What Would You Like to See Most in Supreme Ruler Cold War?

[Projekt 919]

I Always love these kinds of threads on Other Paradox Titles so I figured I start one of my own, also I had to find a place to admit I though Battlegoat Studios Died from Bug overloads on SR2020. anyway I'd love to see this.........

The Cold war period was about one thing, Building Yor Power and Influence and spreading your own brand of Political-Economic Theory Global. So I would love to see a Sphere of Influence System. I envision it being Something Along these lines. A Scoring System would be neccesary to determine Ranks, three catagories could be introduced, Economic score, military score, and technological score. This Could add up to a Total score or a Prestige Value. Then there would have to be national ranks.......

Top Two Countries: Superpowers : A Host of extra espionage and diplomatic options, able to influence any Country Globbaly into thier SOI or Treaty System.

Top Ten Countries: Global Powers : Some Extra espionage and diplomatic options, able to Influence any country on thier continent and able to resist the influence of Superpowers if they wish

Top 25 Nations: Regional Powers: Only Able to Influence countries that they share a border with and capable of resisting great power influence and slow the influence of Superpowers, also certain special espionage options for countries that border them.

Nuetural Nations: Weak Nations with no special charachteristics that are niether helped nor hindered in thier growth.

Sattilite states: Nations Dependent on Another, For Example Vietnam controlling affairs in Laos or The Soviet Union COntrolling affairs in COld war Hungary, No Diploacy except for those within the same SOI

Being In a SOI would mean Several Things..............

1. Goods from the sphere leader would be subsidied and cheaper to buy
2. Goods Purchased from abroad are more expensive other than those from the same SOI
3. The Sphere Leader Garuntees your Independence and will go to war if you are attacked
4. Technologies discovered by one sphere member or leader would have a small (like 0.5%) chance of being gained by sphere members every day (Like Inventions in say V2)
5. any goods you fail to sell are donated to the sphere leaders stockpile
6. A Country in a sphere cannot have a sphere of its own
7. If the Sphere leader goes to war you will be called to fight
8. The Faction Supporting the Sphere Leaders type of Government Gets a large Popularity Boost

Government Ideologies could Go Like This (from Left To Right, starting with Dictatorships)

LEFT
1. Juche Dictatorship
2. Maoist
3. Neo-Stalinist
4. Marxist Leninist
5. Titoist
6. Dengist Communism
7. Peronist
8. Social Democratic
9. Social Liberal

RIGHT

1. National Socialist
2. Military Dictatorship
3. Falangist
4. Absolute Monarchy
5. Fundamentalist Republic
6. presidential Dictatorship
7. Constitutional Monarchist
8. Social Conservative
9. Market Liberalism

Edit: Would Also Like To Go To Brigade Sized Units and Have the ability to Merge them Into Larger ones so instead of having 25 mechanized infantry brigades I can Have 1 Mechanized Infantry Corps, Battalions in SR2020 were really freakin annoying

 

[Kalelovil]

Top Two Countries: Superpowers : A Host of extra espionage and diplomatic options, able to influence any Country Globbaly into thier SOI or Treaty System.

The problem with only having two superpowers is what to do with China. I woulld prefer if there was an event chain leading up to the Sino-Soviet split. If the historical outcome occurs then China should become the third Superpower, capable of assembling its own SOI (and the resulting proxy wars between it and the USSR, e.g. the USSR backed Vietnamese invasion of Chinese backed Cambodia).

There should also be an event chain leading to France's decision to lead NATO, in which case they should become a Superpower as well, albeit one far weaker than the others, while still remaining on friendly terms with USA and the NATO nations and with the possibility of reintegration with the USA's sphere and NATO.

There is also the question of how to handle the Non-Aligned Movement. They could become a seperate SOI led by a Superpower, however the diverse economic and political systems of the various members and the lack of a clear leader (Yugoslavia I suppose, perhaps India?) would make this awkward. Perhaps a more suitable system is for countries which meet certain prerequisites to be able to take a "Non-Aligned Movement" decision which will prevent them joining any SOI and prevent superpowers from being able to influence them.

Top Ten Countries: Global Powers : Some Extra espionage and diplomatic options, able to Influence any country on thier continent and able to resist the influence of Superpowers if they wish

These global powers (maybe major powers would be a better term since their reach isn't actually global) should also be able to try to influence their former colonies outside Europe. How the game handles the process of decolonialisation and the battle for influence over ex-colonies will be interesting to see.

