Is there any more unbalanced, communist game than Twilight Struggle?
>but muh late cards are skewed to the US
The late card skew does not at all make up for the USSR getting all the battleground coups once DEFCON is worn down to start on three every turn. It does not make up for the significant advantage that the USSR gets in the early game which is usually devestating. Certain US cards from the end game are legitimately shit tier like Iron Lady, which protects Britain (never a contested country) in exchange for commie influence in Argentina.
1960 The Making of the President is a million times better and it should still be in print.
I guess there are a lot of commies on here who are fine with this then?!
>>46265622
Communism is cool, man, just chill out. Have a joint and read some Mao.
>>46265639
Mao was a killer. Hayek is my man. I'll never play as the USSR in Twilight Struggle no matter how badly the game is skewed against me. It would be positively immoral.
>>46265067
>unbalanced
>historical
Comes with the territory anon, history is full to the brim with unbalanced conflicts. Granted, in this case the level of abstraction makes it much easier to make a balanced game out of it (mostly by moving the goalposts for "victory") but you can handle it the same way as any other:
>If you're playing someone less skilled than you, give the side you feel is stronger to them.
>If you're playing someone more skilled than you, ask to play the side you think is strongest.
>If you're playing with someone equally skilled, ask which side he wants
>>If he wants the side you feel is weaker, then give it to him
>>If he wants the side you feel is stronger, and you don't feel like playing the underdog, then ask for a handicap (a bonus given to the "weaker" side, many historical wargames list them in the optional rules section)
And, of course, nobody's forcing you to play the game. If you can't have fun just playing it (whether you win or lose) just find something else to play.
>>46265690
> Hayek is my man.
>>46265067
It's unbalanced but not for the reasons you posted. The extra coup per round is not difficult to defend against, especially if you're leading in the space race like you should be. The bigger problem is the fact you can get kicked out of the middle east in the beginning of the game and then it's extremely difficult to get back.
I can't play TS anymore, though, it's too nervewrecking, I switched to 1989, it's much more laid back and I like the political struggle.
>>46266135
Rothbard was an anarcho-capitalist. Hayek was a classical liberal. Totally different, anon.
>>46266377
The Middle East is a big problem. So is constant Russian access to the Near East via Afghanistan (so much for "historical"!) and the number of cards giving them footholds in the Americas and Africa. The USSR has an advantage in literally every region - it can take SK off the bat with Korean War, especially since the Jap card makes control undesirable in the early game for the US, the number of European cards like Suez Crisis and Socialist Governments means the US has to defend Europe with all he's got unless he wants to build up a serious defecit.
The US is seriously crippled despite winning throughout the entire Cold War. The game designers are probably communists.
>>46266550
> Totally different
Like how Salazar and Hitler were totally different? I don't think any sane person could possibly care about the finer points of their economics.
>>46266550
>The US is seriously crippled despite winning throughout the entire Cold War.
The USSR came out of the WW2 with better economic output but the consistent failures of the 5-year-plans set it back in the long run. And I'd say midwar is already fairly balanced for both sides.
>>46266550
What if they're pro US and want to be the underdogs?
>not being USA enough to win against the odds
>>46266599
Hayek was a Nobel Prize winning economist whose theory of the price mechanism is essential to any informed understanding of economics. Grow up and stop crying because he BTFO your insane fetish for central planning.
>>46266135
>a baby
>having owners
Ya dun goofed.
>>46266880
> Hayek was a Nobel Prize winning economist
So was Gunnar Myrdal. #rekt
> Grow up and stop crying because he BTFO your insane fetish for central planning.
Now that's libertarian level of sudden hysteria.
>>46267033
I'd bet good money on the fact that you've never read a page of Hayek in your life.
>>46267197
I've never read a page of Hitler, either, and I doubt you've ever read a page of Marx or Keynes.
>>46265690
>immoral in playing a game of pretend
I think this is the wrong board for you. Perhaps you would enjoyreturning to>>>/pol/ more?
>>46267390
Countdown to being called a commie at three… two… one…
>>46267329
I've read some of both. Some of Keynes' essays are enjoyable even if his ideas about fiscal policy are pants on head retarded.
>>46267416
Why is /pol/ so up in arms about communism? Are they under the impression that anyone takes communism seriously anymore, or at least anyone that matters?
>>46267445
>Keynes "Don't worry, the world war will stop the moment everyone uses up available liquid currency."
>"Aaaany time now. Aaaaaany time."
>Four years later...
baka desu senpai
>>46267481
It's because they have better cards at first.
>>46267445
> his ideas about fiscal policy are pants on head retarded
Oh, so I am dealing with a legit retard here. Ok, I'm slowly but surely backing the fuck out of here.
>>46267712
>he still believes in Keynesian economics and he's actually calling other people retards
O lord
>>46267481
Hernie Sanders and his supporters seem to be taking it quite seriously.
>>46266135
What a retard reads from that:
>It's okay to starve children!
What an even remotely rational person reads from that:
>It's okay to give children up for adoption!
>>46271480
> memetarian excusing totalitarian anti-utopia for rational proposals
What a surprise.
>>46267481
That's actually really easy to explain:
/pol/'s stuck in a specific mentality, frequently a pro-American/Pro-fascist one. Purity of race/intent, individual action, all that jazz. An aggression toward communist regimes happens to be the shared quality of those two doctrines.
It's the time the Pro-Freedom, libertarian crowd and the pro-state Fascist crowd can agree, so it became an easy topic to align on. Like how /tg/ can agree that, as much as they dislike your preferred edition or game, that at least FATAL is shit.
