Can we get a GTS Cold War game??? Pretty please.

[braveshaolin]

There's this boardgame called Twilight Struggle, I find it to be the ultimate cold war experience on multiplayer ground. I know PDS devs are huge boardgamers so I believe they've already played the heck out of it. I second your words, I've always wanted to see a modern Cold War GS game made by them. Gotta wish.
Although I don't thinks it would come before EU5

 

[AUG1024]

I think, the main reason for dropping East vs West some years ago wasn't due to controverals topics but due to "we couldn't make it fun".

Because user got no patience to dance on a string,they just want start a ww, no matter bookmark is 1950 or 1960 or 1970 or whatever.

 

[captainroot]

Because user got no patience to dance on a string,they just want start a ww, no matter bookmark is 1950 or 1960 or 1970 or whatever.

If a player plays a stealth game by trying to fight opponents rather than avoiding them, then the stealth game in question isn't the problem but the player who obviously doesn't play the game the way it should be played and thus deserves losing.

Likewise, if a Cold War GSG states that the player's objective is to avoid direct conflict with the opposing superpower and grind the opponent down by decades of ideological tug-of-war, economic competition, scientific race, ruthless espionage, conventional and nuclear deterrence, political poker and considerate conduct of proxy wars, then the player trying to play it like a wargame deserves to see lots of nuclear mushrooms on the screen and would be better off playing a wargame. On the other hand, those who abide by the game's rules will have a (non-nuclear) blast because their patience in this case is a prerequisite, not a hindrance.

BTW, regarding “patience”: let's not forget that CK3 campaign lasts 586/387 years, EU4 campaign lasts 377 years and V3 campaign lasts 100 years. If players of PDX games have the patience to play these campaigns from start to finish then obviously a Cold War GSG campaign lasting 45 years (1946-1991) will not be a problem.

 

[AUG1024]

If a player plays a stealth game by trying to fight opponents rather than avoiding them, then the stealth game in question isn't the problem but the player who obviously doesn't play the game the way it should be played and thus deserves losing.

Likewise, if a Cold War GSG states that the player's objective is to avoid direct conflict with the opposing superpower and grind the opponent down by decades of ideological tug-of-war, economic competition, scientific race, ruthless espionage, conventional and nuclear deterrence, political poker and considerate conduct of proxy wars, then the player trying to play it like a wargame deserves to see lots of nuclear mushrooms on the screen and would be better off playing a wargame. On the other hand, those who abide by the game's rules will have a (non-nuclear) blast because their patience in this case is a prerequisite, not a hindrance.

BTW, regarding “patience”: let's not forget that CK3 campaign lasts 586/387 years, EU4 campaign lasts 377 years and V3 campaign lasts 100 years. If players of PDX games have the patience to play these campaigns from start to finish then obviously a Cold War GSG campaign lasting 45 years (1946-1991) will not be a problem.

Just like Blizzard? To "teach" player to play game?

 

[jmpveg22]

If one tries to play a game cold war oriented game the same way you play a WW2 game... "user error" is the term that comes to mind.

 

[ZechsMerquise73]

I love cold war aesthetics and more passive gameplay, but arbitrarily setting a game in a time period is, I realize after a long time of wanting this, pretty counter productive. Games do best when they have some reason for being in the gameplay. E.g., Crusader Kings works well justified around titles and court intrigue. EU works well around world conquest and colonization. It seems like a problem with Paradox games specifically that when their game is just set in a time period without a gameplay reason to back the setting and distinguish it from their other titles (e.g., mostly Rome just applies EU rules to another period) it doesn't do as well and ends to come off as if it lacks creative direction.