• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
To be honest... anything remotely related to nationalism, political, and military dynamics is bound to be turned into a flame war. And the Cold War is literally the embodiment of these things.

I don't think any smart developer should/would let that dictate that topics they will and and will not make a game for. I'm tired of seeing gaming companies cater to the 15 and under crowd anyway. Make a cold war game for adults, then just unleash the ban-hammers against those who are not mature enough to handle interacting within it.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
To be honest... anything remotely related to nationalism, political, and military dynamics is bound to be turned into a flame war. And the Cold War is literally the embodiment of these things.

I don't think any smart developer should/would let that dictate that topics they will and and will not make a game for. I'm tired of seeing gaming companies cater to the 15 and under crowd anyway. Make a cold war game for adults, then just unleash the ban-hammers against those who are not mature enough to handle interacting within it.

that's pretty much how the moderators back with EvW handled it.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The game should be interesting to play not only as US or USSR. Which naturally leads to quite ahistorical gameplay. Going full democracy as Kim the First? Or "nah, I'll try again" as Hirohito? "Why do we need a wall, again?" as GDR in 1961? Not sure how I would feel about both presence/absence of such options.
As for the gameplay, I'd like to see a lot of attention given to economy, propaganda warfare and espionage. I don't need HoI's military depth for some tiny proxy wars.
 
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.
I really like this idea. Probably a good way to handle things as a lesser state would be that you really need to be buying weapons early on, but eventually you'll want to transition into making them yourself as an ultimate goal.

The way I see the game flow playing out would be to become the only superpower in the game. Obviously at the start only the US and USSR are super powers, but other states can become that if they have enough internal industrial strength and a large enough power block or sphere of influence. Each super power has their own ideology that they're trying to spread and supplant other ideologies with through influence, prestige, economic power, proxy wars, and espionage. You generally aren't trying to directly attack your rival super powers, but to weaken their sphere of influence enough that they're no longer super powers. Once you're the only one left, you essentially establish a worldwide hegemony under your ideology to win.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The biggest thing I would hope for would be realistic politics, thorough and objective historical research, and avoiding reducing the Cold War to a mere geopolitical conflict between big powers rather than the far more complex worldwide political, economic and ideological struggle it was. In particular I would want the game to avoid an anti-communist bias that reduces one whole side of the conflict to a simplistic caricature. Paradox is already really good with military stuff, and the whole East vs West experience showed that they had good plans on how to model espionage and limited/proxy wars, etc, but as far as politics, economics and historical bias goes I think Paradox has some issues to work out before it could make a really great Cold War game. East vs West would have been good, but I don't think it would have been great/definitive (though it would have been better than any Cold War game made anywhere thus far; the bar is set rather low there). I was particularly disappointed by the way they seemed to handle internal communist politics, such as the Sino-Soviet split, which I think was framed in a really ridiculous and simplistic way; it was clear that nobody did any research (outside of the Western, anti-communist perspective) on the nature of the split and what the two sides argued about and believed in, despite about a zillion documents and articles from many of the governments and parties involved being freely available on the internet. Politics in the communist world was as complex as politics in the capitalist world (even more so in some ways), and things could have gone in any number of different directions there. I would want the game to accurately model the politics of all sides as best as the game format allows. I already trust Paradox to handle Western politics well (being run by Westerners no doubt educated in their own political traditions), but i'm skeptical of how they handle non-Western politics.

So that would be what I would hope for in a Paradox Cold War game; a better and less simplistic handle on politics, with less of a Western liberal-centric perspective. I think Paradox is already great on everything except that. As the Cold War was very political, and military conflict (while dramatic whenever it did flare up) was very much secondary, a good handle on politics is essential. A game that's as close to being politically unbiased as humanly possible, portraying all the sides fairly and accurately based on thorough research, taking into account the many political complexities of the conflict and the many different ways that things could have gone, where you can have a reasonably realistic and therefore more enjoyable experience playing as any country from any side in the conflict. That would have the makings of a really great Cold War game, rather than just an adequate one.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
International and domestic politics, trade, espionage and proxy wars. Social upheaval with the civil rights movement in the US, and things like the Cultural Revolution in China. Chafing under the majors and trying to exert your own influence when you play as a minor.

