The Cold War 1947 - 1991

[JPetroski]

Hi all,

I think back in 2011 I started a thread about a proposed Cold War Scenario. I really don't want a repeat of the OTR creation thread where you have to wade through years of work to find something relevant (and I don't foresee this scenario taking 9 years to build), so I've started this one. Hope it's OK to let the old one die in the archives and start afresh here.

Anyway, @old_hand / Yaroslav / Javier (what do you prefer, btw?) has graciously agreed to assist me with some lua events/modules that will be critical to bringing this scenario to life and we agreed that I'd start this development thread to exchange ideas/progress.

So, what is "The Cold War: 1947 - 1991" besides a long title? Well, it's my attempt to create a scenario that can quickly switch between SP and MP (probably a quick batch file to change events and a rules file with minor tweaks) that showcases a few things:

1. The decolonization of the world;
2. The two superpowers fighting over who will influence the former colonies;
3. An opportunity for non-stop conflict somewhere.
4. The decline of American manufacturing, and the rise of China and/or India to take over that space.

There are seven civs:

USSR
Pro-Soviets
China
USA
Pro-West
European Community
India

They are in that order for a reason - so that this game can be played MP by as little as 3 people (the USSR player would also control Pro-Soviets and China, the USA player would also control Pro-West, and the European Community would also control India).

The USSR, USA, and European Community are "The Big 3" powers and each has a wide assortment of units. China and India are rising powers but can't make many units at home (I'm hoping to balance this by giving them some other advantages). They are reliant on purchasing weapons that the Big 3 make, which is where @old_hand comes in.

I'm hoping to have a system via lua where the Big 3 can put forces out to market for China, India, or the Pro-West/Pro-East to purchase. I envision doing this by having them occupy the same tile as an "arms dealer" unit, which lua will search for on a button press by the other players, though we'll see what old_hand comes up with. Anyway, the purchaser would press a key, get a list of equipment available for sale and the price, make a selection and complete the transaction.

I believe this will make for an interesting arms race where the Big 3 try to keep various minor nations well-stocked, the reason for doing this being key event #2:

Proxy-Wars.
-In the old standard of First Strike, there's a very complicated system for "proxy wars" that I hope to reduce via lua. Rather than having to remember and follow a complicated set of house rules, the two superpowers simply have their proxy nation they play with. The Pro-East and Pro-West start the game off at war with most other civs, and can immediately fight. They don't, however, have access to most units, so if one gets some help from a superpower, the other had better get help too or it will fall.

The USA and USSR can directly intervene against the Pro-East/Pro-West powers, but can't actually capture territory - if they capture a city owned by one of these two groups, lua will switch the city back to the minor, give it a small garrison, and teleport the USA/USSR unit that captured it outside the gates.

The European player's advantage is that they can directly capture these cities, as they're simply reestablishing colonial rule of the area. India and China too can directly capture these states (though China can't fight Pro-East).

Other bits
-This will be a two map scenario, one is an undersea map for submarines to lurk, the other is the main world. I've declined to bother with a high-alt map figuring the AI can't handle that easily in SP. I don't really care if the AI wanders its subs across two maps as it'll just make it more fun to try and find them.

Unit Roster
-Thanks to the prolific work of @Tanelorn and @Fairline , I'm pretty sure I have every unit I need with one exception: anyone willing to draw an HF-24 Marut fighter for India? I scoured the Modern Units and World War III threads but couldn't find one. Apologies if I missed it.

Anyway, here are the rest of the units. You'll note that I've elected to keep APC, Mobile Artillery, Artillery, Mobile AA and Special Forces as "generic" to allow a great variety of aircraft and MBT for sale on the international market. Let's face it, the period was pretty much the age where air power reigned supreme.

