Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Twilightstrategy PDF
Twilightstrategy PDF
theory
This book is for sale at http://leanpub.com/twilightstrategy
This is a Leanpub book. Leanpub empowers authors and publishers with the Lean Publishing
process. Lean Publishing is the act of publishing an in-progress ebook using lightweight tools and
many iterations to get reader feedback, pivot until you have the right book and build traction once
you do.
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Getting Started . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
New to Twilight Struggle? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Is Twilight Struggle for me? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
General Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
General Strategy: Events vs Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
General Strategy: Opening Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
General Strategy: Turn 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
General Strategy: DEFCON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
General Strategy: Reshuffles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
General Strategy: The Space Race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
General Strategy: The AR7 Play . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
General Strategy: Realignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Early War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Duck and Cover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Five Year Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Socialist Governments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Fidel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Vietnam Revolts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Blockade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Korean War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Romanian Abdication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Arab-Israeli War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Comecon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Nasser . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Warsaw Pact Formed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
De Gaulle Leads France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Captured Nazi Scientist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Truman Doctrine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
CONTENTS
Olympic Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
NATO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Independent Reds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Marshall Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Indo-Pakistani War . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Containment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
CIA Created . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
US/Japan Mutual Defense Pact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Suez Crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
East European Unrest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Decolonization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Red Scare/Purge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
UN Intervention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
De-Stalinization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Nuclear Test Ban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Formosan Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Defectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
The Cambridge Five . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Special Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
NORAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Early War recap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
Regions: Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
Regions: Middle East . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247
Regions: Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
Regions: South America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
Regions: Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
Regions: Central America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
Regions: Southeast Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416
Copyright/Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
Acknowledgments
Rob, who introduced me to boardgaming and taught me the value of depthgaming rather than
breadthgaming.
Jason Matthews and Ananda Gupta, who created Twilight Struggle.
Adam and Ross, who introduced me to Twilight Struggle.
But mostly all the readers of Dominion Strategy, who inspired me to start Twilight Strategy, and all
the readers of Twilight Strategy, who inspired me to keep going.
Introduction
This is a collection of articles originally posted on the blog Twilight Strategy¹. Written over the course
of 400 days, it has been a deeply rewarding experience. I hope I have succeeded in introducing more
people to this wonderful game.
This e-book is written with a standard game of Twilight Struggle in mind: Optional Cards used
and no Chinese Civil War variant. It is intended to supplement, rather than replace, the rulebook. It
therefore assumes a basic familiarity with the rules.
Some articles use a little bit of Twilight Struggle lingo; although most should be self-explanatory,
you can consult the Glossary at the end if you need any translation.
If you’d like to discuss this e-book, or Twilight Struggle in general, please visit the Twilight Strategy
Forum².
Sister projects of Twilight Strategy include:
• Dominion Strategy³
• Innovation Strategy⁴
¹http://www.twilightstrategy.com
²http://forum.twilightstrategy.com
³http://www.dominionstrategy.com
⁴http://innovation.boardgamestrategy.com
Getting Started
Getting Started 4
If you answered no to several of these questions, then sadly Twilight Struggle is probably not the
ideal game for you.
Note that these questions did not include “Do you enjoy Cold War history?” or “Do you enjoy
wargames?”. Although fans of Cold War history and/or wargames will love this game even more,
most people who enjoy Twilight Struggle have not had much prior interest in the Cold War or
wargames.
If you answered yes to all of these questions, then you will probably enjoy Twilight Struggle – and
in fact it will probably be your favorite game.
General Strategy
General Strategy 7
should seek to trigger them whenever possible — better that you control its one-time effect than
your opponent — rather than discarding them (by playing them on the Space Race, or by playing it
with UN Intervention) and letting them be reshuffled into the deck. Some examples:
• The US should always try to get Warsaw Pact Formed out of the way as soon as possible,
since 5 influence for the USSR is infinitely preferable to the looming threat of being able to
instantly remove all US influence in eastern Europe.
• A US player that draws De Gaulle Leads France can play it with an empty France and then
place the 3Ops into France to make it 3/1. On the other hand, a USSR player that draws De
Gaulle can headline it and then take France easily on AR1.
• The USSR should play Containment and Nuclear Subs on the final Action Round of a turn,
where they have the least effect, rather than send them to space only for the US to draw them
back and play them more effectively.
• Truman Doctrine is useless in the USSR hand, because the USSR can just play it as soon as
they have no uncontrolled countries. On the other hand, a US player can time its play for
maximum effect, by, for instance, breaking USSR control of France on the final Action Round,
and then headlining Truman Doctrine the next turn to wipe out 3+ USSR influence from a
critical country.
• Many beginner US players will find ways to discard or cancel Blockade from being played.
This is a mistake. If you draw Blockade and can safely play, you should usually do so, rather
than allow the USSR to spring a nasty surprise on you in the Mid War.
Only the truly critical opponents’ starred events, the ones you have no ability to manage, should
be sent to space. These include (but are not limited to!) De-Stalinization, Tear Down This Wall, The
Reformer, and Quagmire/Bear Trap. These are usually either so strong, or so suicidal for you to play,
that you would prefer to assume the risk of your opponent controlling how it’s played rather than
play it yourself.
However, if you’re on Turn 7 or later, you no longer need to worry about the “removing” vs
“discarding” distinction. For all practical purposes, you can safely discard cards knowing they will
almost certainly not return to the game. The draw deck reshuffles on Turn 3 and Turn 7; it’s
occasionally reshuffled on Turn 10, but that’s quite rare. Of course, you still won’t be able to space
every card you see, and will still have to deal with some of the events, but you no longer have to
worry that cards sent to space will return to your opponent’s hand.
Your starred events
Most of these you want to keep around in the deck, since you would rather your opponent have a
hand full of your events than full of his. Sometimes the effect of a card is the same no matter who
plays it: neither side particularly cares who triggers Willy Brandt or NATO. (In other words, these
are generally bad events.) Sometimes a card is only dangerous because your opponent is playing it:
CIA Created, for instance. Sometimes the looming threat of the card is more effective than the card
itself: Truman Doctrine’s continued presence in the deck is often enough to deter the USSR from
engaging in an influence war in Europe.
General Strategy 9
But there are also times when you must trigger your own starred events:
1. Because they will be meaningless or crippled in your opponent’s hands: see, e.g., Contain-
ment/Brezhnev Doctrine, “Ask Not What Your Country…”, Cultural Revolution.
2. Because they are so critical that your opponent will never play them for you, and certainly
send to space: see, e.g., De-Stalinization and John Paul II Elected Pope.
3. Because if you don’t play it now, its effect will be meaningless later: see, e.g., Vietnam Revolts
and Puppet Governments.
4. Because if you don’t play it now, it may never get played. You really hope the USSR will draw
CIA Created, but if you draw it on Turn 7 as the US, don’t hold out hope that the USSR will
somehow draw it again by the end of the game. Just play it if you need it.
If the USSR opening coup of Iran is too good, then I wouldn’t bother dropping DEFCON to 3 by
couping Iran back. You not only risk being couped back if you succeed, but the USSR may be able
to take Thailand first with Decolonization if you don’t succeed. On the other hand, if the coup was
General Strategy 12
weak, then I’m willing to gamble on the Iran coup in hopes of getting something into western Asia.
Overall, I’d much rather have the last coup of the turn than the second-to-last.
On the whole, your goal should be to survive rather than triumph. All of the initiative is with the
USSR; your main objective is simply not to fall behind too much in board position and VPs. You
should accept the fact that you will almost certainly be behind in VPs at the end of the Early War.
That’s OK, so long as you aren’t losing in every region. Recognize when one region is beyond repair
with just Ops, so you can cut your losses and be content to tread water there until you are able to
take advantage of a major event to shake things up.
General Strategy 13
You can never trigger these events on your turn when DEFCON is at 2.
Cards that allow your opponent to conduct Operations
You can never play your opponent’s events from this list on your turn when DEFCON is 2 and
your opponent can drop DEFCON by couping a battleground of yours (keeping in mind DEFCON
restrictions). So if the US has any influence in a battleground in South America, Central America, or
Africa, Lone Gunman is unplayable. Similarly, the USSR can play CIA Created at DEFCON 2 safely
in the Early War only if they have no influence in Third World battlegrounds. This is one reason
why playing Fidel is not such a big deal for the US in the Early War, since it makes CIA Created
unplayable.
Practically speaking, these cards are indistinguishable from unconditional DEFCON degraders. Only
CIA Created comes out early enough such that the USSR might not have any Third World influence;
by the time Lone Gunman and Grain Sales arrive, you would already be far behind if you have no
General Strategy 14
influence in battlegrounds in South America, Central America, or Africa. In truly extreme situations,
you might be able to eliminate yourself from those regions preemptively in order to play one of these
cards.
Note that Tear Down This Wall is also included in this category, because it allows a coup in Europe
despite DEFCON restrictions. Although it is theoretically possible that the USSR has no influence
in any European battleground, they may as well resign anyway if that’s the case.
Cards that have a chance of degrading DEFCON
These are not really a problem, since you would have to be daft to play either of these for the event
at DEFCON 2. Simply play them for Operations and you won’t lose the game. The only way these
can really cost you the game is if you pull them with Missile Envy.
Managing these cards
At its heart, Twilight Struggle is a game about managing crises. So how do you manage these crises?
Obviously, it’s easy to deal with neutral events and your own events (just don’t play Olympic Games
for the event at DEFCON 2!), but how do you dispose of your opponent’s events without losing the
game?
The easiest way is the Space Race. Virtually every card on this list can be sent to space. On the other
hand, you can usually only space one card per turn, and in the case of CIA Created / Lone Gunman,
General Strategy 15
you can’t space those unless under the effects of Brezhnev Doctrine / Containment. And if you’re
under the effects of Red Scare/Purge, your hand suddenly looks a lot more dire.
So sometimes you won’t be able to Space Race a card. At that point, you might want to consider
holding the card until next turn. If you have the China card, this is considerably easier; if you play
the China card, you can even hold two cards. (SALT Negotiations also helps you hold one more card.)
If you don’t have the China card, this becomes a very risky proposition: you’re quite vulnerable to
any handsize reduction. A USSR play of Blockade, Terrorism, or Aldrich Ames Remix, or a US play
of Five Year Plan, Grain Sales to Soviets, or Terrorism can cost you the game. Even your own play
of UN Intervention can lose you the game, and boy will that be an embarrassing way to lose.
Speaking of which, UN Intervention is also a natural solution to this problem. It’s probably better
to use UN on one of these cards than on, say, The Voice of America, since even though Voice of
America is going to hurt, losing the game hurts more. On the other hand, you won’t always draw
UN Intervention, and playing it will cut your handsize, a problem if you have multiple such cards.
And the cards that you most want to use UN Intervention on — CIA Created and Lone Gunman —
will just get reshuffled back into the deck if you don’t trigger the event.
With some foresight, you can also headline the card. Usually the USSR is unwilling to lower
DEFCON during their headline, so it’s generally safe for the US to play a DEFCON-lowering
headline. USSR can likewise wait until AR1 to play cards like CIA Created, since US headlines
generally trigger first, and this way you can play something else if the US lowers DEFCON to 2
during headline phase. Of course, this solution isn’t guaranteed safe as your opponent’s headline
may drop DEFCON first, and CIA Created / Lone Gunman are deliberately designed for maximum
hurt when played in the headline phase.
More rarely, you can use events to help you get out of the jam. Nuclear Test Ban and SALT
Negotiations both raise DEFCON by two levels, so even if your opponent drops DEFCON in
response, you’ll still be able to play your cards at DEFCON 3. Cuban Missile Crisis will stop your
opponent from couping anywhere in the world (and it takes precedence over victories by DEFCON),
but it’s easily cancelled, so it usually doesn’t work. Brezhnev Doctrine and Containment allow you
to send CIA Created and Lone Gunman to space. As USSR, you can take advantage of Nuclear Subs
to stop US coups from dropping DEFCON. As US, Ask Not What Your Country… can discard any
of these cards, and Aldrich Ames Remix (if played as your last Action) discards your last card. And
of course, if you are sufficiently advanced on the Space Race track, you can discard your held card.
General Strategy 16
• Any card played or discarded on Turns 1 and 2 will be guaranteed to be redrawn between
Turns 3-7
• Any card played or discarded on Turns 3-6 will not be redrawn until Turns 7-10
• Any card played or discarded on Turn 7 or later will probably not be redrawn, and if it is, it
would only be on Turn 10
Note that this is not a perfect overlap with when the cards come out:
• All Early War cards are guaranteed to be drawn between Turns 1-3
• All Mid War cards are shuffled in on Turn 4, and therefore are guaranteed to be drawn between
Turns 4-7
• All Late War cards are shuffled in on Turn 8, and will be drawn only on Turns 8-10 (if at all)
What does this mean strategically? It means that when discarding your opponent’s vital events,
you want to discard them on Turns 3 and 7, rather than on Turns 2 or 6.
This is most commonly applied to the two most important Early War events in the game:
Decolonization and De-Stalinization. They are far and away the most important cards to draw,
even more important than Red Scare/Purge. So as a US player, if I draw either or both in the Early
War, I will do my best to hold onto them until Turn 3 before discarding them with Blockade, the
Space Race, or UN Intervention. This guarantees that they cannot be reintroduced to the deck until
Turn 7 at the earliest. If I sent Decolonization to space on Turn 2, by contrast, it could come back at
Turn 3 at the earliest, and not later than Turn 7. It’s a huge difference that dramatically changes the
dynamics of the game.
It is therefore very important to consider what cards you hold on Turns 2 and 6, because those held
cards won’t be coming back into the game for a very long time (if at all). For instance, if, as US, you
are choosing between triggering the Voice of America event vs the John Paul II Elected Pope event
on Turn 6, you should choose Voice of America, because it might come back again next turn, and
hold John Paul. It’s not a huge deal for John Paul to be played on Turn 7, since he can only happen
once anyway. Similarly, as USSR, if you are debating between playing Arab-Israeli War or Defectors
for Operations on Turn 2, you should play Arab-Israeli War now and hold Defectors until Turn 3 so
that you can have worry-free headlines between from Turns 3-6.
This also somewhat affects the Our Man in Tehran event, which is much more helpful on Turn 7
than on Turn 6, and SALT Negotiations, which is exactly the opposite.
General Strategy 17
• cards that will immediately lose you the game (e.g., DEFCON suicide cards)
• cards that provide your opponent access to a region (e.g., De-Stalinization)
• cards that remove your access to a region (e.g., Voice of America)
• cards whose Ops value is not enough to repair its damage (e.g., Ussuri River Skirmish)
• cards that give your opponent multiple plays in a row (e.g., Quagmire/Bear Trap)
• cards that give your opponent lots of VPs (e.g., OPEC)
If you have none of these “truly irreparable” cards to space, then you can also consider spacing:
• recurring cards that are empty action rounds for you: i.e., you spend your action round
repairing whatever damage the event causes (e.g., Socialist Governments)
The Space Race’s VPs are usually not a big deal. They tend to matter more to the USSR, who is
usually disadvantaged in Final Scoring and would like to end the game in the Early/Mid War or a
Turn 8 Wargames. On the other hand, the USSR is much more vulnerable to Space Race success: a
USSR player that makes it to Stage 4 too quickly can no longer space cards of 2 Ops or fewer, and
there are enough bad US 2 Ops events that getting to Stage 4 too early can be a serious liability.
The Space Race’s special text is slightly more interesting: the space-two-cards perk is nice if you are
holding multiple bad cards, and seeing your opponent’s headline is of course a powerful advantage.
In addition, Star Wars helps keeps some interest in the Space Race towards the Late War, as the ability
to play any card in the discard (as opposed to just draw, like with SALT Negotiations) is exceedingly
powerful. As for the Space Race bonuses beyond that, if you are regularly reaching them, you should
seriously reconsider how much you are investing in outer space, versus how much you are investing
on planet Earth. Unlike in Civilization, there is no Alpha Centauri victory in this game!
General Strategy 18
As USSR
These are the US events that I tend to Space Race. The top priority is DEFCON suicide cards:
Title Reasoning
CIA Created* Only possible under Brezhnev Doctrine. Not much of a problem if
DEFCON is at 3 or higher, or if you have no influence in a Mid War
battleground.
Grain Sales to Soviets The handsize reduction means this is probably unplayably bad even at
DEFCON 3 or higher.
Soviets Shoot Down KAL-007* Not at all a problem if DEFCON is high. If necessary, you can get
around the South Korea problem by using the 4 Ops to break US control
of South Korea.
Star Wars* If behind on the Space Race. Even if it doesn’t lead to DEFCON suicide,
it’s usually too strong to allow to trigger.
Tear Down This Wall* Even if DEFCON isn’t at 2, this is still just absolutely brutal for the
USSR.
Title Reasoning
Solidarity* Only if John Paul II is in effect and if I can’t count on Warsaw Pact.
General Strategy 20
As US
These are the USSR events that I tend to Space Race. Again, the top priority is obviously DEFCON
suicide cards:
Title Reasoning
Lone Gunman* Only possible under Containment. Not much of a problem if DEFCON is
at 3 or higher.
We Will Bury You* Playable at DEFCON 3 or higher, but the VP penalty is harsh.
Ortega Elected in Nicaragua Only if I have influence in Cuba.
Overview
The “AR7 Play” refers to any US play on the final Action Round of the turn (AR6 on Turns 1-3, AR7
thereafter) intended to overload the USSR’s first Action Round in the next turn. The AR7 play is the
cornerstone of advanced American strategy and one of the main ways to seize initiative from the
USSR.
The key to the AR7 play lies in DEFCON. At the beginning of most turns, DEFCON will rise to 3,
and so each turn the USSR would like to coup a battleground on AR1 in order to drop DEFCON
to 2 and block the US from battleground coups. The AR7 play therefore attempts to create a crisis
for the USSR that cannot be addressed until AR1 of the next turn. By timing this crisis to arrive
simultaneously with the USSR’s DEFCON obligation, the US hopes to overload the USSR’s AR1,
and force the USSR into one of two unpalatable choices: either address the AR7 crisis (and give the
US the battleground coup) or drop DEFCON (and allow the US to capitalize on its AR7 play).
There are three types of AR7 plays: breaking USSR control, playing into a non-battleground, and
managing bad USSR events.
1. Breaking USSR control of a country
This is the most common AR7 play. You place influence into a USSR-controlled country (let’s say
Pakistan), enough to break control. On AR1 of next turn, the USSR must either restore its control of
Pakistan (allowing you to coup a battleground) or coup a battleground (allowing you to play a high
Ops card into Pakistan to flip the country to capitalism). Either way, you end up sacrificing very
little to gain something significant.
Ideally, you want to break control of a country that is not coupable at DEFCON 3. For instance, if
you broke USSR control of Nigeria, the USSR could just coup Nigeria on AR1 and kill both birds
with one stone.
However, it may still be worthwhile to break control of a Mid War battleground if you have
an obviously desirable battleground coup target. For instance, if you hold South Africa, Angola,
Botswana, and Zaire to the USSR’s Algeria, Nigeria, and Zimbabwe (and therefore have African
domination), the USSR is almost certainly going to coup Zaire on AR1 to gain Domination. However,
if you use your final AR play on Algeria, then the USSR is no longer able to flip Domination with a
single play. Regardless of which country he coups, you’ll be able to maintain the 3-2 battleground
split.
The most flexible way of making this AR7 play is with Operations, but there are many events that
accomplish something similar: John Paul II Elected Pope, Panama Canal Returned, OAS Founded,
General Strategy 22
etc. These are all events that benefit from being played on the last Action Round of a turn because
they are otherwise easy to respond to.
Breaking control on the final AR is most effective when it disrupts the scoring situation in the region
— for example, turning USSR Domination into Presence or US Presence into Domination. It presents
a much more critical crisis for the USSR, and in addition, the US is able to threaten headlining the
scoring card (which may in turn force a suboptimal USSR headline in response).
2. Playing into non-battleground countries
Sometimes you’ll find yourself needing a cheap non-battleground country. Simply playing into it
may just invite a back-and-forth coup war. The AR7 play gives you an opportunity at at least one
uninterrupted turn in that country, to exploit as necessary.
Colombia is a common example, since it is a cheap non-battleground that allows access to the
lucrative South America region. But a US player that plays into Colombia, intending to move onto
Venezuela, will soon find himself couped out by the USSR. Worst case scenario, a strong USSR coup
might mean this play actually lets the USSR into South America unopposed.
The better approach is to place an influence into Colombia as an AR7 play. On the next turn, the
USSR now faces a dilemma: coup a battleground country to drop DEFCON (thereby allowing the
US to play into Venezuela), or coup Colombia to deny Venezuela access (thereby allowing the US to
coup a battleground country).
However, it is important to note that if the USSR goes ahead and coups Colombia, the US now faces
the same dilemma. In other words, if the US is going to allow the USSR into South America, it
needs strong compensation (a lucrative coup target, or saving an important US battleground from
being couped) or little downside (for example, if the USSR is already in South America via De-
Stalinization).
Another common approach is the use of non-battleground countries as realignment boosts. Once
Fidel takes over Cuba, most good USSR players will respond to US control of Nicaragua (relevant
because of its Cuba realignment modifier) by couping the US out of the country. But no USSR player
is going to coup Nicaragua on AR1, and so therefore an AR7 play into Nicaragua usually assures at
least one turn’s worth of realignment against Fidel at +1.
Finally, you may want a cheap non-battleground to threaten a quick Domination. If you meet all
other conditions for South America domination, but just need a non-battleground country, consider
controlling Colombia with your AR7 play. This creates headaches for the USSR: if he coups a
battleground elsewhere, and you happen to have South America scoring, you’ll be able to score
the Domination without the USSR contesting it by couping Colombia back and forth.
3. Disposing of bad USSR events
The last type of AR7 play is when you have a strong USSR event that you have no choice but to
trigger. For instance, De Gaulle (while under Purge) and Muslim Revolution both open up the board
for the USSR and create opportunities for the USSR’s Ops. If you had played them during the turn,
then the USSR would be able to use his Ops in the next Action Round to take advantage. By playing
such events as an AR7 play, however, you force that decision onto their AR1. This doesn’t gain you
General Strategy 23
anything, but it does help mitigate the effects. Before, if you played a Red Scared De Gaulle, you
would lose France. Now, either you don’t lose France, or you do lose it but get a battleground coup
as compensation.
