How could Paradox make a Cold War game?

[loup99]

2) have Stellaris type "Ethos" that reflect a nation's attitude/culture/policy/ect. and nations will interact with each other based on how these line up, POPs within a nation would also have Ethos and if there is enough disunity/conflict between the types of ethos present then civil wars or coups can occur(or maybe just different leadership being elected in democratic nations will make the government drift to match the people)

This I disagree with. The Victoria 2 system is far more realistic and accurate in my opinion (for parties, POPs and ideologies) and could be combined with HoI elements to have ministres, heads of states etc together with some unique depth.

 

[Rip Off Productions]

This I disagree with. The Victoria 2 system is far more realistic and accurate in my opinion (for parties, POPs and ideologies) and could be combined with HoI elements to have ministres, heads of states etc together with some unique depth.

well that's kind of what I was trying to suggest, I was just using the ethos name sense that's a more recent game and the Cold War was hypothetically about ideological differences between nations, so it felt like the appropriate term to use. sorry if this resulted in some misunderstandings.

and what about my other ideas, any criticisms there? I like hearing feedback.

 

[loup99]

well that's kind of what I was trying to suggest, I was just using the ethos name sense that's a more recent game and the Cold War was hypothetically about ideological differences between nations, so it felt like the appropriate term to use. sorry if this resulted in some misunderstandings.

I think we have a different point of view on where the differences were. I believe they were rooted in parties/factions, while your suggestion would make it rooted in countries. That was at least my impression, then there may have been a misunderstanding as you mention.

and what about my other ideas, any criticisms there? I like hearing feedback.

To me, the rest seemed to make sense and I'm not really an expert on game concepts, except perhaps a note on the superpower system that may or may not conflict with the sandbox nature certain users enjoy.

 

[FOARP]

well here's my ideas:


1) Have a system similar to a mix of HoI4's factions and Vicy 3's Great Powers' sphere of influences; there would be 3 types of counties within each faction; the Superpower(USA and USSR) who can influence all nations within the faction, world powers(UK, France, China, maybe Japan or India later in the game) who can have their own smaller spheres of influence within he faction, and minors who make up everyone else. then there's the "neutral" 'third world' nations, they can be influenced by members of both factions until they eventually get pulled into one or the other(or split into both by a civil war).

2) have Stellaris type "Ethos" that reflect a nation's attitude/culture/policy/ect. and nations will interact with each other based on how these line up, POPs within a nation would also have Ethos and if there is enough disunity/conflict between the types of ethos present then civil wars or coups can occur(or maybe just different leadership being elected in democratic nations will make the government drift to match the people)

3) have something similar to HoI4's world tension in the form of the Doomsday Clock; if it ticks up to midnight then a all out nuclear war is probably inevitable, however nuclear war can still happen if someone thinks they have first strike capability or a significant enough advantage that the war would be "winnable"/survivable. the clock will tick up or down due to a variety of things, mostly revolving around the maintaining of nuclear deterrence/M.A.D., but this will only happen if both sides are aware of the disparity in power; for example if you're playing as Russia and manage to set up those missile bases in Cuba without the USA(or any other western/capitalist faction member)'s spies or intelligence agencies noticing then the clock will stay put, but if they do then your going to need to find a way to fix the balance by pulling them out.

4) technology will be put into three categories; secret(new stuff that only you know, can be shared will allies or discovered by enemy spies but otherwise will not spread to other nations who don't develop it from scratch), military(stuff only in use by the army/navy/air force/government/etc., becomes easier to research as more and more nations acquire and use it), civilian(will slowly spread thought the world). most tech will slowly "degrade" through each category over time, though some things will obviously never reach the civilian level, and if you play your cards right all your best toys will stay a secret for a very long time.

5) spies and espionage should be a big part of how the game is played if you're a superpower/world power, putting eyes and ears in enemy territory while rooting out their attempts to do the same in yours, double agents, spreading propaganda and counter-propaganda both in and out of your borders, and so on will be key to "winning" in the long run.

as for the nuclear war itself, I think it having it's own map mode where you'd set up the strategies using a HoI4 style planer to place your missiles, planes, subs and so on and set their targets in the case of war would be the best way to handle it, after all that's how a real nuclear war would be handled isn't it? the plans are already set in the case of needing to use it in retaliation, and if you want to be the one who starts it then you just need to hit the nice big "launch" button...

I think many of these things (certainly the Doomsday clock and the nuclear war plans) were in EvW. The problem (amongst others) was making them fun - it just wasn't (so I understand) much fun when nuclear war is over very quickly and anyway the entire point of the game is avoiding it whilst simultaneously preparing for it.

Thus far in Paradox games spying and propaganda have been peripheral game elements that normally aren't much fun to use compared to the war and conquest that most people seem to like engaging in.

