it does not mean that. "Divisions" is not the same as "eight full Corps". It seems that you read it that way, but that's not what's intended, and we might very well clarify this in the final text. I would ask you to not tell me what I meant with my own text. If that's not too much to ask.

So when are you going to admit you wrote a Soviets Uber Alles Alpha and that your start basically destroys NATO and the US Army

No, this is not in the Alpha, and not what's intended. Nowhere does it say NATO and the US Army are "destroyed", there can certainly exist remaining forces somewhere. But, as I have been trying to explain, time and time again, this is an open-world survival game, not primarily a military simulator, and for the core premise of the game to work, there cannot be large, organized friendly forces near the player characters at the start of the game.

But, as I have been trying to explain, time and time again, this is an open-world survival game, not a military simulator, and for the core premise of the game to work, there cannot be large, organized friendly forces near the player characters at the start of the game.

And that is a problem <sigh> a number of backers (possibly large, possibly small) expected it to be both ... and the fact that a decision has been made for it to be shoehorned into the former only is probably not going to impress them ... I know I am increasingly dubious ... which, yes, really doesn't matter as long as enough people like this new and different direction.

I see that getting any significant change on any of these (and other) issues is unlikely, which is, from my point of view, quite sad, as I had high hopes and expectations.

I seriously doubt I'll be getting anything after the stuff I've already paid for in the Kickstarter ... but I really wish you the best and hope that more than enough backers love it.

Phil McGregor
========
Author: Space Opera (FGU); Rigger Black Book #1 (FASA); Orbis Mundi 2, The Marketplace, Ithura & Porthaven, Fantasy Europe (PGD); Road to Armageddon & Supplements, Displaced, Audace ad Gloriam, Farm, Forge & Steam (PGD).

And that is a problem <sigh> a number of backers (possibly large, possibly small) expected it to be both ...

To some extent, of course it is both, there is certainly plenty of military simulation in the game, but at it's core, it's a survival roleplayig game. And I think we have been very clear about this. All games need a focus.

This is literally from the first two paragraphs of the Kickstarter:

"The new retro-apocalyptic edition of Twilight: 2000, published in partnership with Game Designers' Workshop, goes back to the roots of the franchise with a boxed set for sandbox roleplaying in the devastation of World War III. Just like the original version, the new edition is set in a year 2000 devastated by war – now in an alternate timeline where the Moscow Coup of 1991 succeeded and the Soviet Union never collapsed."

"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."

Perhaps a little bit of calm and consideration might be called for. Speculating in categorical statements on what others actually mean by their texts or really are interested in isn't conducive to a constructive discussion — on either side.


A clarification could indeed also be called for.

The way the history currently reads, at least to me, is as follows: NATO moves troops into Poland; these meet stiff resistance from the enemy and crumble over time down to at best 10% of their original power, losing their armour to depleted spare part reserves and their artillery to depleted ammo.
"Operation Reset" collects the last scattered remnants into a cohesive force and launches an offensive. In spite of initial successes, managing to cut the Soviets off from command and supply lines, they still face a superior enemy — who, to boot, somehow retains both armour and artillery — and are finally annihilated, the last few survivors fleeing into the woods.
Thus, in the end, the Soviets have during the course of the war obliterated all the combined NATO forces that have moved into Poland, while still themselves managing to maintain unit cohesion.

Now, if this summary does not reflect the story as it's intended to read, then yes: a clarification might be a good idea.
If it does, then it obviously doesn't need any clarification. But it does in that case imply a ... let us say, very powerful Soviet Union.


Not all of us are engaged in discussions on other forums or in social media ... for my own part, I am neither; nor do I know who (if any) are. But as for the present context, I am sure we would all hope to see a continued discussion in a mutually constructive spirit.
Hence the question: if other avenues to reach a final environment that fulfils the requirements of the core premise, but also fixes the plausibility issues in the back story that some of us have argued for on basis of factual military history etc — would there be an interest to keep an open mind towards amending the backstory? Or is deeper feedback on the worldbuilding actually undesired; rendering any and all discussion on the backstory meaningless from the outset?

Wow. It looks like a lot of you have Political Science degrees.
I like the setting. As it is. It’s supposed to start in Europe and you are trying to Make it Home if at all possible.
For the rest of the World those questions can be addressed at a later time in different campaigns.
Try to keep a few things in mind as this is a game.
“Red Dawn” actually happened and James Bond exists. So all of those movies where the Russians were the bad guys are now plausible. Full Stop.

I have some ideas to make things more interesting.
Take the Top Secret briefing and include about six decoder overlays and then use the PC’s skills to crack it.
Also the PC’s don’t have full access to all of the large scale maps. Just about 6 small ones and they have to earn access as they go.

Try to keep a few things in mind as this is a game.
“Red Dawn” actually happened and James Bond exists. So all of those movies where the Russians were the bad guys are now plausible. Full Stop.

Probably what is needed is new edition of James Bond RPGs not T2K...

Wow. It looks like a lot of you have Political Science degrees.

Well ... some here do. We're old enough for it now. And some players will, too. And that's actually allowed.

If people who do have deeper knowledge into the real-world mechanisms underlying the game's premise and on basis thereof have problems with that premise as currently written — is them speaking out about it any stranger or out-of-line than those lacking that specific knowledge speaking out about liking it as-is?

None of this should really be mutually exclusive. If — if — there should turn out to be a way to write the backstory so that satisfies both parties: a story that provides an every bit as interesting and diverse gaming environment as the current one — if not even more so, who knows — while also not violating a plausible suspension of disbelief for too many people (some will probably always be inevitable), shouldn't that avenue be explored?

Or is it an end unto itself in that those who, as you put it, "have Political Science degrees" should be excluded from enjoying the published game?

Soviet dominance on the battlefield - now explained by tac nukes

Nicholas, you are much more optimist than me. I see several issue that requires more than quick fix. And the Tactical nuclear solution is, as in reality, more a problem than a solution. I do not feel the atmospheric so good as you... remind me of Mark Walker initial WW3 approach... you remember the one with Vampires? (BTW he has a new platoon level game on KS on WW3... with vampires and werewolves... )

Why would one need a new game for that when there is already Achtung Cthulhu?

Soviet dominance on the battlefield - now explained by tac nukes

Nicholas, you are much more optimist than me. I see several issue that requires more than quick fix. And the Tactical nuclear solution is, as in reality, more a problem than a solution. I do not feel the atmospheric so good as you... remind me of Mark Walker initial WW3 approach... you remember the one with Vampires? (BTW he has a new platoon level game on KS on WW3... with vampires and werewolves... )

Why would one need a new game for that when there is already Achtung Cthulhu?

Well Mark H. Walker is always an enigma... but the game has been funded... so there is a market! Not me (despite having helped him with some element of the game).