Vietnam Revolts and Brezhnev Doctrine also sort of fit in here, since playing them on AR7 minimizes
their impact, but those are a special case.
Headlines
Between the final AR and the first AR of the next turn comes the headline phase. It is easy here for
the AR7 play to fail. The USSR can headline a direct counter to your play: maybe Decolonization
(or other influence-dropping cards) wipes out all hopes you had of Africa domination. Quagmire
takes away your AR1 and gives the USSR two AR’s in a row. Socialist Governments can remove the
influence put in by the AR7 play. A card like We Will Bury You drops DEFCON in the headline phase
and earns VPs to boot, allowing the USSR to address your AR7 play on AR1. In fact, any headline
that discharges the USSR’s DEFCON obligation (Junta, Cuban Missile Crisis) nullifies the point of
the AR7 play.
The US can even interfere with its own plan. Suppose you headline Grain Sales to Soviets, take a
card from the USSR, and use it to coup. Well, that’s good, but now you’ve nullified your own AR7
play. Not that you shouldn’t still headline Grain Sales (probably the best card in the game for the
US), but you may want to consider holding it to next turn’s headline where it won’t interfere with
your AR7 play. Worst of all would be headlining something like Cuban Missile Crisis, needlessly
dropping DEFCON and freely taking the dilemma off of the USSR’s hands.
On the other hand, the US headline can accentuate and compound the AR7 crisis. Truman Doctrine
is the best example of this: an AR7 play into France, breaking USSR control, is normally not that
effective, because if the USSR ignores it and coups, you ordinarily don’t have enough Ops to flip
France in a single play. But a Truman Doctrine headline that eliminates USSR influence in France
makes your AR7 play much stronger and much less ignorable. It is a variant on the typical USSR
headline-AR1 combo.
USSR counters on AR1
Outside of headline counters (described above), there are a few other counters to this tactic. Duck
& Cover is the canonical example: it trades 3VP for the ability to lower DEFCON while placing
influence. It is the all-around best response by the USSR. As an alternative, Junta might be able to
accomplish something similar, and ABM Treaty in your hand at least lets you coup back whatever
the US coups.
However, if the USSR is unable to respond in the headline, it will usually just be forced to choose
between responding to the AR7 play and lowering DEFCON. It is of course impossible to give an
all-around answer as to how to respond to all AR7 plays; generally, however, it is my experience
that forgoing the battleground coup is the safer approach, but depending on where the US will coup
you and what scoring cards are yet to come, you may simply have to take your chances on the coup
instead.
Turn 10
General Strategy 24
Turn 10 is a special case, as it is the very last play of the game. The US AR7 play on Turn 10 is
far more devious: it involves manipulating Final Scoring thanks to your last play advantage. For
example, most USSR players are lazy about Middle East domination and rely solely on Syria for
their non-battleground. A Turn 10 AR7 play into Syria, breaking USSR control, can therefore cost
the USSR Middle East domination.
The Voice of America is the absolute best way of accomplishing this: a choice removal of several
important influence can deny Domination, grant yourself Domination, or even deny the USSR
Presence in multiple regions at once. Barring that, a high-Ops card held until AR7 can accomplish
much the same thing if you are able to break USSR control of a few key countries. Suppose the USSR
controls Mexico / Cuba / Nicaragua, and you control Panama / Costa Rica. With a 4 Ops, you can
break the USSR control of both Mexico and Cuba, flipping Domination and earning you a total of
8VP!
Other events that can help include any event that gives you a lot of influence (Ussuri River Skirmish,
Colonial Rearguards, OAS Founded) or North Sea Oil.
As USSR, the best way to defend against the Turn 10 AR7 play is to end the game before Final
Scoring. Barring that, Turn 10 is usually a very defensive turn for you, as you have no choice but
to shore up all your important battlegrounds / non-battlegrounds. Quagmire, if you are fortunate
enough to draw it on Turn 10, is a great AR7 play by forcing the US player to waste their AR7
discarding to Quagmire instead of accomplishing something useful.
General Strategy 25
Another example is South Africa. If the USSR controls Angola and then takes Botswana, they can
often trap the US in South Africa and realign him out of the region.
The main reason this kind of realignment is so powerful is because your opponent can’t respond to
it. There’s no tit-for-tat where you realign him out, and then he places back in, and then you have
to realign him out again.
Occasionally, it is to your benefit to go for -1 realignments. This happens when your opponent gets
into a region and no one has any influence around it (e.g. Puppet Governments or De-Stalinization).
Although the odds are low, the payoff is big, so if you have a big 4 Ops card to spare, it can be a
worthwhile use to stop him from locking up the region.
The second kind of realignment is when you have a +1 or greater advantage. Any time you are at
+1, you should seriously consider realigning even if the opponent can put their influence back. If
you have influence in the country, then you might realign them out and gain control automatically.
If you don’t, then you should still be ahead Ops-wise, since you are on average removing one or
more influence per Op, and you still maintain your advantage against their restored influence.
This is most common in Latin America, where you have a series of realignment possibilities
stretching from Costa Rica-Panama-Colombia, to Colombia-Venezuela-Brazil, to Venezuela-Brazil-
Uruguay, to Peru-Chile-Argentina.
Common Examples
Generally speaking, the realignment “hot spots” on the board are:
• Cuba
– A particularly popular target given that:
* The USSR often can’t restore their influence, since Fidel was their only inroad into
the region
* The US starts out with uncoupable adjacency
* The nearby non-battlegrounds are cheap
* Cuba is especially valuable as a battleground, given that there are only 3 battle-
grounds, and that it is worth double for the USSR
– You will therefore often see coups around Nicaragua and Haiti, popular targets for Puppet
Governments.
• South Africa
– See Cuba, with sides switched. Usually this happens when the USSR gets into Angola
with De-Stalinization, then takes Botswana and can kick the US out of the region entirely.
Other than Colonial Rear Guards, there aren’t any other US events that can get them
back into the subregion. This maneuver often means the difference between Africa
Domination and Control for the USSR.
• Venezuela/Brazil/Argentina/Chile
– South America as a whole is geographically designed for realignments, and is the region
most likely to see realignments.
General Strategy 27
– This provides a way for you to get back battlegrounds you lost, or steal an extra
battleground after you steal the first
– Colombia/Uruguay are two of the most important non-battlegrounds on the board
because of these realignments
– Junta is especially powerful in this regard, and Che can help as well
• Angola
– Usually the US will be doing this realignment, assuming they have South Africa/Zaire/Botswana
and the USSR got in via Portuguese Empire Crumbles or South African Unrest.
• Algeria
– If whoever controls France doesn’t also control Algeria, this is a good way to attack the
second-most-stable African battleground.
• Mexico
– The US can kick the USSR out if they got in with Liberation Theology. Similar to Cuba,
though less common.
• Europe
– Very rare, since DEFCON has to be at 5, but Italy/France/East Germany are all targets for
realignments when DEFCON reaches 5. Usually it is the US with a massive advantage in
these realignments. The SALT-ABM trick is one way for the US to get in some European
realignments and alter the influence in the region. Otherwise your best bet is events,
particularly Tear Down This Wall. The USSR can sometimes use a Comecon headline
for a Turn 1 AR1 realignment in hopes of a knockout blow in Europe.
Early War
Early War 29
1950
The US Congress passed into law the Federal Civil Defense Act, in reaction to the first
Soviet tests of nuclear weapons in 1949. Duck and Cover is perhaps the most memorable
of a variety of civil defense efforts to raise awareness of nuclear attack. Ironically,
such films may have assisted in increasing the possibility of nuclear war by making
the possibility of such a conflict “thinkable” by the general public.
simultaneously dropping DEFCON down to 2. If you had instead used some other 3Ops card, the
US would at least be able to respond by couping one of your battlegrounds.
Alternatively, it is sometimes more important for you to coup a non-battleground than a battle-
ground, but you still don’t want to give the US a chance at one of your battlegrounds. For instance,
a common Turn 3 AR6 play by the US is 1 influence into Colombia, reasoning that on the next
turn, you must either coup Colombia (thereby allowing him to coup one of your battlegrounds) or
coup a battleground (thereby allowing him access into Venezuela). Respond to this dastardly play by
couping Colombia with Duck and Cover, thereby denying him both a coup and access to Venezuela.
Similarly, a US player that has put all his Middle East eggs into the Lebanon basket can be couped
out easily with Duck & Cover.
Finally, when DEFCON is high (generally only on Turn 1), the USSR can use Duck and Cover to
drop DEFCON by two levels in one play. Timed correctly, this can effectively shut the US out of an
opening coup altogether.
It goes without saying, though, that Duck and Cover is a serious liability for the USSR if DEFCON
is already at 2. It is unplayable and one of the DEFCON suicide cards. Luckily, it is easy to play on
the Space Race.
As US
Generally played for operations, though later on the DEFCON drop and 3VPs makes for a strong
headline by denying the USSR its coup and earning a sizable chunk of VPs to boot. It is slightly
risky to headline in the Mid War, because the USSR can headline We Will Bury You (or, more rarely,
Soviets Shoot Down KAL-007 in the Late War), dropping DEFCON to 2 and thus causing you to lose
by thermonuclear war.
Early War 31
1946-1950
Beginning in the 1920s, the Soviet Union became obsessed with centralized planning of
its economy and industrial development. Twelve such plans were adopted by the USSR
during its history. While economists differ, it is largely agreed that these plans caused
more dislocation within the Soviet economy than they resolved.
USSR because you only have 1 Op to deal with the 2 US influence it places. But by playing Five Year
Plan when you only have OAS Founded left, you are now able to respond with 3 Ops instead of just
1. Similar tricks can be performed with most of the other annoying US 1 Op cards (e.g., Sadat Expels
Soviets, Truman Doctrine, etc.).
On the other hand, Five Year Plan can be a serious liability in a hand of DEFCON suicide cards.
Either you risk playing it early on (hoping the US doesn’t draw one of the suicide cards), or you’re
forced to treat it as yet another unplayable card in your hand.
As US
Almost always played for operations. Occasionally played for the event: one possibility is that you
know that the USSR is trying to hold a DEFCON suicide card, and by cutting their handsize (perhaps
in conjunction with other handsize-reducers like Grain Sales to Soviets), you can force them to play
it and lose. If you’re able to hold onto the China Card and play several discarders against your
opponent, you might be able to force a DEFCON victory. Alternatively, if you’re desperate, you
might play it in hopes of drawing an otherwise game-ending card like Wargames or an unfavorable
scoring card. In the Early War, with excellent card knowledge, you may be able to force out De-
Stalinization or Decolonization if you are fortunate. The event is also more attractive while under
Red Scare/Purge, since it slows the USSR down at the cost of only 2 Ops.
Otherwise, you should always play this for operations. 3 Ops is quite valuable in the Early War for
the US, and moreover, playing Five Year Plan risks drawing Duck and Cover and losing the game
by thermonuclear war.
Early War 33
Socialist Governments
Socialist Governments
1947
Beginning with the end of the Second World War, the US was challenged by democratic
leftist movements within its sphere. Italy, under de Gasperi, was particularly con-
tentious with communists and socialists participating in government. The CIA funded
an extensive propaganda program against these movements. Socialist governments
would be the topic of concern again during the 1960s in France, and with left-wing
labor party in the UK.
terms, or you can simply to take one out of the UK or Canada so that Special Relationship and
NORAD, respectively, don’t trigger.
On Turn 1 in particular, a Socialist Governments headline can cripple the US position. It is one of
the few headlines that can make an opening Italy coup worthwhile, since if you’re going to give
up western Asia, you better at least do some serious damage in Europe to make up for it. The very
threat of a Socialist Governments headline also keeps the US opening setup honest, since it essentially
compels the US to overcontrol Italy.
If nothing else, the Socialist Governments headline is a useful distraction; if you can remove three
important influence, then even if you don’t play into Europe on AR1, the US will usually be
scrambling to fix the situation on their AR1. Later in the turn, it’s not quite as helpful, and you’re
usually better off using the 3Ops or holding it for next turn’s headline.
As US
Typically either played for Operations (to replace the influence lost), or simply played on the Space
Race (especially if under Red Scare/Purge). Either way, it’s an empty Action Round, but at least it’s
usually not a problem to deal with; be thankful you drew it and not the USSR. If you are not careful,
you aren’t always able to replace all your Influence (e.g., if you had 2 in Greece and 1 in Turkey,
and let Socialist Governments trigger first, you may no longer have access to Turkey to replace its
influence).
Somewhat takes away the sting of a USSR play of The Iron Lady, which is technically a US event
but in practice far more useful for the USSR.
Early War 35
Fidel
Fidel
1959
Coming to power after deposing the corrupt Batista, Castro disenchanted the US after
it became clear he was leading a Marxist revolution. The US tried various schemes
to depose or assassinate Castro, culminating in the disastrous “Bay of Pigs” invasion.
Ultimately, communist Cuba would lend support to Marxist governments in Angola
and Ethiopia.
1 or 2 (unless you’ve already Decolonized or De-Stalinized into South America/Africa), and worth
the event if drawn on Turn 3 or later.
At some point in the Mid War, it’s crucial to take Haiti and/or Nicaragua, as otherwise it’s very easy
to realign you out of Cuba with no easy way back in.
As US
For the reasons above, on Turns 1 or 2, it’s probably better to use Fidel’s 2 Ops (in case the USSR
drew CIA Created) than to send him to space only to see him return soon thereafter. But if you draw
him on Turn 3 or later, he’s worth sending him to space: by this point the USSR is going to have
influence in the Americas or Africa anyway, and you might as well deny the USSR a free 2VP (or
more) and foothold in Central America until at least Turn 7. Whether you’re then willing to take
Cuba depends entirely on whether you have Central America Scoring and your tolerance for risk.
If you do play Fidel for Ops and have the luxury of Ops to spare, you can try to realign Fidel out with
the 2 Ops: you have a 34.88%⁶ chance of eliminating him entirely. Your odds are of course greatly
improved if you take Nicaragua (and maybe Haiti, with Puppet Governments), but then the USSR
can just coup you out of those 1-stability countries before you get a chance to realign. So if you’re
keen on realigning Fidel, consider playing 1 into Nicaragua on a final Action Round and present the
USSR with the dilemma of couping Nicaragua or couping a battleground next turn.
⁶http://twilightstrategy.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/ts-realignment-probability-charts.pdf
Early War 37
Vietnam Revolts
Vietnam Revolts
1946
Ho Chi Minh tried repeatedly to enlist the aid of the Truman Administration for
independence. His letters never received a response. The French government, with
support from the US and Britain, attempted to reestablish its colony in Indochina. The
attempted was doomed and would lead to disaster at Dien Bien Phu.
The bonus to Operations is quite nice, though there aren’t really that many ways to spend all those
Operations in Southeast Asia, since you’ll rarely venture south of Thailand. It does mean that if you
plan on playing the card during the turn, you should headline it for maximum benefit. It’s a good
headline candidate because it’s strong enough to be meaningful, but it’s not the end of the world if
it runs into Defectors.
Riku Riekkinen’s thoughts:
Vietnam Revolts is a very good headline, because it allows the USSR to instantly dominate Asia (in
case the US tries to dump Asia Scoring on the headline).
There are 4 camps regarding headlining Vietnam Revolts on Turn 1:
1) Don’t do that. Wait until DEFCON is 3, so that US can’t coup you out of there. This might cost
you Thailand, depending on whether the US is already in Malaysia when you play Vietnam Revolts.
You might still be able to flip Thailand with your +1 Ops and China Card, however.
2) Headline it and coup Iran AR1. Now US can start a coup-counter coup routine in Vietnam, but
it’s couping at a disadvantage due to Vietnam Revolts’ +1. So the US is really looking to empty out
Vietnam with a coup, which it has a 1/6 chance of doing so on each roll.
3) Headline it and play into Thailand & Laos/Cambodia. Now, if the US coups Thailand, you can
coup it back at +1. Even if the US empties Thailand, preventing you from counter-couping, you still
have backup countries in Southeast Asia and can retake Thailand before the US.
Now, it’s generally agreed that couping Iran is the best move for USSR on Turn 1 AR1. However,
if you’re playing with influence bids for the US, Iran is sometimes overcontrolled so heavily that
couping Iran is no longer worthwhile. This Vietnam Revolts headline play is a strong alternative,
and probably much better than Socialist Governments & Italy.
4) Headline it and play Asia scoring on AR1, scoring a quick and dirty Domination. Probably the
worst of these options, but a possibility if you have a truly, truly terrible hand (e.g., nothing but 1
Ops after a Red Purge/Scare headline).
As US
Completely harmless if played on the final Action Round, so long as you make sure you already
took Thailand (and possibly Laos/Cambodia). This card is a good reason not to play into Vietnam
unless you need the country immediately for Asia Scoring or Southeast Asia Scoring.
Early War 39
Blockade
Blockade
1948–49
The Soviets attempted to increase pressure on the Western allies to dissuade them
from creating an independent “West” German government in their zones. The primary
pressure point was a blockade of West Berlin. In response, the UK and US launched the
Berlin Airlift, which at its peak during the “Easter Parade,” had a cargo plane landing
in Berlin every minute.
Strong USSR players know that strong US players do not forget about Blockade, and so will either
play it for Ops and let Blockade come back later in the game (maybe the US will forget about it
then?), play Blockade when US is Purged (which is very strong, because there are no Soviet 4Ops
events in the Early War), or count the Early War cards and play Blockade only when US has no
more high cards.
Very strong USSR players know that strong US players try to hold either Decolonization or De-
Stalinization until Turn 3. Therefore, they play Blockade on Turn 1-2 to cut the US handsize and
therefore force them to discard Decolonization or De-Stalinization before Turn 3, so that they come
back before Turn 7.
As US
Always have a 3 Ops USSR event on hand until Blockade is gone! If the USSR punts it away on Turns
1-2, you have no choice but to be wary of Blockade throughout the Mid War. Accordingly, even if
you get the chance to send Blockade to space (via Containment) or play it with UN Intervention, it’s
often better to just trigger the event so you don’t have to worry.
If you draw Blockade, it’s usually not a problem to deal with. If you have no 3Ops or higher card
(maybe you were Red Scared?), Blockade is going to be your hold card, and you’re going to like it. As
above, it’s important to note that if you do draw Blockade with De-Stalinization or Decolonization
before Turn 3, you simply won’t have the ability to hold those cards until Turn 3 without playing
the China card. So you’ll usually have no choice but to discard De-Stalinization or Decolonization
before the Turn 3 reshuffle.
If you must trigger Blockade and you have no card to discard to it, then make it an AR7 play (AR6,
technically, in this case), which will help mitigate the damage. And who knows, maybe you’ll be in
luck and the USSR will play Containment and you can either space Blockade or discard a 2Ops card.
Riku Riekkinen suggests that if you have Blockade and Decolonization or De-Stalinization in your
hand on Turn 1, then you should consider an opening setup that leaves West Germany empty. The
goal is to be able to play Blockade without discarding any cards, thereby allowing you to hold
Decolonization/De-Stalinization until Turn 3. With an empty West Germany, the USSR is forced to
choose between couping Iran (and allowing the US to play into West Germany with Blockade on
AR1 without discarding any cards), or taking West Germany (and allowing the US into Afghanistan).
A good example of this play can be seen in Annotated Game #2.
Early War 41
Korean War
Korean War
1950–53
Sparked by a North Korean invasion across the 38th parallel, the Korean War would be
the first war sanctioned by the United Nations. There were 15 nations beyond the US
and South Korea with combat forces attempting to defend South Korean independence.
MacArthur’s campaign to the Yalu River provoked a Chinese response that reset the
war to its starting positions on the 38th parallel.
Given the importance of South Korea, try to take it without needing to chance the Korean War event
— ideally with a 4Ops directly. If you can’t spare a 4Ops card, you can just stick in 2 Ops to bring it
to 1/2. If the US counters to the point where you can’t win an Ops war, you can trigger Korean War
for a decent chance at stealing the country. Usually, though, the US player is sufficiently scared of
Korean War that it won’t contest South Korea, and then you can just go ahead and use the 2 Ops of
the War to take South Korea outright.
As US
You usually want to play Korean War as fast as you can. South Korea is critical to your chances in
Asia, and you can’t keep the threat of the card looming around forever. Sooner or later, the Korean
War is going to happen, and you’re better off triggering it earlier than later; when played at 1/0, if
you win, you get South Korea to 3/0, and if you lose, you can bring it to 2/1.
Unlike Arab-Israeli War or Indo-Pakistani War, it is not worth it to build up South Korea’s neighbors
before risking Korean War. Building up Japan and Taiwan is a huge waste of Early War Ops, and in
the case of Japan, might be totally wasted (given US/Japan Mutual Defense Pact).
If you don’t draw Korean War, you’re in a difficult position. Typically, I’ll drop at least 1 influence
into South Korea so that the USSR can’t take it with a 4 Ops card, and then after US/Japan comes
out or the USSR is tempted into using Korean War for Ops elsewhere, I’ll take over South Korea.
Early War 43
Romanian Abdication
Romanian Abdication
1947
King Michael I, a westernized monarch, was forced to abdicate his throne at gunpoint.
Romania was thereafter declared a democratic socialist republic. After the death of
its first communist leader, Gheorghiu-Dej, Romania was ruled by Nicolae Ceausescu,
second only to Stalin in cruelty to his own people.
especially true if Truman Doctrine is not out, since the US would have the option of playing to take
Romania and +1VP each time Europe Scoring comes out.
As US
I’m happy to play this as soon as I can, so that Independent Reds can be merely situational instead
of worthless. Although the Romania Abdication/Independent Reds/Truman Doctrine combo is nice,
it’s not worth it to pursue it on your own. If you play Romanian Abdication, and the USSR plays
Independent Reds later, then hey, why not Truman away the 3 influence for Romania. But it’s
otherwise not worth 3 Ops and 2 Action Rounds to score +1 VP on Europe Scoring.
