Press "Enter" to skip to content


Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Game #8 : Geopolitique 1990

"Well, it is embarrassing. I really did not expect to be nominated. I only said I was a candidate so I could receive some media attention for my university, and my hotels, and my why-not. I don't really care for the people.

But the people, well, they voted for me. As a candidate for the Party, and then as a President.

1989 was a disaster. I think I screw up on the diplomatic front. Badly. Now the military guys are telling me that if we carry on like this we are going to be at war with the Soviets. Uh. Maybe we should avoid that and just try to be more prestigious than them, you know. Or richer. Or maybe we want to be at war with them, and win, and then my legacy is preserved. I don't know, I realized I never had ideas of my own in my life. I never wanted the job.

So guys, gals, here is the deal : I am going to make you advisors, some of you ambassadors, whatever, but please help me run the country. I am terrible at this."

So we are going to go all experimental, and try to play collectively Geopolitique 1990. It should be fun. OK. It can be fun. It is a relatively simple simulation that can have a lot of different outcomes : peaceful victory. Limited war against Canada that ends with Washington burning a second time. Total annihilation. Everything.

I am going to use a variant to my earlier "Fit for a King" interactive AAR, sprinkled with "personal interaction". You will all be part of a Council that takes the big decisions, and some of you will be leading negociations, or whatnot.


To enroll, just tell me :

  • Whether you want to be a diplomat, a general, a member of the administration, ... You will be part of the Council in all cases, but I may use that for personal interactions. Note that the Cold War can remain cold, in which case generals will not see any action.
  • Whether you think USA should prioritize Economy, Prestige or National Security
  • Whether you want a 1990 random start (Free-market Eastern Europe and Communist Saudi Arabia ? Maybe), a 1984 historical start or a 1990 historical-with-some-failed-forecast-start. The other scenarios are unbalanced or don't interest me.

Final note : It is as usual pretty experimental. I have no idea where it will end up.


Dayyalu, Strange Fellow and Kalarion have reacted to this post.
DayyaluStrange FellowKalarion

I'll be a general.

1990 Random Start. I already know how the Great Experiment went in Real Life, and I want my French Commune up dammit


Focus on Economy

I'd like to be a member of the administration, in a post with as much porkbarrel potential (like MoD procurement). And I'd be focusing on national security.

And random start sounds nice

Though I'm on holidays in the country, I'll try to check regularly, but I promise nothing

Hi there!

As your newly elected congressman, I promise you one ting . I am going to fight for this country, and fight to keep everything that makes it special. It's the year of our Lord 1990, and the good old US of A stands at a crossroads. The international stage is unpredictable, heck, some would say downright random - but I'm telling you right now, that ain't how we intend to do business from now on. Many of you know me through my work with the Heritage and Stability Foundation, and I can promise you that I will bring those same principles to my new position. Uncle Sam will stand firm as bedrock, proudly anchored in tradition, and restore the prestige our glorious nation once enjoyed in all corners of the world. Join me, and we can make tomorrow a better past for our children. God bless America!

The Wargaming Scribe and baud have reacted to this post.
The Wargaming Scribebaud

Thanks all ! Let's wait until Monday and then launch it !

"Subscribe to this topic" seems broken. Nothing I can do on the short run, sadly :(.

Heritage and stability foundation đŸ˜€

That's a nice find. And though no foundation with that name exists, I found both an heritage foundation and a stability foundation

  • 1990

Well, given the effort coming from Strange Fellow, I went for prestige as the first target, and economy as the secondary. So the initial set-up is the following :

This is our situation on Economy, Prestige and National Security.

To win the game, we need to push our GNP, Prestige and Security to where the stars are ...

... or alternatively, win a war against the Soviets.

  • Prestige is gained  by signing political or military agreements with other countries
  • GNP by improving the economy and passing economic agreements
  • National Security by having more military forces than the other side and passing military agreements with other countries

I guess that first year of administration did not do too well to our prestige ...

In 1990, the Soviet Union is headed by a bunch old decayed bureaucrats, with names you have never heard of because they were made up for the game :

Our Kremlinologues are telling us those guys are, well, totally average really, except Karpov who is both more hawkish and more competent than the two others

Over time, the Soviet government may change.


