Balance of Power: Expert mode

Balance of Power offers four difficulties, and the second-highest, Expert mode, gives us complete access to all of the gameplay options; military aid to governments or insurgencies, direct military interventions, economic aid to stabilize regimes, political sabotage to destabilize regimes, treaties to solidify allegiances, and diplomatic pressure to intimidate enemies.

There is also a two player mode, but it strikes me as a pointless and arbitrary game of nuclear chicken, as either player can perform outrageous actions and force the other one to either concede a massive amount of prestige or mutually end the game.

For this AAR, I will be playing expert mode as the USA under my own iron man rules. A complete game lasts for eight turns and ends in 1994. If I provoke deliberate nuclear retaliation, it will be the end. If I threaten the USSR over something truly stupid and have to launch my own missiles or else lose absolute credibility for not following through, I'll take the hit and roll with it, but hopefully it won't come to that now that I have a pretty solid set of data designed specifically to avoid that.

However, I won't accept accidental wars that ignite before nuclear threats are even made. These can randomly happen with each escalation, even ones that are very clearly infringing on US interests, and that just feels unfair. Especially when Soviet patience plays a role in determining the likelihood, and the stats that govern this are completely invisible, giving you no way to know that it's run out until it's too late.

To be fair to myself, Balance of Power does have a built-in option to load an old game, and nuclear armageddon doesn't erase or overwrite the last state. However, this doesn't work in MAME, only mini vMac, and only MAME supports MOOF format disk images. So I'll use save states at the start of each turn for this failsafe.

 

1986

 

The events of the year are revolutions in Mali, Zaire, and Burma. All three are in the USSR sphere of influence, but Zaire maintains friendly relations with the US.

I begin by querying USSR actions, but I write off some as impossible to challenge.

• Nuclear treaties with Cuba and Vietnam
• A mutual defense treaty with Libya
  
• Large military interventions to Syria, Czechoslovakia, North Korea, and Afghanistan
• A small military intervention to Indonesia's communist opposition, with materiel attached
• Small military interventions to Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Angola
• Financial aid to Poland, Romania, and East Germany

 

For the rest, I sort by country affinity. It's a long list, but I begin by challenging the actions in the countries at the top of my list - South Korea and Saudi Arabia, and work my way down. The more the Soviets fold, the more they are likely to fold in the future, so it's best to start with the easiest challenges.

They quickly back down on South Korea and Saudi Arabia, but next on the list, Greece, takes an escalation to DEFCON 3 before they abandon a trade agreement. After that, they quickly or immediately abandon operations in Egypt, Morocco, Sweden, Thailand, Philippines, and Israel. The specific actions aren't even important this high up on the list; USSR has no business making policies with American allies.

It takes a few threats to get them to back off on Columbia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Honduras, Peru, Burma, and Taiwan, and I myself back down and allow them to provide aid to insurgents in Chile, Tunisia, and Panama. After they refuse to budge on providing aid to Argentina's right-wing but Soviet-friendly government, I abandon my challenges, save for one more - diplomatic relations with Mali, who dislikes both of us and therefore should respond well to such a challenge. I permit them to perform the rest of their operations, which in rough order of how much it hurts me, are:

• Trade relations with Nicaragua, with $1 billion credit
• Trade agreements with Algeria
• $400 million in military aid and $200 million in economic aid to Mozambique 
• $20 million in military aid to Tanzania
• Military aid to terrorists in Nigeria and Sudan
• Diplomatic relations with South Africa and Zaire

All of the challenges I issued earned me a net gain of 104 prestige points, and now I needed to enact policies of my own. So I went down the list of countries to look for opportunities to improve things, prioritizing my own turf.

Making US policies is even riskier than challenging Soviet ones, because you must declare all of your policies for any given year before proceeding to the next! Only then will you see the Soviet reaction to any of them, and by then it is too late to make adjustments.

I decided on:

• Providing economic aid to France and Spain, whose governments were weakening.
• Small increases in anti-terrorist military aid to Greece.
• Upping Morocco's economic aid.
• $1 billion in military aid to Thailand. I'd send troops too, but Prem doesn't want that kind of help.
• Maximum military intervention to the Philippines, Honduras, and Panama.
• Increased military aid to Columbia and Venezuela.
• Increased military aid and $1 billion in economic aid to Mexico's weakening government.
• Increased military aid and $1 billion in economic aid to Pakistan. To help pay for this and other actions, I slash foreign aid to Egypt and Israel, who are receiving billions and are doing fine financially.
• $100 million military aid and $1 billion economic aid to Chile.
• $100 million military aid to Peru.
• Trade relations with Tunisia.
• Intense diplomatic pressure towards Burma, whose militaristic government dislikes the US, but whose tribal opposition is liable to like me even less.
• Military intervention in Taiwan.
• $400 economic aid to Argentina.
• Military aid to Nicaragua's insurgents and covert propaganda operations.
• $100 military aid to Kenya.