Arms Dealer
Engineers
SSN
SSBN
Sturgeon Class
Ohio Class
Alfa Class
Delta Class
Destroyer
Partisans
Cruiser
Battleship
Aircraft Carrier
NP Aircraft Carrier
Freighter
Strategic Bomber
La-9
MiG-15
MiG-21
MiG-23
MiG-25
MiG-29
Su-27
Il-2
Su-7
Su-25
Tu-95
Tu-160
Spitfire
Meteor
Mystere
Mirage III
Harrier
Mirage 2000
Tempest
Fiat G.91
Jaguar
Victor
APC
Mobile Artillery
SCUD Missile Launcher
Cruise Missile
Conventional Payload
Nuclear Payload
MRBM
ICBM
Camera
Spy
Spy Plane
Freight
P-80
F-86
F-104
F-4*
F-15
F-16
F-4U Corsair
A-1 Skyraider
A-10 Thunderbolt II
F-14 Tomcat
B-52
B-1
HF-24 Marut
J-8
Air Transport
Mil Mi-24
Mangusta
AH-1 Cobra
Soviet Infantry
Guards
Airborne
BMP-3
Katyusha
T-34/85
T-55
T-64
T-72
T-80
Euro Infantry
Foreign Legion
Paras
Warrior
Centurion
Conqueror
Chieftan
Leopard
Challenger
US Infantry
Marines
82nd Airborne
Bradley
M26 Pershing
M48 Patton
M60A1
M60A3
M1 Abrams
Infantry
Gurkha
Paras
Arjun
Infantry
Commandos
Airborne
Type-85
SAVE
Field Artillery
Gun Truck
Stinger
RPG
Terrorist
Nationalists (Latin)
Nationalists (C African)
Nationalists (N Asian)
Nationalists (N Africa)
Nationalist (SE Asian)
Nationalists (Mid East)
Pakistani Army
IDF
Mujahedeen
Revolutionaries (Latin)
Revolutionaries (C African)
Revolutionaries (N Asian)
Revolutionaries (N Africa)
Revolutionaries (SE Asian)
Revolutionaries (Mid East)
Special Forces
Mobile AA

Sorry for the big wall of text but you all know I pretty much develop these openly for one and secondly you're all trapped at home with nothing better to do than read it and add value

Thoughts? I aim to make this SP-capable though I'm hoping to have a fun MP game in the fairly near future. I'm hoping at least 3 of you would like to play it (5 would be the most fun but that might be wishful thinking at this point).

Also, @old_hand there are relatively few tweaks I need to make to a rules file to "break ground" in game with the scenario to get you something functional to play with (Even though it's possible to change native transport via lua I'd prefer to have that locked down prior for the subs) so I'll try to get you something bare bones basic to work with quickly.

 

[old_hand]

Hi!

First of all, the technicalities. I'll do a separate post with feedback about scenario

I've created the first part of the two things you posted.

It looks like this when you press F12:

FirstStrikeDialog

• old_hand
• Apr 13, 2020

If you select the location, then a unit will be created there and the money removed from your treasury. If you have not enough money, you will get an error message

FirstStrikeNoMoney

• old_hand
• Apr 13, 2020

Of course, all of this is customizable, and we can change any parameter you like

With the code I've written you only need to define a table like this:

local NATOproxies = {
                    { place="Nicaragua", unittype=25, price=50, count=1, veteran=false, squares={ {67, 109, 0}, {67, 113, 0} } },
                    { place="Angola", unittype=25, price=700, count=1, veteran=true, squares={ {138, 140, 0}, {139, 141, 0} } }
                    }

A number of units equal to count will be created in any of the squares indicated (random selection). If not possible to create units, another error message will be shown and money will not be removed from your treasury.

Does this look like what you expected for #1?

For #2, I'll do some experiments soon.

 

[Fairline]

This looks excellent. To nitpick, the post-war Meteor should probably be an F8 and I would probably find room for a Tornado as it was Britain, Germany and Italy's main IDS aircraft in the 80's. The post-War UK fighter should probably be a Griffon-engined Spit rather than a Tempest, as well.

Also I think typhoon posted a later version of his Skyraider. I'll dig it out.

 

[JPetroski]

I have one unit space left and could give this to the tornado. This would give Europe parity for aircraft (right now, they have one less). And go ahead and nitpick; it's why I post early!

The Tempest is actually a Fighter Bomber--I can't fit everything I want, unfortunately. The F4U is also jabo in this scenario.

@old_hand yes, that is pretty much exactly what I am looking for! Thank you.

 

[old_hand]

Now some comments about the scenarios. First of all, this looks most excellent. Other can comment more on the accuracy of the weapons, as fairline said.

I love the idea, it reminds me of Twilight struggle, which is a board game about Cold War that I love. I'd go ahead and say that one of the things that I love more of TS is that you can't predict exactly when Castro would break havoc in Cuba... so that's a good thing. Keep some things quite random. Cold War is if, anything, a game of shadows where you have far from perfect information and you suspect everything.

