Which Three-Way Cold War scenario is more interesting?

Strategos' Risk

NATO. vs. USSR vs. PRC
+ real-world basis
+ East vs. West
- in the real-world, China wasn't much of a true contender for the third side
- communism vs. communism could be boring for some

or

Allies vs. Axis vs. Comintern
+ Hearts of Iron 2 basis
+ has both fascism and communism, oh my
- not much real-world basis; it was inevitable that two would gang up on one
- the above is probably unlikely to last for long because Russia is right next to fascist-controlled Europe- at least China and Russia are separated by Siberia

All of this is ignoring things like a cohesive Non-Aligned Movement or a Japanese Empire doing its own thing.
 

Dan Reilly The Great

Banned
the one with the fascists is more interesting, since a Sino-Russian cold war scenario is much less likely since their ideological differences are much smaller than the ones with the west. Also Fascism, Democracy, and Communism are three equally different ideologies. These comparisons are regarding the differences on paper, not reality, since the politicians are going to use the paper differences rather than their real ones for the purpose of political support. Once nukes are discovered, you can seriously lower the liklehood of a WWIII due to MAD. Plus I would be interested to see how the US would play the other two parties against each other.

Also I would like to see how German tank designs would continue to progress into the 90's under nazi control, we might see some really "interesting" ideas.
 

lord of war

i like the one with the facists but it would be interseting to see a prc and ussr and usa cold war what if you got all of them in one hum.
 

M79

A) USA vs German Empire vs USSR
B) USA vs Empire of Japan vs USSR (Japan decides that her fortunes are better with the Allies and spins German aid to China as a threat, survives with GEACPS but *definitely* the weakest of the three powers even after India joins in 1947)
C) Brazil vs South Africa vs India (Cuban Missile Crisis goes very wrong)
D) UK vs France/Italy/Russia/Spain/Benelux vs Germany/Austria-Hungary/Ottomans - late 19th century goes very differently
E) Ottomans vs India vs Spain - late 17th century goes very differently
 

lord of war

i like the seven way cold war....

newworldmap.png
 

strangeland

Both are quite interesting, but 1 is the only plausible one: the Nazis and Soviets will go to war against each other eventually.

An the Chinese and Soviet interpertations of Communism were quite different: maybe by the late 70s/early 80s, you could get a more powerful, extremely radicalized China under the leadership of Lin Biao or Hua Guofeng vs a quasi-Democratic socialist USSR, maybe something like Putin's Russia without the decade of oligarchy and anarchy preceding it.
 

B_Munro

Modified versions of the original two:

NATO vs USSR vs PRC - only the PRC is a _fascist_ state rather than a Communist one. Think Henryk's superpower empire gone Very Wrong.

Axis vs. Allies vs. Cominterm - Reich drove the Soviets east of the Volga, but they have since reconstructed as the Soviet-Chinese Union. Initially a US ally (so they weren't nuked flat when they started to develop their own bombs) but since have broken decisively with West over the whole Mobilization Of The Third World thing.

strangeland, I have sometimes wondered about a China which had stuck more closely to the Soviet model of development: China 2008 as USSR in the late 70's? One wonders how they would deal with their raw material shortages as compared to the USSR - lots more nuclear power plants? :(


Bruce

Bruce
 

Strategos' Risk

Dan Reilly The Great said:
since a Sino-Russian cold war scenario is much less likely since their ideological differences are much smaller than the ones with the west.
Click to expand...

Wrong, in real life after the Sino-Soviet split the PRC and the USSR were pretty much in a confrontational situation anyways, it's just the PRC never united the Third World or the Non-Aligned Movement, or amassed enough nukes, to count as an actual side like the U.S.-led NATO or USSR-led Warsaw Pact.

B_Munro said:
Modified versions of the original two:

NATO vs USSR vs PRC - only the PRC is a _fascist_ state rather than a Communist one. Think Henryk's superpower empire gone Very Wrong.
Click to expand...

Unionist China.
 

Dan Reilly The Great

Banned
Well the thing is that the Russians and Chinese started things relatively friendly enough and had some ideological similarities, which leaves chances open for future cooperation between the two, meanwhile the Germans and Soviets had no chance in hell of being anything but extreme rivals, even more so than NATO was. Now I am not denying that the Chinese and Russians weren't at all likely to get into a cold war situation, just that it isn't as likely as one between the Germans and Soviets, which would have started out pretty much as soon as WWII ended.

This of course is predicated upon Germany winning the war and leaving the USSR intact in the process. You probably need to replace hitler at some point to make this possible though.
 

TheSevenLeggedFallyDowner

IMHO, a protracted three-way cold war in the nuclear age is impossible. IOTL, MAD prevented the USA and USSR from nuking each other. They wouldn't nuke each other out of a fear of being nuked back. In a three-way cold war TL, the strategy would be different. Each power would be trying to play the other two against each other. The goal would not be to prevent nuclear exchanges, but rather to cause nuclear exchanges that are beneficial to your own power. While a cold war could develop temporarily, the constant political games would eventually result in the entire world being annihlated. If you set it before nuclear weapons, then it becomes possible but unlikely because two sides will eventually gang up on the third.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top