Global 1940 Cold War goes Hot Scenario

[strategic planner]

Any new changes? Is it balanced?

[dannyboy2016]

Sorry it took so long to respond to this.
I’m actually going to playtest it this next weekend. Working on a couple sheets with each neutral’s starting alignment, special rules, and space for the forces bought for it by the superpowers.

[empireman]

this is so cool! thanks!

[empireman]

@dannyboy2016:

Sorry it took so long to respond to this.
I’m actually going to playtest it this next weekend. Working on a couple sheets with each neutral’s starting alignment, special rules, and space for the forces bought for it by the superpowers.

Did you play it yet? if you did how did it go?

[dannyboy2016]

Nope. This upcoming weekend is when I’ll be playtesting the revised rules, which will be compatible with holy Larry’s latest rules.

There are some things I don’t have mentioned here like ipc value changes for some territories. Should have a nice download with all the new stuff ready for yall in a few weeks to try on your own. :)

[dannyboy2016]

Just some basic notes on changes that I’ve been working on for the scenario set in the 1960s:

The IPC values of territories, both in neutral and belligerent territories, have been revised. Additionally, the expenditure of foreign aid permanently raises the ipc value of a specified neutral territory by 1 (to a max of 3).  Additionally, Industrial complexes may now be built on islands.

Countries:
The Warsaw Pact Nations
USSR: 93 Ipcs
Warsaw Pact: 33 Ipcs
The Allies
USA: 116 IPCs
NATO: 90 IPCs
SEATO: 17 Ipcs

Allied income is halved until war starts. Additionally, the allies will not be able to initiate hostilities with the USSR until turn 4 unless the communists outright invade one of the following neutral countries: Sweden, Portugal, Spain, Eire, The People’s Republic of China, Taiwan, Japan, Israel, Saudi Arabia, India, or Persia. Until that time, the allies and the communist must weigh the benefits of using their incomes for building up conventional and nuclear forces or jockeying for influence in neutral nations.

All European territories conquered by the communists go to the Warsaw pact. All other territories conquered by the communists fall under Soviet control. All European territories (up to the Soviet borders) conquered by the allies go to NATO. All territories in the Americas conquered by the Allies go to the USA.
There are now a total of 68 victory cities, many of them in neutral countries. Either side will need 50 to win. This will almost certainly require war as most of the new victory cities are in Europe.

Hydrogen Bomb attacks that obliterate Industrial complexes also destroy any victory city in the hit province. That’s one way to make the 50 victory city. If the number of Victory cities is reduced to fewer than 50 then the game ends in nuclear winter. The side with the most victory cities at the end of the turn gets a Pyrrhic victory.

NATO’s capital begins in the Netherlands Belgium. If that is captured then the income is sacked but a new capital is established in the United Kingdom. If London falls then NATO’s funds are looted once more, and the capital moves to Ontario.

[empireman]

@dannyboy2016:

.

Countries:
The Warsaw Pact Nations
USSR: 93 Ipcs
Warsaw Pact: 33 Ipcs
The Allies
USA: 116 IPCs
NATO: 90 IPCs
SEATO: 17 Ipcs

Shouldnt it be:

Allies:
USA
UK
NATO
SEATO

Communist:
USSR
China
Warsaw pact

[dannyboy2016]

There is an earlier scenario in this thread with the UK and the two Chinas as powers. This 1960s scenario is set after the Chinese-Soviet alliance basically broke down. Most of the UK’s colonies are independent by this point, so it seemed better just to merge them with NATO (UK’s Pacific board colonies are part of SEATO)

As t stands countries will be at different levels of influence. It will be easier for the USSR to get China into its camp than the US.

I was working on optional rules for the Chinese player to be kind of a third alliance who could side with whichever power they chose. If other people really want the UK and China in as separate powers I’d consider revising it.

[empireman]

@dannyboy2016:

There is an earlier scenario in this thread with the UK and the two Chinas as powers. This 1960s scenario is set after the Chinese-Soviet alliance basically broke down. Most of the UK’s colonies are independent by this point, so it seemed better just to merge them with NATO (UK’s Pacific board colonies are part of SEATO)

As t stands countries will be at different levels of influence. It will be easier for the USSR to get China into its camp than the US.

I was working on optional rules for the Chinese player to be kind of a third alliance who could side with whichever power they chose. If other people really want the UK and China in as separate powers I’d consider revising it.

Ok I get it, but do you have the setup?

[dannyboy2016]

Yeah the oob is being finalized for testing this weekend. I should have that stuff ready for you all to try on sunday. :)

[empireman]

@dannyboy2016:

Yeah the oob is being finalized for testing this weekend. I should have that stuff ready for you all to try on sunday. :)

Thanks! cant wait to try it out! :-D

[empireman]

@empireman:

@dannyboy2016:

Yeah the oob is being finalized for testing this weekend. I should have that stuff ready for you all to try on sunday. :)

Thanks! cant wait to try it out! :-D

ONLY 2 MORE DAYS LEFT!!! :-D :-D :-D :-D  :-o :-o :-o

[empireman]

ITS SUNDAY!!! Can we have the setup? :-)

[dannyboy2016]

Sorry dudes. My friend bailed on me, possibly on account of the holiday. Will get in play testing this week and work on setup some more.

[empireman]

@dannyboy2016:

Sorry dudes. My friend bailed on me, possibly on account of the holiday. Will get in play testing this week and work on setup some more.

NOOOO!!!
Can you put the setup on and we could help? :-)

[empireman]

@empireman:

@dannyboy2016:

Sorry dudes. My friend bailed on me, possibly on account of the holiday. Will get in play testing this week and work on setup some more.

NOOOO!!!
Can you put the setup on and we could help? :-)

so can you?

[empireman]

@empireman:

@empireman:

@dannyboy2016:

Sorry dudes. My friend bailed on me, possibly on account of the holiday. Will get in play testing this week and work on setup some more.

NOOOO!!!
Can you put the setup on and we could help? :-)

so can you?

waiting for reply…… :-)

[empireman]

hey its the weekend! can we have the setup :-)

[empireman]

WHEN CAN WE HAVE THE SETUP

Sorry, for the outburst, I want to play it soooooo bad.

[empireman]

What happend to every one? Im lonely! And what happen to the setup?