But let's look at the international situation. How is NATO doing ? My advisors gave me an handy map where all the small countries are grouped together so I don't have to remember their name :

Ah, er, it is embarassing. No more NATO. Western Europe went all commie. I KNEW I could not trust President Mitterand and Premier Gonzalez. Italy Italied, of course, but I am very disappointed with Mr Kohl.

At least Ms Thatcher kept her country relatively Commie-free. And I am looking forward discussing with Mazov... Mavoz... the guy from Solidarnosc in Poland.

It is not indicated on the map, but USA also has an economic agreement with North Africa, and USSR with South America. North Africa is very poor, South America quite poor - small advantage for them.

Generally speaking, the richest regions in the world are UK, Western Europe (WE), Eastern Europe (EE) and Japan. OPEC(OP) and Near East (NE) are preeeetttyyy good for free energy. The rest is mediocre or flat-out poor, the poorest of them all being, well, North Africa. Damn.

Finally, military report :

Two fleets, one currently in Arctic, the other at home. No army yet. The Soviet have a Fleet in the Western Med. (I suppose in Toulon !), and one at home that can move to the Arctic or the Black Sea thanks to the famous Murmansk-Sebastopol canal.

So it is time to take some decisions. I am going to be doing the calculations involving food/metals/energy/industrial capacity, so you can take the real, important decisions :

  • Should we disband one (or two) of our fleets ? Currently, one third of our limited resources is allocated to fleet maintenance !
  • Should we expand our military ? If so, we will be unable to increase our industry.
  • If we don't expand, should we focus on diplomacy (creating surplus to trade) or on industrialization. If we disband both our fleets, we may even be able to industrialize TWICE in one turn !
  • Note that in all cases we will be able to do some diplomacy, but depending on how much industrialization and/or maintenance we do, we may do SOME of it or a LOT of it.
  • Did I mention that having a fleet just in front of another country can help with diplomacy ?
  • Did I also mention that we can, well, intervene to try to coup people we don't like with our fleets ? [In game terms, I can do it after negotiating unsuccessfully with a country leaning commie). Of course, sometimes it fails. And sometimes the Soviets can intervene if they have a fleet nearby.

It is so complicated... I really need your advice ...

[I will query you guys for where we should put the diplomatic efforts and move our fleets after those decisions]

Strange Fellow has reacted to this post.
Strange Fellow

"As usual, our esteemed generals and admirals are asking the precious tax-payers dollars to fund the weapons that would have won the previous war! Nay, I say, instead of those rusting cruisers and aircraft carrier of the home fleet, let us reinvest that money in the industry that would built a fleet fit for the 21st century! With the money going preferably in the districts I am representing... For better coordination with the local industry, of course, what were you thinking?"

"As for the 2nd fleet, let it continue its current plan; I do not know what strategic importance the jarheads of the Pentagon saw in the Artic, but maybe they'll scare some polar bears."

In short:

  1. Scrap the home fleet
  2. Invest in the industry
  3. If left over money, use it for diplomacy
  4. Keep the second fleet, it might be useful for "diplomacy"
The Wargaming Scribe and Strange Fellow have reacted to this post.
The Wargaming ScribeStrange Fellow

Well, well, well. I am going to change the plan a bit I am afraid :

  • I think I have been greedy and the game is maybe too complicated for the players to be fun this way, so I will do a more traditional AAR. Thank you for your pretty fun interventions :(.
  • I also discovered that the Commodore 64 version (released one year after the Apple II version) includes several improvements that I really want to have so I will probably restart with the Commodore 64 version. It actually cuts feature, imagine that

The good news is that without the interactivity I will probably post the AAR on several forum at the same time.

Thank you Baud, Dayyalu and Strange Fellow ! There will be something better for forum games soon ^^.

Well shucks, ain't that a gosh darn shame. But don't you worry, mister president, I have complete faith in you to steer this great ship of ours safely to shore. I'll have your back every step of the way, and I'm sure you'll do everything you can to preserve our interests and our values. God bless you, friends.

Damn, I was all ready to play the role of a lifetime: sub-councillor of Economic Affairs attached to the under-secretary of State acting under the third Commission of Internal Policies!

Not a problem, I have some badly-done participation LPs that prove that not all games are doable in such a way.