Global 1940 Cold War goes Hot Scenario

is there a way to contact dannyboy2016? he hasn’t posted in a long time, not that I’m mad I’m just wondering why he hasn’t posted in such a long time.  :?

SOMEONE POST SOMETHING!!!

Post something?

I muddled around with this idea before
And I used slightly less powers than others do.

USA, NATO, SEATO vs USSR, Warsaw Pact, CHINA
That being
Green, Tan, Grey vs Red, Black, Orange

The other colors, French Blue, Italian Brown and Chinese Green represented Pro-West, Pro-Communist, and Neutral respectively
But here is the kicker……

Territories that weren’t firmly held by one of the major powers…had infantry of multiple colors. Representing how it was aligned.
For instance, Cuba had 1 blue, 2 Green, and 3 Brown.
The mechanic being that when you attack, you get the pieces slanted to your side, and the others fight you.
So lets use as an example, French Indochina.
Lets say 2 blue, 2 green and 4 brown start there.
Thats a pretty significant pro soviet slant.

Another mechanic was that during your turn you could buy weapons for your rebel forces.
The cost was price of unit+territory value.
And you can only buy one per territory per turn.

Lets say the Soviets wanted to incite a rebellion in French Indochina.
So they buy the rebels there a Tank.

If you were ready, you could initiate a combat in areas you were investing in, this in addition to other normal combats.
If your rebels win, you take over the territory.

For the West, the blue forces stay put.
For the Communists, you could pay 1 IPC per unit to transform rebels to your power.
As a bonus for the West, they could buy “government forces” at the base price of 3 IPC per Infantry…but they are Green neutral men.
So the West can stabilize these areas. And the Commies could transform the rebels into communist armies, willing to expand.

Time frame would be Korean War
Eastern Germany would be co-occupied by Western and Soviet forces.
The powers would not start at war.
But Korea would start with a strong Soviet slant…so if the West doesn’t invade, then the Soviets can win it in a proxy battle.

This is epic. I wish I hade the peses I needed to play this game.

@oztea:

Post something?

I muddled around with this idea before
And I used slightly less powers than others do.

USA, NATO, SEATO vs USSR, Warsaw Pact, CHINA
That being
Green, Tan, Grey vs Red, Black, Orange

The other colors, French Blue, Italian Brown and Chinese Green represented Pro-West, Pro-Communist, and Neutral respectively
But here is the kicker……

Territories that weren’t firmly held by one of the major powers…had infantry of multiple colors. Representing how it was aligned.
For instance, Cuba had 1 blue, 2 Green, and 3 Brown.
The mechanic being that when you attack, you get the pieces slanted to your side, and the others fight you.
So lets use as an example, French Indochina.
Lets say 2 blue, 2 green and 4 brown start there.
Thats a pretty significant pro soviet slant.

Another mechanic was that during your turn you could buy weapons for your rebel forces.
The cost was price of unit+territory value.
And you can only buy one per territory per turn.

Lets say the Soviets wanted to incite a rebellion in French Indochina.
So they buy the rebels there a Tank.

If you were ready, you could initiate a combat in areas you were investing in, this in addition to other normal combats.
If your rebels win, you take over the territory.

For the West, the blue forces stay put.
For the Communists, you could pay 1 IPC per unit to transform rebels to your power.
As a bonus for the West, they could buy “government forces” at the base price of 3 IPC per Infantry…but they are Green neutral men.
So the West can stabilize these areas. And the Commies could transform the rebels into communist armies, willing to expand.

---

Time frame would be Korean War
Eastern Germany would be co-occupied by Western and Soviet forces.
The powers would not start at war.
But Korea would start with a strong Soviet slant…so if the West doesn’t invade, then the Soviets can win it in a proxy battle.

That´s intersting. I like that!

So…

@MacMan131:

So…

I´m trying it out.

As a huge fan of Imp Games’ East & West, these kinds of games always intrigue me. It’s set in 1948, so there are some similarities to the '46 scenario.

IMHO, 1948 is sort of the high-water mark for NATO (i.e. the European empires) however, East & West is a bit non-historical in this sense.

• NATO was not formed until 1949
• Turkey and Greece did not join NATO until 1952, but are part of the Alliance in-game
• Pakistan, India, and Burma were all independent of Britain in 1948; in E&W they are still part of the empire, and a huge thorn in the side of the USSR
• The breakdown of Indonesia between Dutch-controlled areas and independent(ish) ones is not in line with history

The other high-water mark of the Cold War (based on my research) is around 1975-76. Off the top of my head:

• The Vietnam War was over; Cuba, Afghanistan, Angola, Mozambique, and Ethiopia were all ruled by communist regimes. The USSR (or Warsaw Pact) was at the height of its influence
• The Arab League had expanded across all of north Africa; the Islamic Conference also greatly increased its membership around this time
• The Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) including Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan, as well as the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) including Thailand, Philippines, Australia and New Zealand were still in existence, supported by the major NATO powers of the US, UK, and France
• China had annexed Tibet and fought a small war with India

I’ve done work on 1975-76 scenarios for both the Original A&A as well as E&W and have done a fair bit of study on the cold war era “map” so to speak. If anyone wants to discuss the subject/games here or in a PM, I’d be very happy to respond. :-)