In an alternate timeline, I also sent a minor aid package to India's terrorists, but this was the potato that broke the bear's back and got me nuked faster than I could say "make me," so I drew the line there.

There's a mechanic here that may seem unintuitive but makes sense given the way that Balance of Power's brinkmanship calculations work. When the environment of a country slightly favors the US, go hard with your policies so that they can't bluff you. When the environment slightly favors the USSR, go easy so that you have a chance of bluffing them! Big actions are both more enraging and more respected than small ones, so if the respect is going to be higher than baseline outrage, a daring action will make the difference even higher and make it bluff-proof. If the reverse, then the only way you can win is by bluffing yourself, which requires a small difference.

As for the actions in this timeline, the Soviets challenge nearly all of them, even things like aid to Spain which ought to go unchallenged. For the most part, they back down one by one, but not without a few fights that very nearly get serious.

It's war if they don't back down from a DEFCON 2, but my advisors and my own calculations predict they will.

 

My Nicaragua psy-ops exposed; I back down this time and eat 20 points of humble pie.

 

The world turns.

1987 

 

We have communist revolutions in Burma, Indonesia, Sudan, Kenya, and Mali, a right-wing revolution in Ethiopia (who remain essentially untouchable by us), and extremist revolutions in Tunisia, Tanzania, and Mozambique. Relative stability blesses Western Europe, the Americas, and the Middle East, surprisingly.

This is a net territorial gain for the USSR, but our little spats have ingratiated the US to the rest of the world, who have seen that America stands firm, and that Russia's threats are full of hot air.

I check and list USSR actions. The only truly unacceptable action this year is assisting dissidents in Morocco, and cease immediately when I question it. They withdraw similar policies in Pakistan and Venezuela equally fast, and need to be threatened a bit in Zimbabwe, but Kenya is next on the list and by now they've run out of patience for my chastisement.

I know they're bluffing, but unbeknownst to me, DEFCON 3 will go straight to war.

 

I disregard the majority of the USSR's actions, which occur in their own domain, but take note of others.

• Diplomatic relations with the communists in Burma and Kenya.
• Troops deployed to support the rebels in Tunisia and Tanzania.
• $20 million in military aid to Zaire.
• A coup in Mozambique.
• Economic destabilization and aid to the rebellion in Nigeria.

 

As for me,

• Increase Spain's economic aid to $400 million
• Increase Columbia's military aid to $400 million
• Increase Mexico's economic aid to $2 billion
• Increase Chile's military aid to $400 million and economic aid to $2 billion
• Honduras' insurgency is growing to a guerilla war, but I can increase military aid no further, and the government won't allow direct intervention.
• $800 million in military and economic aid to Peru.
• Panama, like Honduras, still has terrorist problems but won't accept any more help.
• Tanzania and Tunisia, now mutual enemies, gets the works - airstrikes, blockades, assassinations, terrorist aid, and some very strongly worded letters all at once. The Kremlin might be a bit envious, but in the end they won't mind.

 

Moscow issues an empty challenge to the aid to Peru, but is otherwise silent.

 

1988

 

It's a quieter year, as Tunisia alone undergoes regime change. The bad news, they're communists. The good news, they're at least a little bit grateful to us for the help. Iran, Afghanistan, and Sudan Finlandize to the USSR, and Indonesia, Mexico, and Tanzania Finlandize to us.

Mexico is now a reliable ally, and Indonesia's "New New Order" communists at least like us enough to screen Hollywood films in their cinemas instead of banning them. On the other side, Iran and Afghanistan hate us even more than ever, and Sudan drops to the very bottom of my list of battleground states.

The USSR's actions are more confined to their territory this year:

• Large military interventions in North Korea and Cuba. Cuba also receives $2 billion worth of military hardware, which I would find alarming if there was anything I could do about it!
• A medium-sized military intervention in Afghanistan, with $1 billion of economic aid attached.
• $2 billion of military aid to Czechoslovakia.
• $1 billion of military aid to Sudan.
  
• A coup against Ethiopia's new government.
  
• $2 billion to East Germany and Poland.
• $1 billion to Romania.
• $200 million to Syria, Yugoslavia, and Angola.
• $200 million of military aid to Iran.
  

That last action is curious. Iran's Finlandized to the USSR was only partial, and they are still enemies. Why would the Soviets help them? I challenge this action and they capitulate immediately.

