View Full Version : Modernize Trotsky's War?
Hi,
Is there any interest in a modernized Trotsky's War, relating to today's events (re: Georgia and the possible threat to the Ukrane, and the Baltic 'break aways')?
Major sticking point would be force structurs, modeling them different from WW2 units, events, and general layout.
Suggestions? Neat idea, Silvanski?
-J
Silvanski
29 Aug 08, 01:55
Putin's War ;-)
Cool idea
Yeah, but by Turn 10 nukes will start falling all over the map, more likely than not. Although it would be interesting to see a scenario based on conquering everything set in the modern world.
Yeah, but by Turn 10 nukes will start falling all over the map, more likely than not. Although it would be interesting to see a scenario based on conquering everything set in the modern world.
Desert:
Not as much as one might think....imho at least....Putin might be doing some serious 'Brinksmanship' but I doubt he's willing to go 'All the Way', at least on the first date, eh?
He's got to be quite aware that OUR boomers aren't tied up at the dock rusting, like his, eh? Seems to me that it would take more than a little bit for him to go all the way back to 'cold war' strategies.
He's got considerably less toys to put in the sandbox, and less money to do so with!
On the other hand, He might very well be counting on the US being less likely to get into a ground-war over 'provinces' et al, as he controls the Euros oil supply which would certainly slow down any sort of 'coalition' developing....
Certainly would be an interesting scenario, especially if the toaw 'nukes' had more bite than presently, LOL! (and a 'fixed' naval component)...
Desert:
Not as much as one might think....imho at least....Putin might be doing some serious 'Brinksmanship' but I doubt he's willing to go 'All the Way', at least on the first date, eh?
He's got to be quite aware that OUR boomers aren't tied up at the dock rusting, like his, eh? Seems to me that it would take more than a little bit for him to go all the way back to 'cold war' strategies.
He's got considerably less toys to put in the sandbox, and less money to do so with!
On the other hand, He might very well be counting on the US being less likely to get into a ground-war over 'provinces' et al, as he controls the Euros oil supply which would certainly slow down any sort of 'coalition' developing....
Certainly would be an interesting scenario, especially if the toaw 'nukes' had more bite than presently, LOL! (and a 'fixed' naval component)...
1st question would be why? Putin's ICBM's are rusting away - maybe they
have stolen the eqv. of the harpoons:laugh: The new antiship missiles are
designed to defeat cruisers/destroyers - not fleets :smoke:
1st question would be why? Putin's ICBM's are rusting away - maybe they
have stolen the eqv. of the harpoons:laugh: The new antiship missiles are
designed to defeat cruisers/destroyers - not fleets :smoke:
Why which, Matt?
The USSR was always heavy in anti-ship missles, something they seem to have developed befor we did, according to the History channel, LOL!
My point refers to the 'Russian' lack of seapower as a whole, AND thier lack of viable 'first strike' capability....
Seems like a serious lack of strategic assets to me, but then I'm not neccesarily fully up-to-date on the issue, eh?
:clown:
We are off topic, but I can't help it:p
I think as long as the game is kept tactical/operational, Putin has the advantage. Yes, USA spend a lot more money, but a lot of these money are spent in assets that won't matter in the short term (space technology, nukes etc). If we compare the conventional forces, Putin has the advantage in his neighborhood. And I think he is willing to use it, as long as the "game" does not escalate into something more serious. As soon as it does, he will back down, he is not stupid. Just my opinion. :smoke:
I still think that a lot of threats to use nukes would be flying around between Russia and the UN nations that have them, especially the US. Wasn't NATO supposed to use nuclear weapons to slow down the Warsaw Pact in the event of a war, back in the Soviet days?
If the Russians penetrate as far as, say, Germany, it would be a little late to back down, hmm? They can't just say "oh sorry, we didn't mean to conquer half of Europe". The threat of nuclear retribution would probably be a major factor in keeping such a war from occuring.
Therefore, I propose that nuclear weapons be banned from the scenario, so we can have a clean, fair fight.
Herman Hum
02 Sep 08, 04:01
L'zard mentioned this thread to me. I've written three Harpoon scenarios revolving around the Georgian conflict, in case anyone might be interested. They are all flights of fantasy for me, but they might give you some ideas. I'll attach the orders in case they help someone else write one for TOAW.
A GEORGIAN AFFAIR
On 8 August, 2008, ships of the Russian Black Sea Fleet deployed to the coast of Georgia to take participate in the "forcing to peace" operation.
