Conflict Scenario "Able Archer" Development Sneak Peek

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • In this screenshot I am highlighting the "bases" concept that we are implementing:

      As you will notice West Germany is partitioned into several "Forward Defensive Corridors" containing US, Belgian, Dutch and British forces in dug-in positions, guarding the inner German border (Iron Curtain) together with the Bundeswehr, against an invasion from the east.
      These positions are layered and consist of bases, airfields, military hospitals and sometimes naval bases in connection with the cities in the vicinity.
      On the opposite side of the border you have a patchwork of Soviet-Russian bases, serving as staging points for predominately armored divisions and fighter aircraft, supported by local Warsaw Pact units staging from their bases in and around their main national urban areas.
      These troop concentration areas are at their historically correct locations, showcasing the differing ideologies and doctrines underlying the standoff during this critical time in recent modern history.
      While PACT forces focus on a "Deep Strike" strategy where it is vital to retain momentum and break through the enemy frontline hard and quick, NATO's defense doctrine is all about holding the enemy at the FEBA (Forward Edge of Battle Area) denying the enemy the room to manoeuver until reinforcements arrive.

      With the United States and the Soviet Union both being globally projecting forces, you will notice a number of bases outside of the central European theatre of operations.
      Locations such Cuba, hosting both Soviet and US bases on its soil, Incirlik and Rota US Airbases in Turkey and Spain, Sfax and Tartis, Soviet naval ports in "neutral" Mediterranean nations, not to mention Thule Air Base in Greenland are but a few examples of the scale of this conflict.
      All of these bases will be equipped with a preset amount of historically researched units, ranging from Naval Surveillance Planes, Aircraft Carriers, Amphibious Combat Groups to Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines and more.

      All participating nations now have their military technology levels unlocked to their ingame historical settings, including chemical and nuclear weapons, with the exception of ICBMs. (Beware of the Soviet anti-aircraft technology, it is very advanced.. as are the Nato Strike Fighters and more.)
      This being said we do not plan to provide the players with a stockpile of warheads - for simple game balancing reasons, meaning these will have to manufactured, hopefully buying players some time before WMDs start hitting hard.
      I personally believe this is a pretty fair emulation of the political WMD release process, which surely would not have been granted in the first minutes of WW3. And as we cannot accurately simulate the moral and social implications of these strategic weapons, leaving this in the hands of the players seems only fair.
      You will just not know when and where the first bomb drops... Or who is willing to invest into Chemical Weapons early in the war...

      This means players of the neutral nations Yugoslavia, Syria, Austria, Sweden, Finland and Algeria will need to really think hard (and quick) with whom to side - as there will be a new permanent team joining mechanic, allowing these 6 "swing-nations" to tip the scale by deciding during the war with whom to cast their lot: Either NATO or PACT (or potentially try it alone, but good luck with that).



      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • I suppose that even if France wasn't officially integrated in NATO system "except for defensive purpooses" between 1966 and 2009, you consider that it's is in NATO, right ?

      After all, in 1991, our military staff was indeed crying that the Leclerc finished its cycle in the industrial metabolism, and that the first operational MBTs were delivered just a few weeks after the fall of USSR :D. Even if officially neutral ("our own way"), the french OOB never lied on its threats ^^
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • I like this szenario, but I have 1 suggestion for this. In the 80er they have older tanks.
      And some month ago I have also suggest of an old MBT
      With this suggestion you can choice if you want only a cheaper and weaker older MBT or an more expencive and better new MBT.But you can produce both.
      The modern MBT includes also the armor update and the speed update. If you want a faster old MBT you can also research this later.

      Panzerforschungsvorschlag.png
      „Morgen, ihr Luschen!“ --- „Morgen, Chef!“ (Ausbilder Schmidt alias Holger Müller bei der Arbeit)
    • @Opulon - yes, France is part, but not in the continuous defense of Germany, nor in the hosting of US or other foreign bases and forces. At a point in time in the sixties France decided to kick out all foreign troops and the US then moved most bases to the UK, Germany and other locations.

      @Seele07 - we are not planning to implement individual units per scenario at this point in time. You are of course completely right in the sense that a majority of eg. tanks were of older make (T55/72, Leo1, M60) but as we always represent the newest ones in our game on a given research level we would have to change the whole upgrade system. Or implement lots of obsolete units... something we are not very keen on and also not easily done in the game engine.
      This being said, all the unlocked tanks (to use the example) were available in 1983/84 albeit not in the numbers represented on map - but then again these are stand-in units anyway as we are not simulating all the multitude of real tank types of different builds and makes anyway.
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Germanico ().

    • Ok, this suggestion was not only for ths szenario, but I will look what you planning.
      In the time of soviet union they have more quantity than quality. But now they changed their doctrin.
      With my suggestion you can choose.
      „Morgen, ihr Luschen!“ --- „Morgen, Chef!“ (Ausbilder Schmidt alias Holger Müller bei der Arbeit)

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Seele07 ().

    • Pretty sure (considering the time and effort Germanico put into this) it's a test run. it's well beyond a simple "minimum viable design". He tries directly a well-refined and polished scenario.

      The advantage will be that if it fails to answer his KPIs, it will be a precise and definitive answer that it's not a path to follow.


      If it works, to the contrary, you can expect, for sure, to see other maps.

      And, maybe i'm wrong, but i feel that Germanico loves this part of his job :D
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.
    • 1°) This is a team game.

      2°) This is a scenario. Not fitted to AI farming.

      3°) US has the highest tech/production potential, and is, through all parameters, the spearhead of his team.

      4°) US has operational bases everywhere.


      I don't see what is to fix, especially considering the very "HoI-esque" approach.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.