My feedback for the MP would be that the distinction between USA/Pro-Western, etc. is understandable in SP or 3-players MP, but I fail to see how it would work in a 5-players game.

I'd take another idea from one of my favorites board games (A fire in the lake), and make sure that there is a common goal between Pro-West and USA, Soviets and Pro-East, but also their own objectives. IE - many times Pro-Western would use the army or money for their own corruption/regime support rather than fight commies. So either create some barbarians randomly, so you can't be sure that the arms sold to the pro-western are used correctly. Maybe even give money for each barbarian killed and house rule that pro-wester or pro-east win against their own super-power if they have more money at the end of the game.

Another way to make USA/Soviets to not give too much units to the pro-western/pro-esat may be creating some unhappy citizens when units are given out.

Just throwing ideas at random

I'd rather go with Javier

 

[old_hand]

@old_hand yes, that is pretty much exactly what I am looking for! Thank you.

I'd try #2 soon and get back to you!

Would be it easier if rahter than a unit, the arms dealer would be a city or a fixed set of squares in your map?

 

[JPetroski]

How about a type of terrain tile? I have some to spare.

Edit-id still need to define the square, I guess, because I'd want one for each foreign civ (so the seller can decide who they'll sell to).

 

[old_hand]

In that case, you need at least one for naval units and another for land units, isn't it?

I do not know mind, whatever works better for you How would that work? Any unit that enters that terrain can be sold to India? And if they enter another terrain type, they can be sold to another power?

 

[JPetroski]

I do not know mind, whatever works better for you How would that work? Any unit that enters that terrain can be sold to India? And if they enter another terrain type, they can be sold to another power?

I was kind of envisioning it working more or less like that. You put the units on the square, the arms dealer has the carrier function so you can place air units, and I write a little "Sell to India" or "Sell to China" or "Sell to Pro-East" under each tile.

I'm open to suggestions though.

I'll discuss your other thoughts in more detail later. Busy day here and I only had a moment for a break!

 

[Fairline]

Here's Typhoon's Skyraiders:

 

[JPetroski]

You know, @Fairline, I was thinking - what if the US and Europe "split" the fighter/ fighter bomber early to save a slot?

So, get rid of the tempest and maybe include the Spitfire in its stead, but give the Brits access to the F4U as well? F4Us were in service forever and Spitfires were a main fighter all across the globe in the post-war period so maybe this makes more sense? I just don't have much space... I'm hoping the game is fun with "really cool fighters, tanks, infantry, submarines but standard APC, mobile artillery, mobile flak"

 

[old_hand]

So, I think I did #2.

Basically, with this code

local unitsPricesForEgypt = {}
unitsPricesForEgypt["Catapult"] = 10
unitsPricesForEgypt["Artillery"] = 90
unitsPricesForEgypt["Armor"] = 100
unitsPricesForEgypt["Mech. Inf."] = 400
                            
local buyTable = {}
buyTable["Ptolemaic Greeks"] = { prices = unitsPricesForEgypt, position = { 38, 18, 0 }, owner = "Romans",
                                 destination = {{ 69,69 ,0}, {69, 69, 0}, {69, 69, 0}} }

You can first define the prices per civilization. I am using the classic Rome scenario (as converted by the Professor), so I created a table with is called unitsPricesForEgypt, and we create entries for the types of units and the value

Then, we can create a buyTable entry per civ, where we indicate:
* What is the table for prices
* What is the position of the "selling tile", ie, the tile where the untis for-sale are located
* Who is the seller of the units that are for-sale (just in case, someone conquer that square, maybe this is not needed)
* The destination where the unit will be put after-sale. First position is for land units, second is for sea units, third is for air units. In my case, I used Alexandria all the time, that's why the position is always the same, but it's not mandatory

So, some screenshot. This is the roman units for sale, please notice the position is 38,18

SecondOptions

• old_hand
• Apr 14, 2020

Example of units to buy

As you can see there are a Catapult, a Howitzer, an Artillery, an Armor and a Mech. Inf.

Ok, so the romans left those units for buy. It's Egypt turn ("Ptolemaic Greeks"), we press Ctrl-B (buy) and we can see the options for buying:

SecondDialog

• old_hand
• Apr 14, 2020

Example of buying dialog

Notice that both Hotwizer and Mech Inf are missing. The first one is not defined in the table, so it's not considered to be "sellable" (is that a word in English? I'm so sorry for my bad english). Mech. Inf. is in the list, but it's price (400) is bigger than Egypt's treasury (300) so it does not appear in the list. We select armor

SecondBuy

• old_hand
• Apr 14, 2020

After buying the unti

Voilà. Armor is created in Alexandria and removed from the roman square.

