If Paradox did a Cold War game, what features would you want?

[lordreaven448]

I was thinking to myself today about what a CW game from Paradox would look like. I think that if done, the game game should focus HEAVILY on Proxy wars and spying. HoI IV's greatest moment for me was playing as the USSR and helping Communist Spain win the Civil war by "donating" weapons, armour and the such. That sense right there made me feel like a power, and I spent more time helping China win (lose) the war against Japan. I will be honest and I completely forgot about the rest of the game.

I think if Paradox could pull that off with a hint of CK2 it will be great. The other major perk is that minor nations would have free reign to an extent to carve their own destinies.........until Big Brither tells him to knock it off.

What do you guys think? What do you envision as your dream "Cold War" game.

 

[jmpveg22]

Supreme Ruler Cold War is a decent starting point
Aside from everything that was to be in East Vs West... I would like to see:

1) Realistic weapons production and procurement
This means that instead of having every country able to make their own weapons (which is utterly unrealistic and actually complicates the game far too much)... most countries are forced to procure/buy weapons from the obvious actors.
The USA, the USSR, The UK, The French, The Chinese, and some others depending upon the era were literally the providers of the overwhelming majority of weapons (aircraft, tanks, ships, and everything else). It should be this way in the game as well.

A country can become a weapons procurer... but it should take massive research, and investment. Thus it should not be the preferable choice. Instead most countries should look to make arms deals or appeal for military aid as a way to equip armies. As a result these deals and interactions would have a result on relations of countries in the game.

2) Multiple starting years with realistic research on forces, industry, economies, and diplomatic standings
-1950 "Stalin Era":
Defined by Korean War, rebuilding of Europe, the rise of China, nuclear proliferation (France, China, and the UK all pursue nuclear technology), Formation of military alliances (NATO and Warsaw PACT), possible attempts of German reunification, beginnings of the Space Race, Middle East conflicts
-1961 "Khrushchev Era":
Defined by Cuba turning Red and outcome, Red expansion, The Space Race, Eastern Bloc reforms and their outcomes (Does the communist bloc reform itself or follow its historical outcome), Vietnam heats up for the Americans, American domestic unrest, Sino Soviet relations focus (do they split or not).
-1968 "Brezhnev/Detente Era":
-1979 "Transition Era":

3) A time frame of 1950-2000
Suppose the August Coup of 1991 never happened, or imagine if Gorbachev focused all his efforts on perestroika rather than both perestroika & glasnost... the USSR would still be around today. Likely be the contemporary China.

4) Multiple outcomes
The cold war does NOT have to automatically end in collapse of one side or warfare. If History took any number of turns we could have seen a Tri-polar world entering the 21st century.

5) Realistic diplomatic and econonomic relations and options

 

[jmpveg22]

6) A realistic oriented Arms race system

Nuclear Parody and deterrence should be a player's priority... however nuclear war should not be. What i mean by this is that part of the games overall system, should be that if you are playing as any one of the 3 major powers (USA, USSR, China) you should always want to ensure you have a decent deterrence capacity. If your deterrence falls far behind our opponents, they should become more aggressive in their foreign and diplomatic policy. If your deterrence capacity falls too far behind... there is a chance (emphasis on chance, not a certainty) they may consider either a first strike or an offensive conventional war against you or your interests.

Likewise if you enjoy a nuclear primacy that is too overwhelming, you risk off-putting much of the international community as they begin to see you as overly aggressive and apocalypse inclined. Thus your odds of making new economic and political partners begins to take a hit.

Basically it should be a balance that you are aiming for. And Nuclear war should be a last resort part of the game, obviously with dire consequences (so it should not be preferable in nearly all situations).

One more thing: if nuclear war does occur, the game goes on. If you were stupid enough to pull the trigger, you have to deal with the aftermath. So in the rubble of a 1970/80s NATO-Warsaw Pact exchange no matter how limited... you could see a country like China rising to a spot of global primacy as they were not participants and the major competition destroyed itself. Even if the player won the nuclear war, they still would likely lose the overall game (as the cost to rebuild, recover, and regain diplomatic standing would be overwhelmingly high).

 

[jmpveg22]

7) Ability to play many crucial nations and entities, as well as non state actors.

