This level goes beyond challenge; it is a simple, brutal, unfair massacre. Enjoy.
Thus warns the manual about nightmare mode. For the sake of completion, I'm going to try it from the other side. The book warns thusly,
You
should try playing as the USSR some time to develop a better feel for
Soviet paranoia. As the General Secretary of the USSR, you will find
that your resources are more limited than those of the American
President. More important, you will find that you have fewer friends
around the world. In fact, the world looks quite hostile from Moscow.
Well, right off the bat, Ethiopia is taken by right-wing militants, and the US won't be in a hurry to let us take it back. There are also revolutions in Zaire, to my benefit, and in Burma, to my detriment.
I review US actions.
Ha! Cuba is firmly in the USSR's pocket, with a +12 affinity advantage to our side, making it effectively untouchable. We will have our revenge for that humiliating missile crisis...
Oh. Oh no. I don't get it - computer controlled USSR would have never stood for that. But now I must or I lose! Not only that, but they're also intervening on behalf of Indonesia, which was impossible when I played as them, but I guess it's only funny when the computer does it.
Quickload
They also will not be shaken on their policy of aid to Nigeria despite the affinity numbers being in my favor by a degree of +9. At least the prestige loss from a DEFCON 2 backdown isn't crippling.
Next on the list is Ethiopia. An unshakable USSR stronghold in the last game, now it's under threat from US imperialists who would dare to establish diplomatic relations and lend them a $500 million aid package.
They back off, but not before I have to threaten them with a DEFCON 3.
It's quickly evident that my old tables don't apply. In particular, sphere of influence seems to be weighted more strongly than I estimated, and I'm not sure if that's because the rules are different for the USSR, or because it's nightmare mode, or if it's because I underweighted it the first time around and it just didn't matter as much in expert mode.
But I move some calculations around, and come up with a new order.
Solid US allies, in descending loyalty:
| Region | USA prestige | USSR prestige | Total prestige | Sphere | Defense treaty | |
| West Germany | West Europe | 503 | -365 | 585 | Very strong USA | Nuclear |
| Britain | West Europe | 325 | -189 | 347 | Absolute USA | Nuclear |
| Italy | West Europe | 168 | -84 | 216 | Very strong USA | Nuclear |
| Japan | Pacific | 189 | -86 | 220 | Very strong USA | Conventional |
| South Korea | Far East | 158 | -111 | 203 | Very strong USA | Conventional |
| France | West Europe | 267 | -200 | 428 | Fair USA | Nuclear |
| Canada | North America | 92 | -44 | 95 | Very strong USA | Nuclear |
| Israel | Middle East | 99 | -87 | 159 | Absolute USA | Conventional |
| Spain | West Europe | 87 | -61 | 112 | Strong USA | Nuclear |
| Greece | East Europe | 33 | -8 | 53 | Very strong USA | Nuclear |
| Australia | Pacific | 49 | -32 | 70 | Very strong USA | Conventional |
| Saudi Arabia | Middle East | 71 | -40 | 130 | Absolute USA | Bases |
| Turkey | Middle East | 57 | -47 | 122 | Strong USA | Conventional |
| Phillipines | Pacific | 27 | -13 | 44 | Fair USA | Conventional |
| Egypt | North Africa | 47 | -28 | 122 | Fair USA | Bases |
| Pakistan | Middle East | 23 | -18 | 60 | Fair USA | Bases |
| Thailand | Far East | 31 | -17 | 57 | Slight USA | Bases |
| Morocco | North Africa | 29 | -11 | 74 | Slight USA | Bases |
Solid USSR allies, in ascending loyalty:
| Region | USA prestige | USSR prestige | Total prestige | Sphere | Defense treaty | |
| Syria | Middle East | -14 | 35 | 90 | Strong USSR | Conventional |
| Iraq | Middle East | 0 | 0 | 95 | Strong USSR | Bases |
| Yugoslavia | East Europe | 6 | 12 | 81 | Strong USSR | Conventional |
| Angola | South Africa | -4 | 4 | 17 | Very strong USSR | Bases |
| Ethiopia | North Africa | -6 | 12 | 40 | Very strong USSR | Bases |
| Libya | North Africa | -18 | 12 | 38 | Absolute USSR | Conventional |
| Afghanistan | Middle East | -73 | 41 | 133 | Very strong USSR | Nuclear |
| Czechoslovakia | East Europe | -56 | 140 | 180 | Absolute USSR | Nuclear |
| North Korea | Far East | -119 | 163 | 190 | Absolute USSR | Nuclear |
| Poland | East Europe | -57 | 191 | 245 | Very strong USSR | Nuclear |
| East Germany | East Europe | -77 | 194 | 249 | Absolute USSR | Nuclear |