The Ukrainian government saw the writing on the wall. With this invasion, the Kremlin was re-asserting control over its sphere of influence on the former Soviet republics.
In hopes of checking future aggression from Crimean bases leased to Russia, the Ukrainian parliament demanded that the vessels which participated in this naked act of aggression not return to those ports.
Russian Deputy Chief of the General Staff, Anatoly Nogovitsyn, replied in a Moscow press conference, "These are our bases and we will return there," he stressed.
The Ukrainian armed forces have been ordered to enforce the parliamentary decree.
Duration: 48 hrs
This scenario should be played with both the Nuclear and Aircraft Logistics options enabled.
All comments and feedback welcome:
hermanhum@hotmail.com
Russia
ZZZZZ 0010Z11Aug08 ZZZZZZ
1.0 SitRep:
Peace has been forced upon the genocidal Georgian government. With the current cease-fire in place, Black Sea Fleet units may return to base.
The opportunistic Ukrainian government claims that this rightful and legal deployment of Black See Fleet units for this peace-making operation was in contravention of the lease terms for the Crimean bases. In response, the Ukrainians have illegally seized control of the Black Sea facilities.
2. Orders:
STAVKA has decreed that this unprovoked act of aggression shall not stand. All Black Sea units are hereby ordered to continue their return to Donuslav. If port control has not been returned at the time of their arrival, local commanders are authorized to re-take control from the Ukrainians.
**** Commander's Eyes ONLY ****
Vasily,
We have set the Georgian house in order. We may as well take care of the Ukrainians at the same time. Better to break them to the new yoke earlier, than later.
Gen. Nogovitsyn sends
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1) Ensure safe arrival of amphibious units to Donuslav
2) Protect CG Moskva
3) Destroy the 3 surviving Georgian battalions
4) Destroy 40 facilities at Odessa
Ukraine
**** FLASH **** FLASH ****
SSSSS 0010Z11Aug08 SSSSSS
START Message
1.0 SitRep:
Russian units based at Crimean ports leased to Russia under the auspices of defensive needs have been deployed to support the unprovoked invasion of Georgia.
This naked act of aggression has made it abundantly clear to the Ukrainian parliament that Russia intends to restore hegemony over those states it believes to fall within her sphere of influence.
In hopes of avoiding another 80 years under Russian imperialism, the Ukrainian council of ministers has decreed that the ships participating in this invasion shall not be permitted to return to their ports in the Crimean.
The Russian Deputy Chief of the General Staff has ignored our demands and stated that they will return to port in direct contradiction to the terms of use for those facilities.
Ukrainian forces have seized control of the Donuslav, Sevastopol, Oktyabrskoye, and Simferopol facilities. The Russians have said that they will maintain course back to "their" bases. If control is not returned by the time they arrive, they will proceed to re-take their property.
2.0 Orders:
The Russian ships must not be allowed to return to the Crimean ports.
A flight of four An-24 transport aircraft is standing by in Odessa to deliver the Ukrainian Tu-22M crews and technicians to Oktyabrskoye. Ensure their safe arrival. Once there, they are ordered to prepare and return the Tu-22M bombers to Odessa at their earliest opportunity. The bombers will not be available for combat operations until they have returned to Odessa. Do not change their loadouts until they arrive at Odessa.
3.0 Weather:
Meteorological outlook indicates clear weather is expected for most of the next 72 hours.
4.0 Rules of Engagement:
Warning level Red. Weapons Free. Engage Russian forces as necessary to achieve your objectives.
Message ENDS
**** FLASH **** FLASH ****
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1. Sink three amphibious ships and the Moskva
Turkey
SSSSSSS 0010Z11Aug08 SSSSSSS
1.0 SitRep:
The unprovoked aggression exhibited by Russia towards Georgia is disturbing and signals the beginning of a new Cold War.
The General Staff has determined that there is a slight chance of averting a new Cold era if Russia can be shown that her aggression will not be tolerated.
2.0 Orders:
Two submarine units have set sail to intercept the Russian Black Sea units returning to port.
Sink them, but leave room for plausible deniability. Turkey must not be implicated in these actions.
3.0 Rules of Engagement:
Warning level Red, Weapons Free.
Do not engage Ukrainian units.
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1) Sink the Moskva
2) Sink one Amphibious vessel
OR,
3) Sink 3 Amphibious vessels
GEORGIA PEACH
On 13 August, 2008, President Bush directed the United States Navy to oversee a "rigorous and ongoing" air and naval humanitarian mission to Georgia.