I further dissuade them from operations in India, Zimbabwe, Nicaragua, Kenya, Mali, and Burma, but cannot shake their resolve on instigating coups in Mozambique and terror attacks in Tanzania. I also stand by as they instigate riots in Nigeria, and give $200 million to Tunisia's government.

I commit economic and military aid here and there, mainly in my own sphere. Mexico's failing economy gets its maximum allotment of $4 billion, partially reallocated from Egypt and Israel.

As a bit of a test, I make a minor military commitment to Nicaragua's contra elements. I ceded ground to the Soviets on Nicaragua before, but the Soviets begrudge it this time along with everything else. Only a handful of objections are raised, and none of them turn into threats.

1989

It's chaos in Africa, with multiple revolutions. Ethiopia turns red again, as do Mozambique and Tanzania. Zaire, Mali, and Kenya are taken by extremists. Iran and Nigeria also Finlandize, but they don't seem to like the Soviets any better, they just hate me more. Nigeria, so much more than I must now consider them untouchable.

I am able to stop Soviet actions in Panama, Nicaragua, and Burma, but am only partially successful in Mozambique, preventing an establishment of diplomatic relations, but failing to prevent $100 million in military aid.

The rest of their actions, which includes support for rebellions in Nigeria, Kenya, Mali, and Zaire, either make no sense for me to challenge, or seem not worth the risk.

 

My own actions are largely focused on aid, which I continue to move around from places that need it less to places that need it more. Chile gets a $4 billion maximum allotment, Columbia gets $2 billion in military aid, and I increase commitment to the the Nicaraguan contra. Peru weakens, but I can't help; I'm out of earmarked funds.

 

1990

Nicaragua finally completes its revolution against the Sandinistas and joins my sphere. Meanwhile, Iran and Nigeria Finlandizes to USSR (once again, this is not made apparent by the new prestige values), and Kenya, Mozambique, and Indonesia to me. Indonesia goes so hard that they become firm allies.

The USSR once again deploys a nonsensical aid package to their Iranian enemies which they immediately withdraw when I object, and I am also able to spook them out of Mozambique, Panama, and my newly acquired ally Nicaragua. I also test them in Zimbabwe, where they withdraw aid, and Tanzania, where they do not.

I myself provide Indonesia with economic aid, Chile with military bases, and establish relations with Mozambique. I also move some cash from Chile, which is now prospering, to Peru.

 

1991

The USSR falls and the game is over.

Just kidding! It's Chile and Mexico who fall. So much for weaning them off the foreign aid; Chile government stability immediately went from "very strong" to "coup" the moment I reallocated the smallest amount of funding. It's not a dramatic regime change, and the new government actually likes us a bit more.

As for Mexico, all that aid could only delay the inevitable. The new government remains US-aligned, but likes us a lot less than the old one did.

Ethiopia has another right-wing revolution, albeit a Soviet-friendly one and deep in their sphere of influence, which they quickly re-establish relations with. Mali and Kenya are re-taken by communists, Mozambique Finlandizes, and Iran's papers claim they do but the actual prestige numbers have not changed; they already hate the US as much as they possibly can.

 

USSR once again tries to aid Iran, and I once again stop it. They also wish to aid Nigeria's terrorists, which I absolutely must not try to stop. I also convince them to abandon operations in Panama and Mozambique, but cannot convince them not to build military bases in Burma.

To their enemies, they instigate:

• Terrorist aid and a coup in Kenya
• Riots in Zaire
  

 

My own attempt to establish relations with Ethiopia is soundly rebuffed, but the rest of my actions are successful.

• Increase West Germany's economic aid to $2 billion.
• Increase France and Spain's economic aid to $4 billion each - this comes from Mexico and Chile, who are now prospering under their new leadership.
• Diplomatic relations with Indonesia, with $400 million in economic aid attached.
• Maximum aid to terrorists in Mali and Kenya, with full-on diplomatic offensive toward the government.
• Increase Argentina's economic aid to $400 million.
• Increase Nicaragua's military aid to $1 billion.
• Military aid to Zimbabwe.
• Increase Tanzania's military aid to $100 million.
• Diplomatic offensive on Zaire.
  

 

1992

 

It's a very busy year.

Iran does the usual. Multiple countries Finlandize to the US, including North Korea and Cuba, though this only makes them marginally less hostile and hardly changes the playing field. Nigeria Finlandizes to the USSR.

Pakistan, who I neglected last year, has a coup, and becomes less hostile to the USSR. Mali, Kenya, and Mozambique all have right-wing revolutions.

I chase the Soviets out of Mali, Kenya, Mozambique, and Nicaragua, but a blunder costs me 100 prestige points for trying to deny them a foothold in Tanzania, which I should have considered their turf.