**I think the Obvious choice of nations/states a player can choose from should be:
-USA
-USSR
-China
-UK
-France
-West Germany
-East Germany
-Canada
-Mexico
-Nicaragua
-Guatemala
-El Salvador
-Yugoslavia
-Czechoslovakia
-Poland
-Hungary
-Bulgaria
-Albania
-Romania
-Sweden
-Ireland
-Iceland
-Finland
-Norway
-Denmark
-Netherlands
-Belgium
-Italy
-Austria
-Switzerland
-Turkey
-Greece
-Portugal
-Spain
-India
-Pakistan
-North Korea
-South Korea
-Mongolia
-Afghanistan
-Thailand
-Burma
-Japan
-Indonesia
-Philippines
-Australia
-Brazil
-Argentina
-Bolivia
-Colombia
-Venezuela
-Chile
-Cuba
-Egypt
-Jordan
-Syria
-Israel
-Iran
-Saudi Arabia
-Ethiopia
-South Africa

**Players should be also able to play as "colonized powers", who are striving to obtain independence either via diplomacy or independence wars. Some are pretty toothless (Alaska and Hawaii), while others are powerful and all but inevitable (Algeria and IndoChina).
-Pretty Much all of Sub- Sahara Africa
-Tunisia
-Morocco
-Libya
-Algeria
-Indochina (Laos, North Vietnam, South Vietnam, Cambodia)
-Many Middle East actors. (Iraq, South Yemen, Kuwait, Bahrain)
-Malaysia
-Bangladesh
-Any one of the Soviet SSRs, especially the Baltic States
-Malta
-Cyprus
-Czech Republic
-Slovakia
-All of the Yugoslav republics
-Puerto Rico
-Alaska
-Hawaii

**Players can also lay as non-state actors that are trying to obtain various specific objectives.
-The IRA
-The PLO
-Various Kurdish movements
-Various communist movements (FARC, Castro and friends, etc etc etc)
-Various Rebel movements
-Various "Freedom fighters"

 

[Kliwarrior]

Economy
This would be the most difficult part to implement

Besides that , I would like to have


Limited military intervention ( Corea, Vietnam and Afganistan are clear examples of wars where the opponents didn't use their full power )

Proxy wars - Local conflicts (e.g. middle east)

Support to rebels/revolutionary or "official gorvenments" (or both of them... )

Coup d'etat (e.g. chile )

 

[RWA05]

All of these sound like good ideas, I think a Cold War Game would be fun. As to realistic weapons procurement, I had a thought the other day, which would pretty much just cause intense rage, where every program you start can occasionally double in cost and production time.

 

[sdeezie]

A rotatable globe map, like in "Superpower"!

It would look great when the ICBMs start flying over the north pole.

 

[jmpveg22]

A rotatable globe map, like in "Superpower"!

It would look great when the ICBMs start flying over the north pole.

This times 1000000000x

A global/spherical map is kind of a necessity in a game heavily focused around the cold war and nuclear deterrence.

 

[jmpveg22]

All of these sound like good ideas, I think a Cold War Game would be fun. As to realistic weapons procurement, I had a thought the other day, which would pretty much just cause intense rage, where every program you start can occasionally double in cost and production time.

I don't think it should work as every program gets more expensive... i think it should work as every program needs a certain amount of perquisite techs and research points. Taking into account my earlier arms procurement idea and other ideas:

1) Realistic weapons production and procurement
This means that instead of having every country able to make their own weapons (which is utterly unrealistic and actually complicates the game far too much)... most countries are forced to procure/buy weapons from the obvious actors.
The USA, the USSR, The UK, The French, The Chinese, and some others depending upon the era were literally the providers of the overwhelming majority of weapons (aircraft, tanks, ships, and everything else). It should be this way in the game as well.

A country can become a weapons procurer... but it should take massive research, and investment. Thus it should not be the preferable choice. Instead most countries should look to make arms deals or appeal for military aid as a way to equip armies. As a result these deals and interactions would have a result on relations of countries in the game.