20 August, 2008, DDG McFaul, WHEC Dallas, and LCC Mount Whitney were soon enroute to Georgia after picking up aid supplies in Crete.
21 August, 2008, Russian forces block the only land entrance to the Georgian port of Poti after vowing to withdraw troops the day before.
Duration: 24 hrs
This scenario should be played with both the Nuclear and Aircraft Logistics options enabled.
All comments and feedback welcome:
hermanhum@hotmail.com
Russia
ZZZZZ 00050Z21Aug08 ZZZZZZ
1.0 SitRep:
The meddlesome Americans are, once again, trying to interfere with the legitimate security concerns of the Russian Federation. Now that the Army has forced peace upon the genocidal Georgians, the Americans seek to undermine the operation under the guise of a 'humanitarian mission'.
The GRU has learned that many of the 'humanitarian supplies' picked up in Crete are actually Stinger missiles intended to re-supply the Georgian bandits now lurking in the hills.
The Georgians are also attempting to evacuate their military and command elements from Poti to Batumi.
2. Orders:
Do not allow the Georgian terrorists to escape. Sink the evacuation fleet.
Destroy all facilities at Poti, Kutaisi, and Tblisi along with the two defending Georgian battalions. You will need every possible plane in this endeavour. Leave the Navy to deal with the evacuation fleet.
In order to allow the Georgian terrorists to gather aboard their ships, KUG Moskva is to maintain station for 10hrs and complete UnRep operation before commencement of eradication plan.
KUG Shtil will maintain station and complete UnRep operation before advancing upon Poti 0600Z21Aug08
KPUG Kerch and attached elements will maintain station within 10nm of current location and conduct ASW sweep prior to advancing on Poti at 0600Z21Aug08
3. Rules of Engagement:
Warning level Red, Weapons Free. Do not engage the Americans, but return fire if hostile intent is demonstrated.
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1) Destroy the two surviving Georgian battalions
2) Destroy 70 facilities
3) Sink the surviving Georgian Navy
Georgia
Georgia
Turkey
SSSSSSS 000500Z21Aug08 SSSSSSS
1.0 SitRep:
The unprovoked aggression exhibited by Russia towards Georgia is disturbing and signals the beginning of a new Cold War.
The General Staff has determined that there is a slight chance of averting a new Cold era if Russia can be shown that her aggression will not be tolerated.
2.0 Orders:
Atilay and Preveze have set sail to intercept the Russian Black Sea units.
Sink the Moskva, but leave room for plausible deniability. Turkey must not be implicated in these actions.
3.0 Rules of Engagement:
Warning level Red, Weapons Free.
Do not inform the Americans of your actions and take precautions against blue-on-blue engagements. We know that the Americans have sent at least one SSN into the region.
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1) Sink the Moskva
USA
SSSSSS 000500Z21Aug08 SSSSSS
Operation Georgia Peach
1. SitRep:
NCA has directed an ongoing naval and humanitarian mission to Georgia. The first elements of this mission are enroute after picking up supplies in Crete.
After initially agreeing to a cease-fire and withdrawal, the Russians appear to be digging in and, in some cases, advancing to seize additional positions.
2. Intelligence:
Russian ground units have cut off land access to the Georgian port of Poti; where our ships have been ordered to deliver their supplies.
A Russian naval task force remains at sea after returning to the port of Novorossiysk for replenishment. Russian intentions are unknown.
With Poti isolated, the Georgians are attempting to re-supply and evacuate through the town of Batumi.
3. Orders:
Make full speed for RefPt Poti [18kts speed of advance] and deliver the aid supplies.
Take no action which would jeopardize this mission neither in support of the Georgians nor the Russians.
4. Rules of Engagement:
Warning level Yellow; Weapons Free to engage in defensive measures ONLY.
*Armed* Russian vessels and aircraft coming within 1 nm of your gunfire range or their max gunfire range may be deemed hostile and fired upon. Reconnaissance, MPA, AEW, EW, and interceptors are not considered threatening or armed in relation to vessels.
[Scenario should be played with Weapons Status Free to ensure that player is not surprised. If combat commences, Weapons Tight may be re-enabled at the discretion of the player.]
Do not fire unless first fired upon.
Warning: Turkish forces have been spotted during our transit across the Black Sea. Neutral forces may be in the area.
*** Commander's Eyes ONLY ***
To: Cmdr. Schorr
I know that you are being put into a very tense situation. Maintain situational awareness at all times. Although things are presently peaceful, they could change swiftly and drastically.