The big thing is I really don't want it to be a Cold War gone hot scenario simulator. Frankly I wouldn't be against any huge escalation like that just resulting in MAD and a game over. War should absolutely be part of the game, but HOI-but-20-years-later is the last thing I want out of a Cold War game. I see a lot of posts here about people talking about weapons procurement, but that's really not what the Cold War is about. The military race and how it factors into the major nations' peacetime economic prosperity is a vital component of the Cold War, but you don't need to have a production tab a la HOI4 to model that.
 
I agree when it comes to fighting wars between major powers. Minors fighting one another, civil wars, and proxy wars should be a regular thing. Weapon procurement is something that should be important for minor's military power and as a source of trade and influence for major powers.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
global arms trade should generally be restricted to a top-down approach outside of alliances, as well as a particular option to select what origin country you want to get weapons from. this could be useful for diplomacy, and could prevent a nation that frequently buys surplus from playing both sides, like if India tried buying MiG-19s and T-54s while already having a sizable number of F-4 Phantoms and M48 Pattons.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
global arms trade should generally be restricted to a top-down approach outside of alliances, as well as a particular option to select what origin country you want to get weapons from. this could be useful for diplomacy, and could prevent a nation that frequently buys surplus from playing both sides, like if India tried buying MiG-19s and T-54s while already having a sizable number of F-4 Phantoms and M48 Pattons.
well I'd imagine that the opinions and ideologies of the countries would play a huge part of who you can trade with in general, and military equipment even more so; the Communists and Capitalists would embargo each other frequently unless their economies are in really bad shape and/or they're just that desperate for the resources in those other nations...

Vicy2's economic/trade system would make a good starting point, though obviously the Communist/Capitalist systems need more work that how much or how little micro-managing you're allowed to do... because that just makes Communism the obvious choice for people who know how to min-max the systems.
 
I honestly wouldn't find a Cold War game very fun. I imagine playing as the USA, and seeing my Korean ally get invaded. I intervene and drive the Commies back. Suddenly, the Chinese intervene! Unless I go for the nuclear option, Korea is a stalemate. I would have to restrain myself for literally everything, unless I want to get destroyed.

That is why playing Germany is so fun in HoI. You really are encouraged to throw caution to the wind and invade everybody.
 
I honestly wouldn't find a Cold War game very fun. I imagine playing as the USA, and seeing my Korean ally get invaded. I intervene and drive the Commies back. Suddenly, the Chinese intervene! Unless I go for the nuclear option, Korea is a stalemate. I would have to restrain myself for literally everything, unless I want to get destroyed.

That is why playing Germany is so fun in HoI. You really are encouraged to throw caution to the wind and invade everybody.

well, with the korean war it's really more a lesson of the EU and CK games: there's always another day. as opposed to the total war environment of HOI.

that said MAD didn't exist in 1950-1953 and nuclear power was still very lopsided towards the US. it wasn't until 1959 that the USSR had enough nukes to devastate the US, and china didn't have any nukes until 1964.
 
well, with the korean war it's really more a lesson of the EU and CK games: there's always another day. as opposed to the total war environment of HOI.

that said MAD didn't exist in 1950-1953 and nuclear power was still very lopsided towards the US. it wasn't until 1959 that the USSR had enough nukes to devastate the US, and china didn't have any nukes until 1964.

China really should become its own sphere of influence after the mid-1960's... a much weaker one than the USA or USSR, but still a new sphere. The trick would be simulating a world of detente, where you had 3 competing and counterbalancing interests/camps.
 
China really should become its own sphere of influence after the mid-1960's... a much weaker one than the USA or USSR, but still a new sphere. The trick would be simulating a world of detente, where you had 3 competing and counterbalancing interests/camps.

pretty much. though i'd peg its sphere as appearing after Mao Zedong dies. just about everything in china began to improve after maoism had gone by the wayside.
 
Hmm... I think a combination of the alliance system from HoI 4 and apply sphere system for these alliance, is enough to replicate that.

However, with that system, modelling the UK will be a challenge, since they are part of NATO and Commonwealth.
 
Hmm... I think a combination of the alliance system from HoI 4 and apply sphere system for these alliance, is enough to replicate that.