2) Multiple starting years with realistic research on forces, industry, economies, and diplomatic standings

5) Realistic diplomatic and econonomic relations and options

To acquire these techs and points you need to build/procure defense contractor research centers (western countries) or Design Bureaus (eastern countries). these should be highly costly installations, with each installation specializing in either aircraft, land, nuclear/space, or sea design production.

Naturally certain countries already come with certain installations. Some Examples:

-USSR (Starts with 75)
Mig, Antonov, Tupolev, Sukhoi. Mil, Yakolev, etc, etc etc, (Air)
Almaz, Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation Energiaetc etc (Space/Nuclear)
KMDB, Uralvagonzavod, etc (Land)
Sevmash, Admiralty, etc (Sea
-USA (Starts with 75)
Lockheed, Boeing, McDonnell Douglas, etc (Air)
Martin Marietta, Lockheed Space etc etc (Space)
Chrysler Defense, BAE Systems etc etc (ground)
Bath Iron Works, Newport News etc etc (sea)
-Untied Kingdom, France (both start 50)
-China Starts with (starts with 25)
-East Germany, West Germany Czechoslovakia, Poland, Canada, Italy, Japan, (start with 10)
-Israel, Yugoslavia, (Both start with 5)

This somewhat forces most nations to engage in arms trade, or appeal for arms aid. One other interesting aspect could be the acquisition of licenses from Nations... like how Germany, Czech, and Poland all manufactured their own downgraded versions of Soviet T-55s and T-72s because they were sold/gifted the licenses and productions methods/means. This saved them research and time procuring new arms.

 

[Evan05]

Fun peace time mechanics.

 

[Rath12]

Semi Procedural weapon generation: basically supply requirements, and get possible weapon systems from defense industry. I.e.:"build me nukes with adjustable yield 1kt-1mt weighed under .5ton, under 3mil per peice.a

 

[Rath12]

Fun peace time mechanics.

For that I suggest some seriously deep Intel mechanics, and easy ways to veiw how you are doing against the ideological axis of the enemy.

Also, managing dissidents. For the USSR it's pretty easy (kill them all), but western countries would have to deal with my grandma rubbing mud all over stuff or something. Also, the magic bus.

Way more diplomatic options.

Move government deapth, possibly made up of a decent number of seperate laws, instead of categories like in other games (stellaris isolationist dictatorships or whatever there called, or tribal/nomadic/feudal/merchant republic/theocracy in ck2

 

[jmpveg22]

I think if paradox just hired the guy who did East Vs West and developed it in house... that would have been a decent game.

 

[DrTjr]

The looming threat of Mutually assured distruction with a Dr. Strange-love style event tree that could result in the total annihilation of both sides.

Also Democracies should be a pain to manage 100% with communist threats both real and imagined.

And last off a HoI4 to Cold War game converter

 

[yourworstnightm]

MAD. If WW3 happend everyone lose.

 

[aruon]

I think if paradox just hired the guy who did East Vs West and developed it in house... that would have been a decent game.

that's BL Logic, the team behind AoD.

 

[MN121MN]

Well, for starters;

a. Timeline and Bookmarks (this is not that important)
I imagine a Cold War game ending in 2000, since if we see 9/11, it marks a different breed of era from the Cold War. Rather than modelling a 9/11 type of event in-game, better to cut off the timeline. For the bookmarks, I think this quite represents the game, although it's a bit too much.
1946 - Reconstruction
1948 - Israeli War of Independence [not prioritized]
1950 - Korean War
1955 - Warsaw Pact
1961 - Vietnam War & Race to the Moon
1973 - Chilean Coup, Oil Crisis, and Yom Kippur War
1979 - Iranian Revolution
1981 - Reagan and Star Wars
1986 - Chernobyl [not prioritized]
1990 - War in Africa & Middle East, impending collapse of Soviet Union & reform of China
1997 - Asian Currency Crisis (fall of Southeast Asian regimes)

However, one important thing we need is the ability to choose the starting time, not only the bookmarks.

b. Proxy Wars
IMHO, HoI 4 already has a good concept for the proxy war and backing some aspects of a rebel. Though I'd like for the ability to control or play as rebel forces in a country. I agree with the previous statements, but I would like to add two paths of support for rebel forces. First, through the espionage system. It would drain espionage resources, less effective support but maintain relations and opinions with other countries. Second, through open diplomacy. This means the country openly support a faction of a country. While the support will be effective, the country will have reduced opinions with other countries who share opposing ideology with the factions.