If you like this, then when you are ready with your scenario I can integrate the code for #1 and #2, and you only need to update the table. Of course, if you want more features/different messages/anything else, just please tell me.

BTW, I am going to modify #1 so the "do nothing" is always the first option. The reason for that is because when you have a dialog in CIv, if you press ESCAPE is the same than pressing enter, so the selected option is executed. This I found very counter-intuitive, but, fortunately, as the selected option by default is the first one, at least if someone press Ctrl-B and then escape, they end up buying nothing.

Do you like this approach?

 

[Fairline]

You know, @Fairline, I was thinking - what if the US and Europe "split" the fighter/ fighter bomber early to save a slot?

So, get rid of the tempest and maybe include the Spitfire in its stead, but give the Brits access to the F4U as well? F4Us were in service forever and Spitfires were a main fighter all across the globe in the post-war period so maybe this makes more sense? I just don't have much space... I'm hoping the game is fun with "really cool fighters, tanks, infantry, submarines but standard APC, mobile artillery, mobile flak"

Well the French certainly used Corsairs in Indochina in the '50s so that would be sensible. As an aside the British immediately stopped using US equipment as soon as the War finished to meet the terms of Lend-Lease, to the extent that those naval aircraft that couldn't be returned to America were ditched over the side of carriers I believe - If this hadn't been the case I'm sure the British would have continued their use in the late 40's at least

 

[Fairline]

Another nitpicky unit-related observation: the PLA wore green from most of the period of this scenario (1950s through to mid-1980s). The khaki uniform was only worn during the Chinese civil war and early Korean war:

 

[JPetroski]

I love the idea, it reminds me of Twilight struggle, which is a board game about Cold War that I love. I'd go ahead and say that one of the things that I love more of TS is that you can't predict exactly when Castro would break havoc in Cuba... so that's a good thing. Keep some things quite random. Cold War is if, anything, a game of shadows where you have far from perfect information and you suspect everything.

The lack of prediction is important. In the SP game I will have events for various rebellions but don't want to tie them to a date for precisely this reason.

My feedback for the MP would be that the distinction between USA/Pro-Western, etc. is understandable in SP or 3-players MP, but I fail to see how it would work in a 5-players game.

Well, my basic thought was this: the USA and USSR start as clearly the two superpowers, significantly stronger than all other groups. To balance this, they can't capture new territory - they can only create new proxies. Europe, China, and India can directly capture territory. So, the US and USSR want to "control" as much of the globe as possible for a couple of reasons:

1. They're constantly at war with the pro-side for the other group, so you wouldn't want Communists in Mexico causing trouble, for example and would want to stamp that out and ensure your side is stronger.
2. They're seeking a source of new income and to be the arms manufacturer of the world, and the bigger the pro-side is, the more they can buy.
3. The scenario objectives are directly tied to who has the most objective cities, but the USA and USSR "win" if their pro-side owns/controls these. I probably will use a counter system where every city that isn't a "core region" of some country gives the player a point, and the goal is to amass a certain number of points. Maybe China and India need less points to win for balance. So, Europe is worth no points. The USA is worth no points. Africa and Latin America are worth the points instead.
4. Having the Soviets control the pro-East means that Soviet tanks don't need to invade Europe on turn 1 to be "in cold war conflict" with Europe - Pro-Soviet forces can attack European colonies from turn 1 instead.

I'd take another idea from one of my favorites board games (A fire in the lake), and make sure that there is a common goal between Pro-West and USA, Soviets and Pro-East, but also their own objectives. IE - many times Pro-Western would use the army or money for their own corruption/regime support rather than fight commies. So either create some barbarians randomly, so you can't be sure that the arms sold to the pro-western are used correctly. Maybe even give money for each barbarian killed and house rule that pro-wester or pro-east win against their own super-power if they have more money at the end of the game.

