Is twilight: 2000 worth playing or is it annoying and broken?

>Military hierarchies tend to hinder player enjoyment more than help in my experience
The game still assumes you have a hierarchy within the player party, user.
And it actually works wonders, as long as you know how to manage leadership over party as seen by game design from early 80s. Namely - players discuss between themselves what to do and how to perform, but their actions don't happen, unless leader reports them to GM. And trust me, this really works wonders, especially when it comes to streamlining complex situations and allowing to have well-placed, tactical decisions all over the place.
And that's part of the reason why the game insists on maintaining military hierarchy within the party

Yes OP, twilight 2000 is fucking awesome.

Don't let anyone else tell you otherwise

Some people might complain that the system in T2000 v2.2 makes people too durable. After all, it is possible to get shot in the head with a 9mm handgun and live. Most player characters can do it. I disagree, however. The system encourages you to shoot as often as possible. If someone has five rounds in their magazine, they're usually going to shoot all of them at you if they can. There's no benefit to holding back.

Thus, in practice, this extra durability basically gives you the chance to make a single fuckup. In a game of military adventure where your group will almost certainly get into most of their firefights with other people with automatic weapons, this is pretty important. So while it's not completely realistic, that cushioning is there for a reason.

Also, body armor is not a joke. It's not universally effective, but not having it counts as your free fuckup if you get into a gunfight.

I like it, but like a lot of GDW games it tends toward the simulationist end of the spectrum, so expect bullet wounds to be deadly.

Recon Deluxe® by Palladium Games™

>Also, body armor is not a joke. It's not universally effective, but not having it counts as your free fuckup if you get into a gunfight.
Nope, that counts as both the free fuckup and actual fuckup, even before you get into a fight. So in combat without any body armor whatsoever you are striking already a 2nd major fuck-up. Third is when you get shot and killed the very same moment.

>Is twilight: 2000 worth playing or is it annoying and broken?

It's not annoying or broken. It's realistic and accurate. That's something D&D/d20 kiddies can't really handle and so they "think" it's broken and annoying.

In T2K, guns work like guns do, weapons kill like weapons do, and people die like people do. That's something people who are more comfortable with cinematic RPGs find troubling. They want their multiclass, Level 15, half-ogre/elf, paladin-thief-rogue to be able to butcher 100s of opponents without getting a hangnail. In T2K, a gunshot from a pistol fired by a little old lady NPC can kill the most veteran PC because that's how guns work.

2.2 is definitely worth it.
Probably the best combination of ease of play yet still being fairly realistic.

Don't forget the GMs that still run adventures like its D&D, with dozens of opponents that never retreat, surrender or negotiate, but only fight to the death

The concept has always seemed boring to me, and the system is needlessly to a fairly egregious degree.

Don’t neglect considering the 2k13 edition(unless pencil illustrations with 80’s hair are your sine qua non). The coolness under fire mechanic in Twilight is great and brings a lot of realism to the game ie humans don’t react to traumatic stimuli like killer robots. I’ll reiterate user’s earlier post about not getting on the wrong end of support weapons. Long bursts and suppressive fire will wreck you. V2.2’s enhanced survivability mostly means that if you get in a knife fight in the 2nd act, you’ll be good for more than just a lookout or getaway driver in the finale. Twilight is “a good ambush should be a somewhat disorderly execution” the Game. You’ll need to tell your players to avoid fighting even remotely fairly unless they like creating new characters. Could you players come up with an ops plan as murderous as the climax of 84 Charlie MoPic? If the answer is no, you might have your work cut out for you.

>The coolness under fire mechanic in Twilight is great and brings a lot of realism to the game ie humans don’t react to traumatic stimuli like killer robots.

I kinda like how it worked in T:2000 2.2. It's factored into initiative and controls how many actions you have during a combat round due to hesitation. If some shit goes down and you might panic, roll a d6 and get over your Initiative. After Initiative 6, you STOP PANICKING. Which is fucking AWESOME, until your vehicle catches fire and you miss your chance to freak out and bail because you're too dead inside to react.

That's a really cool dynamic and I'm surprised more games don't try something like that.

Very true.

CUF captures the outright weirdness of actual gunfights like 4 guys with rifles/shotguns all missing a perp ~50 ft away who gets drilled in the back by a 60 yd pistol shot through a half open window by patrol b&w blocking the alley.

Mechanically, the 2nd edition is the best. I never liked the hesitation and the shot system of first edition. Fluff-wise, I find the 1st edition to be superior. It’s a very based 1980s, Cold War setting. 2nd was less realistic with the German neo-nazis stirring shit up. Both editions are clearly superior to Recon (stats are rolled on 1d100, much more randomness isn’t possible).

Recon - The only good thing about Recon are the realistic shooting modifiers. Otherwise, the system is a mess.

Tour of Darkness for Savage Worlds seems interesting. You could check it out.

bump for interest.