I do not challenge their attempt to start a coup in Zaire, nor an intervention in Burma.

As for me, I go full on offensive toward Nigeria and Zaire, knowing the Soviets won't stop me.

Things are very bad here and I'm going to make them a lot worse in the short run.

My other actions are:

• Increase West Germany's economic aid to $4 billion.
• Begin trade relations with Indonesia and increase economic aid to $1 billion.
• Increase Turkey's economic aid to $4 billion. This comes from a few places presently doing well; Egypt, Pakistan, Greece, Philippines, Morocco, and Panama.
• Chile - sigh - is weakening again. I up its aid back to $2 billion.
• Peru needs more help too, and I find exactly $2 billion in Israel, Brazil, Thailand, Columbia, Honduras, Venezuela, and India.
• Maximize military aid to the new governments of Mali and Kenya.
• Military and economic aid to Mozambique.
• Economic aid to Nicaragua and Zimbabwe.
  

I have to fight for the last few, but I win. 

1993

It's the last turn of the game and the world is relatively stable! Can I squeeze out a few more prestige points without ruining everything?

My designs in Nigeria do unfold, and it is massively beneficial to the USSR, but also quite beneficial to me.

 

Iran actually has a coup! Of course the new government just hates the secular world even more.

Somehow this seems even less plausible than the October Surprise theory.

Ethiopia and Tanzania are re-taken by right-wing guerillas, North Korea and Cuba decide to hate the US a bit less, and Sudan and Zaire also Finlandize.

For this final turn, I do almost nothing. I review the Soviet activities, challenge multiple nonsensical ones, press operations on my turf, and back down from a few small scuffles, but I don't enact any new policies of my own.

 

1994

 

Game over! We don't get to see the final events, but Soviet prestige took one last dip and now they have to enter the new year as complete losers without any prom dates.

GAB rating: Above average.

As a simulation, Balance of Power is almost staggeringly sophisticated for its time, and yet not overwhelmingly complicated. A mouse-driven interface with perfect integration of the Macintosh widgets and a logical layout of options and data views make it feel surprisingly modern and intuitive to navigate. I'm not completely sold on the real-world verisimilitude here - I know it's difficult to accurately model something that hasn't happened yet, but by Balance of Power's rules, the Cuban Missile Crisis should have been unwinnable. Still, it is teaching and applying real-world principles, and as much as I'm loathe to accept its proposition of ruthless pragmatism, which was in no small part influenced by ruthless pragmatist Henry Kissinger's memoirs, one can't deny just how much this philosophy shaped the state of the modern world, for better or worse.

But as a strategy game, Balance of Power isn't nearly as deep as it seems, and this is at least partly by design. The world here is governed by many systems, and the numbers on immediate display are just beginning to scratch the surface, but outside of crises, there's not much interaction with any of it. The systems are designed to resist massive world changes, and the bulk of your prestige is won or lost on the Washington-Moscow hotline. You can't really have long-term goals or much of a strategy beyond optimizing your year-to-year gains; the world just isn't set up for that. You could win the game on expert mode without ever enacting a single policy or checking a single country's status - just go through the USSR's yearly actions and challenge the truly stupid ones, and the world will see what bumbling amateurs they really are. And while Balance of Power wisely abstracts the governing systems and calculations, the rules can feel capriciously arbitrary if you don't understand how outrage excess is calculated. But if you simply understand that it's proportional to the difference in absolute prestige values, then you're 90% of the way there.

The tertiary political databases are pointless but impressively vast. Did you know Brazil has 1 person per person?

 

It's an impressive piece of work that plays interestingly with CRPG Addict's BDI scale, with a bit of creative interpretation. The breadth of systems is immense for the time, with 60 countries modeled and catalogued with details on each ranging from US/Soviet nuclear policy to how many televisions are owned per capita. Crawford envisioned even greater breadth than this, with trade mechanics and relations between non-superpower countries simply not fitting into the Mac's hard-slotted 128KB of RAM. Some of it was later realized in the 1990 edition update. Immersion is quite excellent as well - it's abstract, but I felt like the world's nations were in the palm of my hand, that I could build up with one hand and destroy with the other, and the morality of the consequences on the ground were distant and untroubling, small sacrifices to make compared to the existential threat of total nuclear destruction year after year. But, as mentioned, it all seems much deeper than it really is, and "solving" even a small portion of the game's math makes the difference between the impossible and the trivial. Either way, it's just not that fun to play.

And absolutely screw the "accidental war" mechanic that can instantly and immediately end the game when you made a perfectly reasonable decision because the game decided you're winning too much or just randomly.