Early War 45
Arab-Israeli War
Arab-Israeli War
The State of Israel was virtually born of war. After the end of the British mandate,
Israel was thrust into conflict with its Arab neighbors. Israel prevailed in all such wars,
excepting its invasion of Lebanon in 1982, from which it ultimately had to withdraw.
Arab success was nearly achieved during the surprise attacks of the Yom Kippur War,
however these too ultimately failed. While superpower intervention was frequently
threatened on both sides, ultimately success or failure in the conflicts rode upon the
relative capabilities of Arab and Israeli militaries.
and 1 influence in Israel if you succeed. That makes it one of the better candidates for the USSR
Turn 1 headline.
During Turn 1, a decent US player is going to take Jordan / Lebanon before investing in Israel. (Egypt
is also a good choice, but it will probably eventually fall to Nasser.) So it’s nice to take those Israel-
neighboring countries first, before the US can, so that you can wield the threat of Arab-Israeli War
to keep the US from the only Middle East battleground not susceptible to Muslim Revolutions.
If the US does manage to solidify Jordan/Lebanon, this event is best played for Ops. If you’re under
Red Scare / Purge, maybe you would consider triggering the event, just for the Mil Ops, but the odds
aren’t in your favor to actually win.
As US
This is not much of a threat if you draw it. Israel is expensive enough that it is usually the last
battleground in the Middle East to see any play anyway. So when you play Arab-Israeli War early
on, there’s usually not much influence at stake. As long as you manage to get out of Israel before
this event is played, even if you lose the War, it’s not a huge deal. Accordingly, Arab-Israeli War is
one of the few events where you’ll often see the opponent’s event triggered after the Operations are
conducted. Simply use the card to place 1 into Lebanon and 1 into Jordan or Egypt, and you will be
fine.
Early War 47
Comecon
Comecon
1949–1991
The Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON) was founded in reaction to
the allure of the Marshall Plan to the Soviet satellites in Eastern Europe. While very
loosely organized and dominated by the Soviets in its early years, COMECON would
ultimately fulfill the role of trade liberalization and industrial rationalization for Eastern
Europe.
Aside from this edge case, I always play Comecon for Ops. The 4 influence is so scattered and usually
so irrelevant that I have never seen any competent USSR player play this for the event. It’s still nice
to have around in the Late War if you come under Chernobyl in Europe, but it’s no Warsaw Pact.
When the US plays it, my targets for influence, in descending order, are: Poland, East Germany,
Yugoslavia (assuming I opened with 4 EGER / 4 POL / 1 YUG), and Czechoslovakia (to defend
against eventual Tear Down This Wall realignments). But it’s mostly moot, since this influence will
probably get De-Stalinized anyway.
As US
This is basically a free 3 Ops card. I suppose you could hold off on playing this until after De-
Stalinization, but harmless 3 Ops cards are hard to come by as US in the Early War.
The one interaction of note is with Eastern European Unrest. Against a greedy USSR player who
does not overprotect East Germany and Poland, you might consider headlining Eastern European
Unrest and threaten a costly Europe Scoring. This play does not work if you play Comecon first.
Early War 49
Nasser
Nasser
1954-1970
One of the giants in the Pan-Arab movement, Gamal Abdel Nasser rose to power
through military coup. Attempting to steer an independent course during the Cold
War, he provoked western governments by accepting Soviet aid, and nationalizing
commercial property—the Suez Canal being the most prominent example. Egypt, under
his leadership, was viewed as a Soviet client, and would serve as a Russian proxy during
repeated wars with Israel. He died in office after 18 years of service, having frustrated
the attempts of a variety of domestic and international enemies.
use of this event is before the US has had a chance to put 2 into Egypt, because then it will cut the
US off from Libya and essentially gain you two battlegrounds.
If Nasser isn’t important — either because you got into Egypt via a coup or the US has locked up
both Egypt and Libya — then the normal rules about preserving your starred events apply. No need
to use this if you could potentially give the US a headache and counter the effects of Sadat Expels
Soviets. This isn’t to say that you shouldn’t fight for Egypt: the Middle East will be scored quite a
bit, and you don’t want to miss out on Egypt/Libya battlegrounds if you don’t have to.
As US
Nasser means you lose Egypt for the Early War. But there’s no reason to lose Libya as well. Accept
the loss of Egypt and bide your time waiting for Sadat Expels Soviets. In the meantime, make sure
you can get to Libya and secure it. Put 2 into Egypt, so that even if the USSR plays Nasser you’re not
completely out of Egypt and have at least one AR where Egypt is 1/2 rather than 0/2. This allows
you to either control Libya or retake Egypt.
If you drew Nasser, his best use is probably on the final AR, after having locked up Libya: you use
Nasser and put Egypt to 1/2. Now the USSR has three options: 1) coup Egypt, 2) coup elsewhere,
3) control Egypt. No matter what, you end up getting an advantage somewhere: you save a more
important country from being couped, you get to retake Egypt, or you get to coup. It’s a fine example
of the AR7 play.
Early War 51
1955
A reaction to perceived Western aggression by the creation of NATO, the Warsaw Pact
was a Russian-dominated military alliance that included all of the states of Eastern
Europe except Yugoslavia. It integrated both tactics and equipment throughout the
alliance along Soviet models. Albania withdrew from the Pact in 1968.
best (and sometimes only) defense against the Late War US onslaught of Chernobyl, Tear Down This
Wall, East European Unrest, John Paul II Elected Pope, and Solidarity.
Once you get to Turn 7 and draw Warsaw Pact, it is then a common USSR hold card in case of
European emergency. Since any card played or discarded on Turn 7 or later is likely not going to
return to the game, you must try to keep it in the game for as long as possible. As long the US player
is convinced that the Warsaw Pact may yet be formed, he will be very hesitant about investing into
Europe, thereby nullifying one of the great US advantages in the game.
In the unfortunate event that the US triggers Warsaw Pact Formed in the Early War or Mid War and
there is no meaningful US influence to remove, I ordinarily bump East Germany and Poland by 2
each and stick the other influence in Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia. (Yugoslavia because I usually
start with 1 there, and Czechoslovakia because it could theoretically provide a -1 against a Tear
Down This Wall realignment of East Germany or Poland.)
As US
If you draw this in the Early War / Mid War, count your blessings. As US, Warsaw Pact Formed
is actually a better draw than most US events (like, say Five Year Plan). Being able to get rid of a
critical USSR Late War card is a huge bonus, and by playing it when you have no influence to be
removed, you can save yourself a lot of worry and headaches in the Late War.
As an added bonus, an early play of Warsaw Pact Formed means the USSR can no longer dump
NATO or Independent Reds with impunity.
Early War 53
1958–1969
Founder of France’s Fifth Republic, De Gaulle’s role during the Cold War is generally
viewed through the lens of his second presidency. While still a western ally, De Gaulle
attempted to establish France as an independent voice within the confines of the western
camp. He developed an independent nuclear deterrent, withdrew from NATO’s unified
command structure, and criticized US policy in Vietnam. He also pursued increased
trade and cultural relations with the Soviet Bloc. He sought in all things to restore France
to her former place of greatness in world affairs.
If you already control France, then there is obviously no need to play De Gaulle. Keep him around
in the deck just in case the US tries any funny business in France.
If the US controls France, then you should remember that De Gaulle’s overall effect is just 3 Ops.
If you play him for the event on an Action Round, the US can repair its effect with a 3 Ops card
and you’ve gotten nowhere. A better use of De Gaulle is to take advantage of your headline-AR1
back-to-back combo: headline De Gaulle, then play Ops into France to take over the country on AR1.
You give up the battleground coup, but it’s worth it to flip France your way.
If no one controls France, the best way to take France is by gaining access to it via West
Germany/Italy/Algeria, and then using the 3 Ops of De Gaulle himself to just take the country
directly. This keeps De Gaulle in the deck. If you can’t do this, then the headline-AR1 combo still
works, but again, you’re giving up a battleground coup.
Regardless, keep an eye out for Algeria. Even if the US triggers De Gaulle and then repairs the
damage, you can at least grab a key African battleground.
As US
Regardless of the French situation, this is a great card to draw as the US.
If the USSR already controls France, that’s too bad, but then this card is a free 3 Ops, a rarity in the
Early War.
If you already control France, then this is an empty Action Round, since you can repair De Gaulle’s
damage with the 3 Ops. (Note: spacing De Gaulle is not a great idea since you would rather dispose
of him for no effect rather than allow him to come back and potentially hurt you more.)
And if France is empty, then you trigger the event and then pour the 3 Ops into France, making it
3/1. The USSR is unable to control it with a single play, and thus may be wary of engaging in an
Ops war if the threat of Truman Doctrine looms over his head.
The biggest concern with De Gaulle is that it allows the USSR access into Algeria. Given the typical
US Early War Ops scarcity, there’s not much you can do about this. If the USSR is distracted with
other priorities, try to make sure that you take Algeria before he does.
De Gaulle becomes a serious liability if you are under Red Scare/Purge, because his Ops value no
longer offsets the event. If Purged, I would either try to hold De Gaulle until next turn, or simply
accept that France is probably lost. In such situations, it can be nice to play De Gaulle on your last
Action Round, so that if the USSR wants to capitalize off of it, he at least has to do so during AR1,
thus giving you a battleground coup.
Early War 55
1945–1973
Code named “Project Paperclip” in the United States, the victors of World War II
scrambled to “recruit” former Nazi scientists into their own research establishments.
In the West, such efforts involved shielding scientists from war crime investigations.
Perhaps the most famous case is Wernher von Braun who is thought of as the father
of America’s rocketry program. Stalin was reportedly confounded by Soviet failure to
grab this knowledge base first.
More commonly, this is a good headline candidate if you have nothing better. It’s a nice headline
for USSR especially, if the threat of Defectors is still out there.
It does not take up your normal Space Race slot for the turn, so you should examine the probabilities
on the board if you are going to use this and Space Race a card. Obviously you would prefer to use
this on one of the VP spaces that succeed on only 1-3 instead of 1-4.
Captured Nazi Scientist’s event becomes increasingly valuable if it survives to the Mid War. In
addition, if neither player has advanced much on the Space Race, it is helpful if you are desperate to
space multiple cards. Playing CNS and then spacing a problem card can accelerate you to Animal
in Space with 2/3 probability, allowing to space one more problem card.
As always, there is the risk of advancing too far on the Space Race track. This is more of a problem
for the USSR: it’s nice to earn 2VPs and see the enemy headline first, but not so nice when you are
unable to space Voice of America or Grain Sales to Soviets.
Early War 57
Truman Doctrine
Truman Doctrine
1947
Before a joint session of Congress, the President announced the new Truman Doctrine,
ushering in an era of intense intervention on behalf of states with liberal economic
and political institutions. Truman stated “I believe that it must be the policy of the
United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed
minorities or by outside pressures.” The Truman Doctrine was prompted by the United
Kingdom’s withdrawal from its traditional great power role in the Near East. The
immediate effect of the doctrine was a massive influx of military and economic aid
to Greece and Turkey.
If you draw Truman Doctrine, it’s not hard to dispose of. Just make sure that you don’t have much
influence in an uncontrolled country and it’s a null event. If you have to get rid of an influence in
Finland, oh well. This becomes quite problematic after Independent Reds, when it will always have
at least some impact, so try to get rid of Truman as soon as you possibly can. Be thankful you drew
it and not the US.
In rare circumstances where you cannot safely play Truman Doctrine, consider using Five Year Plan
if you have it. If you play Five Year Plan with only Truman Doctrine in your hand, you now have 3
Ops to deal with the President instead of just 1.
As US
After drawing Truman Doctrine, the US player should try to make something happen with it instead
of holding onto it for later. This is because Truman Doctrine is nigh-useless in the USSR’s hands,
and Truman is one of the few ways for the US to establish initiative in the Early War. This normally
means a AR7 play: break control of France, hold Truman Doctrine, and then headline it next turn. (An
example of this play: Annotated Game #1, Turn 2, AR6.) It’s also possible (and much more rewarding)
to pull this off against East Germany, but USSR players normally overprotect East Germany and
make uncontrolling it much more difficult.
If you really can’t make anything happen with Truman, hope to draw it in the Late War. Its power
amplifies significantly when combined with all the other US Late War Europe events, so if you draw
it with Chernobyl or Tear Down This Wall you can set off some real fireworks.
You can also engage in some Turn 1 shenanigans with Truman. Against a USSR setup of 3 EGER /
3 POL / 4 FIN, place 1 influence into Finland and headline Truman to wipe out Finland. Now De-
Stalinization is pretty safe to play, since he has few good countries to move influence out of, and
East European Unrest actually becomes relevant. Ordinarily, though, the USSR won’t do such a rash
opening setup, and in any event I prefer to hang onto Truman to try to do more damage with him
elsewhere.
Early War 59
Olympic Games
Olympic Games
1948, 1952, 1956, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988
Sport often served as an outlet for the intense competition between the Superpowers,
and that competition was never so intense as at the Olympics. The Olympics served
as a test bed to see which society could make the greatest strides in human physical
achievement. It fit neatly into Communist ideology of “the New Man.” The games
frequently reflected the global political situation, as with the terrorist attacks in Munich,
and became overt political tools with the US boycott of the Moscow games in 1980, and
the Soviet boycott of the LA games in 1984.
in any event, if DEFCON is greater than 2, you should have much greater priorities than hosting the
Olympics.
About its only use is as a headline (albeit a rather risky and ineffective one) if you have nothing else
to headline, or when you’re truly desperate for VPs. Remember that an Olympic Games headline
can cause you to lose the game if your opponent also degrades DEFCON in the headline!
A pedantic footnote: in the Deluxe Edition, the wording of the card’s boycott clause was slightly
changed⁷. The new wording (“as if they played a 4 Ops card” instead of “with 4 Operations points”)
means that a Olympic Games boycott is now subject to⁸ Red Scare/Purge. Not that it ever matters,
but it helps clarify the boundaries of Red Scare/Purge, which is often the subject of rules questions.
⁷http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/605440/olympic-games-wording-change-in-deluxe-edition-and/page/1
⁸http://boardgamegeek.com/article/6399698#6399698
Early War 61
NATO
NATO
1949
The second part of the US strategy to rebuild Europe, the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) became synonymous with the West’s opposition to the Soviet
Union. An oft repeated maxim for NATO’s purpose captures it nicely: “NATO was
created to keep the Soviets out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.”
As US
I have never played this card for the event as the US. The coup/realignment restrictions are pointless
because DEFCON restrictions already prevent nearly all coups and realignments in Europe. Brush
War immunity against Italy is sometimes nice, but most of the time you should have Spain / Greece
/ France anyway, which provide de facto Brush War immunity.
NATO’s only real impact comes with Special Relationship in the Optional Cards, because it gives
Special Relationship a substantial boost. Even that, though, is still not worth giving up the 4 Ops.
What this really means is that you should try to play Warsaw Pact or Marshall Plan as soon as you
can in the turn, so that the USSR cannot simply play NATO with impunity. They’ll still play it, of
course, but at least they’ll give you the Special Relationship boost for it.
Early War 63
Independent Reds
Independent Reds
1948
Regardless, Independent Reds is usually not worth bothering over. You need every Op you can get in
the Early War, and Eastern Europe is too expensive to fight over in the Early War anyway. Romania
is the most troublesome, since if you play Independent Reds after Romanian Abdication, the US can
play Truman Doctrine to score an additional 1VP on Europe Scoring. Even then, Independent Reds
is probably not worth sending to space.
As US
One of those events that the owner of the event isn’t that interested in triggering. For a US player, it’s
usually not worth an Action Round, though if you’re in a tight battle for European domination it can
be a cheap way to cut the USSR’s country count. But Independent Reds does have an impact on US
play: it’s the opposite of the above, namely, that you want to trigger Warsaw Pact Formed, Comecon,
and Romanian Abdication as soon as you can so that Independent Reds isn’t totally useless.
Early War 65
Marshall Plan
Marshall Plan
1947
On June 5, Secretary of State George C. Marshall announced to the world the US plan
to reconstruct all of Europe. Due to Soviet pressure, Eastern European states did not
participate. However, for the 16 nations of Western Europe that did, the Marshall Plan
marked the first step on the road to recovery and ultimate victory in the Cold War.
Another option is to send Marshall Plan to space. This is more plausible when you’re under Red
Purge and therefore cannot control two of the Mediterranean countries with the card’s Ops. Even
if you aren’t, it’s sometimes worthwhile to sacrifice the 4 Ops of Marshall Plan: you’ll have to find
the Ops eventually to play into Europe, but there are definitely situations where you’re better off in
Europe without the poisoned 4 Ops of Marshall Plan.
The best way of playing Marshall Plan is with UN Intervention, which gets you the best of both
worlds. It is in fact probably the best Early War USSR candidate for UN Intervention, along with
CIA Created (if you have influence in a Mid War region).
Ideally, you’d like to play Marshall Plan as late as possible so that the US can waste most of its
effect. If you can bait the US into controlling Canada before Marshall Plan, for instance, before
playing Marshall Plan, you’ve effectively wasted a US Operations point. In particular, if you do
space Marshall Plan (or UN Intervention it), then it’s a pretty painless 4 Ops in the Mid War.
It goes without saying that if you also have NATO in your hand, you should play NATO first, before
Marshall Plan (and before the US can trigger Warsaw Pact Formed).
As US
This is best as a Turn 1 Headline, because you can adjust your opening setup to take advantage of
it. As the game goes on, it gets worse and worse because as countries are controlled, the influence
becomes less and less helpful. But it remains very powerful even if played in an Action Round; if you
can get Marshall into the 2-stability Mediterranean countries on Turn 1 or 2, you probably won’t
ever be dominated in Europe (and conversely you can assure Domination if you get France).
This is therefore the only starred US event in the Early War that I will almost always play for the
event, because it is too risky to let this get into the reshuffle. If it comes back on Turn 3, it might
still do some good, but if it comes back any later it probably won’t accomplish anything. Of course,
there will be times when you don’t need Marshall Plan for European domination and/or desperately
need the 4 Ops elsewhere, and in those situations you should feel free to let it go. But in general,
Marshall Plan is the rare starred event that gets worse and worse as the game goes on.
On the flip side, be careful you don’t rush too quickly into Europe, as otherwise the effect of Marshall
Plan will mostly be wasted. Of course, there is always a sense of urgency in Twilight Struggle, and
Marshall’s influence is even more wasted if you let the USSR take all the Mediterranean countries
first. But for example, if the UK is hit with Suez Crisis, there’s no need to patch it back up to 5
immediately as you may as well wait for the Marshall Plan influence.
The countries I target with Marshall Plan, in descending priority:
• Benelux, Denmark
Early War 68
Indo-Pakistani War
Indo-Pakistani War
From the time of India’s independence from Britain, the Muslim and Hindu elements
of this former colony have been in conflict. Pakistan has traditionally been on the
losing end of these conflicts, but has relied on US and PRC support to maintain military
credibility against a more robust Indian defense capability.
disaster. India is even more perilous: it’s a huge pain to get to Burma first and then get India, and
even if you lock down the whole region, India is never safe (unlike Pakistan). It’s usually therefore a
good idea to contest Burma a little in the Early War: not only is it 1VP when Southeast Asia Scoring
comes out, but it also increases the chance that you can steal India.
The other big threat of the War isn’t even the loss of the country; it’s the loss of access. If you play
into Pakistan and control it, losing the Indo-Pakistani War will also cut you off from India. So if
you’re very concerned about the Indo-Pakistani War, you can play a single influence into Pakistan
first. This way even if you lose the War, you can still take over Pakistan. Your opponent will be able
to play into India first and likely take it over, but it’s better than losing Pakistan and being blocked
out of India.
The US will tend to play Indo-Pakistani War more than the USSR in the Early War. This is for two
reasons: one, the USSR is more likely to be in Pakistan/India than the US, and two, the US has a
more difficult time collecting Military Operations. Indo-Pakistani War is therefore tantamount to at
least +2VP (or possibly +4VP) when no other source of Military Operations is available. Of course,
Early War Ops are precious, but 2VP for 2Ops is quite tempting, and the possibility of another 2VP
and a crucial battleground makes it even sweeter.
As USSR, drawing Indo-Pakistani War makes life a whole lot easier. It means you can spread directly
east in a straight line without having to detour into Afghanistan. This means you make it much
farther into Southeast Asia than you otherwise would if you had to stop to defend against a possible
Indo-Pakistani War. (This is true of US as well, but US is usually just grateful enough for even the
opportunity to play into Pakistan.)
After the Early War, the region is usually sufficiently locked down that the Indo-Pakistani War has
little chance of changing anything, and you can usually get the Military Operations elsewhere. But
in the event of some sudden change in the region (e.g., Brush War, Ussuri River Skirmish), the Indo-
Pakistani War can be an ace in the hole: if the US can somehow flip Pakistan, India is suddenly
looking a lot more vulnerable.
Early War 70
Containment
Containment
1947
A term coined by diplomat and Sovietologist George Kennan, it came to form the
cornerstone of US policy toward the Soviet Union during the early Cold War. It found
early application in the Truman Doctrine and sought to “contain” Communism to those
areas where it already existed.
One of the four great US headlines in the Early War, along with Red Scare/Purge, Defectors, and
Marshall Plan. Unless I have a hand full of 4 Ops and scoring cards, I almost always try to headline
Containment, because if I play it for Ops the USSR could draw it and then it would be almost
worthless. And even if my hand doesn’t benefit much from Containment, I will simply hold it to
next turn and headline it then.
Somewhat ironically, with Containment the US can expand much more aggressively than usual in
the Early War. With a Turn 1 Containment headline, it is actually possible for the US to exit the
Early War firmly ahead in both position and VPs (or even with an autovictory) given fortunate rolls
and draws.
Containment is slightly better than Brezhnev Doctrine for two reasons: one, it comes out earlier,
and two, even if the USSR plays it on the last Action Round, it will still have an effect. On Turn 3, if
I have not yet seen Containment, then I know the USSR is holding it to the last Action Round, and
so I will make sure that my last play can take advantage of it. It would be a waste to play a 4 Ops or
a scoring card only to see it “boosted” with Containment.
