Forums of the Megaverse®

Has anyone played a Recon game in which they were the V.C. fighting against the American imperialist?*




*Most VC saw America as another foreign power attempting to gain control like the French, Japanese and English before them.

Geronimo 2.0 wrote:with the GM controlling an American military or mercenery (and screw the PC labels, let's call them what they are. Private Contractor or PMC are a ******** symantics used to obscure the fact that they are hired gunmen and professional killers)

PMC's are not "mercenaries" or "hired killers", and unlike most of the media, who are talking out of their fourth point of contact, I've worked for one, and will probably do so again in the future. The company I worked for, like most PMCs, provided a wide range of services. Everything form day laborers to armed security personnel (my job). And while all of us were prior military (mostly former Marines), we weren't out looking to get into gun battles with the locals. Most of our contracts were for low visibility security details escorting US government equipment in foreign countries. Or in the case of Iraq, providing security personnel for convoys, fixed site security, or PSDs for KBR personnel moving between various CF sites. the company also provided truck drivers, forklift operators, other labor (mostly Gurkhas). I've got friends that work for Blackwater, Armor Group, Aegis, Dyncorp, Cresent, Triple Canopy, etc. etc., and last I checked, none of them were out there engaging in offensive combat operations either. So lets keep the hype to a minimum.

Well, technically, PMCs are mercenaries as they are fighting for a paycheck.


The idea Geronimo suggested is pretty much your standard cyberpunk 2020 game.

Oh, I also thought of a similar game taking place a hundred years from now in which an American force is fighting against a resurgence of the indian nations in the American Southwest. It's not what you think. The General commanding the Americans was of Chinese descent and most of the American soldiers were hispanic. The indians also had a large number of whites who felt connected to them.


People play the American side in Recon because that's a side they can relate too. It's hard for them to step into another's cultural shoes and play say, the Iraqi insurgency. Until I read, Islam for dummies, I had little idea of their world. I supposed one could play say, a Red Dawn style game in which American is occupied by a foreign power.

Peacebringer wrote:Well, technically, PMCs are mercenaries as they are fighting for a paycheck.

I fight for a paycheck, and so does everyone else in the military. While I enjoy my job, I'm not doing it for free. And as far as PMCs engaging in combat goes, they, unlike mercenary units, don't go out looking to engage in offensive combat operations (and their is a difference). PMCs primarily provide training, force protection (Security), and support functions. They're not out conducting sweeps, kicking in doors, etc.

If you want an example of a modern day mercenary unit, look no farther than the now defunct Sandline International. These guys were mercenaries in every sense of the word, and they were by all accounts VERY good at their job. They did everything from fly attack helos to provide commanders for armored vehicles. A lot of their upper management is involved with Aegis Security (guys I'm on the road with every day), as the same companies that funded Sandline are the ones funding Aegis. Aegis, unlike Sandline, only provides convoy, fixed site, and personal security, and doesn't get involved in the stuff that Sandline was involved in. But a lot of governments don't want anything to do with them because of who they're associated with.

Peacebringer wrote:People play the American side in Recon because that's a side they can relate too. It's hard for them to step into another's cultural shoes and play say, the Iraqi insurgency. Until I read, Islam for dummies, I had little idea of their world. I supposed one could play say, a Red Dawn style game in which American is occupied by a foreign power.

I play the Americans in Recon because I no desire to roll play an either the VC or North Vietnamese. It's not that I don't understand the VC and North Vietnamese, and I can't speak for others, but personally I could care less about playing a communist soldier or insurgent out to kill American troops. I just couldn't get into the roll.

Dominique wrote:I fight for a paycheck, and so does everyone else in the military. While I enjoy my job, I'm not doing it for free. And as far as PMCs engaging in combat goes, they, unlike mercenary units, don't go out looking to engage in offensive combat operations (and their is a difference). PMCs primarily provide training, force protection (Security), and support functions. They're not out conducting sweeps, kicking in doors, etc.

Nah, you're saying watermelon isn't a fruit because it doesn't grow on a tree.

Not all mercenaries kick in doors. A merc is someone who fights or provides military support for those who fight who is not officially part of a country's military. Just because they are Americans, doesn't mean they're not mercenaries.

I play the Americans in Recon because I no desire to roll play an either the VC or North Vietnamese. It's not that I don't understand the VC and North Vietnamese, and I can't speak for others, but personally I could care less about playing a communist soldier or insurgent out to kill American troops. I just couldn't get into the roll.

There you go.

War in itself doesn't care about a side.

Peacebringer wrote:Not all mercenaries kick in doors. A merc is someone who fights or provides military support for those who fight who is not officially part of a country's military. Just because they are Americans, doesn't mean they're not mercenaries.

So the DOD, DOA, DON, etc. employees, and the contractors who cook in the DFACs, or clean out the port-o-johns, as both are functions that would have to be conducted by military personnel if they weren't contracted out, are mercenaries? I fail to see how you can come to that conclusion. I'm not trying to flame you, but I'd really like to know the line of reasoning that's allowed you to form your opinion. As this definition of a mercenary "a professional soldier paid to fight for an army other than that of his country" is what is what's more commonly accepted.

Not to stir your guys' pot, but I watched a show on History International tonight called "Soldiers for Hire." It was a fairly in-depth expose of the history and current operational status of the Private Military Contractor.