Government Ideologies could Go Like This (from Left To Right, starting with Dictatorships)

LEFT
1. Juche Dictatorship
2. Maoist
3. Neo-Stalinist
4. Marxist Leninist
5. Titoist
6. Dengist Communism
7. Peronist
8. Social Democratic
9. Social Liberal

RIGHT

1. National Socialist
2. Military Dictatorship
3. Falangist
4. Absolute Monarchy
5. Fundamentalist Republic
6. presidential Dictatorship
7. Constitutional Monarchist
8. Social Conservative
9. Market Liberalism

A simple one dimensional (and subjective) system and classification such as that seems far too crude for the complexities of Cold War geopolitics. Something like HOI2's system of 7 sliders (http://www.paradoxian.org/hoi2wiki/index.php/Domestic_Policy) would be more appropriate.

 

[Balthagor]

Before I dive into commentary on the new ideas...

...also I had to find a place to admit I though Battlegoat Studios Died from Bug overloads on SR2020...

I am never able to let comments like this slide by. SR2010, SR2020 and SR2020GC are some of the most stable, bug free titles I've ever seen. Bar none. If you dispute this claim I'd invite you to post in the SR2020 forum to support your claim. The Cold War engine is a continuing progression of the Supreme Ruler engine so if you think there are bugs, fixing them affects the quality of the new project as well.

I'll not touch that topic again so we don't drift permenantly off topic.

So I would love to see a Sphere of Influence System...

Done. Now, what that means is still being defined. SR2020 had a Spheres of Influence system but it was focused on similarities and differences between regions where as the new system will need to focus on a two sided division (Soviet/US). Whether other nations can rise to superpower status is still being defined. Kaleovil's comments go directly to issues we're currently exploring.

 

[RedRalphWiggum]

I fully expect the US to be presented as more benevolent than Stalinist USSR, but I really hope too much bias doesn't creep into this project. The west had satellites and nations under its thumb just as the East did. Don't forget one country was allowed to leave the Warsaw Pact and one refused to participate in the invasion of Czechoslovakia so I hope it's not presented as a monolithic and evil entity opposite the freedom-loving and glorious NATO.

 

[Projekt 919]

Before I dive into commentary on the new ideas...


I am never able to let comments like this slide by. SR2010, SR2020 and SR2020GC are some of the most stable, bug free titles I've ever seen. Bar none. If you dispute this claim I'd invite you to post in the SR2020 forum to support your claim. The Cold War engine is a continuing progression of the Supreme Ruler engine so if you think there are bugs, fixing them affects the quality of the new project as well.

I'll not touch that topic again so we don't drift permenantly off topic.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be out of line, per chance do you have a link to the latest patch

Done. Now, what that means is still being defined. SR2020 had a Spheres of Influence system but it was focused on similarities and differences between regions where as the new system will need to focus on a two sided division (Soviet/US). Whether other nations can rise to superpower status is still being defined. Kaleovil's comments go directly to issues we're currently exploring.

Yay

 

[Samilou]

Done. Now, what that means is still being defined. SR2020 had a Spheres of Influence system but it was focused on similarities and differences between regions where as the new system will need to focus on a two sided division (Soviet/US). Whether other nations can rise to superpower status is still being defined. Kaleovil's comments go directly to issues we're currently exploring.

To me, leaving out the ability to change spheres of influence of power status would be like leaving out the ability to declare war. There would be no point in playing.

 

[bluepoo]

nm

 

[Hundane]

The problem with only having two superpowers is what to do with China. I woulld prefer if there was an event chain leading up to the Sino-Soviet split. If the historical outcome occurs then China should become the third Superpower, capable of assembling its own SOI (and the resulting proxy wars between it and the USSR, e.g. the USSR backed Vietnamese invasion of Chinese backed Cambodia).

There should also be an event chain leading to France's decision to lead NATO, in which case they should become a Superpower as well, albeit one far weaker than the others, while still remaining on friendly terms with USA and the NATO nations and with the possibility of reintegration with the USA's sphere and NATO.

There is also the question of how to handle the Non-Aligned Movement. They could become a seperate SOI led by a Superpower, however the diverse economic and political systems of the various members and the lack of a clear leader (Yugoslavia I suppose, perhaps India?) would make this awkward. Perhaps a more suitable system is for countries which meet certain prerequisites to be able to take a "Non-Aligned Movement" decision which will prevent them joining any SOI and prevent superpowers from being able to influence them.

As a player I would want the ability to possibly make my region an influental superpower no matter what region I chose to play. Getting some regions to be an influential superpower might be nearly impossible but it would be fun to try.

Other things I would like to see:
The ability to alter history thru diplomacy,espionage,and overt and covert wars.
The possibility that my poor leadership decisions will result in a coup, rebellion, or loss of an election. Wouldnt mind if assinations were possible either.
Being able to install puppet governments with the risk of losing control if not properly maintained.

One scenario type I would like to see is running a 3rd world type region during the Cold War that moves to a Nuclear Hot War between NATO and the Soviets. Will my region be caught in middle ?, did I get involved ?, did my region survive ?. Can I rebuild and become the Supreme Ruler?

 

[Balthagor]

...but I really hope too much bias doesn't creep into this project...

What is more likely is that each side will treat itself as benevolent and the other side evil. The side you're playing should set the focus.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be out of line, per chance do you have a link to the latest patch...

Certainly; here.

To me, leaving out the ability to change spheres of influence of power status would be like leaving out the ability to declare war. There would be no point in playing.

Sorry, I don't understand. Nations will be able to move in/out of a given sphere based on the actions of the superpowers such as Egypt switching sides but the focus is on the two superpowers. The Cold War is generally seen as a struggle between two regions.

As a player I would want the ability to possibly make my region an influental superpower no matter what region I chose to play. Getting some regions to be an influential superpower might be nearly impossible but it would be fun to try...

That would be something to do in sandbox mode. The "campaign" for this title is intended to be focused on the two sides in the conflict. I know, last time sandbox = campaign. Some of this is still being decided.

 

[Arbus]

As a player I would want the ability to possibly make my region an influental superpower no matter what region I chose to play. Getting some regions to be an influential superpower might be nearly impossible but it would be fun to try.

I don't agree with this, the USA and the USSR should be the only superpowers from the begining to the end. Other countries might become regional powers, and even compete with the superpowers at the regional level (as one could argue were the cases of china and france), but that's it. A superpower is a country which streches its influence all over the globe, and I don't see any other country (besides the SU and the US) which could claim that title during the timeframe. Even the UK and France, being members of the UN security council, with worldwide military facilities and nuclear capacity, were not on par with the two superpowers. For me 3 triers of countries are enough: superpowers, regional powers, and nobodies.

Also, contrary to RedRalphWiggum, I don't expect any bias towards one side or another, it would be terrible for gameplay.

What I would like the most, is the ability to tailor my policies, i.e. what if the perestroika started earlier? Could the colapse of the SU be prevented or at least postponed? And what if the US in a time of crisis decided to nationalize the auto industry? I mean, without the US becoming a socialist paradise and the SU turning to russia in the 90s, we should be able to change our nation policies and explore those what if scenarios.

 

[Hundane]

That would be something to do in sandbox mode. The "campaign" for this title is intended to be focused on the two sides in the conflict.

Sorry I didnt clarify for the sandbox mode. The way I understand it, the campaign will only be able to be played as either USA or USSR so maybe a little clarification, by the "two sides" do you mean any NATO region or Warsaw Pact will also be playable in the campaign ?

I don't agree with this, the USA and the USSR should be the only superpowers from the begining to the end. Other countries might become regional powers, and even compete with the superpowers at the regional level (as one could argue were the cases of china and france), but that's it. A superpower is a country which streches its influence all over the globe, and I don't see any other country (besides the SU and the US) which could claim that title during the timeframe.

If you want to stick to a totally historical game then I would agree but if I am running another region and making decisions for that region, why should my region be limited because of some historical guidelines ? If I can build up my economy and military to extend my reach globally , then I am a Superpower.

 

[Balthagor]

We haven't been specific yet because there's still a lot of design work going on. At this time, the engine handles "regions" internally much like SR2020 did, meaning if "France" is "not playable" that's because of a setting in one of the data files. The region is still on the map. We could release the game locked to just US-USSR but it would be about 2h before the modders posted a version without region locks in place. We might as well do it ourselves.

There is resources being directed towards the "key story" behind the title, much like the "Global Crisis" campaign had a back story in the documentation. For the key story of the game, it will be built around only the two superpowers. The naming of the different gameplay modes/settings just isn't locked down yet.

 

[Hundane]

Playing different regions in campaign mode will just add to the replayability off the game. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Kalelovil]

...

I agree that France's situation (or another major NATO power if they leave NATO in an ahistorical but plausible manner) could be abstracted as them simply leaving the US SOI and remaining a mjor power. I also agree that it shouldn't be possible to normally transition from being a major power to a superpower (in the interests of a solid campaign storyline and events, although I think it was a possibility, if unlikely, historically).

However, having China as simply a major power that the US and USSR compete to have in their SOI would be leaving out a lot of the depths of the historical sino-soviet split. There should be quite a complex event chain leading to the split included in the campaign. In the mid 1960s the Cold War was more tripolar than bipolar, there were a number of border conflicts and proxy wars (which could only be properly simulated if China was a superpower) between the two countries and "military documents of the time indicate that the USSR had more nuclear-attack plans against China than against the US" (Mueller, Jason: Evolution of the First Strike Doctrine in the Nuclear Era, Volume 3: 1965–1972).

 

[elryacko]

I wish leaders would be responsible to the whims of their population. None of this simplistic nonsense that this or that action would increase popularity or militancy. This can be represented in the form of lobbies:

Industry lobbies want to make money. They want less regulation, less corporate taxes, more subsides from the government, etc.
Military lobbies want to make war. For any slight against the nation, they will advise you to declare war (although they won't demand war unless your nation has been attacked). They also want a bigger budget. Military lobbies are the most dangerous when they are entrenched in a military mindset.
Government union lobbies want higher wages, less turnover, and for the government to expand.
Union lobbies want nationalization, less turnover, higher wages, more protections for unions.
Senior citizen lobbies want higher state pensions, and generally less taxes.
Anti-war lobbies want peace not war. People who make up anti-war lobbies typically are intellectuals and/or draft dodgers. Usually the anti-war lobby is impotent during either a popular/necessary/defensive war or when there is no draft.
Ethnic/cultural/religious lobbies are made up of citizens who are affiliated with a different cultural group. They want different things, some which aren't so major (ha'lal food in schools), to rather major items (affirmative action, Zionism).

Political trends and movements of a country should also bear influence, some citizens probably would want social reform, others simply think government should deregulate. These ideas wane and gain favor based on how well the ideas improve lives.

Each lobby has their own approval rating of the government. If various things are not met (pensions increase, dominant ethnic group far richer then minority, etc), their approval goes down. If their approval goes down far enough, they will either organize to over throw the government (depending on whether or not they have support to overthrow from various institutions: army, media, politicians), or riot, or form terrorist groups, etc. An ethnic/cultural group which controls the army, media, and politics of a region will organize to secede. It should be possible to staff armies with officers of the dominant ethnic group, and ensure that only certain politicians are appointed.

Obviously it is also very important to keep wages increasing (more, more, more!). Otherwise you'll have to deal with a growing union lobby.

Espionage should be able to influence the opinions of a nation's various lobbies, trigger coups, army mutinies, and influence ideological trends, fund rebels. Espionage funding should be able to be used to disrupt or fund a lobby group (for example in Koreagate, Korean spies were caught "gifting" to various politicians for pro-Korean policies, or in the case of dictatorships, independent unions are often disrupted )


I also would like to see Balance of Power design characteristics: http://www.erasmatazz.com/page78/page146/page147/BalanceOfPower.html
And I want to do everything the soviets did according to the Mitrokhin Archive: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/index.cfm?topic_id=1409&fuseaction=va2.browse&sort=Collection&item=The Mitrokhin Archive

 

[Samilou]

Sorry, I don't understand. Nations will be able to move in/out of a given sphere based on the actions of the superpowers such as Egypt switching sides but the focus is on the two superpowers. The Cold War is generally seen as a struggle between two regions.

OR, not of powers status. Power status needs to be able to shift. It was a typo.


For the storyline, major powers should also have their fair share of attention.

 

[RedRalphWiggum]

What is more likely is that each side will treat itself as benevolent and the other side evil. The side you're playing should set the focus.

Exactly as it should be. Excellent!

Also, contrary to RedRalphWiggum, I don't expect any bias towards one side or another, it would be terrible for gameplay.

I wasn't expecting any big bias, I was just stating that I hoped there wouldn't be. after all, if this game was being developed by a Russian company you might have some concerns about how the conflict would be portrayed. but it sounds as if it's going to be even-handed.

 

[bluepoo]

what i'd like to see:

->the ability to influence a target country's rebels with funding in weapons in order to have a sucessful coup or revolution. for example as the soviets, if i provide arms and money to cuban revolutionaires pre 1960, the end result if successful, would make cuba a part of my sphere. or as the americans, if i support the polish solidarity movement, if succesful, i would gain some prestige and have poland within my sphere; etc. in other words, coups and counter-coups either being directly influenced by a super power or by natural progression if not one side is influencing the target country.

these could also be influenced by their neighbors. for example communist vietnam influencing laos and cambodia.

->also regional powers. for example, china. although not considered a superpower during the cold war, it still carried weight in the region. for example the vietnam war. the chinese supported north vietnamese over the south and had a role during the funding and supplying of the north vietnamese.

 

[Kalelovil]

->also regional powers. for example, china. although not considered a superpower during the cold war, it still carried weight in the region. for example the vietnam war. the chinese supported north vietnamese over the south and had a role during the funding and supplying of the north vietnamese.

Although not as powrful or influential as the USA or the USSR historically, I would argue that China was much closer to a superpower than just a regional power. China competed for influence over communist movements throughout the world (especially Africa) and held Albania and Somalia in its SOI for quite some time.

 

[Galaahd]

I just expect it to be realistic, so no WC with Belize, let's say.

Put the focus on diplomatics, politics, intelligence agendas/espionage rather than warfare.