Yes, I was thinking of having random barbarian spawns (though event driven to make it easier to choose which units and how many) that will probably spend a significant amount of time popping up in Africa and Central/South America especially. Depending on the timing, you might find that your investment in a region gets diverted to fight the barbarians rather than the opposite side! Many of the civil wars and insurrections of the time weren't simple 1v1's either, with multiple parties involved, so that would work. Also, if the barbarians do capture a city, it would be fair game for both superpowers to try and take back and you'd see an ever-shifting map.

Another way to make USA/Soviets to not give too much units to the pro-western/pro-esat may be creating some unhappy citizens when units are given out.

I'm hoping that there's a need to give a lot of units to their pro-groups so that there can be constant conflict in this scenario "somewhere." It's almost cat and mouse where one group might start a revolution in one place and then the other has to scramble to keep up. I'm really hoping that this mechanism keeps the action hot and heavy throughout the scenario and keeps a MP game very lively where people are constantly "at war" without actually nuking each other or rolling over Europe

If you like this, then when you are ready with your scenario I can integrate the code for #1 and #2, and you only need to update the table. Of course, if you want more features/different messages/anything else, just please tell me.

BTW, I am going to modify #1 so the "do nothing" is always the first option. The reason for that is because when you have a dialog in CIv, if you press ESCAPE is the same than pressing enter, so the selected option is executed. This I found very counter-intuitive, but, fortunately, as the selected option by default is the first one, at least if someone press Ctrl-B and then escape, they end up buying nothing.

Do you like this approach?

I love this approach. Thank you very much! My only question is when the buyer purchases the unit, does the seller get the money? The seller should.

For #1, the list might get quite extensive so we'll probably need a "next" and "previous" button and limit how many will show up on screen. Prof. Garfield included this in OTR with the strategic redeployment mechanism if you want to take a look. I'm pretty sure he has an entire menus module that could help as well.

Well the French certainly used Corsairs in Indochina in the '50s so that would be sensible. As an aside the British immediately stopped using US equipment as soon as the War finished to meet the terms of Lend-Lease, to the extent that those naval aircraft that couldn't be returned to America were ditched over the side of carriers I believe - If this hadn't been the case I'm sure the British would have continued their use in the late 40's at least

The Corsair (and Mustang for that matter) actually were in service through the 1969 "Football War" between El Salvador and Honduras.

The goal with these units is basically to give the smaller/emerging civs (including the pro-west and east civs) something to build independently and for an extended period until they can come up with good equipment of their own. So the Yak and Shturmovik for the Pro-Soviets/China and the other stuff for Pro-West/India basically. I believe both India and Pakistan used Tempests during their first war but I'd have to double check.

Another nitpicky unit-related observation: the PLA wore green from most of the period of this scenario (1950s through to mid-1980s). The khaki uniform was only worn during the Chinese civil war and early Korean war:

I was planning on having perhaps 3-4 units graphics that just changes the look of the infantry as we go. Thus, I borrowed pretty heavily from @techumseh 's Burma and @Patine and @McMonkey 's Korean War for the first group of units. That's not to say I got everything perfect, or won't be revising later, but hopefully that explains why Nationalist China has the Asian mainland uniform, for example (frankly my first stab at these is to get stuff reasonably close, and I rely on the community to help me narrow the gap given your expertise is just this and mine is not). I just find it difficult to place units on the map if they haven't been changed to something reasonable first (it's hard to visualize if you're placing infantry that looks like battleships). Also, pouring through what you all have created for art inspires in many cases what units to use as I made a legitimate effort to find everything I needed (hence why the Marut is the only request).

It's never going to be perfect as army's didn't just change uniforms in a coordinated fashion across the globe, but I figure maybe "Early Period" "Mid Period" "Late Period" would be fair. So, early would be perhaps 1947-1960 with more of a "Post WW2 to Korean War" look, Mid might be 1960-1980 "Vietnam" look, and then the Late Period (1980-1991) would look like the Reagan era or perhaps even Desert Storm.

Edit - as an aside, I agree with @Prof. Garfield that long MP scenarios are almost impossible to keep going. It seems like the 100 turn mark is probably best, but at the same time, I don't see many scenarios making it even to there, so I've decided that each turn will be 4 months, bringing approximately 132 turns, give or take (I'm not sure of the exact starting month with this mechanism so it might be 130 or 131 turns). I think if I can keep overall unit numbers down, this is still fairly reasonable, especially for a 3 player game that is intended to be SP compatible.

 

[old_hand]

I love this approach. Thank you very much! My only question is when the buyer purchases the unit, does the seller get the money? The seller should.