Early War 72
CIA Created
CIA Created
1947
In an effort to bring to a close the inter-service bickering that marred U.S. intelligence
during WWII, President Truman created the United States’ first independent agency
capable both of intelligence analysis and covert operations. Its 40 year cat-and-mouse
game with its Soviet counterpart, the KGB, would be the stuff of legend, and one of the
hallmarks of the Cold War.
(preferably as the last card in your hand, but if you delay too long the US may play Fidel!), and even
at DEFCON 2 it won’t cost you the game.
If you draw it and you do have influence in a Mid War battleground, well, then you’ve not got a lot
of good options. You can play it on AR1 if DEFCON is still 3, allowing the US the coup and revealing
your whole hand. You can take advantage of Nuclear Subs to get out of it, since then the CIA Created
coup won’t lose you the game. You can space it if you are under Brezhnev Doctrine. You can play it
with UN Intervention, but then you can’t hold a card to next turn, and you might need to do that if
you’re dealing with other bad US cards.
Unlike Lone Gunman, I do not usually hold this turn to turn, waiting for a better chance to discard
it. I usually just play it on AR1, because there are too many things that can cause me to discard a
card from my hand, which would lose me the game if I don’t have the China card.
As US
Because of how bad it is for the Soviets to draw this, I always play this for Operations before the
Turn 3 reshuffle.
In the Mid War, between Turns 3 and 6, there’s still a chance the USSR will draw it if I play CIA
for Operations. So I’ll usually play it for Ops. But if I have literally no other headline choice, or if I
desperately need to conduct some Ops / drop DEFCON in the headline, then CIA is a good choice
for the headline.
If I draw it on Turn 7, though, then the USSR isn’t ever going to draw it, and playing it for the event
is strictly superior to playing it for Ops. I will usually headline it (though there are tons of great US
headlines at this point).
This card means that I’m willing to trigger Fidel on Turns 1 or 2 because it’ll make CIA unplayable
if they draw it. On Turn 3 I’ll probably space it unless I know the USSR is still holding on to CIA
and has no other influence in the Mid War regions.
Early War 74
1951
On September 8th the United States quietly extended its nuclear umbrella to its former
Pacific rival. In doing so, it also soothed the nerves of Japan’s neighbors about a
remilitarized Japan appearing on the world scene. In exchange, Japan played host to
America’s forward presence in Asia. Japan effectively became an unsinkable aircraft
carrier for both the Vietnam and Korean wars. Obviously, US reliance on Japanese
products during the ensuing conflicts greatly aided Japan’s economic recovery and
eventual economic might.
Of course, if the US has already taken Japan for some reason, then it is a truly free 4 Ops card because
you were never going to coup or realign Japan anyway.
The two interactions worth noting: if you have Asia Scoring/Korean War (or know that Asia
Scoring/Korean War is going to be triggered this turn), it is obviously to your advantage to hold
onto US/Japan until after those are played. I have had situations where the US player is forced to
score a Asia Domination for me on his final Action Round because he thought I would play US/Japan
for him.
There is one situation where you might try to defy the Defense Pact: if US/Japan is discarded on
Turn 3, Asia Scoring has yet to come out, and Japan remains at 1/0, it may be worthwhile to steal
a Asia Domination by taking Japan with the China card. After all, if Japan gets you Domination
(or denies it to the US), then it’s worth a total of 6VP (4 for Domination, 1 for battleground, and 1
for adjacency). There’s about a 50/50 chance that you’ll lose it all when US/Japan comes back out
somewhere in Turns 7-10, but 6VP is a pretty big chunk of VP…
As a footnote, if you’re teaching the game to a new USSR player, you should absolutely advise him
of the existence of this card, lest he be forced this lesson the hard way like so many other Soviet
Premiers (including yours truly).
As US
Unless the USSR has actually taken over Japan—a very rare occurrence—this is never worth playing
for the event. Even if you need Japan, you can just play it for Ops and put 3 into Japan and 1
somewhere else. And if you don’t need Japan, you can usually just play it for Ops elsewhere, content
in the knowledge that most USSR players won’t ever dare play into Japan.
On Turns 1-2, the Ops are probably more important elsewhere than Japan. But on Turn 3 you should
use 3 of the Ops to take Japan and 1 Op elsewhere, to prevent the play described above. All in all,
it is a card you’d much rather have in the USSR hand. Depending on where Asia Scoring is in the
deck, though, you can’t just wait for US/Japan forever: if US control of Japan is what determines
Domination, it is better to waste 3 Ops than lose 5VP…
Early War 76
Suez Crisis
Suez Crisis
1956
An embarrassment among allies, the Suez Crisis ended any remaining doubt that the old
system of Great Power imperialism was dead. Threatened by Nasser’s nationalization
of the Suez Canal, Israel, France and the United Kingdom conspired to alter Egyptian
policy at bayonet point. They failed to appreciate Eisenhower’s aggravation at their
unannounced initiative. Though initially militarily successful, the three powers were
compelled to withdraw under American pressure.
After your Iran coup on AR1, if the US doesn’t expand out of Israel, then you can use Suez Crisis on
AR2 for the same effect. A good US player will make sure to expand into Lebanon or Jordan quickly,
however, and then Suez Crisis is not that great of an event.
On later turns, you can headline Suez as a pseudo-De Gaulle or Socialist Governments. You can
follow up a Suez Crisis headline with any number of plays: taking over France, playing Special
Relationship without triggering it, or scoring Europe on undeservedly advantageous terms. It is
otherwise just a 3 Ops card.
As US
This is rarely a problem card, even if you are under Red Scare. Although it removes 4 influence
and you only have 3 Ops to repair the damage, 3 Ops are usually more than enough to restore the
important influence:
• Israel is no big deal, so long as you expand out of Israel first. Since you probably aren’t
interested in taking Israel in the Early War, the only threat is losing access in the Middle
East.
• The UK is relevant only for European domination and Special Relationship. (Suez Crisis is in
fact the main reason you’d ever lose influence in the UK.) Accordingly I will stick a Marshall
Plan influence into the UK, and if I sense that Special Relationship will be triggered I will try
to recontrol the UK eventually. But otherwise you can safely ignore the loss of influence in
the UK until you have Ops to spare.
• France is hopefully empty when you play this card. If it isn’t, since the other countries are not
that important, you can use the 3 Ops of this card to repair the 2-influence damage done in
France.
Depending on the situation, Suez Crisis may sometimes be an empty Action Round, but even if it is
I will always play it for Ops rather then sending it to Space. Being able to get it out of the deck is
much preferable to allowing the USSR the possibility of headline shenanigans.
Early War 78
1956–1989
Captured most visibly by Nagy’s attempt to withdraw Hungary from the Warsaw
Pact and Czechoslovakia’s Prague Spring of 1968, members of the Warsaw Pact
frequently sought to loosen the reins of Moscow. When taken too far, from the Soviet
perspective, the effects could be devastating. Soviet tanks became a universal symbol
of Soviet determination to hold on to Eastern Europe, through undisguised oppression
if necessary.
Much as the threat of a Socialist Governments headline forces the US to slightly overprotect its
Western European battlegrounds, so too does East European Unrest force the USSR to overprotect
its battlegrounds, as otherwise an EEU headline would be quite awkward for the USSR. And if
you’ve overprotected the two battlegrounds enough (or Comecon / Warsaw Pact did it for you),
then this isn’t even an empty Action Round, and you can freely spend the Ops elsewhere. Think of
it as transferring 3 Ops from Eastern Europe to somewhere else.
In the Late War, this card is absolutely miserable. Losing 4 Influence from East Germany / Poland
simultaneously, right as you’re being hit with Chernobyl / Tear Down This Wall / Solidarity, can be
brutal. It’s not quite as bad as the others, but it’s a good candidate for the Space Race. Be glad you
drew it and not the US.
As US
In the Early War and Mid War, you usually have something better to do than remove from 3 Influence
from overprotected or irrelevant countries. It can be a decent headline (threatening Europe Scoring
on AR1) or AR7 play, but usually the USSR has overprotected East Germany and Poland enough
that there’s not much point to it.
In the Late War, this card is an absolute monster. Combined with all the other pro-US Europe cards,
being able to delete two influence from East Germany and Poland simultaneously is huge. It’s more
than just a 4Ops equivalent: its real use is to break USSR control of the two countries, allowing
you to pour in influence without paying the 2-for-1 penalty. Coupled with Chernobyl, it opens the
floodgates to the Late War American takeover of Europe. If you draw it on Turn 7, do everything in
your power to hold it until next turn.
Early War 80
Decolonization
Decolonization
1947–1979
While it is hard to put precise dates on the decolonization process, those dates chosen
represent two of the most significant decolonization successes. Sparking the retreat from
empire was Britain’s fulfilled promise of independence for India in 1947. At the other
extreme, Rhodesia’s first majority elections spelled doom for the apartheid system.
or a South Africa realignment, eliminating all US presence in Africa. Algeria is next in importance,
if you have not yet established access to France, because it provides a back-door into the country.
(This is an example of Decolonization’s power: when you play into both Thailand and Algeria, you
are often forcing the US to confront multiple threats at once, and there is no way they can defend all
of them simultaneously.) Nigeria is third (though sometimes more important than Algeria if France
is already settled), because it is a country that is otherwise inaccessible without going through an
easily-couped non-battleground.
You can think of Africa as being divided into three subregions, divided by non-battlegrounds:
Algeria, Angola/Zaire/South Africa, and Nigeria. You want access to all three of them, and although
De Gaulle does give you access to Algeria, the only way to get into all of them is with Decolonization.
Early War summary
In the Early War, I will normally drop only one into Southeast Asia, because I will eventually have
access to the region anyway and it will merely jumpstart my progress there. Depending on DEFCON
and the US position I will place it in Malaysia, Thailand, or sometimes Burma. The remainder of the
influence will go into Angola, Algeria, and Nigeria.
Decolonization is such a valuable card that I rarely headline it in the Early War if I am at all
concerned about Defectors. Losing it to Defectors is so costly that I would rather be safe and play
it on an Action Round unless I knew that Defectors isn’t being headlined (because it’s already been
played, because I have it in my hand, or via some psychological read of your opponent, if you are
confident in such things).
Past the Early War
In the Mid War, Decolonization remains a top-tier card because it evolves into a “drop 4 influence in
Africa” event. By this time, Southeast Asia is likely sewn up, and the fact that it can put 4 influence
into a region with mostly 1-stability battlegrounds is still game-changingly powerful.
As US
Along with De-Stalinization, this is a card so powerful you can’t even send it to space until after
the Turn 3 reshuffle. If I’m not able to hold it to Turn 3, I will absolutely send it to space, or hold
it until I can. It is of such importance that I would rather trigger Blockade and lose West Germany
before triggering Decolonization: at least then, the USSR has to invest 4 Ops to get the 2VP swing.*
Decolonization will mean much more than that, come Africa Scoring (or sometimes Asia Scoring).
In the Mid War, Decolonization is still very bad, since it is only a 2 Ops card and you need 4 Ops to
repair its damage. It can be one of those AR7 plays (to mitigate its effect), but more commonly it is
just an auto-space.
Its existence is why I try to get into Angola and then Zaire as quickly as I can. USSR control of
Angola cuts you off from two battlegrounds and puts you at a severe disadvantage in Africa.
* Of course it can be more than 2VP, depending on whether it hands over Domination VPs or possibly
Europe Control. If you must lose West Germany, then as the Blockade article notes, you should do so
on the last AR.
Early War 83
Red Scare/Purge
Red Scare/Purge
1945–1989
Sparked by fears that the “enemy is among us,” the “red scare” hit its apex with
Senator Joseph McCarthy, and the hearings on “Un-American activities” in the House
of Representatives during the 1950s. Soviet purges were a notorious aspect of power
transition within the Kremlin. However, Stalin was the true master; 12 million people
were imprisoned in his camps at the time of his death in 1953.
Early War, for example, so long as you have 3 of those cards (1 Ops, scoring, or cards to be played
for the event), then you are losing 4 or less Ops overall. Of course, 2 Ops in one play is better than
1 Op in two plays, and having your 2 Ops be cut down to 1 is especially painful when jostling for
control of 2-stability country.
On the other hand, Red Scare/Purge can simply lose you the game. It is a major hand management
crisis when it knocks formerly dangerous-but-spaceable cards (like Grain Sales to Soviets and The
Voice of America) down to an unspaceable 1 Op: now you must either play the card, or hold it to
next turn. If you have multiple DEFCON suicide cards, Red Scare/Purge will often make some of
them unspaceable, thereby causing you to either lose by DEFCON or by forcing you to trigger really
unpleasant events.
In addition, Red Scare/Purge strengthens certain events that are otherwise mitigatable by their Ops.
De Gaulle Leads France is a good example: if the US already controls France, then they can play this
and then restore the 3 influence of damage with the 3 Ops. Alternatively, if no one controls France,
then the US can trigger the event and take it to 3/1, so that the USSR can’t take France with a 4 Ops.
Neither of these plays are available to the US any more if they are holding a De Gaulle that has been
knocked down to 2 Ops: they are now forced to give up France (good for the USSR) or send the event
to space (which allows it to come back again later for the USSR to do more damage with).
Finally, Red Scare/Purge is a nasty combo with Blockade and Quagmire/Bear Trap. With the former,
you can almost guarantee a West Germany loss; with the latter, you can sometimes force your
opponent to skip multiple Action Rounds in a row.
After triggering the event, it is important to go on the offensive and play aggressively. The number
one way to waste Red Scare/Purge is to play defensively or timidly; if you aren’t creating threats
for your opponent that he is unable to deal with because of his lack of Ops, then there’s no point to
headlining it and you may as well have just played it for Ops. Force your opponent to respond to
your threats: even though he usually might be able to, he will probably eventually have to give up
if he is under Scare or Purge. On the flip side, if you aren’t in such a position to play aggressively,
then you should seriously reconsider headlining this event. Either hold it to next turn or use the 4
Ops to bolster your position.
In summary, I will almost always play Red Scare/Purge for the event. In the Early War, when its
Ops are most valuable, I will hesitate to do so if I otherwise have very few Ops, but in the Mid War
and beyond, I will usually trigger the event (and use SALT Negotiations to play it again, if possible).
It’s a very powerful event, and playing it twice in the Early War can often decide the game. But it’s
easy to auto-play the event without carefully considering how to maximize its potential.
Early War 85
UN Intervention
UN Intervention
1947–?
The United Nations remained generally unable to influence the struggle between the
superpowers due to Security Council veto power throughout the Cold War. However, it
occasionally stood as a gauge for world opinion, and could mediate in stalled conflicts
throughout the Third World. It was also the backdrop for a number of quintessential
moments of the conflict, including the Soviet Korean War walkout, the “We Will Bury
You” speech, and of course, the Cuban Missile Crisis—don’t wait for the translation Mr.
Zorin!
Because UN Intervention prevents event text from triggering, it does not remove starred events from
the game. UN Intervention is therefore best played with unstarred events, or truly awful starred
events. Something like Blockade hurts, but you’re probably better off just triggering it rather than
using UN and reshuffling the card to return at a possibly more troublesome time.
DEFCON suicide cards are naturally the first priority for UN Intervention, especially CIA Created
/ Lone Gunman, which cannot be sent to space. Otherwise, UN Intervention is best with very high
Ops cards (which you could send to space, but would prefer having Ops — Marshall Plan is a good
example) and unspaceable cards (which you can’t send to space). In particular, UN Intervention is a
great way for the USSR to dispose of the nasty US Mid War 1 Op events like OAS Founded.
In the Mid War, UN Intervention has interactions with U2 Incident (not meaningful) and We Will
Bury You (much more meaningful). As US, you should simply make sure you play UN Intervention
(if necessary) before U2 Incident if you have both in your hands, and immediately after We Will
Bury You (if you are so fortunate).
It is tempting to keep holding UN Intervention between Action Rounds to wait for a “bad” card to
play it with (and to deny it to your opponent). This is not a terrible idea, but be mindful that a) you
are limiting the potential Ops in your hand; b) if you draw multiple DEFCON suicide cards, UN
Intervention is not necessarily much help because of its handsize reduction effect.
Early War 87
De-Stalinization
De-Stalinization
1956
During the 20th Party Congress, Nikita Khrushchev openly attacked Stalin’s leadership
of the Soviet Union. It was seen both inside and outside the Soviet Union as the
beginning of a new era. This proved to be a particularly bloody assumption for Nagy’s
Hungary. Khrushchev had no intention of “liberalizing” Soviet domination of Eastern
Europe, even if he was trying to bring an end to the cult of personality that had
characterized internal Soviet government.
I also rarely headline this card, because it is a very risky card to have Defectored. Moreover, you
have to play this at DEFCON 2, so that the US doesn’t just coup out your influence immediately.
If you have Decolonization, then De-Stalinization is an easy choice: all four into the four South
American battlegrounds. If you don’t have Decolonization, I will tend to put a couple into Africa
(perhaps Angola and Algeria), and the other two into South America (one in Venezuela and one
in Argentina or Chile). I don’t usually place it into Central America, because I can coup Panama,
Fidel grants me Cuba, and Mexico is too easily realigned out. More importantly, De-Stalinization
into South America gives me more access than De-Stalinization into Central America.
Remember that The Voice of America is the perfect antidote to De-Stalinization, so be sure to fortify
your position by the Mid War so that VoA cannot just remove all of your influence.
As US
Like Decolonization, this is a hold-until-Turn-3 card. Whether or not the USSR triggers this can
be game-deciding, so spacing it on Turn 3 earns you a massive advantage. By Turn 7, this card is
mostly useless, and can be safely played for Operations. But I would rather give up West Germany
to a Blockade than play this in the Early War.
In many ways, De-Stalinization is like Puppet Governments, with the key difference being that it is
guaranteed to be drawn by Turn 3, when it still matters.
Early War 89
1963 – ?
The first Nuclear Test Ban treaty owes its origins to the de-escalation process that
followed the Cuban Missile Crisis. It prohibited further nuclear tests in the air,
underwater or in space. International pressure for such a ban mounted in the 1950s
as scientific evidence began to document severe environmental damage caused by
earlier atmospheric testing by the nuclear powers. Underground testing remained
an allowable methodology, but all forms of “peaceful nuclear explosions” were also
banned, tightening the non-proliferation regime.
The other corner case is when DEFCON starts off very high for some reason, at which point this is
a 4Ops for 3VPs trade. Still not great, but maybe sometimes those 3VPs can be important.
But both of these are desperation moves. 98% of the time, this is just a powerful 4Ops card whose
event text you skip over. Even in that 2% where the event is meaningful, you probably would have
rather been playing How I Learned to Stop Worrying (in the first case) or Arms Race (in the second
case).
That’s not to say its presence in the game is bad, or that the card needs a better event text. It serves
a niche role, but a crucial one (when it comes up). More generally, not every event can, or should,
be Red Scare/Purge or Grain Sales to Soviets: sometimes you just need to play Ops. A game where
every event was game-changing would probably be too swingy to enjoy.
Early War 91
Formosan Resolution
Formosan Resolution
1955
Reacting to the “loss of China” the United States Congress extended to President
Eisenhower open ended authority to defend Taiwan—technically known as the Republic
of China on Taiwan—with military force. The resolution came at a time when the United
States faced challenges from the People’s Republic in Indochina as well as the Korean
peninsula. Effectively, Taiwan sat under the US nuclear umbrella, and the balance of
power within the Taiwan Straits would now remain a question of strategic importance
to the United States.
Occasionally, in the Mid War, if Taiwan is already taken by the US (i.e., to protect against Korean
War) and the battlegrounds are indeed split 3-3, then Formosan Resolution can give the US
Domination. But I find this somewhat rare — much more likely is that the US ends up cancelling it
by playing the China Card before Asia is scored.
Note that unlike Shuttle Diplomacy, this does not go away after Asia is scored, only after the US
plays the China Card. It also matters for Final Scoring.
As US
Unless I already have Taiwan for some reason, this is not worth the effort. It’s just too many Ops
in the Early War: Taiwan is a costly country and you’d have to give up the 2 Ops from Formosan
Resolution too.
Sometimes this can be helpful in a Mid War deadlock. But even then, the tedious process of playing
Formosan, controlling Taiwan, and then playing Asia Scoring is usually too slow.
That having been said, this is a second reason to take Taiwan, the first being a defense against Korean
War. Usually either of those reasons on their own is not enough to take Taiwan, but together, I will
probably invest the 3 Ops.
Early War 93
Defectors
Defectors
1945 – 1989
Preceding the start of the Cold War, citizens of the Eastern bloc fled or defected to the
West. Defectors came in two primary archetypes. Spies and double agents who had been
discovered or needed to “come in from the cold” would frequently flee to their masters
and allude capture. Examples of this type of defector include KGB Deputy Chief Yuri
Nosenko and KGB London Bureau Chief Oleg Gordievsky. Perhaps more embarassingly,
and certainly more publicly, many talented Soviet artists defected while on tour in the
United States or Europe. While the West also suffered occasional defections, particularly
from westerners involved in espionage, it never reached the same proportion or the same
level of public spectacle.
In other words, I usually don’t particularly care about Defectors. Headlines like Junta, or a Turn 1
Suez Crisis are great, but not the end of the world if they get cancelled.
As USSR, if I draw Defectors on Turn 1 or 2, I will try to hold it until Turn 3 before playing it for
Ops. This keeps it out of the Turn 3 reshuffle and ensures worry-free headlines for most of the game.
This is analogous to the US holding Decolonization/De-Stalinization until Turn 3, though Defectors
is not nearly as important as they are.
A common USSR trick against Defectors is to headline a scoring card for a region that you are being
Dominated in. This is most effective when against a relatively inexperienced US player, and when
you haven’t seen Defectors come out Turns 1 or 2 (meaning it is guaranteed to be in his hand on Turn
3). It is one of the rare ways to discard a scoring card without scoring the region. Of course, you can
also headline an actively-dangerous US card when you expect the US to be headlining Defectors,
but that’s much more risky, whereas the downside risk of headlining the scoring card is much lower.