Follow the Marine Corp maxim: always have a plan to kill everyone in the room.
**** Sixth Fleet Sends ****
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1. Protect loss of both DDG and LCC
2. Ensure safe arrival at Poti
3. Unload in port for 11 hours
MONTREUX CONVENTION
Since 1936, the Montreux Convention has governed the passage of naval vessels through the Straits of Bosporus and the Dardenelles. Turkish sovereignty over these waters was recognized with all signatories. The Convention limits vessels to 15,000 tons with a maximum combined tonnage of 45,000 tons for countries not sharing a border on the Black Sea. Foreign naval vessels are limited to 21 days within the Black Sea.
On 21 August, 2008, three NATO frigates from Spain, Poland, and Germany sailed into the Black Sea and were joined by the American frigate, Taylor, for port visits and exercises off the coasts of Romania and Bulgaria.
On 27 August, Russia's ambassador to NATO gave an interview with newspaper, Vremya Novostei, warning that, any NATO attack on the Moscow-backed regions would mean, "a declaration of war on Russia."
Duration: 24 hrs
This scenario should be played with both the Nuclear and Aircraft Logistics options enabled.
All comments and feedback welcome: hermanhum@hotmail.com
Russia
ZZZZZ 1115Z28Aug08 ZZZZZZ
Operation Bottle Opener
1.0 SitRep:
The Americans have committed an act of war against the Russian Federation. While conducting counter-insurgency operations against the genocidal Georgian army and navy, units of the Russian navy and air force came under attack from NATO vessels at Poti. The fact that these attacks were delivered under the false pretense of a 'humanitarian aid mission' makes them all the more heinous. A formal letter of protest has been filed and presented at the United Nations.
2. Intelligence:
NATO's Standing Maritime Group 1 has entered the Black Sea to supposedly visit Varna and Constanza for anti-terrorist training exercises.
The Americans have violated the Montreux Convention by sneaking a nuclear submarine into the Black Sea.
3. Orders:
STAVKA has ordered contingency plan, Bottle Opener, to be conducted immediately.
**** Commander's Eyes ONLY ****
For centuries, the might of Russia has been bottled up behind the Bosporus and Dardenelles Straits. We have observed the Montreux Convention because it gave Mother Russia security in the Black Sea. However, now that Turkey has reneged upon her sacred duty as impartial arbitre over foreign naval forces entering the Black Sea by allowing access to so many NATO vessels, we will also no longer observe former international niceties. Seize the Bosporus and unleash the might of Russia.
Dmitry Medvedev, President,
Russian Federation sends
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1) Ensure safe arrival of 5 amphibious units at the Bosporus
2) Protect landing for 8 hours
3) Destroy all 14 facilities at the Bosporus landing site
Turkey
SSSSSSS 1115Z28Aug08 SSSSSSS
1.0 SitRep:
The American "aid" mission has ended in disaster with many of the ships sunk or damaged.
The discovery that an American submarine traversed the Straits in direct contravention of the Montreux Convention is being blamed on Turkey even though it was done without our knowledge or permission.
Regardless, the fury of Russia has turned upon Turkey for this heinous act committed by the Americans.
However, no act of aggression has yet been committed against the Turkish Republic. Therefore, we are unable to invoke Article 4 of the NATO Treaty.
2.0 Intelligence:
NATO HQ Bruxelles has reported that the amphibious squadron normally based at Donuslav Lake is absent from their berths. Their whereabouts are unknown.
3.0 Orders:
Two submarine units that have been maintaining surveillance of the Georgian fiasco are now returning to port.
Protect the approaches to the Bosporus from amphibious invasion. NATO Standing Maritime Group 1 is on hand to lend assistance, but will take no pro-active measures.
If the amphibious squadron has sailed to invade the Turkish homeland, sink them.
3.0 Rules of Engagement:
Warning level Red, Weapons Free.
Do not engage Ukrainian units.
**** Commander's Eyes ONLY ****
I am going to try and light a fire under the dotards at higher HQ to warn them of the potential danger to our sovereignty. The Intell group cannot decide if the threat is real or imagined. While they dither, we face disaster.
You are my "ace in the hole". If the Russians are coming, you must delay them long enough for the army and air force to react. All available assets have been assigned to you. If the Bosporus is captured, Turkey will fall under the hegemony of the Russians for the next 100 years.
Make Kemal Ataturk proud.