For #1, the list might get quite extensive so we'll probably need a "next" and "previous" button and limit how many will show up on screen. Prof. Garfield included this in OTR with the strategic redeployment mechanism if you want to take a look. I'm pretty sure he has an entire menus module that could help as well.

Copy that. I didn't implement the money transfer, but I will do without any problem, it should be trivial.

I'll look into OTR and see the menu module.

 

[typhoon353]

My two cents:

For SSNs, I'd propose the more numerous Victor over the Alfa as the Soviet counterpart to the Sturgeon, unless you're aiming to emphasise the Alfa's unique characteristics for gameplay purposes.

For the V-bomber, I'd suggest Vulcan rather than Victor which ended life as a nuclear/conventional bomber prematurely due to structural fatigue.

If you're looking to trim units, you could consider dropping the P-80 in favor of a generic straight wing first-generation jet fighter. This could also fill in for the Meteor, which could then be swapped out for the Hunter, if that was your intention of going with the Starfighter (which was widely exported but not prolific in US service) over the F-100 Super Sabre. Dropping Tempest for the F4U as the Western attack fighter is a great suggestion, but given that the two overlap in role and performance somewhat, you might want to swap the Skyraider for a jet equivalent (A-4 Skyhawk or A-7 Corsair) as a Western counterpart to the Su-7. Jaguar and Tornado also fill the same niche, and would come down to a question of exportability (Jaguar) or higher performance (Tornado).

I'd also suggest the original BMP-1, whose appearance in the late-1960s came as a rather nasty shock and prompted a scramble in the West to put a comparable MICV into service, rather than the BMP-3 which was developed at the tail-end of the scenario's timeframe. Giving the BMP to the Soviets earlier could be offset by having higher values for the more advanced Warrior/Bradley. Ditto for the Arjun which only entered service in the 2000s after an exceedingly troubled development. The Vickers MBT which was manufactured by the Indians locally as the Vijayanta from the mid-1960s to 90s could be a possible replacement. Suggest dropping Challenger for the more widely used Leopard 2, or dropping Conqueror entirely. A fun unit to have could be the T-64 which was introduced contemporaneously with the T-62 but was too advanced for Soviet industry at the time to produce in numbers, leading to the less complex T-72.

 

[JPetroski]

I really appreciate the suggestions @typhoon353

A lot of this stuff came down to "what are there units for already" as there wasn't a Vijayanta that I could find, though I didn't look for Vickers Mk 5 - maybe it is already there and just needs an Indian shield? I'll poke around.

I'll take a look at the other suggestions and am inclined to go with what you say. I went with the Victor bomber as opposed to the Vulcan because the Victor had more range, though I suppose it doesn't matter much and the Vulcan is certainly more ubiquitous and just has a "cooler look" in general.

and would come down to a question of exportability (Jaguar) or higher performance (Tornado).

Yes, that's a great idea - export ability meaning "costs less to produce" in this scenario ... Kind of how the F16 is planned to be cheaper than the generally "better" (I know this is debatable) F15, for example.

I appreciate everyone helping with the units now. Right now, I'm working on art and building the scenario in an excel file... Once the art is done, I'll build the rules and then place units on the map. So, now is the time to opine

 

[Fairline]

+1 on Typhoon's suggestions, especially the BMP-1. Given that the Tornado was used by the Saudis and the Jaguar was a niche aircraft in RAF and French service I'd go with the Tornado; lots of British, Germans and Italian squadrons used them. The Vulcan also extended it's life as a conventional bomber long after its V-bomber role had been supplanted by Polaris subs. As for it's range, with multiple refuels (by converted Victor tankers, ironically), a Vulcan bombed the Falklands having taken off in Ascension Island; Google tells me this is 6200-odd km.

Here's the HAL Marut you were after John together with a Meteor F8 I'd swap for the WW2 one you used. Having researched them for the unit pic as I'd never heard of them before your request, I found out that the designer of the Marut was Kurt Tank of FW-190 fame!

 

[old_hand]

Copy that. I didn't implement the money transfer, but I will do without any problem, it should be trivial.

I'll look into OTR and see the menu module.

Ok, I think I have made it work, both the money transfer and using some of the Professor's multi-page dialog. JP, then, unless you have any other comment, I'll wait for you to have the basic skeleton of scenario and I'll add my lua to that. Is that OK?