I think it should be open to do that, but then again the costs in investments, research and ressources should mean that you can do little else beside reaching the moon (as in: You reached the moon, but there are no TVs in your country for anybody to see you land).Originally Posted by Fire and Ash
I think it should be closely tied to mass-media war (which USSR was failing, I think). Gagarin, first guy in space, was super popular. On the other hand, moon landing wasn't that much of accomplishment - USSR got man in outer space and robot moon landing before that - but it's the thing everyone remembers about space race. I don't see why walking on useless rock which was visited and sampled bore is more important that first man outside the Earth or first man in outer space (Leonov, I think) or even first space station. But when you play Civilization, you build moon landing, it had great advertisement. So, the side with better social techs can turn it's first space race advancement (it was first for USA, I think - first Sputnik, first living creature and first man were Soviet) into much greater bones.
This has to happen - has anyone played Buzz Alderin's race for space? It was a great sim for the space race, and would be cool if this game could capture the spirit. Don't forget that the space race invented tons of everyday tech as well, so I agree that it would feed back into daily life.
We came in peace to save all mankind; now look at the mess we left behind.
Launching a (few) satellite(s) could remove the fog of war for the player, like in the first C&C: Red Alert game. Seems decently realistic.
Defectus in optatis non est.
Largely depends on what kind of satellite.
Also just strapping a TV cam to a sat will do little for your SIG or ELini
t.
Nonsense, you can launch from any point on earth, it just costs you more fuel.
Make that 'much more fuel'.
To the point were it might become unfeasible to launch before you reached a certain (higher) amount of minitaturization.
What about an option to just fake it?
Then other side would know and expose them. F.e. in reality USSR had just the same tech. Conspiracy theory fans amuse me with all their deep analyze, thinking soviet specialists would miss something they've noticed.What about an option to just fake it?
Though in a cold war world, who would believe anything about that?
If the Russians say it is false, well they do not have the best track record as far as truth is concerned, no?
They could prove it to neutral specialists over the world.
Also they've tried to show everything American as lies and evil, do you really think they wouldn't try to find something fishy about it?
Are there really 'neutral specialists' in the cold war?
I do not believe the moon landing to be faked, but if it had been, i doubt the soviets claiming it to be fake would have convinced no one.
Even if they had gotten specialist into their boat these would have been easy to discredit as KGB-puppets or been pressured into silence.
Scientific ethic is not as strong as to withstand enforcible deaththreats.
Space missions should give prestige and internal stability, but maybe have some later ones give resources and stuff; had the USSR and USA remained more closely matched in the space race, I doubt the moon landing would have been more than a stepping stone as opposed to victory. Missions further out, maybe to asteroids and Mars, would have followed probably.
I think a solar system map for colonization/warfare would be a bit too much to ask for now, though
When at last the cast departs the stage
To cheering crowds and accolades
Fear not for fun when lights do fade
To plays like this encores are made.
Why internal stability?
If the house is burning around you, the hippies won't stop hating your guts just because you put a reactionary on the moon.
What would be possible if the US and Soviets don't sign treaties limiting or eliminating the militarization of space? Pre-positioned nukes in LEO ready to drop onto targets from orbit?
All Hail Him,
The Secret Master
Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.
One interesting thing is that I did read that the Soviets did fund the spreading of all kinds of weird conspiracy theories in the US. Like kennedy assasination theories, and it's not such a stretch to imagine that the KGB gave good money to spread doubt over whether the US landed on the moon.
Can we at least acknowledging that this is quite ironic?
Rather than internal stability, I think it would be better to say "adds to ruling party support." You would still have existing dissent and national unity (using hOI3 terms), but the ruling party looks better at home thanks to something like this.
All Hail Him,
The Secret Master
Note: If I write a post in this hideous color, I am speaking as a Demi-Moderator. Paying attention is strongly advised.
I don't think that's the best way to put it. Instead I think a better way is that it would increase national prestige, and prestige would play some kind of role in how much the people support the ruling ideology (democracy, communism etc.) but not necessarily ruling party (in the case of the USSR they're the same thing, in the case of the US that can mean either the Republicans or Democrats). If your national prestige drops too low, allies will start to abandon you, and your people will start contemplating alternative economic systems and ultimately revolution. High Prestige will mean the opposite.
Likewise getting lots of wins at the Olympics will also increase prestige, as will other things.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote