Cold war scenario

Does anyone else think that a Cold War scenario could be really sweet in Civ 5?

You could have Soviet puppet states in Poland, East Germany etc.

City-states would be awesome. Not just the Vietnam War or Korean war, but also you could have missions like "Supply Afghanis with weapons to resist Soviets" or "Place nukes in Cuba" etc. etc.

Maybe there could be some more special projects- NATO, Warsaw Pact, and you can build a spaceship to the moon for some extra happiness or something.

I think it'd be pretty cool.

better days said:

Does anyone else think that a Cold War scenario could be really sweet in Civ 5?

Click to expand...

Yes.

You could have Soviet puppet states in Poland, East Germany etc.

Click to expand...

No.

City-states would be awesome. Not just the Vietnam War or Korean war, but also you could have missions like "Supply Afghanis with weapons to resist Soviets" or "Place nukes in Cuba" etc. etc.

Click to expand...

Vietnam=/=City-State

Maybe there could be some more special projects- NATO, Warsaw Pact, and you can build a spaceship to the moon for some extra happiness or something.

Click to expand...

Apollo Program? Isn't that already in the game?

A lot of things would be cool I suppose but AIs don't play it like a Cold War game. Human players do.

I understand that Vietnam, historically, is not a true city-state. However, for the purposes of the game, it is a small nation, not trying to win the game, that opens up diplomatic possibilities, most specifically the fact that city-states can ask civilizations to take out other city states. I think that this does a fairly good job of modeling a lot of what happened during the Cold War, even though these small nations aren't actually city-states.

And I forgot the Apollo Program is already in the game, thanks.

I just think that there is a lot more potential for a good Cold War scenario/mod in Civ 5 as opposed to previous incarnations.

better days said:

Does anyone else think that a Cold War scenario could be really sweet in Civ 5?

You could have Soviet puppet states in Poland, East Germany etc.

City-states would be awesome. Not just the Vietnam War or Korean war, but also you could have missions like "Supply Afghanis with weapons to resist Soviets" or "Place nukes in Cuba" etc. etc.

Maybe there could be some more special projects- NATO, Warsaw Pact, and you can build a spaceship to the moon for some extra happiness or something.

I think it'd be pretty cool.

Click to expand...

A cold war with an insurgency mechanic, a REAL insurgency mechanic where enemies actually spawn in the countryside, would be ****ing amazing. Not to mention all the maneuver warfare that would happen in a NATO vs. Warsaw pact conflagration.

OOOh, APCs and armour fighting and maneuvering around eachother in the Fulda gap would be intense!

migkillertwo said:

A cold war with an insurgency mechanic, a REAL insurgency mechanic where enemies actually spawn in the countryside, would be ****ing amazing. Not to mention all the maneuver warfare that would happen in a NATO vs. Warsaw pact conflagration.

OOOh, APCs and armour fighting and maneuvering around eachother in the Fulda gap would be intense!

Click to expand...

Until nuclear subs prowling the East Coast decide to level said coast to radioactive dust.

I agree with everything in the OP except for the puppit states. That would give the Soviets a huge atvantage.

I agree with everything in the OP except for the puppit states. That would give the Soviets a huge atvantage.

Click to expand...

How so?

If its Warsaw Pact vs NATO, what difference does it make if some of the Warsaw countries were puppet states?
Western Europe would also need to either be puppet states or part of the NATO player.

I do think the potential for using city state mechanics for India, Arabs, Vietnam, Israel, Cuba, South Africa, etc. etc. would be interesting.
Vying for influence on the international stage.

Having limited wars or proxy wars against the minors.

One way to make it interesting: I would consider hardcoding a block that the NATO player couldn't declare war on the Soviet player, and vice versa. So there are many turns where each side is trying to gain power solely through influencing the various city-state neutral players, and fighting limited proxy wars against those states.
And hardcode any conquered cities to become puppet states (and disable puppet state annexation) so the two players are limited to the cities they start with.

And then, have a *random* chance of WW3 breaking out each turn, and then say a 30 turn war. And then the winner is the one with the most points at the end of the war.

So no-one knows when the big war will break out. Constantly preparing, but you can't ambush the AI. And you face a constant tradeoff between having your forces ready for ww3 vs using them elsewhere in proxy wars.

You could either base it solely on score at the end, or you could base in on victory points, where victory points accrued each turn for controlling key cities, either directly (4 points), or through puppet states (3 points) or through city state alliance (2 points).

migkillertwo said:

A cold war with an insurgency mechanic, a REAL insurgency mechanic where enemies actually spawn in the countryside, would be ****ing amazing. Not to mention all the maneuver warfare that would happen in a NATO vs. Warsaw pact conflagration.

Click to expand...

That… would be awesome. Especially with the city-state options like buying them off or racing other civs to complete their quests. Could perhaps add in a script by which the longer the conflict goes on/the more enemy troops get committed to their state (or the more money gets funneled in by their allies) the more units they produce in their countryside.

I would absolutely love to play this.

An alternate reality Cold war scenario? That would be intense!

This does sound awesome. I hope a modder makes this.

Make it happen firaxis!

I think the 1upt rule would make a Cold War scenario fantastic because you could have a front line in Europe between NATO and the Warsaw Pact with tanks, infantry, helicopters facing each other down. I'd use a map of Europe, start the scenario with NATO and Warsaw Pact having tons of troops lined up facing each other, and give both sides lots of nukes ready. This would create the tension that either side could strike first but at the risk of a cataclysmic war. Players could try two different strategies. They could either try to win an all out war or they could try to ally with city states and develop their economy and culture and try to have the highest score at the end of the scenario.

Ahriman said:

And then, have a *random* chance of WW3 breaking out each turn, and then say a 30 turn war. And then the winner is the one with the most points at the end of the war.

So no-one knows when the big war will break out. Constantly preparing, but you can't ambush the AI. And you face a constant tradeoff between having your forces ready for ww3 vs using them elsewhere in proxy wars.

Click to expand...

But would we want WW3 starting based off of a random chance? I think that a better way to do it would be to allow the player (or the AI) to start WW3 with an actual reason (excuse?) for war.

For example, playing as the Soviets, if an American Stealth Bomber is shot down/discovered over your territory, you would be able to declare war. Or if you discover a nuclear sub in your waters, etc.

Another way to do it would be to have a sort of "tension-meter" that builds with crises, such as proxy wars in city states, and the above mentioned affronts to the other civ. The meter would slowly decay as time moved on, and if it ever reached a certain level, WW3 could erupt (either it automatically would, or it would give the players an option to).

If the tensions ever got low enough, perhaps arms-reduction talks like SALT could start or peace conferences. This level should be low enough to where its not possible for at least 15-20 years, showing how high tensions originally were.

There will be proxy wars that spill over into larger geopolitical conflicts. I'm already getting goose bumps...

Auncien said:

There will be proxy wars that spill over into larger geopolitical conflicts. I'm already getting goose bumps...

Click to expand...

It would make an epic LAN party

And ther should be the third side: non-alignment states: Yougoslavia,India,Egypt, almost whole Africa could be one big neutral state besides some colonies.

Akar said:

It would make an epic LAN party

Click to expand...

Pizza guy shows up. Ok got your pizz....Shh! can't you see there are delicate negotiations concerning the safety of the free world going on in here?

Civ5 is serious business.

generalwar said:

And ther should be the third side: non-alignment states: Yougoslavia,India,Egypt, almost whole Africa could be one big neutral state besides some colonies.

Click to expand...

Why would you need a big neutral state when you can use city states?
I would do it like this: Any nation which can get more than one city on a world map or is important enough as an individual player can be an individual player.
(USA, Russia, China, Brazil, Canada, Australia, India)
Any nation that can easily be represent as a single city can be a city state.
For balance NATO and Warsaw should have an equal number of city states and actual cities. (I would prefer NATO and Warsar to be city states aligned with USSR /USA)

But would we want WW3 starting based off of a random chance?

Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely. Real leaders were constantly preparing for a war that they never knew when might happen.

I think that a better way to do it would be to allow the player (or the AI) to start WW3 with an actual reason (excuse?) for war.

Click to expand...

A cassus belli system is very hard to get to work.
And the problem with a mod like this is that, by design, it is only really going to have two players. So its very hard to make the mod challenging from both perspectives, because you're doing a single player vs a single AI.
If you let players choose when to start the war, then the human player can anticipate this and prepare, but the AI can't, and so you add to the huge list of advantages that the human has over the AI.
I would think you would want as many mechanics as possible to level the playing field.

For example, playing as the Soviets, if an American Stealth Bomber is shot down/discovered over your territory, you would be able to declare war. Or if you discover a nuclear sub in your waters, etc.

Click to expand...

Why is an American stealth bomber or a nuclear sub going to be in enemy territory if you're not at war, in a Civ game?

It'd be fine to have fluff stories like this as event text justifying the actual start of the war, but I think taking the actual start of the war out of the hands of the player/AI would be a great idea for this kind of mod.

And ther should be the third side: non-alignment states: Yougoslavia,India,Egypt, almost whole Africa could be one big neutral state besides some colonies.

Click to expand...

I would think that a lot of these would use city-state mechanics, so that you get a resource advantage for having them be your ally, and they can only be allied to one of the superpowers.