However, with that system, modelling the UK will be a challenge, since they are part of NATO and Commonwealth.
But aren't all British Commonwealth nations also part of NATO as well? So maybe the additional closeness of the Commonwealth nations can be represented through better trade agreements and various opinion boosters due to similar culture/ideologies/whatever else the game uses to judge relations.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
But aren't all British Commonwealth nations also part of NATO as well? So maybe the additional closeness of the Commonwealth nations can be represented through better trade agreements and various opinion boosters due to similar culture/ideologies/whatever else the game uses to judge relations.
Nope, only Commonwealth members part of NATO are Canada and the UK.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
As for the game mechanics, I have a few ideas. Well, a moderately large word document full of ideas. I'll put highlights here:

War
Land
Land units are built the same as in HOI4, with the caveat that you can build "Reserve" units. Unlike EvW, where "Reserve" units where left in a universal "pool", in Iron Curtain, Reserves are placed on the map similar to HoI3, with a toggle to activate them. Reserves use 1/10 of the manpower as active divisions, but require the same amount of equipment. Additionally, as well as capturing Equipment of other countries when you annex them, you also capture Equipment over the course of the war, during battles, and ESPECIALLY when you totally destroy or route enemies. This Equipment can be used or reverse engineered.

Designing Divisions
This is done the same as in HOI4, again, with Line Brigades, and Support Companies. Line Brigades include; Infantry (in trucks or technicals, mainly used for early game and 3rd-world combat), Light Infantry (representing higher-trained infantry, including Mountaineers and early-period Marine divisions), Paratroopers, Mechanized (your default 1st and 2nd-world infantry, in APCs), Heavy Mechanized (late-period 1st and 2nd-world infantry, in IFVs), Armour, Militia (units like the National Guard), Air Assault (late-period infantry riding in helicopters, late-period 101st Airborne, Marines), and lastly Irregulars (Guerrila forces with special rules). Support Companies include Armour again, Anti-Tank, Anti-Air, Artillery, Rocket Artillery, Recon, Engineers, and Air Cavalry (representing attack helicopter groups). All Support Companies are assumed to be self-propelled.

Irregular Combat
Most combat works as in HOI4. Irregulars, however, are unique. Irregular units cannot be combined with other Line Brigades or Support Companies. They have the ability to coexist with hostile units in a province. Irregular units gain large bonuses in urban and rough (mountain, hill, jungle, desert) terrain. Irregular units have a special trait, Infiltration, which is counterable by the Counterterrorism trait of the opposing unit. Irregular units capture territory as usual, denying supplies through the region, and denying the owner access to the resources of the province. When a Regular unit moves into the province containing an Irregular unit, rather than trigger a battle at the border, it captures the province back. On regular intervals, the Regular unit rolls its CT against the Infilitration of the Irregular unit, to try and bring the Irregular into an open battle where it will be annihilated. Until it does so, both units suffer attrition, the Irregular at a rate determined by the CT score, and the Regular at a much much higher rate based on the Strength of the Irregular unit. Both it and the Irregular unit can move freely out of the province, but the Irregular unit attempting to move lowers its Infiltration score and triggers an instant CT roll against it, outside of the normal intervals.

tl;dr: Irregulars fight like HoI navies.

Air
Not finished yet. HoI 4 has a decent barebones structure to work with to begin with, but it requires a LOT of tweaking to even work in HoI 4. The theory behind it is good though.

Nuclear
Honestly pretty happy with how it was laid out in the EvW dev diaries. I would add the mining and trade of Raw Uranium, as well as Civilian Centrifuges, to show how a country could develop legal Civilian Centrifuges and then upgrade them into Military Centrifuges.

Naval
On the most part, EvW's dev diaries was good on this, with one exception; more than just planes should be able to attack over multiple tiles. Helicopters and Long-Range ASW missiles are also important. Anti-air attacks planes, PD detracts from damage done by Helicopters and missiles. Fleets can either evade, stay at missile range, or close to conventional range. Mission types include patrol, fight piracy, support amphibious invasion, or attack specific targets (which can include in-land targets with LR cruise missiles).

Economy and Production
Overall, the Economy is a combination of V2, and HoI4, with the addition of semi-independent Companies, an idea that I've also floated around for V3. It is simpler than V2, but more complex than HoI4, representing that Iron Curtain is just as much an econo-political game as it is a war game, but it has a much larger war aspect than Vicky, which can't be overshadowed.

