Collapse of the Soviet Union *On Vacation*

[Industrial Helix]

Just thought I'd throw this out there.



Could be fun, no?

[natty dread]

Seems nice... would you have more territories? It seems a bit small, by the territory count.

[Industrial Helix]

Nah, I'm kind of interested in the dynamics of small maps. Most are the typical bonus area/+1 for 3 territories and since I have a thing for superbonuses, this seems like something new.

[AndyDufresne]

Hm, feels too gimmicky at the moment. But I like the general idea.


--Andy

[jefjef]

I believe your are missin an island in the pacific that was conquered from Japan.

[Industrial Helix]

I believe your are missin an island in the pacific that was conquered from Japan.

Sakhalin? Well, on the map The Russian Federation has been cut up a as to show the whole thing would be too much for the map... plus Sakhalin didn't secede from the Union. Unless you're talking about something I don't know about.

@Andy.. Yeah I see what you mean, but I kind of intended it to be that way. It's just kind of a thought rather than an actual plan. What would you prefer to see in this map?

[jefjef]

I believe your are missin an island in the pacific that was conquered from Japan.

Sakhalin? Well, on the map The Russian Federation has been cut up a as to show the whole thing would be too much for the map... plus Sakhalin didn't secede from the Union. Unless you're talking about something I don't know about.

@Andy.. Yeah I see what you mean, but I kind of intended it to be that way. It's just kind of a thought rather than an actual plan. What would you prefer to see in this map?

I was looking for another tert for ya. As far as the Russian Federation goes it is made up of states itself.

There is also already a Soviet map too. Could this end up in a way maybe repeating it?

Perhaps go to a cold war map say 1962. Occupied Germany. Cuba missle crises. NATO. Warsaw Pact Etc...

Just throwing around some idea's.

[Industrial Helix]

Ah I see. Well, like I said I'd prefer a small map over some giant one.

And I don't really care for the Soviet Union map either... its just too big for me and nothing looks familiar. The idea behind this map is that it focuses on those countries who broke away from teh Soviet Union in the 90s.

[captainwalrus]

I am not really felling this, but the idea is good.
A few things:
The theme needs to be made more clear, but I don't know how.
It bugs me when there are some really big territories and some really small ones, if you like it that way, that is fine, but Russian Federation overpowers things like Estonia.
Can Russian Fed. attack Poland?

[Industrial Helix]

I am not really felling this, but the idea is good.
A few things:
The theme needs to be made more clear, but I don't know how.
It bugs me when there are some really big territories and some really small ones, if you like it that way, that is fine, but Russian Federation overpowers things like Estonia.
Can Russian Fed. attack Poland?

Yeah, Russia can attack Poland.

Isn't logical that Russia would overpower Estonia? The idea is to present the new geopolitical reality of the end of the Cold War.

[MarshalNey]

The Russians were the de facto ruling class of the Soviet Union, and of course the Russian Federation should be able to overpower Estonia... but if that's the case then why did Estonia get away with independence?

The answer is that keeping many of these places became more trouble than it was worth, economically and politically- particularly the Warsaw Pact countries of Eastern Europe. I know that I'm not stating anything new, but I think that these facts could work into the theme of the map.

If you made the Russian Federation the central piece of this map you might be able to capture the feel of the Russians' embattled struggle to maintain its political hegemony.

What if, for instance, the Russian Federation was a big bonus all to itself, like a +4 or +5. However, every country held in addition to the Federation gave a negative (-1) bonus, as they are full of restive ethnic populations. Along these lines, maybe some more rebellious or particularly unproductive areas (The Polish union strikes, Lithuanian rebellion and Georgian revolution come to mind) give an even greater negative (-2) bonus.

For players who don't have the Federation, then maybe there is some over-arching bonus for uniting the satellites or the Baltic States or other geopoltical regions. It seems like the bonuses are pretty slim in the map right now- you get +2 for 4 satellite countries, but there are only 6 total.

I think it might spice up the dynamic, by making the Russian Federation both a mighty engine by itself and a disaster in combination with other countries- sort of a curse in disguise.

[Industrial Helix]

The Russians were the de facto ruling class of the Soviet Union, and of course the Russian Federation should be able to overpower Estonia... but if that's the case then why did Estonia get away with independence?

The answer is that keeping many of these places became more trouble than it was worth, economically and politically- particularly the Warsaw Pact countries of Eastern Europe. I know that I'm not stating anything new, but I think that these facts could work into the theme of the map.

If you made the Russian Federation the central piece of this map you might be able to capture the feel of the Russians' embattled struggle to maintain its political hegemony.

What if, for instance, the Russian Federation was a big bonus all to itself, like a +4 or +5. However, every country held in addition to the Federation gave a negative (-1) bonus, as they are full of restive ethnic populations. Along these lines, maybe some more rebellious or particularly unproductive areas (The Polish union strikes, Lithuanian rebellion and Georgian revolution come to mind) give an even greater negative (-2) bonus.

For players who don't have the Federation, then maybe there is some over-arching bonus for uniting the satellites or the Baltic States or other geopoltical regions. It seems like the bonuses are pretty slim in the map right now- you get +2 for 4 satellite countries, but there are only 6 total.

I think it might spice up the dynamic, by making the Russian Federation both a mighty engine by itself and a disaster in combination with other countries- sort of a curse in disguise.

Hmm... well, the independence of Estonia only seems to occur during a hiccup in Russian geopolitical power... 1918, 1991. The norm is that it is occupied and given Russia's recent return to power from the early 1990s, Russia stands poised to overpower Estonia again.