As US
Most beginning players are too eager to headline Defectors. Not only is it risky on Turn 3, as
described above, but more generally, I prefer to headline more aggressively as the US (e.g., Red
Scare/Purge, Grain Sales to Soviets, The Voice of America). Obviously you don’t always have the
luxury of such powerful events, but in general, cancelling the USSR headline doesn’t seize the
initiative and keeps you on your heels.
That having been said, Defectors is a fine headline. By preventing the headline-AR1 combo, you
negate one of the USSR’s most powerful weapons against you. If I draw it with a powerful headline
I will headline the other card and hold Defectors until next turn.
A quick rules clarification: Defectors, if headlined, will always cancel the USSR headline regardless
of Ops value. The edge case is: if you headline Five Year Plan and draw Defectors, Defectors will
now only cancel the USSR event if the USSR headline triggers “after” the Five Year Plan headline.
In other words, if the USSR headlines a 4Ops card, it wouldn’t be cancelled by the Five Year Plan –
Defectors interaction, but any 3 Ops or lower headline will be.
Finally, and this should go without saying, if the USSR has made it to the stage of the Space Race
where he can see your headline before he chooses his, do not choose Defectors! All you’re doing is
allowing to discard a US or scoring card of his choice.
Early War 95
1934 – 1963
The Cambridge Five (Kim Philby, Guy Burgess, Anthony Blunt, John Cairncross,
and Donald Maclean) were British civil servants who, unbeknownst to the British
government, had become Communists while at university, and recruited as Soviet
agents shortly thereafter. The spy ring was one of the most effective Soviet intelligence
efforts of the Cold War, as all five rose to positions of great responsibility and trust in
the civil service. Maclean, in particular, was privy to a large number of nuclear secrets;
the information regarding the size and readiness of the Western nuclear arsenal played
a key role in Stalin’s decisions to blockade Berlin and to arm the North Koreans for
their invasion of South Korea. The spy ring fell apart when the U.S. VENONA project
exposed Maclean; he and Burgess defected in 1951. Philby was able to elude exposure
until 1963, passing secrets all the while; he too managed to defect. Blunt was unmasked
around the same time, but secretly gave a confession, exposing other agents (including
Cairncross).
Ops: 2
Removed after event: No
As USSR
This is an event that is generally triggered only in the headline phase. It is a somewhat weak headline
for the USSR only because the odds of success are usually low. Nevertheless, the payoff can be huge:
not only can you combo it with an AR1 play to take over a battleground (a sort of USSR NORAD),
you can also use it to gain access in a critical region that you are otherwise locked out of (like a mini
De-Stalinization).
The Cambridge Five is best headlined on a turn that maximizes the odds of the US having a scoring
card in hand: on Turn 3 or Turn 7, you may be able to positively identify a particular scoring card
in the US hand if it hasn’t shown up yet in that reshuffle. Alternatively, it’s also a wise headline if
it’s Turn 6 and few of the scoring cards have yet shown up in the Mid War reshuffle. It should go
without saying that if the reverse is true (if all the scoring cards have come out already), then this
is a null headline.
Note that if the US has multiple scoring cards, the USSR chooses one (and only one) of them to apply
to the Cambridge Five.
As US
Completely harmless, so long as you play it with no scoring cards left in your hand. It is ideally
played at the end of your turn, as the knowledge that you have no more scoring cards can be
advantageous to the USSR, but even if you have to play it earlier in the turn, it’s not really that
bad of an event (because it does not expose the rest of your hand).
Early War 97
Special Relationship
Special Relationship
1946 – ?
The Special Relationship is a phrase used to describe the exceptionally close political,
diplomatic, cultural, economic, military, and historical relations between the United
Kingdom and the United States, following its use in a 1946 speech by British statesman
Winston Churchill. During the Second World War, the development of the atomic
bomb required collaboration and trust between the British, Canadian, and American
governments to a degree perhaps previously unimaginable. Additionally, in 1943,
Britain made the crucial decision to share ULTRA codebreaking results directly with
US intelligence. This relationship blossomed into the BRUSA Agreement, whose terms
guided intelligence sharing throughout the Cold War. Even today, the UK and US
remain the closest of allies, sharing military bases and economic ties throughout the
world.
Depending on whether Special Relationship is NATO-activated, this can be either a minor annoyance
or an irritating source of US VPs.
The best case scenario is when the US doesn’t control the UK. This will happen somewhat naturally
from Suez Crisis; the US usually has too many priorities for its influence than to repair the UK early
on, and so you can often get away with a no-effect Special Relationship.
If the US does control the UK, but NATO is not in effect, then look to its neighbors. If the US
already controls both France and Canada, then you can consider the influence to be moot and safely
disregard the event text. If they don’t control Canada, then try to delay playing Special Relationship
until they do. In the worst case scenario, where you control France, you’ll have to spend at least one
Op of Special Relationship to repair its damage.
Once Special Relationship is NATO-activated, it becomes much more powerful. A competent US
player will never trigger NATO, but you almost certainly will, because its 4 Ops are too much to pass
up. So if you hold both in the same hand, you should play Special Relationship first. (As discussed
in the NATO article, this is also good reason to try to delay Warsaw Pact Formed and Marshall Plan,
so you can punt NATO for no effect.)
If you do hold Special Relationship in a post-NATO world, you can either use the two Ops of Special
Relationship to try to break UK control before triggering the event text, send the card to space
(though there are many good US candidates for the Space Race around this time in the Mid War),
or just bite the bullet and accept that it’ll cost 2VP to use 2 Ops (assuming, of course, that you are
fine with giving the US two influence in a western European country).
As US
If Special Relationship is not NATO-activated, then there is obviously no point to playing it for the
event, since you can (almost) always use its 2 Ops to duplicate its effect (the exception being if you
are under Red Scare/Purge and want to use Special Relationship to break USSR control of France).
If Special Relationship is NATO-activated, then it becomes a somewhat tempting event: the 2VP is
quite nice by itself, and the two US influence is helpful if the USSR controls Italy or France.
You should never, however, play NATO to boost Special Relationship. NATO is one of the crappiest
events in the US arsenal, and it should only ever be triggered by the USSR.
The real benefit of Special Relationship is that the USSR is often forced to play it for you. This is
a good reason, therefore, to control the UK: Suez Crisis will wipe out one or two influence, and
occasionally Socialist Governments might take one out of it as well. I wouldn’t go out of my way to
control the UK, especially if NATO hasn’t been activated, but you should make sure that at least one
influence from Marshall Plan makes its way to the UK. Once NATO has been activated, if Special
Relationship is still in the deck, then I would definitely drop a spare influence into the UK when you
have a chance.
Along the same lines, in the Early War, if you do control the UK but NATO has not been activated,
it’s to your benefit not to immediately control Canada, so that you have a useful place to drop the
influence from Special Relationship. Of course, sometimes you will have to control Canada before
he plays Special Relationship, in which case you’ll have to settle for overcontrolling France.
Early War 99
NORAD
NORAD
1958 – ?
Certainly, however, everyone is in agreement that it’s not a great card for the USSR to draw, because
it’s a bit too good for the USSR to play it for the US. Accordingly, I like to space this card as USSR,
but find that I often can’t spare the Ops. In particular, on Turns 1 and 2, I’ll usually just play it for
Ops because the event is not particularly useful until the Mid War. But if I am able to, I will send
this to space rather than deal with the consequences for the rest of the game.
NORAD has an unusual counter in Socialist Governments, which is an all-around good USSR
headline, but especially useful to defuse NORAD for an Action Round.
When NORAD goes into play, it becomes more important to overprotect your controlled battle-
grounds, especially your 2-stability battlegrounds, if the US has influence in them.
NORAD is most annoying when you drop DEFCON to 2, because the US gets an influence and
then gets to play immediately afterwards. If the US drops DEFCON to 2, then it’s not as much of
a problem to deal with. This suggests that in AR7 play situations, NORAD’s presence sometimes
means that you should be willing to give up the battleground coup.
Finally, I usually save Quagmire and hope to draw Red Scare/Purge with it as the USSR, but with
NORAD active I will trigger Quagmire ASAP. Conversely, if NORAD is not out, I’ll hold Quagmire
until NORAD comes out (or until I draw Red Scare/Purge).
As US
NORAD makes it important to control Canada. The best way to do so is to let the USSR do it for
you: Marshall Plan and Special Relationship can often provide the boost you need in Canada without
having to invest any of your own influence.
The real problem with triggering NORAD is giving up its 3 Ops. On Turns 1 and 2 in particular, I
tend to play NORAD for the Ops and hope it comes back to me early enough in the Mid War. By
Turn 3, I will generally try to spare the Ops rather than punt it until Turn 7 at the earliest.
The best way to make use of this is to have influence in USSR-controlled battlegrounds. 2-stability
battlegrounds in otherwise DEFCON-restricted areas are great targets; the African battlegrounds are
as well, but those are generally less stable and swing back and forth much more than say, Libya. In
addition, the USSR’s Asian battlegrounds, even the 3-stability ones, are excellent places for NORAD
because the 5 Ops of the China Card allow you to flip more stable countries.
NORAD somewhat clashes with the typical US goal of lowering DEFCON to 2 in the headline phase.
In other words, by preventing the AR1 coup, you miss out on NORAD’s compensation for that coup.
It does, however, work nicely with ABM Treaty and SALT Negotiations, both of which can cause
DEFCON to go to 2 multiple times in a turn.
An active NORAD makes Quagmire even more unplayable, not that you wanted to play it on yourself
before anyway.
Early War 101
The average Early War hand should have 17.7 Ops. Subtract headline and hold card, and you
normally expect to play about 13-14 Ops per turn.
Notice that although there are more US Ops than USSR Ops, this usually is a bad thing for the US;
for example, they have no 4 Ops USSR starred events to eliminate from the deck or discard to Red
Scare/Purge + Blockade, and on average USSR events have fewer Ops to deal with their own effects.
Mid War
Mid War 103
Brush War
Brush War
1947– ?
Also characterized as low intensity conflicts, brush wars tended to begin in reaction to
local conditions either within a state or between states. However, due to duration, or
superpower intervention, an essentially local dispute could be elevated to superpower
conflict. Examples include the civil war in Mozambique and the war between Ethiopia
and Somalia.
to use it on Thailand, Pakistan, or Italy: countries that are normally not subject to coups at any point,
and therefore very difficult to flip once controlled. Thailand in particular I find is a frequent Brush
War target: unlike Pakistan or Italy, it is not always necessarily surrounded by similar influence.
Of course, Brush War can (and often does) play a key role in the Mid War regions as well. It just
happens to stand out as one of the few events that can immediately flip a European or Asian 2-
stability battleground, in an otherwise very stable pair of regions. The shifting demands of the game,
of course, will dictate where Brush War ends up being used.
In general, the US benefits a little bit more from Brush War than the USSR: the USSR has coups, while
the US often struggles to get Mil Ops and flip battlegrounds at DEFCON 2. Plus, Italy (a lucrative
Brush War target) is often off-limits to the USSR’s Brush War if NATO has been triggered. (Not that
you would, as US, play NATO to protect Italy from Brush War very often, but it’s a nice benefit if
the USSR played NATO for you.)
Mid War 105
Arms Race
Arms Race
1947 – 1989
The arms race between the Soviet Union and the United States was at play throughout
the Cold War, and many attribute the Soviet Union’s collapse to an inability to sustain
the final arms race instigated by Ronald Reagan. This element of competition between
the nations involved both nuclear and conventional weapons. Frequently, there was an
interplay between the two kinds of forces. During the early Cold War, the United States
(having rapidly demobilized after World War II) had to rely on its nuclear weapons in
a doctrine of “massive retaliation” to counter Soviet preponderance in conventional
weapons. After the Soviets developed nuclear weapons of their own, both powers
reverted to a system of flexible response. Underlying nuclear strategy throughout
this later era was the concept of mutually assured destruction. This reality made the
likelihood of direct superpower conventional warfare unlikely. However, the dynamic
of conventional weapons competition had its own paradigm. There, the West relied
on superior technology to design higher performing weapons to compete against the
massive numbers that could be generated by the Soviets’ command economy.
Ops: 3
Removed after event: No
Note that it doesn’t matter whether your opponent has met his Military Operations requirements:
all that matters is whether you have, and whether you have more than he does. Usually it will be
the USSR that benefits from this event, but a US player with ABM Treaty or something similar can
often benefit as well.
Assuming that you will not be playing this for the 1 VP (absent extraordinary circumstances), Arms
Race thus becomes a rather straightforward choice between 3 Ops or 3 VPs. In this, Arms Race is
quite unlike most of the Ops-for-VPs events in that it is actually worthwhile: 3 VPs are often superior
to 3 Ops, especially late in the Mid War. (Compare to say, U2 Incident.)
But it depends on how you’d use those 3 Ops: flipping a battleground, in and of itself, is only worth
2 VPs, but denying or achieving a Domination bonus adds an additional 2-4VPs, depending on the
region. So for example, if you have no other options, Arms Race is better used for Ops if you are
flipping a 1-stability African battleground and achieving Domination as a result. But if you already
have Domination, 3 VPs are better than those 3 Ops even if you flip the battleground.
Ideally, you want to wait as long as possible in the turn to decide whether you need Arms Race’s 3
Ops, or if you can get by without and get the VPs instead. Of course, it is never so easy in Twilight
Struggle — the longer you wait, the more likely it is that your opponent equals your Mil Ops, at
which point the 3 VPs are no longer available to you.
As a rule of thumb, I tend to play Arms Race for VPs towards the end of the Mid War (even holding
it between turns if necessary), and early in the Mid War I hold it until the end of the turn and look
for an opportunity to trigger it for VPs. In the Late War I will almost certainly take the 3 VPs (and
actively try for it).
As a final note, Arms Race is often pretty high up on the list of “lousiest cards to receive through
Missile Envy”, despite the thematic appropriateness.
Mid War 107
1962
The mere mention of this event elicits fears of the nuclear holocaust that almost was. For
14 days in October 1962, the two superpowers seemed destined to clash directly about
the Soviet emplacement of Medium Range Ballistic Missiles (MRBMs) and Intermediate
Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBMs) in Cuba. To prevent the installation of additional
offensive weapons in Cuba, John F. Kennedy declared a naval quarantine around Cuba.
Tensions reached a near breaking point when a U-2 flight was shot down over Cuba,
and Khrushchev demanded US missiles be removed from Turkey in exchange for Soviet
missiles being removal from Cuba. Ultimately, Khrushchev was compelled to settle for
a US pledge not to invade Cuba, and a private agreement to resolve NATO’s missile
bases in Turkey.
Now, as US, it is not usually a big deal to remove two from Turkey or West Germany: you’ll almost
always have at least two influence in one of those two countries, and removing influence is not a
big deal for either of them.
As USSR, however, this event is very problematic if Fidel hasn’t been triggered. If you don’t have
influence in Cuba, then you can’t remove it, and so you are essentially locked out of coups for the
rest of the turn. This has a number of effects:
• The US is able to play Lone Gunman, which is no longer a DEFCON suicide card;
• The US can play Che without repercussion;
• The US can raise DEFCON (via SALT Negotiations or How I Learned to Stop Worrying) and
then coup away freely;
• The USSR is unable to play DEFCON-raising cards (in particular the USSR is now unable to
trigger SALT Negotiations or ABM Treaty) without allowing the US several easy coups.
• The US will certainly earn at least 2 Mil Ops VPs, and possibly more if they can raise DEFCON;
• The US can spread freely through non-battlegrounds without fear of being couped.
Of course, the USSR can reap some of these benefits as well (it is nice not to have to worry about
Nuclear Subs!), but it is rare for the US to have no influence in either West Germany or Turkey.
Even if the USSR does control Cuba, a Cuban Missile Crisis headline is still pretty annoying, because
losing 2 influence in Cuba makes it quite vulnerable.
Finally, Cuban Missile Crisis is a decent headline if you anticipate that your opponent’s headline
will lower DEFCON and be subsequent to yours. For example, as US, if the USSR headlines Olympic
Games (or Missile Envy, and you hold We Will Bury You), then a Cuban Missile Crisis headline will
win you the game.
A couple of rules pointers:
• The influence removal is not an Action and can be done at any time. (It is unclear whether
you can actually do this in the middle of your opponent’s Action, i.e., after he announces an
intent to coup or realign Cuba, but this is probably an area better suited for sportsmanship
than explicit timing rules.)
• The Cuban Missile Crisis win condition takes precedence over a DEFCON-lowering coup,
so Lone Gunman is no longer a DEFCON suicide card if the USSR is under its effect and
cannot cancel it. (Presumably Lee Harvey Oswald is unable to assassinate Kennedy until he
has successfully resolved the Crisis.)
Mid War 109
• The text of Nuclear Subs (which confusingly reads “Does not affect Cuban Missile Crisis”)
simply means that a US player with Nuclear Subs is not immune from the effects of the Cuban
Missile Crisis.
• Cuban Missile Crisis applies to all coups, including “free” coups (through Junta or Tear Down
This Wall).
Mid War 110
Nuclear Subs
Nuclear Subs
1955
The United States launched the first nuclear powered submarine. It instantly antiquated
decades of antisubmarine warfare that had developed during the Second World War.
Admiral Hyman Rickover was to oversee the development of a new nuclear navy,
and create a third, and seemingly invulnerable arm, in the American nuclear triad.
Ultimately, the Soviets would follow suit.
So Nuclear Subs is not a big problem when you draw it. It’s much more dangerous when the
US headlines it against you, causing your African battlegrounds to tremble in fear. Against such
a headline, there are several possible responses. The best is to overwhelm the US with threats
everywhere else. Coups are still restricted geographically by DEFCON, and because they take up
your entire Action Round, a round spent defending against influence into Europe or Asia is a round
where the Nuclear Subs must stand idly by.
I also like to keep DEFCON high: this can mean either playing SALT Negotiations (double bonus by
imposing a -1 on all coups), or just leaving DEFCON at 3 at the beginning of the turn. This allows
you to respond to the US battleground coups with a coup of your own: rather than allowing them
the last word over and over again, you can choose a country to retaliate in. This can even make
Nuclear Subs a detriment for the US, as their coups no longer drop DEFCON and lock you out of a
response coup.
Depending on the likely target of the US coups, non-battlegrounds become quite lucrative. If you
control the right ones, you can consistently respond to the US coups with realignments. The US will
be hesitant to coup non-battlegrounds during the turn, and even if you can’t set up a realignment
you can often grab enough countries to deny Domination.
Occasionally you can pull off a fancy play with Yuri and Samantha, Latin American Death Squads,
or even Cuban Missile Crisis, though I find such circumstances to be rare.
Finally, there is no better feeling than being able to harmlessly dump CIA Created, ordinarily a
DEFCON suicide card, after the US plays Nuclear Subs. (This is incidentally a good reason to play
Nuclear Subs yourself, say on AR6, so that you can dispose of CIA on AR7).
As US
Given the risky nature of coups, this event is best for taking over a USSR-controlled Africa, or
perhaps getting into South America if you have been locked out entirely. 1-stability countries are
near-guaranteed successes on coups, but 2-stability countries are much more risky.
Beware that couping is an action without flexibility. (An alternative way to put it is that coups
are “expensive” in terms of Action Rounds, compared to direct influence placement.) You can’t
coup a little bit here and place some influence there. By committing yourself to coups, you expose
yourself to ripostes elsewhere on the board. Against a good USSR player, you will often find yourself
agonizing over whether to respond to the USSR (thereby wasting your Nuclear Subs) or to coup
(thereby giving the USSR free rein). A US player too aggressive with her Nuclear Subs will often
simply run out of Action Rounds and cards.
On the other hand, Nuclear Subs is still a fine headline even if you don’t intend to coup on every
Action Round. As is generally true in Twilight Struggle, sometimes the threat is worse than the
execution. The mere possibility of Nuclear Subs coups can compel the USSR into a premature Africa
Scoring or other suboptimal plays.
Mid War 112
Quagmire
Quagmire
1964 – 1975
As USSR
Quagmire has three main uses. The first, and most direct, is that it cancels NORAD. (It doesn’t
actually prevent NORAD, so NORAD can still theoretically be triggered after Quagmire.) If relevant,
this is usually enough of a benefit for me to play it for the event.
The second is to hope that the US rolls really poorly and gets stuck in the Quagmire for an extended
period of time. If they fail their rolls, you get to conduct back-to-back Actions, one of the Holy Grails
of Twilight Struggle. The benefit of consecutive Actions is almost always immense: it can let you flip
a battleground, get into an otherwise inaccessible region, set up a vital realignment, score a region
undeservedly advantageously by temporarily breaking control, or a whole host of other possibilities.
Of course, the odds are against you. If you play Quagmire and they successfully discard and roll,
then nothing has really been accomplished, except you gave up a nice USSR event and probably so
did they.
The real point of this second use is when you can tilt the odds towards you with Red Scare/Purge.
Timed correctly, you can deprive your opponent of many Action Rounds in a row, and as a bonus,
strand them with low Ops cards that they must hold in hand for next round. For example, if you
headline Red Scare/Purge, and then spring Quagmire halfway through the turn, they might have no
3+ Ops events left. In that case, not only can they not discard to Quagmire and be forced to skip a
whole bunch of Actions (allowing you carte blanche to take over the world), those low Ops cards
stay in their hand through next turn as well. (If you are really lucky or sadistic, you can use SALT
Negotiations or the luck of the reshuffle to grab another copy of Red Scare/Purge to do it all over
again next turn …)
The third main use is to time Quagmire so as to force the US to skip a crucial round. For example,
you can play it as an AR7 play, to deny the US their own AR7 play. Or you can headline it, causing
the US to miss their AR1 and allowing you a back-to-back AR1 and AR2. It is especially nice on
Turn 10, because missing out on the Turn 10 AR7 play will usually come as a nasty surprise to the
US.
Accordingly, I usually trigger Quagmire as USSR. The main exception is if the US is under
Containment for some reason, or if NORAD isn’t out and I desperately need the Ops. But I will
often hold it for a turn or two and hope to draw it with Red Scare/Purge, because that combo can
be game-warpingly powerful.