Instanbul HQ Sends
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1) Sink the Moskva
2) Sink one Amphibious vessel
OR,
3) Sink 4 Amphibious vessels
NATO
SSSSSS 1115Z29Aug08 SSSSSSS
Operation Active Endeavour
To: Standing Naval Maritime Group 1
Fr: NATO HQ, Bruxelles
1. SitRep:
SNMG-1 was planning to visit the ports of Varna, Bulgaria and Constanza, Romania for training exercises. Unfortunately, the crisis in Georgia has escalated.
The humanitarian relief operation to Georgia, Operation Georgia Peach, has turned into a bloody shambles with many casualties on all sides. Both Russia and the Task Group commander claim that they were fired upon and only acted in self-defense. Regardless of who provoked the conflict, tensions within the Black Sea are at an all-time high.
Ukrainian intentions are unknown at this time.
2. Intelligence:
NRO reports the quays at Donuslav Lake and Sevastopol empty during the last Lacrosse satellite pass. Russian Baltic Fleet dispositions are currently unknown.
NavIntell believes that the Russians may attempt to escalate the conflict with seizure of the Bosporus.
3. Orders:
Maintain the integrity of your command.
Turkey cannot invoke Article 4 of the NATO Treaty since no act of aggression has yet been perpetrated upon her. However, be prepared to lend assistance if the conflict escalates.
Do not allow the Russians control of the Bosporus. Protect the approaches. The survivors of the Georgian debacle depend upon this access in order to escape the Black Sea.
Avoid Ukrainian units until confirmation of political posture.
4. Rules of Engagement:
Warning level Yellow, Weapons Tight.
Take all measures necessary for the protection of your command. If fired upon, you may respond-in-kind. Do not initiate hostilities.
You may act to protect Turkish allies under attack in accordance with Article 4 of our Treaty obligations. Turkish instigation of hostilities is NOT << repeat >> NOT sufficient justification for weapons release.
Warning: Ukrainian forces may be in the area. Maintain situational awareness at all times.
Victory Conditions [Spoiler]:
1) Protect at least 4 facilities at the Bosporus from destruction
I've used several news sources for the background information. I can find them if anyone would like to see them.
I still think that a lot of threats to use nukes would be flying around between Russia and the UN nations that have them, especially the US. Wasn't NATO supposed to use nuclear weapons to slow down the Warsaw Pact in the event of a war, back in the Soviet days?
If the Russians penetrate as far as, say, Germany, it would be a little late to back down, hmm? They can't just say "oh sorry, we didn't mean to conquer half of Europe". The threat of nuclear retribution would probably be a major factor in keeping such a war from occuring.
Therefore, I propose that nuclear weapons be banned from the scenario, so we can have a clean, fair fight.
Desert;
Perhaps your refering to 'nice clean fair chemical weapons', which IIRC, have a MUCH greater punch than the 'nerfed' Nuke rules, and really make a difference to 'artty'...
ToaW-Nukes are pretty much 'add mud/bad lands to hexes' as far as I'm concerned. Not the sort of 'Total nuclear Armegeddon' that we might anticipate, as there just isn't that much 'hate and discontent' in the combat results......
YMMV, and my understanding is based on some 'old' scenarios...but I've yet to see something equivalent to "The Day After" (ilk) in any of the scenarios that have nuke-permissions to play with, eh?
Needless to say, I'd REALLY like to see someone use the new equip file to make something in the way of a 10-20 mgtn weapon deliverable by aircraft or tac-missle.......one that's a 'on point' targeting sort, eh?
While this might really tend to make a long game short, methinx it could REALLY show why these weaps don't work well in the real world, LOL!
P1: shoots missles. P2: shoots missles. Target hexes are now unplayable/excluded. Depending on map scale, surrounding hexes now unplayable/excluded.
Next turn: EEV shows downwind pattern: all hexes affected unplayable/excluded.....
Turn 'X' (depends on scale).....P1 player throws last rock...P2 player throws last rock...EEV indicates 'draw' .........
LOL!
:yummy:
L'zard mentioned this thread to me. I've written three Harpoon scenarios revolving around the Georgian conflict, in case anyone might be interested. They are all flights of fantasy for me, but they might give you some ideas. I'll attach the orders in case they help someone else write one for TOAW. I've used several news sources for the background information. I can find them if anyone would like to see them.
Just Beauty, HH! Thanks for the add-in, some inquiring minds should get a boost from it all, eh?
"Dancing in a Nuclear Winterland...."
:clown:
Sil, now that I'm through foaming at the mouth, perhaps you've got a comment concerning "Putin's War" ?