| Vietnam | Far East | -140 | 280 | 358 | Absolute USSR | Nuclear |
Battleground states, in ascending order of US loyalty:
| Region | USA prestige | USSR prestige | Total prestige | Sphere | Defense treaty | |
| Taiwan | Pacific | 9 | -9 | 58 | Fair USA | Bases |
| Honduras | North America | 5 | -3 | 13 | Fair USA | Bases |
| Sweden | West Europe | 31 | 15 | 100 | Strong USA |
|
| Panama | North America | 0 | 0 | 1 | Fair USA | Bases |
| Mexico | North America | 11 | 2 | 37 | Very strong USA |
|
| Brazil | South America | 23 | 0 | 75 | Fair USA |
|
| Colombia | South America | 12 | -2 | 31 | Fair USA |
|
| Chile | South America | 10 | 7 | 14 | Fair USA |
|
| South Africa | South Africa | 6 | -12 | 41 | Slight USA |
|
| Venezuela | South America | 3 | 0 | 22 | Fair USA |
|
| Peru | South America | 3 | 1 | 24 | Fair USA |
|
| Sudan | North Africa | 0 | -1 | 10 | Slight USSR |
|
| Burma | Far East | Varies | Varies | 5 | Varies |
|
| Nigeria | North Africa | 8 | -17 | 109 | Strong USSR |
|
| Mali | North Africa | Varies | Varies | 6 | Varies |
|
| Argentina | South America | -6 | 6 | 88 | Fair USA |
|
| Kenya | South Africa | 0 | 0 | 4 | Slight USSR |
|
| Tunisia | North Africa | 1 | 0 | 5 | Strong USSR |
|
| Algeria | North Africa | 0 | 0 | 19 | Fair USSR |
|
| Zaire | South Africa | Varies | Varies | 9 | Varies |
|
| Tanzania | South Africa | 0 | 0 | 6 | Strong USSR |
|
| Zimbabwe | South Africa | 0 | 0 | 11 | Strong USSR |
|
| Mozambique | South Africa | Varies | Varies | 3 | Varies |
|
| India | Far East | -3 | 3 | 49 | Fair USSR |
|
Special cases:
| Region | USA prestige | USSR prestige | Total prestige | Sphere | Defense treaty | |
| China | Far East | 227 | -568 | 1455 | Slight USSR |
|
| Cuba | North America | -48 | 60 | 78 | Strong USSR | Nuclear |
| Indonesia | Pacific | 16 | -22 | 72 | Slight USSR |
|
| Iran | Middle East | -112 | -48 | 205 | Slight USSR |
|
| Nicaragua | North America | -3 | 3 | 5 | Slight USA |
|
Iran is the only case here that seems to obey the normal rules. As a mutual enemy, the US will tolerate any and all negative actions toward them. And you'd better do the same when they inevitably do. But after that, it gets bizarre.
China, by the numbers, should be targetable with negative actions. The Soviet hate is much stronger than the US love. But if you try anything at all, the US will absolutely refuse it.
Cuba, also by the numbers, should be absolutely untouchable by the US. Despite that, the US will overthrow Castro's regime, and you can't stop it.
Indonesia, conversely, is untouchable by you. The US will send military aid, but it probably won't work, and you'll have a communist revolution anyway, but not necessarily one that benefits you.
In Nicaragua, the US will aid the left-wing Sandinista, and you can't convince them not to, even though the stats suggest this should be possible.
For my next and final post on the game, I will try a semi-honest round using these new tables.
"Oh. Oh no. I don't get it - computer controlled USSR would have never stood for that. But now I must or I lose!"
ReplyDeleteIt's not "I must or I lose", it's "I must or *everybody* loses". The difference was when computer was playing USSR, it had no compunctions of making sure everybody loses. But you as a human have additional external incentives, such as desire to not end the game prematurely.
If we switch sides and you had made this move as US against the computer USSR, it would have played out the same. It goes to the brink and either you back off or everybody loses. The computer US again doesn't care if the game ends early.
It would be interesting to see how often a computer vs computer would do these sort of boneheaded moves that are all but guaranteed to escalate to nuclear war against a computer.
Computer vs. computer would be guaranteed to end immediately. The computer-controlled USA always overthrows Castro on turn one. The computer-controlled Soviets would never tolerate that. The computer-controlled US always backs Indonesia's New Order, and the computer-controlled USSR always backs the communists, and would mutually nuke each other over that.
DeleteIn any event, the computer doesn't actually care if it wins or loses, but its crisis-mode decisions usually have some consistency; if the computer would have zero tolerance for any given action, then it should also back down when challenged for doing the same action itself. But there seem to be some hard-coded exceptions.