As US
I almost always space Quagmire. Note the crucial difference between Quagmiring yourself and
being Quagmired: when the USSR Quagmires you, you usually just get out on the first discard, and
nothing of value was lost. But when you Quagmire yourself, you guarantee the USSR at least one set
of back-to-back Actions, and possibly more. (Note also that when you Quagmire yourself, the USSR
gets to know in advance when you will be emerging from the Quagmire.) There are simply too many
things a strong USSR can do to you with a set of back-to-back Actions to risk self-Quagmiring, and
cancelling NORAD only adds further fuel to the fire.
There are exceptions however. Sometimes you have too many problematic USSR events in hand and
Mid War 114
the Quagmire discard is the only way to escape. Rare is the hand, though, that genuinely calls for a
self-Quagmire. A better instance is when your last two cards are Lone Gunman and Quagmire and
you can’t hold a card; here, Quagmiring yourself is the only way to avoid DEFCON suicide, because
by skipping your Action Round with nothing to discard, you are “holding” Lone Gunman to next
turn.
Mid War 115
SALT Negotiations
SALT Negotiations
1969, 1972
Initiated during the Johnson Administration, and completed by President Nixon and
Secretary Brezhnev, the first Strategic Arms Limitations Talks (SALT) treaty essentially
sought to limit the number of nuclear platforms, and restrict defensive systems that
threatened the system of mutual deterrence. The success of this treaty led to the
initiation of a second round of negotiations or SALT II. The diplomatic wrangling
over this treaty began under President Nixon, and was completed in 1979 by President
Carter and Secretary Brezhnev. SALT II provided broad limits on new strategic weapons
platforms and banned mobile ICBMs. Owing to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the
treaty was never ratified. President Reagan asserted that the Soviets were not complying
with the terms of SALT II in 1986 and withdrew from the treaty.
1. It raises DEFCON by 2 levels. This is an easy way to get out of a DEFCON suicide situation,
though beware your opponent dropping DEFCON twice in one move (via Duck and Cover
or We Will Bury You). It is also if you desperately need to coup a battleground, even if that
means letting your opponent get in the first coup (and letting him coup Asia).
2. It gives coups a -1 modifier. Occasionally useful against Nuclear Subs, and somewhat eases
the volatility of raising DEFCON.
3. It retrieves a card from the discard. This is obviously the most important part of the event.
Here, SALT tends to favor the US. Obviously both sides are interested in grabbing cards like
ABM Treaty, Brush War, or Red Scare/Purge, but the US also has Grain Sales to Soviets,
Colonial Rear Guards, Ussuri River Skirmish, East European Unrest (if in the Late War), and
The Voice of America. Usually the USSR has OPEC and Decolonization (occasionally De-
Stalinization, if early in the Mid War). (Note that although it is usually used on recurring
events, there’s no reason why you couldn’t use SALT for a starred event that your opponent
discarded.)
4. A second benefit of retrieving this card is that it lets you hold an extra card to next turn.
This can be critical if you need to hold a card and also discard a card from hand (e.g., with
Blockade).
Note that SALT Negotiations is most effective on Turn 6, and least effective on Turn 7. And it is
often a card I hold from turn to turn, waiting for something good to show up. I am hesitant to play
this for Ops, because I don’t like the risk that my opponent will draw it in the Late War, where there
are even events to choose from (e.g., East European Unrest).
SALTing for ABM Treaty deserves its own mention. For starters, it’s ABM Treaty, one of the best
events in the game. In addition, it either gives you two coups in exchange for one of his, or it means
you can also get in a DEFCON 4 coup. Finally, it’s a great trick for the US to pull on AR7: play SALT
for ABM Treaty, watch DEFCON rise to 5, and then headline ABM Treaty to engage in a rare Europe
realign or coup. This is one of the rare Twilight Struggle combos that cannot be stopped by the other
player under any circumstances.
Mid War 117
Bear Trap
Bear Trap
1979 – 1992
In an era of seemingly increasing Soviet hubris, the USSR reverted to old patterns of
power politics by meddling in the affairs of Afghanistan—the battleground country
in the “Great Game” rivalry between imperialist Russia and Victorian Britain. The
Soviets considered Afghanistan part of their natural sphere of influence. However,
when Soviet troops directly intervened in an Afghan power struggle and deposed the
existing president, they greatly miscalculated the reaction of world opinion. Smarting
from defeat in Vietnam by seemingly inferior forces, the Reagan Administration sought
to make Afghanistan into an equal nightmare. Over a ten year period, the United
States provided over $2 billion in assistance to the Islamic resistance or mujahideen
in Afghanistan.
I almost always space Bear Trap. Note the crucial difference between Bear Trapping yourself and
being Bear Trapped: when the US Bear Traps you, you usually just get out on the first discard, and
nothing of value was lost. But when you Bear Trap yourself, you guarantee the US at least one set of
back-to-back Actions, and possibly more. (Note also that when you Bear Trap yourself, the US gets
to know in advance when you will be emerging from the Bear Trap.) There are simply too many
things a strong US can do to you with a set of back-to-back Actions to risk self-Bear-Trapping.
There are exceptions however. Sometimes you have too many problematic US events in hand and
the Bear Trap discard is the only way to escape. This is considerably more common than a US player
needing to self-Quagmire, but still somewhat rare. A better instance is when your last two cards are
CIA Created and Bear Trap and you can’t hold a card; here, Bear Trapping yourself is the only way
to avoid DEFCON suicide, because by skipping your Action Round with nothing to discard, you are
“holding” CIA Created to next turn.
As US
Bear Trap has two main uses.
The first is to hope that the USSR rolls really poorly and gets stuck in the Bear Trap for an extended
period of time. If they fail their rolls, you get to conduct back-to-back Actions, one of the Holy Grails
of Twilight Struggle. The benefit of consecutive Actions is almost always immense: it can let you flip
a battleground, get into an otherwise inaccessible region, set up a vital realignment, score a region
undeservedly advantageously by temporarily breaking control, or a whole host of other possibilities.
Of course, the odds are against you. If you play Bear Trap and they successfully discard and roll,
then nothing has really been accomplished, except you gave up a nice US event and probably so did
they.
The real point of this is when you can tilt the odds towards you with Red Scare/Purge. Timed
correctly, you can deprive your opponent of many Action Rounds in a row, and as a bonus, strand
them with low Ops cards that they must hold in hand for next round. For example, if you headline
Red Scare/Purge, and then spring Quagmire halfway through the turn, they might have no 3+ Ops
events left. In that case, not only can they not discard to Quagmire and be forced to skip a whole
bunch of Actions (allowing you carte blanche to take over the world), those low Ops cards stay
in their hand through next turn as well. (If you are really lucky or sadistic, you can use SALT
Negotiations or the luck of the reshuffle to grab another copy of Red Scare/Purge to do it all over
again next turn …)
The second is to time Bear Trap so as to force the USSR to skip a crucial round. For example, you
can play it as an AR7 play or headline, which causes the USSR to skip their AR1. This is not really
as nice as when the USSR headlines Quagmire on you, though.
In general Bear Trap is worse than Quagmire. It doesn’t cancel NORAD, there are fewer “timing”
opportunities for the US to play it, and there are more US events for the USSR to discard. Accordingly,
I usually hold Bear Trap as US until I draw it with Red Scare/Purge, or some kind of opportunity
presents itself. And if I still don’t have Red Scare/Purge by Turn 6 I will just play it for Ops, so the
USSR at least has a chance of drawing it in the Turn 7 reshuffle. Without Red Scare/Purge, you
would much rather add this to the USSR headache list than play it yourself.
Mid War 119
Summit
Summit
1959, 1961, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1979, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989
Summits between the leadership of the superpowers became major implements of public
diplomacy from the mid to late Cold War. Success was measured in terms of agenda
items secured, treaties signed, and who was tougher on whom. As in an international
boxing match, non-aligned countries watched from the sidelines trying to discern which
power was in the ascendant. Virtually all major arms control agreements were either
initiated or concluded at a summit. In that sense, they were an important tool for sizing
up relative intentions, and ensuring the Cold War did not become hot.
More commonly, because of its very low Ops value, you might headline it if there’s nothing else
worth headlining and you’d rather conserve your Ops. Alternatively, if you are absolutely desperate
for VPs, Summit offers you the grim choice of a chance at 2VPs or nuclear annihilation.
Mid War 121
1964
As the reality of nuclear holocaust became accepted by the public, fatalism about its
inevitability also took hold. The landmark black comedy, Dr. Strangelove, captured this
new mood. However, such attitudes are hardly unique. Similar fatalism about mankind’s
ultimate destiny can be found throughout literature of the time and sparked a whole
sub-genre of science fiction, the post-nuclear-holocaust dime novel filled with atomic
mutants and vague remnants of contemporary civilization. Ironically, the pessimism
that is reflected in these works may have aided the possibility of nuclear war by making
such an act “thinkable.”
Like other DEFCON degraders, it’s also useful as a headline trap, since if your opponent’s headline
degrades DEFCON and is subsequent to yours, you instantly win. (One advantage HILTSW holds
over headlining other DEFCON degraders is that it can’t backfire if your opponent also tries to lower
DEFCON in the headline.)
The Mil Ops is what really sets this card apart: it means you can headline it to prevent battleground
coups, but also earn your Mil Ops VPs at the end of the turn. In addition, it gives the US a little
trick on the last Action Round: use How I Learned to Stop Worrying to set DEFCON to 5, meaning
instead of losing 2 VP to Mil Ops requirements, you can force the USSR to lose up to 3 VP to Mil
Ops.
So, like most Mid War cards, this one tilts slightly to the US, who often needs both DEFCON at 2
and Mil Ops more than the USSR does. But the USSR can get good value out of it as a DEFCON
raiser: if they headline the card, they might be able to raise DEFCON to 4 or 5 and be able to coup
Asia / realign Europe on AR1.
Mid War 123
Junta
Junta
1945– ?
In Spanish, the term Junta means “coming together.” In a Cold War context, it normally
refers to the coming together of right wing military cliques to oust an existing
government and replace it with a military dictatorship. Juntas were so common in
Latin America throughout the period that they became a nearly ritualized affair. More
frequently than not, military juntas enjoyed the tacit blessing of the U.S. government
as they looked to check leftist elements in Central and South America. Notable juntas
include the military dictatorships that ruled Argentina from 1976 to 1983 and Guatemala
from 1954 to 1984.
battleground directly (since your coup odds are much lower, and you can’t coup battlegrounds with
it at DEFCON 2). But it is the only one of the three that is guaranteed to give you influence in a
region. In addition, it does two things at once, so not only does it let you realign, it will also help
you set up a good realign opportunity.
Junta is a more common headline than ABM Treaty / Brush War, mainly because it’s the only one
of the three that can degrade DEFCON. The choice of coup or realign gives Junta the best of both
worlds: stealing the headline coup is a great option, but sometimes realignment is the safer play.
This is especially true for USSR, who can headline it, realign, and then coup on AR1 for Mil Ops and
perhaps also a bigger coup.
After DEFCON drops to 2, Junta is almost exclusively used to set up a critical realign. If you
control Brazil and the US controls Venezuela, you can use Junta to drop 2 influence in Colombia
and immediately start realigning, rather than giving the US an opportunity to coup Colombia to
defend itself. Common realigns include Costa Rica/Colombia realigning Panama, Colombia/Brazil
realigning Venezuela, Venezuela/Uruguay realigning Brazil, Argentina/Peru realigning Chile, and
for the US, realigning Mexico or Cuba with Guatemala or Nicaragua, respectively.
Because it guarantees influence placement, Junta is often a critical card to draw when neither side
has made any inroads into South America. Even if you are forced to waste the second half of the
event, it may be worth it just to get into the region.
Some common rules questions:
Kitchen Debates
Kitchen Debates
1959
During a time of increased tensions following the successful launch of Sputnik, then
Vice President Richard Nixon took a good-will trip to Russia. What followed was
a sometimes playful, sometimes pointed public exchange between Nixon and Nikita
Khrushchev throughout his stay in Moscow. The exchange is known as the Kitchen
Debate, for a particularly sharp exchange in front of a US model home’s display of a GE
electric kitchen. Nixon furthered his domestic political ambitions with a seeming jab at
Khrushchev’s chest, reaffirming his anti-communist credentials at home.
I find Kitchen Debates to be more helpful as a rough barometer of how I’m doing. Start worrying if
the US has more battlegrounds and is ahead on VP.
Note that this card is not⁹ removed from the deck if triggered while the prerequisite is not met.
As US
1 Op is usually not very helpful, and 2VP often is. Unless you have some immediate use for the 1
Op, I prefer the 2VPs and the opportunity to poke my opponent in the chest.
⁹http://boardgamegeek.com/article/6399698#6399698
Mid War 127
Missile Envy
Missile Envy
1984
A term coined by Dr. Helen Caldicott, it reflects the general feminist critique that
the Cold War was driven by male ego with very Freudian undercurrents. When one
examines the terminology of “deep penetration” and “multiple reentry” one wonders if
she had a point. Caldicott went on to found Physicians for Social Responsibility, and
her book became a rallying point within the anti-nuclear movement.
This is the worst case scenario with Missile Envy. For starters, DEFCON suicide is eminently possible
if DEFCON is at 2 — but even when it is at 3 in the headline, you can still lose if your opponent’s
headline degrades DEFCON ahead of Missile Envy. For example, as USSR, you might pull We Will
Bury You when the US headlined Grain Sales to Soviets. Alternatively, as US, you might pull Duck
& Cover or Soviets Shoot Down KAL-007 when the USSR headlined We Will Bury You. (It is also
conceivable, though staggeringly unlikely, that Missile Envy pulls Olympic Games or Summit, both
of which can also degrade DEFCON.)
Aside from DEFCON suicide, it is also possible (though extremely rare) that the event you pull with
Missile Envy is harmful to you. For instance, Nuclear Test Ban might raise DEFCON at a point
when you want to lower it. In general, as long as either We Will Bury You (for USSR) or Duck and
Cover/Soviets Shoot Down KAL-007 (for US) are out of the game, then I don’t worry about the
possibility of losing the game via Missile Envy, especially in the headline, and especially if I’m the
US (since the USSR rarely lowers DEFCON in headline).
2. You are forced to trigger a meaningless event.
The second-worst possible outcome. More commonly happens to the US: US/Japan Defense Pact and
NATO are the best examples. Arms Race is often a wash as well. This rarely happens to the USSR
as its high Ops events are almost always useful.
Even in this situation, I still consider Missile Envy a net plus, since you’ve eliminated a high Ops
card from your opponent’s hand.
3. You trigger a event good for you.
Generally the second-best possible outcome, depending on how good the event is. Most of the really
good events have high Ops, and so the possibilities range from Red Scare/Purge, ABM Treaty, Muslim
Revolution, or Marshall Plan, to Brezhnev Doctrine, Bear Trap, Ussuri River Skirmish, or OPEC. Of
course, maybe you trigger something that is only speculatively helpful, like Flower Power, but in
general, your high Ops events are good to trigger in exchange for 2 Ops.
4. You get to conduct Operations.
I consider this generally the best possible outcome. Not only can you conduct operations in the
headline, but you’ve also eliminated a high Ops event (a potentially powerful opponent’s event)
from your opponent’s hand. Taking Muslim Revolution and turning it into a no-strings-attached 4
Ops US coup is a gamechanger.
[The above analysis, incidentally, illustrates that I usually try to hand over their event or a neutral
event rather than my own event.]
The second half of Missile Envy is usually just as strong: the fact that you force your opponent into
a 2 Ops play on AR1 is very exploitable. For example, as US, when you headline Missile Envy, the
USSR is now forced to either coup with a 2 Ops or let you coup. Not a big deal if he’s couping Zaire,
but a real discomfort if he was counting on a big coup to get into South America. Conversely, the
USSR can headline Missile Envy then make an AR1 play for a battleground knowing that the US
response can only be 2 Ops.
Mid War 129
In general I do not use Missile Envy during the middle of the turn, first because DEFCON is already
2 (furthering the risk of nuclear suicide), and second because the opponent will have already used
high Ops cards, and I’m no longer assured of a 3 or 4 Ops card.
Missile Envy may combo well if you know your opponent’s hand already (i.e., you headlined CIA
Created or Lone Gunman), since you can have an idea of what you will be getting.
Mid War 130
1956
Perhaps the most famous quote of the entire Cold War, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev
uttered this immortal line while addressing Western ambassadors at a reception in
Moscow. With these words Khrushchev announced a period during which he would
probe the West for weakness and opportunity. The Berlin Crisis exemplified this
expansionist policy.
than couping. Perhaps you think the US will drop DEFCON in their headline and a DEFCON victory
is one of the few ways you can win the game.
And of course, sometimes you just want 3 VPs. It’s a ton of VPs, and towards the end of the Mid
War, if you can lower DEFCON, 4 Ops for 3 VPs is a decent trade. Indeed, what usually pushes me
to headline it is the combination of the VPs plus the chance for an instant DEFCON win.
The 3VPs take precedence over any card played by the US, so if you play We Will Bury You on at
-17VP, and the US plays a scoring card worth +10VP on its next AR, We Will Bury You goes first
and ends the game before the US scoring card is tabulated.
Note that you can almost always headline this safely, since it is a 4 Ops event, meaning the only
possible US headline that would take precedence and drop DEFCON is Soviets Shoot Down KAL-
007.
As US
A DEFCON suicide card almost all of the time, and even when it isn’t automatic suicide, 3VP is a
lot to give up. I almost always send this to space. You could theoretically use this as a way to drop
DEFCON in the headline if you have UN Intervention in your hand, but you’d probably prefer to
just use UN Intervention with this for the 4 Ops.
Mid War 132
Brezhnev Doctrine
Brezhnev Doctrine
1968
But its great advantage over Containment is that it allows the USSR to deal with the irritating Mid
War US 1 Op cards: OAS Founded, Panama Canal Returned, Kitchen Debates, and Sadat Expels
Soviets. (Sometimes CIA Created, if you are unlucky.) It makes those events eligible for the Space
Race and alternatively makes it much easier to mitigate their effects. (The latter is also true for Ussuri
River Skirmish.)
Occasionally I will hold this from turn to turn if my hand is not particularly suited for Brezhnev
Doctrine (e.g., many scoring cards or no US events). But I will always headline it sooner or later.
As US
Play it on the last Action Round and be glad you drew it.
Mid War 134
1974
Portugal was the last European power to abandon her major colonial possessions in
Africa. While admitted to NATO, Portugal was ruled by dictatorship under Antonio
Salazar, who felt that colonial possessions would preserve Portugal’s place in the
community of nations. Nevertheless, the repression of nationalist insurgencies brought
criticism both from newly independent nations, as well as Portugal’s NATO allies.
Finally, with a democratic government in place, Portugal renounced its claims. Shortly
thereafter, Portugal’s former colonies of Angola and Mozambique descended into civil
war and became major flash points for East and West on the continent of Africa.
sometimes flip Angola, but most US players will overcontrol 1-stability battlegrounds anyway (so
you can’t just flip it with a 3 Ops). And if you’re under Red Purge, the event’s text suddenly looks
a lot better when the alternative is just 1 Op.
Outside of these situations I rarely play Portuguese Empire Crumbles for the event. It’s the Angola
influence that really matters, and if you needed 2 influence there you could just use the card’s Ops
and keep the event in the deck.
As US
Drawing Portuguese Empire Crumbles is not much of a problem. The 2 Ops can easily be used to
repair Angola, and who really cares about SE African States. If the USSR isn’t in Africa, then I will
consider spacing it, but if that’s the case then you should also be able to use the card’s Ops and
control of Zaire/South Africa/Botswana to realign the Angola influence out.
Mid War 136
1964 – 1994
The racist, minority government of South Africa began to be challenged by the African
National Congress with Soviet and Cuban assistance from bases in Tanzania and
Zambia and other “front-line” states. The era of peaceful resistance formally ended with
the massacres in Sharpeville and Langa. For its part, South Africa sought to destabilize
its neighbors, and undertook an invasion of Namibia, while also supporting UNITA
in Angola and FRELIMO in Mozambique. However, increasing black population, more
powerful black trade unions, and hostility from other western nations eventually placed
South Africa on the defensive. While the Reagan Administration pursued a policy of
“constructive engagement” with the Apartheid government, it remained a controversial
proposition. Ultimately, the collapse of the eastern bloc made P.W. Botha’s release of
Nelson Mandela inevitable.
Practically speaking, South African Unrest serves much the same purposes as Portuguese Empire
Crumbles, though it’s a tiny bit better because its influence goes into more important countries and
is recurring. I will still usually play it for Ops, unless the 2 influence in a neighbor gives me the
chance to flip Angola. Usually 1 in South Africa is not a huge deal, and isn’t going to let you flip a
controlled South Africa. But if the countries are open to Ops, or if I haven’t been able to get into the
region, then South African Unrest is a godsend.
I almost always choose 1 in South Africa and 2 in a neighbor. For one, it’s 50% more influence, and
no longer counterable with the card’s Ops. For two, Angola and Botswana are both lucrative targets,
and 2 influence in Angola can sometimes flip the country. Only if I already control Angola/Botswana
will I consider putting both influence into South Africa.
Despite a possible interpretation of the event’s text otherwise, you cannot use this for 1 in Angola
and 1 in Botswana: it has to be 1 in South Africa plus 2 in Angola or 2 in Botswana.
As US
Much more annoying to deal with than Portuguese Empire Crumbles, since you can’t actually repair
3 influence with 2 Ops. If the USSR chooses 2 in South Africa, then it’s no big deal, but 2 into
Botswana and/or Angola is more annoying, especially if you want to use your Ops before the event
but don’t know which one the USSR will play into.
That having been said, it’s a lot less painful than some other USSR events, so I usually just suck it up
and play it. But if I have nothing more urgent to space, then this is certainly going to space instead
of being (at best) an empty Action Round.