Nukes are always easier to deploy in strategy wargames than they are in the real world. "Nukes flying around like crazy..." ? Nope. Will not happen.
Best Wishes,
Steve
"Nukes flying around like crazy..."
Those aren't my exact words, and besides, you never know. That's what strategy games are for, hm?
And you would probably change your tune once a few well-placed 1mt nukes decimate your entire force, L`zard. While they aren't world-destroying in TOAW, they are definitely not matchsticks. :shock:
And you would probably change your tune once a few well-placed 1mt nukes decimate your entire force, L`zard. While they aren't world-destroying in TOAW, they are definitely not matchsticks. :shock:
You may be right, desert.....I'll admit I haven't given a nuke scenario a try since migrating to T-3......
I'll have to take time to do so, I just might end up eating my words (pass the ketchup, please...), LOL!
:clown:
Desert,
Sorry if I misquoted you.
Nobody has yet done a really good nuclear scenario. The main problem being that the nukes are unleashed much too easily. Nukes are a political weapon in the same way that an army is a political weapon and as distinguished, for example, from rifles which are a military weapon.
The nuclear equation is not as simple as I present here but this is if not the heart then close to it.
Big Cheeses (and you can substitute president, prime minister, politician, dictator, mad mullah, genocidal psychopath etc) all have one thing in common. They are control freaks. They all understand the myriad subtleties of control to the nth degree. Nukes give them (at least the illusion of) control over their destiny.
Take Iran for example. They want nukes as an antidote to US conventional military supremacy. They see nukes as a viable method of controlling US hostility.
Nukes, however, only provide control as long as they remain on their launch platforms. Once the nukes fly you lose control. No Big Cheese voluntarily gives up control.
In the only example of nukes being used, Truman found himself in the unique position as probably the only politician who will ever be able to use nukes and keep control at the same time.
Getting back to TOAW, a really good nuclear scenario would not have the use of nukes but instead introduce and generally crank up a period of nuclear tension and standoff. Difficult to achieve though. It would require some very careful event and scenario planning. I'd like to see it though.
Best Wishes,
Steve
Would that scenario involve any actual armed conflict between the players, or will it just simulate the Cold War?
And if you know that nukes are not present in the scenario, then there isn't really going to be much tension.
Desert,
In TOAW terms: Armed conflict. Lots of nukes. First nuke used both players lose. It's a very fine line to tread and most difficult to programme. Genuine nuclear tension though.
It would require incentives for both players to be aggressive and yet require them to be cautious at the same time. A points victory on the draw.
Best Wishes,
Steve
That could be simulated with an EEV threshold of some kind. The hard part would be figuring what causes the EEV to rise and fall.
It does sound kind of interesting, I have to admit.
That could be simulated with an EEV threshold of some kind. The hard part would be figuring what causes the EEV to rise and fall.
It does sound kind of interesting, I have to admit.
Possibly the use of TO's to allow 'permissions' for nuke weapon free status, keyed directly to each TO activation.....
Wildcards, political negotiation between players via TOs, failing alliances, backstabbing, double dealing, mutiny, friendly and unfriendly media, NGOs, and the environmentalists campaigning for a "green war" - start quietly and then slowly crank up the volume. Ah yes, I love the smell of TOAW in the morning! :devious:
Best Wishes,
Steve
Things like mutiny would be difficult to simulate...variable allegiance is on the TOAW wishlist though.
So are multiple sides/players, to make alliances easier to implement.
friendly and unfriendly media, NGOs, and the environmentalists campaigning for a "green war"
Speaking of which...
http://www.cracked.com/article_15660_ultimate-war-simulation-game.html
Use EvilEd to set up nuclear exchange options, and cascading events which increment the event variable, or rising percentage of total nuclear holocaust, leading to an OD for both players :)
e.g Each time you use a nuke (and maybe the first player to do so gets a 50% chance of starting the total nuclear exchange, then next time they're used by either player, 15% chance, then 20%, etc. until the game ends normally, or a nuclear holocaust stops the game)
So yeah, some tac nukes fired by NATO to break a Sov echelon might lead you to a conventional victory, but you incur the chance of losing everything also...
Rationale for a 50% chance of holocaust upon first use would be to "model" the shock, and the very real possibility that things escalate real fast...
But once that initial tac strike happened, if the nuclear winter isn't there yet, then chances drop that the next usage will trigger the war, rising again with each further strike.
Or something like that, implemented with a series of events triggering each other.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.