As a point of fact, a Mercenary is a professional soldier serving or working solely for monetary gain, hired for service in a foreign army. You cannot tell me that to the Iraqi people, the PMCs in Iraq are not seen as soldiers working for the US Military (a foreign army). As for the idea that the soldiers who are actually in the US Military are mercenaries too, the greatest difference is that they work for the government of the United States not a corporate management system (even if that corporation is currently contracted to the government of the US); they are soldiers in the employ of the people of the US, not in the employ of men and women who can choose to change allegiances at the drop of a contract.

A legal link about the problems with mercenaries:
http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/international-law/4110245-1.html

There is, however, a difference between the mercenary of old and the Private Military Contractor of today; both will fight for whoever pays the most, but mercenaries were often the most violent people who only had (and got) whatever training they had before joining their mercenary group - from former military to ex-convicts. The PMC is well trained and often well disciplined (with the exception of one or two companies out there) and held in check in US occupied territories by the media coverage and consequential public outcry in the States. Both, unfortunately, also have no judicial controls restricting their human rights activities (or the violation thereof).

Ultimately, whether the PMC and the Mercenary are the same or different seems to depend on whether they are contracted out to a first world country or a third world country. Perhaps the Private Military Contractor should ask him or herself, "do I act from the spirit of national idealism and pride or from the desire to earn a quick buck?" If their answer is idealism and pride, they should quit their current job and join (or re-join) the Army or Marines; perhaps if they did, the government would see the need to hire PMCs to fill the roles that should be filled by soldiers of the US Military. If their answer is to earn a quick buck, they should sit back and accept the title of "Mercenary" with pride and dignity. They are mercenary, but they are NOT all "Mercenary Killers" - that is a completely different animal.

Instead, the PMC is paid MUCH more than the soldier who is putting his life on the line "conducting sweeps, kicking in doors, etc.". I think that if our government is so intent on contracting out the occupation it should put the mercenaries in the dangerous jobs and the real soldiers in the support jobs or it should begin paying the soldiers what they are worth and giving them the benes they deserve!

I resent the entire idea that a soldier in the service of his country could be called a mercenary. I served in the US Air Force (with honor and integrity), but when I got out I understood that my time as a combatant/combat support was completed and "if" I was to fight as anything other than resistance to hostile takeover in the future it would be after having been called back into military service by my country not in the employ of some independent international corporate entity. I was a soldier, not a mercenary!

Now that I have to decide whether to go on with school, find a job in the field, or re-up for service, I have asked myself the question above. My answer was easy - although I would love to make that much money, I know that military service is part of patriotism. What are PMC's going to do if, after the US government ends its contracts, they find that their employers take a contract with a government that is hostile toward the US and they are going to be ordered to attack a group of US citizens or US interests? Quit?

PMC = Mercenary

Accept it.

As to the original question, I play Stateside because I like the thrill of being on guard and in a defensive stance in the 'Nam. In my modern games, I play Stateside because I disagree vehemently with terrorism.

One little example of a Modern mercenary unit is Executive Outcomes. They were active in the 1990's in Angola and Sierra Leone. Both times they were enployed by a legitimate nation to prevent it's overthrow by a violent rebel movement.

In the case of Sierra leone, EO literally forced canibals away from that nation's capital. While there are some who decride EO's lack of takeing prisoners. But, the black South African's who made up the bulk of EO did not want to take prisoners after seeing the Atrocities that had been commited by the RUF.

Before EO got to Sierra Leone, one American mercenary of excelent reputaion Bob Mckenzie was tortured to death by child soldiers and then eaten. According to Human rights organizations the RUF was maiming small children and infants. Not to mention they were seriously into kidnapping children and useing them as soldiers. Such actions were athema to profesional soldiers and it is little wonder as to why few prisoners were taken by EO. those taken by RUF could only look forward to a very painful death and possibly a date with a cooking pot.

Geronimo 2.0 wrote:That might be a fun game. It might also be fun to play those people who are kind of like the Vietnamese version Native Americans... oh, crap, I forget the name for them...

There's a lot of them, just like Native Americans. Montenyard from all I know is a generic term for mountain person that can be applied to a wide range of ethnic groups living in Vietnam and Cambodia.

Geronimo 2.0 wrote:

Natasha wrote:

Geronimo 2.0 wrote:That might be a fun game. It might also be fun to play those people who are kind of like the Vietnamese version Native Americans... oh, crap, I forget the name for them...

There's a lot of them, just like Native Americans. Montenyard from all I know is a generic term for mountain person that can be applied to a wide range of ethnic groups living in Vietnam and Cambodia.

YES! That's the name I was thinking of! Thank you.
Just think of what a challenge it would be to play those guys.

Yea, a bow and arrow ambush just isn't the same as a napalm strafe.

Actually, it's Montagnards. The Recon game gives an adventure that puts the player on the other side as a VC working as a maid at a base. Some of the ways they smuggled weapons and even made them are amazing. The exhibits at the Ho Chi Minh Museum in Saigon are educational. The VC made good work of tunnels to escape detection. The Cu Chi Tunnels streched from the outskirts of Saigon to Cambodia, about 250 km of tunnels! These tunnels were started by the Viet Minh in the '40s and continued into the Vietnam War.

No,I'm sorry if this sounds lame but while I respect the NVA and the VC as people.I will never play them.Heck I won't even play them in video games.Sorry.

Dominique wrote:I've got friends that work for Blackwater, Armor Group, Aegis, Dyncorp, Cresent, Triple Canopy, etc. etc., and last I checked, none of them were out there engaging in offensive combat operations either.

Guess that's why I'll never work for a PMC. I like offensive operations, and I'll take the pay cut to keep 'em.

-STS