Mid War 138
Allende
Allende
1970 – 1973
A physician, Salvador Allende was popularly elected in Chile to lead that nation’s
first socialist government. Allende moved quickly to socialize copper production—
Chile’s largest export commodity. The mines were largely held by two US companies,
Kennecott and Anaconda. Relations with the US soon turned frosty, and the CIA
supported an attempted coup in 1970. It failed. However, as the West applied harsh
economic sanctions, the Allende regime floundered in its second and third years. In
1973, the military, led by Augusto Pinochet, deposed Allende with a bloody assault on
the presidential palace. Allende took his own life.
If you’re already in South America, then Allende is rarely helpful unless you really need 2 influence
in Chile right now. Better to just let it come back in the Late War.
When taking over South America, I usually take over Chile last, because maybe the US has to play
Allende for me. But as soon as I suspect the scoring card is coming, I take Chile rather than miss out
on Control or Domination because I was too cheap to spend two influence.
Similarly, if I need to establish access to South America via coup, I usually coup Venezuela/Brazil,
because I might eventually gain access to Chile via Allende and Argentina via The Iron Lady.
As US
The easiest way of dealing with Allende is to overcontrol Chile first and then use Allende’s 1 Op to
repair the damage. If the USSR doesn’t have access into South America, then the best way of dealing
with Allende is usually via realignment: take Peru and Argentina, then realign away the two USSR
influence.
The worst situation is when neither of you are in South America: you’ll just have to hold Allende
for a long time. If forced to play it, your best bet is to still try to realign Chile, with 1/6 odds¹⁰ of
knocking the USSR out entirely.
¹⁰http://twilightstrategy.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/ts-realignment-probability-charts.pdf
Mid War 140
Willy Brandt
Willy Brandt
1969
An ardent socialist and opponent of the Nazi party during his youth, Willy Brandt led
the West German Socialist Democratic party to the Chancellorship in 1969. There he im-
plemented the same pragmatic approach to east-west linkages that had characterized his
mayorship of West Berlin. Termed Ostpolitik, under Brandt, West Germany normalized
relations with the Soviet Union, Poland and Czechoslovakia. While not abandoning the
notion of German reunification, he acknowledged the inviolability of existing borders
and went on to normalize relations with East Germany. Ultimately, his government was
brought down by an internal spy scandal.
If France somehow is still empty on Turn 4, Willy Brandt makes a decent headline by “kicking down
the door” to France and giving you access. But you should have already gotten access to France,
either by forcing your way into West Germany/Italy earlier, or Decolonizing into Algeria.
As US
If you really, honestly, have nothing else to space, then you may as well space Willy Brandt. Usually
I’m more than happy to give the USSR a VP and play the 2 Ops, especially since I probably used
Marshall Plan to shore up West Germany a little. If it hasn’t been triggered, then Willy Brandt is
equivalent to a 1 Op if you use the other Op to repair West Germany. But you don’t even really need
to repair West Germany yet if Europe Scoring has come and gone.
Mid War 142
Muslim Revolution
Muslim Revolution
1979
As secular Arab and Muslim states throughout the Middle East displayed corruption,
repression and incompetence, more radical forms of Islam began to come to the fore.
The Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt, sought to topple the secular regime there
and in Syria. This led to further cycles of repression and authoritarian rule within these
countries. A similar cycle took place in Iran under Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi.
A long standing regional ally of the United States, and the West generally, the Shah
was deposed by a popular revolution led by the anti-western Ayatollah Khomeini.
This ushered in the world’s first contemporary theocracy. Iran’s Mullahs would spend
the rest of the 20th Century in efforts to export their revolution to other Shia Muslim
communities.
Muslim Revolution is one of the main reasons US players tend to avoid the Middle East. This is
therefore one of those cards that derives much of its power from the threat rather than its actual
effect. And since it is a 4 Ops card, I am often tempted to use it for Ops instead of the event,
particularly if Middle East Scoring has come and gone.
In general, there are three reasons I will play this for the event:
First, when the US controls the 3-stability battlegrounds (Iraq and Saudi Arabia). They lose more
influence, and also can’t recontrol both in a single turn.
Second, you have enough influence in the country to automatically take it over. For example, if Iran
is already at 4/2, then it goes to 0/2 and becomes yours after Muslim Revolution, instead of going
from 2/0 to 0/0.
Third, if the US has no access to the affected battlegrounds and therefore can’t get back in before
you. If the US has no influence in Tunisia, Sudan, and Israel, then they can’t do anything about
losing Libya/Egypt, and you have a lot of time to control them. This is especially pertinent if it is
knocking the US out of the region entirely — but be mindful of Sadat Expels Soviets / Camp David
Accords!
Of course, make sure that what you’re doing actually affects the scoring of the region. If the region
is tied 3-3, or you are being dominated 4-2, then you’re OK with knocking the US out of two
battlegrounds, letting them take one back, and then taking the other. But if you are losing the Middle
East 5-1, you need to be able to take both battlegrounds before the US does to make it worthwhile.
And if you are dominating the Middle East, then re-evaluate whether you really need the benefit
from Muslim Revolution. (Of course, Shuttle Diplomacy throws a wrench into all of this math.)
As US
A notorious bugbear for American players, and a commonly-spaced event. But the threat that
Muslim Revolution poses is often overrated: provided the three conditions listed above do not apply,
it is usually a null event like Socialist Governments. If you are 2/0 on Libya/Egypt, then you lose 4
influence and have 4 Ops to put them back in. Influence in Israel and Tunisia is a great way to do
this.
Note that Muslim Revolution—crucially—does not affect Israel or Lebanon, two great places for
the US to hide during the Muslim Revolution. This is partially why Lebanon is such an important
country to take in the Early War, since it is the only Middle East country completely immune to bad
events until the Late War.
Mid War 144
ABM Treaty
ABM Treaty
1972
The Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty sought to cement the system of mutually assured
destruction as the lynchpin of strategic balance. The ABM treaty restricted the ability
of the two superpowers to defend themselves from nuclear strike. In theory, this made
a first strike to prevent the introduction of destabilizing defensive systems unnecessary.
Both nations were allowed to defend either their capital or one field of ICBMs with a
missile defense system. The Soviets deployed such a system around Moscow. Ultimately,
the US abandoned its system deployed in Grand Forks, North Dakota.
This is a pretty self-explanatory way to dramatically alter the dynamics of South America or Central
America, and more rarely a way to really, really lock up an African battleground. For the US, they
get a small bonus here with NORAD.
You can also headline this to conduct operations in the headline. Headlining it (or playing it on AR1,
as USSR) gives you the chance to perform the rare Asia coup, possibly flipping Thailand or Pakistan.
Of course, being able to conduct operations in the headline is an all-around useful tactic. The US
can perform the SALT-ABM trick: use SALT Negotiations to reclaim ABM Treaty to your hand at
the end of the turn, pushing DEFCON up two levels. Then as DEFCON rises to 5 next turn, you
headline ABM Treaty and get to conduct operations in Europe in the headline phase: typically a
series of realignments, though occasionally you might see an Italy coup. The USSR can do this too,
but it’s a little bit trickier: first, you’re giving the US a free (albeit -1) battleground coup on AR7;
second, the US might headline Defectors; third, a US 4 Ops headline would trigger before yours. The
US faces none of these problems.
Mid War 146
Cultural Revolution
Cultural Revolution
1966 – 1977
While primarily representative of an internal power struggle within the People’s Repub-
lic of China, the Cultural Revolution had profound international implications. As Mao
Zedong felt increasingly marginalized by moderates within the Chinese Communist
party, he lashed out to restore ideological purity and train the next generation of
revolutionaries. The resulting turmoil of purges, denunciations, and creation of the
Red Guard brought China to the brink of civil war. It also made more pronounced, the
rupture between China and the Soviet Union. However, the anarchy and isolationism
that reigned made rapprochement between the United States and the PRC impossible.
As the Nixon administration took office, the gulf between the two nations appeared
wider than ever.
Of the three China Card events (Nixon Plays the China Card and Ussuri River Skirmish are the
others), this one has the least useful “if you already have the China Card” effect. 1 VP for 3 Ops is
pathetic and almost never worth the trade.
However, claiming the China Card face-up is much more lucrative: having the China Card helps
protect you from DEFCON suicide and makes it much easier to manage your hand. I will therefore
often play this to claim the China Card if I can spare 3 Ops. If I already hold the China Card, I
usually just use Cultural Revolution for the Ops, but occasionally I’ll play the China Card first, and
then take it back with Cultural Revolution.
If for some reason you know that the US is holding Cultural Revolution (say, on Turn 7), it’s nice to
play the China Card, giving it to them face-down, and forcing them into a difficult decision (hold
Cultural Revolution to next turn, space it, or play it and give back the China Card face-up).
As US
By definition, the China Card is worth at least 2 VPs because whoever holds it at the end of the game
gets 1 VP. So there’s no reason to play this and just hand over the China Card, especially face-up. If
you draw this holding the China Card, you should always play the China Card first, then trigger it
for a measly -1 VP. And if you draw it while the USSR holds the China Card, try to play it as soon
as possible, because the only time this card is really annoying is when you have the China Card
face-down.
Mid War 148
Flower Power
Flower Power
1965 – 1970
A term reportedly coined by the poet Allen Ginsberg, “flower power” came to represent
the nonviolence and peace movements of the 1960s. The classical context for the phrase
was the placement of daisies into rifle muzzles, and the anti-war slogan “make love,
not war.” Flower power is also representative of the general ambivalence to the use of
military force that resulted from the American experience in Vietnam.
As US
Like the USSR, you are probably not going to pass up the 4 Ops from this card. Unlike the USSR,
you’re going to have deal with its ill effects later on: chances are, you’ll probably draw at least one
or two “War” cards and be forced to space them or lose 2 VP per. Fairly annoying, and everyone has
forgotten about Flower Power at one point or another and lost 2 VP without realizing it.
Generally I’ll just space the War cards, which isn’t a big deal until you have other cards you want
to space as well (or if you’re Purged). Brush War is of course the main exception.
Usually I don’t end up playing An Evil Empire for the event unless I also have a lot of “War” cards
in hand with An Evil Empire. And it goes without saying that if you draw Flower Power with “War”
cards in hand, you should play all the Wars first.
Note that Arab-Israeli War, if prevented by Camp David Accords, does not count for Flower Power
and is a safe play.
Mid War 150
U-2 Incident
U-2 Incident
1960
Starting in 1955, the United States began running surveillance flights over the Soviet
Union at altitudes beyond Soviet anti-aircraft ranges. However, in May of 1960, a
Soviet Sam II missile struck Francis Gary Powers’ aircraft in Soviet airspace. Plane,
pilot and gear were captured by the USSR. The incident proved a major embarrassment
to the Eisenhower administration, as they initially denied that the US was running
such missions. The successful downing of the U-2 caused a major chill in superpower
relations and was a propaganda coup for the Soviet Union.
Play this for the Ops and don’t think twice about it, unless you’re at -19VPs, in which case space it,
duh.
Pedantical aside
Much more interesting (to me, at least) is whether this card should be “U2 Incident” or “U-2 Incident”.
According to both the 1962 United States Tri-Service military aircraft designation system¹¹ as well as
the U.S. Navy Style Guide¹², military aircraft is always designated with a hyphen (e.g., U-2, F/A-18
Hornet, B-52 Stratofortress). But in Twilight Struggle, both the card and the Player Aid Card List
omit the hyphen. (Oddly enough, the historical notes at the end of the rulebook, as reprinted above,
do include the hyphen.)
Of course, it is possible that the event is actually referring to an incident involving a certain Irish
rock band, and the picture of the plane is just thrown in there to confuse us.
¹¹http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962_United_States_Tri-Service_aircraft_designation_system
¹²http://www.navy.mil/tools/styleguide_print.asp
Mid War 152
OPEC
OPEC
1960
Founded to allow oil producing countries to have more control over the price of oil, and
thereby state revenues, OPEC has grown into an institution that controls two-thirds
of the world’s oil reserves and generates roughly half of the world’s oil exports. The
creation of OPEC was a major blow to the control of the global oil market by the Western
giants like Exxon and British Petroleum. While OPEC does include non-Middle Eastern
countries such as Venezuela, Indonesia and Nigeria, it is heavily dominated by countries
from that region. As a result, OPEC has intervened in the political crises there. Most
famously, OPEC refused oil exports to Western countries supporting Israel in the Yom
Kippur (or October) War. This resulted in a 400% increase in oil prices and required
rationing in the West.
OPEC is a bit like an extra Middle East scoring card, except only for you. It is up to you how many
countries you need in order to trigger OPEC: I have done it for 1 VP, but usually I probably wouldn’t
usually trigger it once it is 2 or fewer VPs. Normally this ends up being around 4-5 VPs; I often hold
onto it to see if I can extract some extra value out of it.
As US
OPEC really is like an extra Middle East scoring card, but unlike a Middle East scoring card, it has
3 Ops and therefore can be spaced. And indeed, I usually do space it, since it is a rare game indeed
where this isn’t scoring 3+ VPs.
Alternatively, you can also use the 3 Ops to try to break control of a USSR country to lower OPEC’s
effect. This is like a Special Relationship null play, but carries the disadvantage that you’re probably
still giving up some VPs.
On Turn 6, this is one of those cards that I make sure to try to hold past the Turn 7 reshuffle before
discarding, since this is particularly bad time to be handing the USSR an extra 4-5 VPs.
Incidentally, any time you see the USSR play into Gulf States, you should be on alert that OPEC is
coming.
Mid War 154
Lone Gunman
Lone Gunman
1963
I usually try to keep this in the deck, especially if I’m not doing well as the USSR. But it does make
for a decent headline, especially if you draw this on Turn 7 or later and there’s no way it would end
up in the US hand anyway.
It’s always lovely when the US is forced to headline this event, especially since you can either use
the 1 Op for influence or realignments, and then coup with a bigger card on AR1, or just coup with
it in the headline to avoid NORAD.
As US
Lone Gunman is in general the most painful DEFCON degrader in the game. You can’t space it, like
with We Will Bury You. You can’t match it up with Containment, which should usually get triggered
in the Early War. It’s worse than its counterpart CIA Created because you’ll always have influence
to target with it, and you can’t play it on AR1.
So unless you headline it, you’ll almost never get a chance to get rid of this DEFCON suicide card.
The general DEFCON article discusses in greater detail how to deal with cards like these, so I will
just make a few particular notes:
One unusual way to escape Lone Gunman, if you can’t hold a card to next turn, is to Quagmire
yourself on the second-to-last turn holding just Lone Gunman. As you can’t discard Lone Gunman,
you just skip your Action Round and get to hold it to next turn. Obviously not ideal, but still
preferable to DEFCON suicide.
I generally hold Lone Gunman turn to turn until I find some way to get rid of it. The alternative is just
to bite the bullet and headline it, but the problem, of course, is that Lone Gunman causes maximum
hurt in the headline phase and can still lose you the game if the USSR headlines a DEFCON degrader.
(Usually the USSR doesn’t, though, since they intend to coup, but NORAD changes this dynamic
somewhat.)
However, if you are forced to lose a card, via Blockade, Aldrich Ames Remix, or Terrorism, holding
Lone Gunman basically loses you the game if you can’t raise DEFCON or play the China Card. So
if you are threatened by any of those and lack the China Card, you are basically forced to headline
Lone Gunman rather than risk the loss.
Finally, never give up just because you realize you are stuck with Lone Gunman! There is always
the chance that the last USSR play will be Ask Not …
Mid War 156
1946 – 1988
The Cold War was instigated in the context of an evolving international system.
As the world relinquished a multi-polar system comprised of polyglot empires, it
replaced it with a bi-polar system dominated by continental nation states. Anti-colonial
movements tended to have strong anti-western sentiments, as the foremost colonial
powers were now in the western camp. However, the drive to independence was not
uniform, nor uniformly successful. Several long rear-guard actions were fought by
the colonial powers that either lengthened their stay or maintained a quasi-colonial
relationship with the newly independent country. British intervention in Malaya (1948),
the French resistance to Algerian independence (1954) and South African intransigence
in Namibia (1966) all serve as examples of this aspect of the post colonial experience.
Almost always worth spacing as the USSR, since it adds 4 influence to low-stability countries and
you only have 2 influence with which to respond. Along with Nuclear Subs, it can flip a USSR-
controlled Africa to capitalism very quickly.
As US
Identical to and yet weaker than Decolonization, Colonial Rear Guards doesn’t usually come out
fast enough to lock up Africa or Southeast Asia. But it’s still a very strong event: it can be used as
a destabilizing headline or AR7 play if the USSR controls Africa and Southeast Asia. If I don’t have
immediate use for it, I tend to hold it or use it for overprotection insurance influence rather than the
2 Ops.
Normally the influence from this will be dumped into Africa, since Southeast Asia should no longer
be very contested. But I usually put at least one into Thailand (to threaten a China Card takeover),
and then perhaps some into Philippines / Malaysia / Indonesia if Southeast Asia will be scored
soon and those countries are still uncontrolled. But the influence usually goes much farther in the
1-stability African battlegrounds.
Mid War 158
1970
Though widely criticized by the right domestically, the Carter administration’s decision
to turn over the Panama Canal to Panama proved immensely popular with Latin
America. The Canal was a vital strategic link for the United States navy both during
the First and Second World Wars. However, by the time of the Korean War, the canal
was no longer large enough to accommodate contemporary warships. With its utility to
the U.S. military greatly diminished, while its propaganda value as a relic of American
imperialism still on the rise, Carter realized that gradual hand-over of the canal was the
best policy alternative.
But if the US isn’t in South America, and especially if you don’t yet have the region locked down,
this is hugely problematic. You could theoretically use the 1 Op to realign the US out of Venezuela,
but your odds of success are only 27.78%. A better use is often to headline Panama Canal Returned,
and then try to coup Venezuela on AR1 (or, if you are concerned about the US dropping DEFCON
in the headline, use the 1 Op of Panama Canal Returned on AR1 to coup Venezuela, but with only
1/2 chance of success).
As US
I normally use this for the event only when I need to establish access to South America, though of
course I will be careful to do so only at DEFCON 2. It can also be useful as an AR7 play to break
USSR control of Venezuela or Panama (preferably both).
Mid War 160
1978
Following a lull in the Middle East peace process caused by the 1976 presidential
elections, President Carter entered office with a burst of new energy on the subject.
Through direct personal appeal, Carter was able to bring ultimate resolution to the Yom
Kippur War and completely change the dynamic of the Middle Eastern question. Israel
and Egypt normalized relations and a framework for Middle East peace was agreed
to. Years later, this would allow for the Oslo accord, and the Jordanian–Israeli Peace
Agreement. Additionally, Carter also secured the complete realignment of Egypt. Once
a Nasser led hotbed of anti-Western feeling, Egypt was to become one of America’s
foremost allies in the region. Sadat would pay dearly for the leadership he showed
during the talks. He was assassinated by Islamic radicals in 1981.
An event on the border between spacing and not spacing: none of the effects by themselves are
particularly harmful, but the combination of all three is a little bit irritating. The influence is often
not worth repairing: Sadat Expels Soviets will likely undo all the work you’ve done in Egypt. But
Camp David Accords gives the US halfway to control, and Sadat takes them the rest of the way.
As US
A nice event, and one I try to trigger. It is especially nice when you have no influence in Egypt, since
then Sadat Expels Soviets will give you Egypt instead of just putting it to 1/0. Cancelling Arab-Israeli
War is a small bonus, and 1 VP is 1 VP.
Mid War 162
Puppet Governments
Puppet Governments
1949 – ?
Not a concept unique to the Cold War, the term “puppet governments” refers to a regime
that holds power due to, and with the support of, either the Soviet Union or the United
States. A derisive term, it is almost always used by the opponents of a state to undermine
the government’s legitimacy. Both the Soviets and the Americans would apply the term
to any closely allied state, but it might be better understood in the context of the Diem
government in South Vietnam or Mariam government of Ethiopia.
never clear whether you should use the Ops before or after the event: if you use it after, then the
US has more targets for the influence. But if you use it before, you’re allowing them “consecutive
actions” by letting the US drop 3 influence into countries like Colombia, Saharan States, or Nicaragua
for realigns on their next action.
So I usually try to space it. It’s fairly low on the priority list behind Grain Sales to Soviets and The
Voice of America, of course, but I would rather the US play this event than I. If I’m unable to space it,
I try to make absolutely sure that there’s no semi-useful country out there for Puppet Governments
(Afghanistan, Colombia) before playing it to coup back the most useful country that the US takes.
As US
This is the equivalent of De-Stalinization, except it gets pretty lame pretty quickly. In fact, I find its
efficacy is often directly correlated with whether Decolonization/De-Stalinization have been played.
If I’m playing this for the event, it’s either because I can place the influence in otherwise-inaccessible
battlegrounds (not Mexico), I have a plan that involves controlling multiple non-battlegrounds (i.e.
a headline threatening AR1 realignment, or denying an Africa Domination), or sometimes both.
If the USSR triggers it and all the obvious spots are taken, some frequently-overlooked countries to
drop influence into include Czechoslovakia, Peru, and Tunisia, all of which offer some less-common
realignment possibilities.
Mid War 164
In 1973, difficult climatic circumstances and dramatic crop failures prompted President
Nixon to allow for massive grain sales to the Soviet Union. While a blow to Russian
pride, the program was nevertheless a step towards normalized relations between the
superpowers. Additionally, it provided an enduring domestic lobby to pressure for
continued thawing in economic relations between the two countries. In 1980, President
Carter suspended the program in retaliation for the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Shipments were resumed a year later under President Reagan. This culminated in a
treaty with the Soviets, with the Soviets promising to buy 9 million tons of US grains
per year.
Being hit by Red Scare/Purge while you have this in hand is crippling. This card (and others like
Voice of America) is a reason why the USSR tries to hang onto the China Card during the Mid War,
so that they can hold multiple cards from turn to turn.
SALT Negotiations is a good way to try to defuse Grain Sales — either you raise DEFCON and
therefore can play it without triggering suicide, or you get to draw an extra card from the deck and
can hold an extra card to next turn.
As US
This the best US event in the game. It is certainly by far the best all-around headline for the US:
it conducts Operations, it cuts the USSR handsize, it can lead to a DEFCON win, it’s recurring, it’s
unplayable by the USSR, and it’s impossible to backfire on you.