But, such was not the case in 1991 and you make a valid point coupled with an interesting gameplay dynamic. I like the lines that you're thinking along but there's one big thing that bugs me: If Russia has such a negative role then nobody is going to take the territory or if it yields a large bonus (albeit with the negative multiple occupancy bonus) what is to stop a player from taking Russia and sitting on it until they overpower the rest of the map. One round passes by with 3 extra men and that person is well ont he way to an unbreakable lead.

[MarshalNey]

Grrrr... you make a good point, especially in a No Spoils game someone could just sit on the Russina Fed and build. Dang... and yet...

hmmm. I guess that sort of ties in with the second part about other bonuses being hard to come by. "Breakaway" groups need to be able to get significant bonuses without too much trouble- that way a lethargic Russian might get outpaced.

If, for instance, there were more regional bonuses out there- let's say 4 other areas in this- 21 tert I think? - map, so about 5 countries per geopolitical bonus, then maybe "outsider" forces could put together bonuses that could seriously challenge the holder of the Russian Fed.

If each bonus region had something like a +2 bonus for 2-3 countries of the region (depending if it was say 4 or 6 countries just to have variety), and the Russian Fed gives a +4 bonus, then it's very feasible for an "outside" player to gather a coalition of territories that would challenge the Russian Fed.

True, the Russian Fed's forces would be more concentrated, but I don't think she could wait until she had enough to run the entire map- some other player would probably have emerged (as they usually do) to hold +6 to +10 in bonuses, besides a small bonus for # of terts.

And the key here, then is how the holder of the Russian Fed. plays their hand and how the holders of the breakaway republics respond. A Russian Fed. player would almost, as a matter of course, want to take countries in blocks, to offset their negative bonuses with the +2. The outsider players, on the other hand, would want to merely break the Russian Fed's blocks without taking extra, especially if they could burden the Fed with a really rebellious republic (a -2 bonus tert). You could even justify it a bit by saying that once one republic of a Russian block is "free", the others want to follow suit and cause trouble.

I'm not sure if this is helpful, but I think the idea could still be good by reworking the regional bonuses outside the Russian Fed. I love scenario-type maps, though

[MrBenn]

Hmmm

I'm not too sure that the supercontinent idea would work so well on such a small map?

[00iCon]

where's everyone's favourite Kamchatka?

[Teflon Kris]

I'm really interested in your series of new maps Helix.

This one may be the most popular, given its relatively recent theme.

I'm sure that, between us all, we can come up with something gameplay-wise here.

Just a quick idea to consider: would a couple of cities (maybe with neutral starts and some kind of bonus, auto-deploy or not) be of interest?

[Industrial Helix]

Well... this was just a little trial run to see how people felt about small maps with super bonuses. I wasn't going to include it in the map pack as its gameplay is totally different and is about the collapse of communism, as opposed to rise. But I guess if there's a demand to see the map make its way through then I'm down with that.

For the map pack, the staple idea are commanders and a city/territory base. Perhaps for this map there could be the dissidents like Havel and Walesa and Yeltsin/Gorbachev which one way the cities. Could be a conquest map, the neutrals representing soviet rule.

Thoughts anyone?

[theBastard]

hm, very interesting and for me also important. I´m from Slovakia and I was young but remember all things about this - revolution, jingle with keys on the squares...disidents...

one general notice: the name of map is "Collapsing of SU" but the gameplay and bonuses looks more as reunited SU. I think bonuses should be done when country gain independence. I do not know how, yet

[natty dread]

Yet another example of how poorly Photobucket treats JPG:s...

Click image to enlarge.

change JPG->PNG or bucket->shack, either works...

[Teflon Kris]

Well... this was just a little trial run to see how people felt about small maps with super bonuses. I wasn't going to include it in the map pack as its gameplay is totally different and is about the collapse of communism, as opposed to rise. But I guess if there's a demand to see the map make its way through then I'm down with that.

For the map pack, the staple idea are commanders and a city/territory base. Perhaps for this map there could be the dissidents like Havel and Walesa and Yeltsin/Gorbachev which one way the cities. Could be a conquest map, the neutrals representing soviet rule.

Thoughts anyone?

Hmm, I like it.

show: Some Gameplay Ideas

I think you're right that this should be seperate to the rise of communism map pack - definitely forge on with it though, we don't hae many small maps on the site and very few with any gameplay features or theme.

If you stick with the current gameplay we'll need to get calculators out to see the chances of dropping the bonuses / nearly dropping the bonuses etc (i.e. the drop determining the result too much).

Edit: Having a system similar to your Cuba map may be a good approach?

[Teflon Kris]

Ok - how about the politicians. There could be independance guys from the revolutionising states, liberal soviets and imperialist soviets - objectives / bonuses could be linked to holding a combination of the liberal soviets + 1 or 2 others. How the politicians connect to the main map regions coulkd be determined according to what makes the gameplay work best.

[theBastard]

Ok - how about the politicians. There could be independance guys from the revolutionising states, liberal soviets and imperialist soviets - objectives / bonuses could be linked to holding a combination of the liberal soviets + 1 or 2 others. How the politicians connect to the main map regions coulkd be determined according to what makes the gameplay work best.

this is good idea. I´ve read that you, Helix thought about disidents (Havel, Walesa). the map has not much regions now, so there should be a place for any new... maybe in Soviet Union should be Gorbatchov and in Soviet´s satelites some disidents, and holding them brings any bonus...

try build map realy on Collapse of SU, so also bonuses will be build on this...

[jasnostj]

I'd say keep this one a simple small map. Enough projects with all kinds of complicated stuff going on already.