 

[Rip Off Productions]

To me, the rest seemed to make sense and I'm not really an expert on game concepts, except perhaps a note on the superpower system that may or may not conflict with the sandbox nature certain users enjoy.

well who's a Super/world/minor power can change if one gains/loses enough influence on the world stage, though the Super Powers would be fairly well entrenched and would take a long series of mishaps to fall hard enough that the next strongest in their faction has to take up the role... but it can happen,thugh that bring up the question of what condisions make the title of super power pass to the next in line, and when does the faction simply collapse? after all wouldn't one of the "win" conditions be to recreate how the Cold War ended in real life?

I think many of these things (certainly the Doomsday clock and the nuclear war plans) were in EvW. The problem (amongst others) was making them fun - it just wasn't (so I understand) much fun when nuclear war is over very quickly and anyway the entire point of the game is avoiding it whilst simultaneously preparing for it.

Well hypothetically it would be possible to start and win a nuclear war, it would just require a f*ck-ton of hard work to get that level of superiority over the other side and/or achieve first strike capability, and preventing the otherside from doing the same would be a big part of the game.

Thus far in Paradox games spying and propaganda have been peripheral game elements that normally aren't much fun to use compared to the war and conquest that most people seem to like engaging in.

and that's the core of the problem isn't it? a Cold War game needs to revolve around the game of cat and also cat that is the world of espionage and spycraft, because a vast majority of the time(unless you're plays as Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, or any other tiny third world nation that most people here have ever even heard of) you should not be fighting any wars at all, save for sending a few platoons here and there as part of an intervention in one of those third world nations.


In general an "arcuate" "simulation" of the Cold War would be an extremely niche game within the already niche Grand Strategy genre...

 

[jmpveg22]

I think they should look to make a more complete, polished, refined, and evolved version of Supreme Ruler Cold War. I think the dudes @ battlegoat were on the right track, they were just underpowered, understaffed, probably underfunded, and didn't completely finish the game.

 

[ninthlite]

a lot of suggestions and thoughts on this thread are bloody horrible, and then peeps are getting butthurt when people don't worship their ideas. W

 

[Vetgirig]

A cold war game is probably best done as a CK2 style game. Managing assets(spies) and making sure the right rulers rule different countries in the world. stealing tech and keeping world tension low so to not provoce a WW3.

Winning condition could then be if all world rulers is spies for your country.

 

[tinculin]

The game should evolve around turning nations to democracy or communism without tensions rising to a point where a major nation declares war on another.

The moment one of the big five declare war on another, it should be game over and everyone loses.

The Cold War would need to be a much bigger political & economic game than anything else

 

[Rath12]

Ww3 should be possible, but the buildup to winning it should basically require near collapse of the USSR or US. It should be the sort of thing only possible with a violent coup rushing through the Kremlin. MAD should be a significant part of the AI.

 

[jmpveg22]

Ww3 should be possible, but the buildup to winning it should basically require near collapse of the USSR or US. It should be the sort of thing only possible with a violent coup rushing through the Kremlin. MAD should be a significant part of the AI.

WWIII should be possible in many situations... and not always end in nuclear means.

For example... suppose in the mid to late 1980s East OR West Germany decided Unification needed to be carried out. Or the same could be said with the Koreas.

Basically the alliances in play would have come to the aid or their respective side (NATO and Warsaw Pact). A nuclear exchange is not an assured thing when the assets at risk are not the USA, UK, or USSR. A possibility yes... but by no means inevitable. MOST Diplomats and politicians have an odd habit of wanting to remain rich and survive... moreso than anything else

There are many other situations in which WWIII would have remained largely conventional...
-Germany Unification
-Korea Unification
-Korea Unification
-Taiwan vs PRC
-Vietnam Vs PRC
-Iran Vs USSR
-Pakistan vs USSR
-Japan vs China
-Japan vs USSR
-The countless civil wars that drew in both sides

All were hypothetical conflicts that were avoided... often multiple times. If one of these went hot, I'd imagine the diplomats (o both sides) would work overtime to ensure they dont return home to a crater.

 

[TheFuego]

Victoria + HoI4 combat + proxy wars

 

[captainroot]

Listen up, people: Paradox is conducting now a survey titled: "Help Us Improve Our Strategy Games!". In the survey there is one question regarding being interested (or not) in a "digital strategy game set post-1946". If you want to make Paradox-made Cold War game a reality, fill out the survey accordingly. You have time until March 22nd (17:00 CET), so don't waste time and voice your opinion NOW and maybe, just maybe, we will finally get a proper Cold War game we have been waiting for so long! Imperator: Rome is just around the corner, Victoria 3 will soon became reality, so let us set the stage for our dream-come-true!