Simplified Pop System
Similar to Vicky, we are going to track Pops. Just like Vicky, Iron Curtain is just as much of an econo-political simulator as it is a war-game. As such, we need to track the economic well-being and political beliefs of the populace. There are 4 different 'Types' of Pops; Workers, Managers Scientists, and Capitalists. They each have a simplified role. Lower Class pops work in factories, or in RGOs, creating goods. Management works in factories to raise the efficiency, Intellectuals work in Labs to produce Research or in Centrifuges, and Capitalists invest in Companies.
Pops demand goods. All Pops require Survival Goods. Workers also need Low-Class Goods. Managers and Scientists require Middle-Class Goods on top of that, and Capitalists require Upper-Class Goods additionally. If pops can no longer afford Middle or Upper-Class goods, they count down to demotion. If pops are rich enough to buy Middle-Class to Upper-Class Goods, they count down to promotion. If pops can afford their goods but none are available to buy, then they begin to raise in Dissent. If they cannot acquire Survival Goods, then they also begin to count down to death.


Production Lines and Factories
There are 11 different types of Production Lines, similar to the 3 types in HoI4. They can be divided into Civilian and Military Lines. Factories can be switched between Lines, but the cost to re-tool the factory depends on how similar the Lines are. The lines that can be switched cheaper are Civilian and Military Centrifuges, Infantry Equipment to Low-Class Goods and vice versa, and Middle- and Upper-Class Luxuries to Motor-Lines and vice versa. Unlike HoI4, Input Goods do not simply slow down production, but are required and consumed to produce goods. Factory Lines can be set to Full, Half, Minimal, or Closed Employment, which lowers employment and thus labour costs, but also lowers output. Closing a factory sends a percentage of the goods used to build the factory back into the companies stockpile. Production Lines producing more goods lowers the prices of the goods.

Industrial Goods
Civilian Lines are Survival, Low- Middle- and Upper-Class Goods, as well as Construction Supplies, used to build factories and province buildings, and Civilian Centrifuges, which do ???.
Military Lines are Infantry Equipment (used to build Small Arms and Support Equipment), Motor Lines (used to build tanks, AA/AT, etc), Plane Lines (used to build planes, helicopters), Shipyards, and Military Centrifuges. The State can ban specific Military Lines from export, should they wish.

RGOS
RGOs are free-form Production Lines pre-set in a province. They are limited in the number of factories they can support, depending on the province. Unlike V2, however, factories must be constructed in an RGO to provide the positions for Workers to gather the Raw Goods.

Raw Goods
I'm not entirely sure which goods would make the final cut, but I've bolded the ones I'm most sure about.
Fuel is used in Plane, Motor, Middle- and Upper-Class Lines, Shipyards, as well as as upkeep for all military units save for Irregulars, in varying amounts.
Rubber is used in Planes, Trucks, Middle- and Upper-Class Lines
Aluminum is used in Planes, Support Equipment, and Upper-Class Lines.
Steel is used in Small-Arms, Support Equipment, Ships, Tanks, AA/AT/etc, Construction, Middle-Class Goods.
Tungsten is used in Planes, Tanks, AA/AT/etc.
Chromium is used in Tanks and Capital Ships.
Uranium is used in Centrifuges.
Foodstuff is used to create Survival Needs.
Lumber is used to make Construction and Low-Class Goods.

Companies
Companies are an extra step in the economy, new to PDS games, a replacement for V2's World Market. For state-run Production Lines, the State is considered to be the Company. I'll call out any other places where a state-run Production Line differs from a Company-run Production Line.
Simply put, each Production Line is owned by a specific Company (with the exception of the pre-set RGO Production Lines, which can have factories from multiple Companies in it). Goods are added to the companies Stockpile. When a state or Pop buys a good, they buy it from the Company. Money is given to the Company. The company first spends the money on salaries and input goods. Secondly, they may save up to spend on a new factory. Lastly, profits are split amongst investing Capitalist pops, based on how much the Pop has invested in that Company. State-run Production Lines give profits to the Budget. Companies can, of course, go bankrupt. As shown above, they set the Employment Level based on the demand for their goods, and can close factories to gain back a percentage of the construction costs of the factory.
For state-build Lines and Factories, the State sets the Employment to Full, Half, Minimal, Closed, or Automated, which will treat the line as if it was a Capitalist-driven Company. Thus, as the USSR, you can ensure full employment, and that everyone receives a wage, but if your factories are not efficient enough, or you cannot secure the raw goods, you may not be able to supply everyone with the goods they demand, despite them having the money to pay for it. This is an important point often missed; communist systems were supply-driven rather than demand-driven. If people didn't get goods, it was because there was not goods to give them, not that they couldn't afford them. This models that.