c. Economy
This is going to be the most challenging aspect to model in-game: something akin to Victoria (the concept of markets, spheres of influence, and so on) but separated for the free market capitalists (the West) and the closed market of the communists (the East). The non-aligned countries would automatically be part of the free trade market, but they get preferential access to the communist market. Economic embargo should also be part of this economy. Aside from this, major shifts in the economy during the 70s (collapse of Bretton Woods) would change the global economy. Globalisation also plays a major factor.

d. Diplomacy
Diplomacy is also hard to model. First, the establishment of groups like UN, Non-aligned Countries, Arab League, OPEC, etc. must work. Espionage must be improved from EvW, not only the card system (which is not good enough, IMHO, to model the espionage of the Cold War). The challenge with an earlier start is modelling a non-existent Warsaw Pact.

e. Focus Trees
I don't know if focus trees should make a comeback. On one hand, it provides a lot of scenarios. On the other, it is a lot of scenarios, and the timespan is longer. Another option from focus trees is decisions, just as the previous ones.

 

[jmpveg22]

A Cold War grand strategy game needs to happen... but judging by the feedback of HOI4 and current lackluster feel of Stellaris, I kinda don't think Paradox should make it. To be honest I question if they are up to the task.

I think maybe paradox should publish it or fund it... but not make it. Give a bunch of $$$ to Battlegoat Studios or the dudes who did East Vs West... but maybe get their own current house in order first.

 

[Samman666]

- A dynamic and interesting political system and economy inspired by Victoria

- Logistics and front line combat inspired by Hearts of Iron

- Military, political, and social leaders with a good amount of depth but not an over complicated amount inspired by Stellaris

-Focus trees that can encourage different mutually exclusive paths to go down much like HOI4's, but preferably more varied and dynamic.

-Spreading social movements much like how EU4's new institution system works.

- Ten million communist rebels 24/7 inspired by Victoria

 

[aruon]

A Cold War grand strategy game needs to happen... but judging by the feedback of HOI4 and current lackluster feel of Stellaris, I kinda don't think Paradox should make it. To be honest I question if they are up to the task.

I think maybe paradox should publish it or fund it... but not make it. Give a bunch of $$$ to Battlegoat Studios or the dudes who did East Vs West... but maybe get their own current house in order first.

ehhhhhh, HOI games have always been a beast for paradox to do considering the massively increased number of military units and unique features- and making a decent AI is such an enormous problem that casts a shadow over just about everything. stellaris on the other hand was more inexperience due to being a new genre for them, the only way they could gain practical experience is by trial and error, which has served them well as the Heinlein patch will give stellaris much more personality.

problems with outsourcing:

battlegoat:

now while Battlegoat studios would be an interesting company to contract for a cold war game, there's a BIIIIIIIIIG issue: they have a much different style and focus of gameplay than that of PDS. and like PDS, their style is their signature. you can't just mesh them together. and that makes it an even harder idea to pitch, especially since BL Logic's East versus West just didn't pan out. and those are developers who cut their teeth as PDS community modders and are more or less cut from the same cloth as the PDS developer old guard.


BL Logic- AKA "the guys who did EvW":

East versus West. it was an ambitious idea. an awesome idea. but you have to understand- it was and is about as difficult an undertaking as any scenario the Clausewitz engine was designed in mind for. the general interface and design of Hearts of Iron and the user experience of HOI, victoria and EU wrapped up in a relatively recent era dominated not by conquest, cultural hegemony and a 0/2/1 idiot ruler, but the probability of the End Of The World, ideological supremacy, and the general state of FUBAR that the planet was in from the late 40s-90s. there's pretty much no order taller than modeling THAT. and EvW used an outdated engine version to boot.

whether the PDS devs are up to the task... it's more a question of do THEY think they're up to the task.

and i think the house is very much in order. it's just not every day can be better than the last... unless your nickname is Groogy. right now there's no drug on earth that can make him any happier and less of an adorable maniac what with the EU 4 dev MP.