Trade
Items from other countries cost more. In my V3 economic model, this is done via Infrastructure Companies, to avoid a Money Pit. In this simplified version, the extra money goes to the Company, who is assumed to handle transportation themselves. It's cheaper to buy goods from your country, than from other countries on the same continent, than from other countries on different continents. This can be balanced out, however, by other countries having more efficient lines, setting the base price of their good lower. Thus, it may be cheaper in the end to import lumber from China than to get it from France.
Additionally, Tariffs can be set on specific Types of Lines or Raw Goods, to protect local industries, and encourage local Pops and Companies to buy from other local Companies rather than abroad.


Economy of the State
In addition to the Tariffs mentioned above, the state also sets Tax levels different for each Pop, as well as sales from any state-owned factories. These are the main sources of income for the state.
How does ordering military goods work? In the "Orders and Stockpiles" page, you can place an order for a specific type of good. Under, for example, "Small Arms", you will see any Small Arms lines currently operating in your country, plus a list of other countries offering their own Small Arms for sale. Unless you are a major power, it will most likely be to your benefit to buy arms from someone who is, as your own tech will not be as powerful, or your factories as efficient. When you place an order from a company, you buy first from their immediate available stockpile, and then from on-going production. If demand is higher than production rates OR no production exists for the specific good you require, a company will transfer or create a line to make the desired product, after a short delay.


Espionage
Espionage Points
Espionage Points are points that are collected by Intelligence Center buildings (on a slow trickle), and by carrying out the cheap Spy Ring espionage mission, and spent on all missions. Espionage points are for a specific country, and can only be spent on missions in that country, and have to be built up by Spy Ring missions in that country. The Intelligence Centre gives a small trickle up to a maximum based on the total levels of intelligence centres you have in all countries, and a large trickle in your own country. Countries that are annexed give half of the espionage points in them to the country that annexed them. Missions only last a certain # of months. They also may trigger random events related to the mission.

Supporting Coups
Can either trigger a popular revolution by raising dissent and raising organization or popularity of a specific party, OR can directly cause a “vanguard” revolution allied with a high-organization party.

Tech Espionage
Used to learn technology the target knows that you do not.

Military Espionage
Used to learn about enemies military division patters, strength, and nuclear warhead #s, silo locations.

Tech and Research
Same as in HoI 4, plus ability to reverse engineer captured or bought Equipment of other nations to attempt to learn that tech. Consumes the captured Equipment, instead of using it.

Take EvW’s ability of setting “goals”, and the automating tech towards those goals. If tech is automated and there is excess research available not being used, it will automatically choose a tech using the same logic as the AI. AI also uses this system; it will choose a few goals (balance between long, short, and medium-term goals), and fill in gaps.

I'm still working on the Internal Politics section of the design bible, not sure quite what that's gonna look like. It may end up being more complicated than either HoI3 or Vicky2, as I want to be able to model different types of democracies better...
 
Supporting Coups
Can either trigger a popular revolution by raising dissent and raising organization or popularity of a specific party, OR can directly cause a “vanguard” revolution allied with a high-organization party.

Something important is that Paradox needs to make this fun. We can already do this in HOI4, however it's literally just hitting a button and losing .25 political power daily.

There needs to be some advanced mechanics to make supporting coups both fun and to help model why certain regions (like the middle east) was extremely hostile toward certain ideologies. A petty nation spirit that gives -0.1 Communism support each day isn't going to suffice.
 
I think the trick to making those kind of features good is to have a whole sheath of events linked to them. I was seeing not a "support coup" button, but "raise dissent" and "support party" buttons that, when combined, create conditions for a coup. Because of how closely this is tied to the Internal Politics section, this bit is also iffy.
 
Interesting flavor events and ways to compete with other powers for ideological supremacy in the country seem like the best options I can think of. Maybe some risk/reward things as well, such as a shot at accelerated uptake at the cost of potential danger or extremism down the line. It feels a bit like the same problem with how boring enlightening species in Stellaris is right now. On the other hand, things actually happen when you try to infiltrate instead.