I almost always try to headline this, even if I have NORAD in play — the only possible exception is
if I’m headlining Red Scare/Purge and have Bear Trap in hand. In that case I will save Grain Sales
for the next turn headline (but ideally trigger it before Turn 7).
Keep in mind that the handsize reduction for the Soviets is just as painful as the Operations you
get to conduct; accordingly, I almost always take the card and play it rather than return it. (Also
remember that because you’re just playing it like you’re playing any other card, you can do things
like send it to space.) Even taking a neutral 1 Ops is often superior to returning the card because of
the handsize problems.
There are a very few instances, however, where I would return the card:
• Scoring cards, assuming that the USSR is unlikely to improve its position, are a good candidate
to return so that you can actually conduct Operations.
• Extremely strong USSR events like Brezhnev Doctrine or Decolonization, IF you can’t or don’t
want to space it. For example, if I draw We Will Bury You, I typically just keep it and send it
to space, but if I already have a card in my hand I need to space, or if I really need to conduct
Operations, then I will return it to the USSR.
• Harsh US events, like OAS Founded, are sometimes better left as crises for the USSR player
(assuming he can’t space it).
• 1 Op events, if you desperately need 2 Ops for some particular reason. (This is rare.)
Mid War 166
1978
The first non-Italian to be elected Pope since the 16th Century, Pope John Paul II
represented a rejuvenation of Catholic influence upon the world stage. The United
States gave formal diplomatic recognition to the Papacy for the first time in its history.
As a Pope elected from communist Poland, John Paul II presented an enormous
challenge for Poland’s leadership. To criticize the new papacy would only alienate
the public, to embrace it would be antithetical to communist doctrine. Furthermore,
John Paul II was known to be an ardent critic of communism. John Paul’s election
marked a turning point in internal Polish political dynamics that would culminate in
the Solidarity movement. Mikhail Gorbachev remarked that the fall of the iron curtain
would have been impossible without John Paul II.
This isn’t really a problem to deal with influence-wise, since most Soviet Premiers already
overprotect Poland with some mixture of Comecon/Warsaw Pact/opening setup influence.
The real issue is Solidarity, which can prove quite annoying later on. John Paul II won’t control
Poland for the US, but Solidarity (coupled with East European Unrest) can.
Therefore, at best, this event is only a wash for you, and at worst, it creates further problems for you
down the line. This makes John Paul II a very attractive recruit for the Soviet cosmonaut program.
As US
For the reasons listed above, I try to trigger John Paul II so that the USSR has to worry about
Solidarity later. It’s a nice AR7 play, especially if you hold Truman Doctrine, because Poland is not
only adjacent to the USSR but also a key realignment modifier on East Germany when Tear Down
This Wall arrives in the Late War. It gets even better with NORAD in play, because it provides
another good place for NORAD influence.
But I wouldn’t over-invest into Eastern Europe until I’m sure that Warsaw Pact is safely disposed
of. Trigger John Paul II, make the USSR sweat a little bit, but don’t immediately pour in influence
unless you know you can’t be thrown out by the Warsaw Pact.
Mid War 168
1960 – 1989
Throughout the Cold War, both left and rightwing governments supported reactionary
regimes that resorted to disproportionate force when reacting to threats to that govern-
ment. While this was a particular penchant of rightwing governments in Latin America,
leftist governments also proved their deft use of brutality. El Salvador, Guatemala,
and Columbia remain the most harrowing examples of the practice of government
sponsored murder. President Osorio of Guatemala once infamously remarked “If it is
necessary to turn the country into a graveyard in order to pacify it, I will not hesitate
to do so.”
The main limit to its usefulness is that you don’t really need that many non-battleground coups.
Therefore, events that allow more battleground coups by either side (SALT Negotiations, How I
Learned to Stop Worrying, ABM Treaty, Nuclear Subs, etc.) all make LADS more useful, provided
that South America/Central America is yet to be scored.
Mid War 170
OAS Founded
OAS Founded
1948, 1967
Founded with the specific aim of promoting democracy in the western hemisphere, the
OAS has been an occasionally useful body for the promotion of US interests within
the hemisphere. It provided international legitimacy for US actions during both the
Cuban Missile Crisis and the US invasion of Grenada. Trade promotion and economic
development were added to the OAS charter in Buenos Aires in 1967. The revision of
the charter also established the existence of permanent OAS diplomatic venues with the
creation of a General Assembly in Washington, DC.
1. For starters, 1 Op is obviously not enough to offset the 2 influence. It also makes it unspaceable.
2. If neither side is in South America, then it is terrible to just hand it over to the US with such
an event.
3. Even if both sides are already in South America, OAS Founded has so many different targets
for its influence that it is therefore nearly impossible to preemptively defend against (like the
US can with Allende).
4. In particular, all of the 2-stability battlegrounds in the Americas are vulnerable to OAS
Founded. If Brazil is 0/2, then OAS Founded will make it either 2/2 or 2/3, and then a 3 Ops
card is enough to take it over.
Accordingly, unless one side or the other has thoroughly locked up the Americas, I hold onto it until
I can find one of the following ways of discarding it:
• If neither side is in South America, it’s sometimes worth a speculative gamble to headline
OAS Founded, thereby giving you a juicy coup target on AR1. This could backfire horribly,
though, if the US lowers DEFCON in the headline, denying you the coup, or if the US puts
influence into Chile, whereupon you probably have to realign Chile instead (and give the US
the battleground coup).
• Brezhnev Doctrine allows you to space the card or repair its damage with 2 Ops instead of 1.
The latter is usually preferable, but the former can be better if the US isn’t in South America
yet.
• Five Year Plan, in addition to being able to magically discard scoring cards, can also magically
discard OAS Founded if played on AR7 holding only these two cards. It will still trigger the
event, but now you have 3 Ops with which to deal with OAS Founded, rather than just 1.
As US
This is a gigantic pain for the USSR to deal with, and so it’s nice if you can return it to the draw deck
for the USSR to draw. I often find, however, that I can put it to better use either as a normal event (if
neither side is in South America and DEFCON has dropped to 2), or as a particularly painful AR7
play. It is also a nice headline by threatening an advantageous AR1 scoring.
Mid War 172
1972
Realizing that normalization of relations with China was key for US withdrawal from
South Vietnam, Nixon sought a summit between himself and Mao. Nixon dispatched
Henry Kissinger to secret talks with the PRC’s foreign minister Chou En-lai to lay the
groundwork for the visit. Capitalizing on deteriorating Sino-Soviet relations, Nixon
scored perhaps the greatest diplomatic coup of the Cold War. The Shanghai Com-
munique that followed the summit danced around several fundamental disagreements
between the two countries, including Taiwan and Vietnam. However, it was clear that
the Soviet Union could no longer depend upon Chinese support in regional conflicts.
While Nixon expressed his desire to fully normalize relations between the two countries
quickly, Watergate interrupted these plans. It would fall to Jimmy Carter to restore full
diplomatic relations between the two countries.
An annoying China Card event with a choose-your-poison dilemma. The best solution to this
dilemma is to ignore it altogether by sending Nixon to space; if forced to play it, I would usually
rather fork over 2 VPs than the China Card, but of course this may depend on the state of the scoring
track.
As US
A good event. 2 Ops for 2 VPs is a strong trade, particularly towards the end of the Mid War, and the
China Card itself is worth at least 2 VPs (because possession at the end of the game gives +1 VP for
you rather than your opponent). The main drawback is that you only get the China Card facedown,
thus depriving you of an Action Round of Ops, but if you have an AR to spare, it is worth playing.
Mid War 174
1972
Anwar Sadat was an early participant in anti-colonial activities against the British-
sponsored Egyptian monarchy. He became vice president under Nasser, and inherited
a deteriorating relationship with the USSR when he transitioned into the presidency.
The Soviets refused Egyptian demands for increased economic and military aid, and
the Egyptians were trying hard to keep a foot in both camps. In reaction, Sadat expelled
the 5,000 Soviet military advisors and 15,000 air force personnel in Egypt. After the
brokered Mideast peace following 1973 war, Sadat became convinced of the need for
closer relations with Washington.
But you don’t really have any other options — sometime in the Mid War, Sadat almost certainly will
be triggered. So it’s better to plan for him in advance: if the US breaks control of Egypt with Camp
David Accords, I don’t bother reinforcing it if I’m going to be expelled by Sadat soon afterwards.
For the most part Sadat can be effectively neutralized by keeping either Nasser or Muslim Revolution
in the deck.
As US
This is a great event if the USSR controls Egypt, and almost always worth triggering. It is better to
play Camp David Accords first, then Sadat, to keep the Sword of Damocles Sadat hanging over the
USSR’s head.
Mid War 176
Shuttle Diplomacy
Shuttle Diplomacy
1973
and Asia have an even number of battlegrounds, nothing will usually happen if the USSR already
has Domination and a 4-2 advantage in battlegrounds. But if you are tied 3-3 on battlegrounds, then
Shuttle Diplomacy will often give the US Domination (usually the worst case scenario).
In summary, the possible outcomes for Shuttle Diplomacy are:
I’m therefore OK with playing Shuttle Diplomacy for the Ops. It is pretty far down the list in terms
of Space Race priority unless I know for sure that it will affect the next Domination. Usually at least
one of the two regions should only be a 1VP swing.
Generally, you would rather Shuttle Diplomacy get triggered on the Middle East. Not only is the
potential Domination swing smaller, it is also more likely to have no effect on Domination in the
first place.
As US
Like the USSR and Flower Power, it’s hard to find a reason for the US to play Shuttle Diplomacy for
the event. 3 Ops are immediately useful, whereas the event’s benefit is speculative and uncertain
unless you also have the scoring card in hand. It is most effective when the battlegrounds are tied
3-3, but even then, depending on non-battlegrounds, it still may not affect Domination. And even if
it affects Domination this turn, it may no longer by the time either of the scoring cards is played.
Rules clarifications:
• The US gets to choose which battleground to deny the USSR. This is relevant only in the
extraordinarily rare circumstance where the USSR controls Japan.
• The USSR can lose Presence as a result of Shuttle Diplomacy, if they only control one country
(which happens to be a battleground).
• The US cannot gain Control as a result of Shuttle Diplomacy.
Mid War 178
1947
Formed in 1942 under the War Information Office, the VOA initially broadcast war
news into Nazi occupied Europe. In 1947, it altered its mission to begin broadcasting
into the Soviet Union. Voice of America has become one of the best known international
broadcast efforts in the world. It provided a powerful outside link to the state-controlled
media systems of the Eastern Bloc. Together with Radio Free Europe and Radio Free
Asia, Voice of America became a hallmark of US public diplomacy efforts during the
Cold War.
it on AR1 when DEFCON is still at 3. The Voice of America is never safe for the USSR to play and
never mitigatable, not even if boosted with Brezhnev Doctrine.
The event is at its worst when you just made inroads into a region and VOA eliminates you entirely:
for instance, it is a perfect antidote to a Mid War De-Stalinization. It is therefore imperative for you
to try to establish footholds of 5 influence (or one country with 3 influence) whenever and wherever
you fear VOA. Losing 4 influence is tough but at least salvageable; losing access entirely can decide
the game. This means, for instance, that you cannot just rely on 2 Venezuela / 2 Brazil as your sole
foothold in South America, or 1 Angola / 1 Zaire / 1 Nigeria as your sole foothold in Africa.
As US
As indicated above, The Voice of America is best when you can use it to knock the USSR out of a
region entirely. Sometimes such a situation will naturally fall into your lap; other times, you can
manufacture such situations with an eye towards VOA as the knockout blow. A couple of strategic
coups and realignments can reduce the USSR down to what he thinks is a last stand, before VOA
takes him out by the knees.
If you can’t eliminate access, then the next best effect of VOA is in countries where you have
influence and can immediately control or threaten to immediately control. It is a good way to
simultaneously threaten two regions at once and force the USSR to choose between them.
VOA is one of the best AR7 plays. In particular, VOA is at its most devastating on Turn 10 AR7. If I
draw VOA in the Late War, I will do everything possible to make sure that I can hold it until then
for a crippling final blow.
It is somewhat athematic that VOA cannot affect Europe, but I suppose the event is strong enough
without it being a quasi-East European Unrest as well.
Mid War 180
Liberation Theology
Liberation Theology
1969 – ?
An outgrowth of the Second Vatican Council, liberation theology stresses Jesus Christ as
liberator. The theological strain that sustained this outlook originated in Latin America
and flourished there, particularly with the Jesuit order. While never embraced by Pope
John Paul II due to its Marxist undercurrents, liberation theology remains very popular
with individual priests and the laity in the third world. Its emphasis on social justice
and its critique of capitalist excess has, however, been incorporated into broader Church
doctrine.
that often breaks US control of multiple battlegrounds and opens the door for a highly advantageous
Central America Scoring (like Socialist Governments and Europe).
It is often used to get to Mexico, otherwise inaccessible as Fidel gets you Cuba and Panama can be
couped. Beware being realigned out of Mexico, however, especially if you lose Guatemala. You can
also use it to grab a lot of non-battlegrounds to cement your or deny their Domination.
As US
One of the few genuinely unpleasant Mid War USSR events. I usually send this to space, particularly
if the USSR has no access to Central America. Even if they do, it takes 3 Ops to repair the damage, and
so it’s usually just easier to send it to space rather than preemptively fortify the region. In addition,
Central America Scoring is often decided by non-battlegrounds, and Liberation Theology can very
inconveniently take a whole bunch of non-battlegrounds all at once.
One of the main ways to defuse this card is to make sure to play into Mexico. Most US players get
complacent about their southern border, and end up losing it to Liberation Theology before they
had a chance to contest it. Yes, you can realign the USSR out, but I’d rather not have to worry about
it in the first place.
Mid War 182
1969
After years of deteriorating relations and China’s first nuclear test, forces of the People’s
Republic of China and the Soviet Union clashed along their long and porous border.
The Ussuri and Amur Rivers’ possession remained uncertain between the two nations
and were a source of friction. Following a military buildup on both sides of the
border, tensions spilled over into a several sharp skirmishes. While full-blown war was
avoided, the fighting led directly to the People’s Republic of China’s interest in rapidly
normalizing relations with the United States.
There are really two options to this — either you can just fork over the China Card face-up, which is
bad for all sorts of reasons, or you can give the US 4 influence, knowing you can only repair 3. The
latter is better if the US doesn’t have a face-up China Card, i.e., you played the China Card earlier
in the turn.
Regardless of the path you chose, triggering this event basically means the loss of Asia or the China
Card, rendering you very vulnerable to DEFCON suicide. As a result I almost always send it to
space.
As US
The main appeal of Ussuri River Skirmish is that Asia is very difficult to flip. This event coupled with
the China Card is therefore one of the few ways to swing the region in your favor in the Mid War
if it has yet to be scored. 5 Ops is enough to flip any uncontrolled 3-stability country or any non-
overcontrolled 2-stability country. I usually target Thailand first, then Pakistan/North Korea/South
Korea, depending on which I control.
Although Ussuri is a powerful event, it’s also easily parried with a 4 Ops card. Therefore, you want
to time Ussuri so that the USSR either can’t respond to it (late in the turn, when he has used up his
high Ops cards), or must hand over the initiative in order to do so (i.e., headlining Ussuri or playing
it on AR7). It’s even better when you can headline Ussuri River Skirmish on top of an AR7 play
that already de-stabilized Asia, because then the damage is hopefully irreparable in a single Action
Round.
You can also just play Ussuri for the China card, which I often do if I need to hold an extra card this
turn (and would therefore like to play the China Card), take away a safety outlet for the USSR, or if
Asia has already been scored.
Mid War 184
1961 – 1973
The seminal line of perhaps the most powerful inaugural address ever given by a US
president, President Kennedy ushered in an era of American confidence and resolve
during the Cold War. Popular with American youth, Kennedy inspired a renewed
dedication for public service both with ambitious goals for government sponsored
science and youth oriented public service like the Peace Corps. His call for selfless
dedication to the needs of the nation reflected the passion of a restless generation of
young Americans eager to make their mark upon the world.
But before you do so, you should consider whether it’s possible that a) the US knows you have it, or
b) the US is still holding on to Lone Gunman or a bad scoring card. Many experienced US players
sometimes hold onto bad cards in the Mid War in hopes of a USSR Ask Not… that will save them
from Lone Gunman / bad scoring cards.
The best “double agent” trick here is if the US sees you have Ask Not… in your hand (via CIA
Created), assumes you’ll play it, and then you instead make a vicious AR7 play that forces a response
from them using the very card they had hoped to discard.
Regardless, I rarely space this event. I really don’t want the US to draw it in their hand, even in the
Late War. Sooner or later there’ll be a time when you can safely play this on AR7 knowing that there
is not much the US can discard.
As US
An absolute life-saver for the US, and potentially one of the most powerful cards in the game
depending on what you’re discarding. When I draw this, I hold onto it from turn to turn, potentially
even using the China Card to hold more bad cards, so that I can assemble together the worst possible
hand to discard. Generally this means Lone Gunman and bad scoring cards, plus some combination
of unpleasant USSR events like We Will Bury You, Muslim Revolution, and OPEC. (Yes, this means
that I am holding onto President Kennedy’s inaugural speech to get rid of Lee Harvey Oswald. Got a
problem, history?) If there’s anything I can even remotely deal with, I will try to deal with it without
enlisting the services of President Kennedy.
When I do finally discard to Ask Not…, I usually also discard weak low Ops neutral events (goodbye,
Summit), or sometimes even low Ops US events if they aren’t helpful (e.g., Sadat Expels Soviets if
I already control Egypt). Sometimes I’ll hold onto a high Ops starred USSR event that I don’t mind
triggering, or would rather trigger than send back into the deck, but those are rare. U-2 Incident and
Cultural Revolution are perhaps the only ones that comes to mind.
If I don’t have Ask Not…, I try to keep it in my mind. If holding Lone Gunman or a killer scoring
card, I will sometimes hold onto it until AR7 (as described above) and hope for a miracle discard.
If somehow Ask Not… ends up in the discard, remember that it is potentially a great target for SALT
Negotiations and/or Star Wars if necessary.
Finally, keep in mind that Ask Not is potentially a suicide card — not DEFCON suicide, but if you
draw more scoring cards than you have Action Rounds available. And even if it isn’t immediate
suicide, discarding when you don’t need to at the end of a turn can sometimes force you into doing
something that you would not rather do. Exercise caution, therefore, when you are given the option
of discarding with just two cards and one play left.
Mid War 186
1961 – 1973
Initiated by President Kennedy as a counter for growing Cuban influence in Central and
South America, the Alliance for Progress was to help integrate the economies of North
and Latin America. Emphases for the program included land reform, democratic reform
and tax reform. By the late 60’s the United States had become fully embroiled in Vietnam
and South Asia, thus aid for Latin America waned. Furthermore, few Latin American
countries proved willing to undertake the required reforms. As a result, the Organization
of American States disbanded its “permanent” Alliance for Progress Committee in 1973.
It is therefore almost always an autoplay if I draw it early in the Mid War and the US doesn’t have
many battlegrounds. But if they already control more than 2, I’ll just send it to space and hope that
I draw it again later and can space it again. (Remember that like all discards, it is better discarded
on Turn 7 than Turn 6.) If unable to space it, you can just use the Ops to break control of at least one
of the US battlegrounds first.
One of the best uses of this card is as your AR1 coup. Trigger the event after your coup, and oh,
what’s this, I happened to coup away your only Latin American battleground. How unfortunate …
As US
The reverse of the USSR analysis holds: if this can’t score you 3 or more VPs, play it for Ops and
trigger it in the Late War for more. Once it gets to 3+ VPs, I tend to prepare to trigger it lest the USSR
draw it in the Late War.
Mid War 188
1961 – 1969
After years of lagging behind Soviet space exploits, the United States put its full
intellectual and economic weight behind the “race to the moon”. President Kennedy
initiated Project Mercury. Ultimately, the National Aeronautics and Space Administra-
tion would overcome enormous technological hurdles to place a man on the moon. As
Neil Armstrong, the first human to set foot upon the moon’s surface, descended from
the space craft, he uttered the immortal line “one small step for a man, one giant leap
for mankind.” In so doing, he confirmed an American come-back victory in the space
race between the superpowers.
be able to jump ahead to the 3/1 VP space (even more useful than the 2/0 space). In general it is more
effective the later it is played, like Captured Nazi Scientist.
It is best played when you are exactly one space behind your opponent, so that you can reap the
benefit of the slot you are jumping to. Occasionally it is worth it to jump to the peek-at-headline
space when you are two boxes behind your opponent, but ideally you’d space something first, and
then use One Small Step to get the 3/1 VP bonus too.
One Small Step is often also a hidden source of VPs. Among experienced players that try to keep
track of what cards can still award VPs in the Late War, One Small Step is commonly forgotten.
The great danger One Small Step poses (like Captured Nazi Scientist) is that you could leap too far
forward and no longer be able to space cards of 2 Ops or fewer. This is especially a problem for the
USSR, who would love to peek at your headline, but perhaps not if she can no longer send Grain
Sales to Soviets and The Voice of America to space.
Of course, if you are ahead on the space race, then none of this matters and it’s just 2 Ops.
Incidentally I don’t really understand why this isn’t starred. Perhaps if you play it for a second time,
you are going to Mars.
Mid War 190
Che
Che
1955 – 1967
Ernesto “Che” Guevara, commonly known as el Che or simply Che, was an Argen-
tine Marxist revolutionary, physician, author, guerrilla leader, diplomat, and military
theorist. A major figure of the Cuban Revolution, his stylized visage has become
a ubiquitous countercultural symbol of rebellion and global insignia within popular
culture. Guevara remains both a revered and reviled historical figure, polarized in the
collective imagination in a multitude of biographies, memoirs, essays, documentaries,
songs, and films. As a result of his perceived martyrdom, poetic invocations for class
struggle, and desire to create the consciousness of a “new man” driven by moral rather
than material incentives, he has evolved into a quintessential icon of various leftist-
inspired movements.
One of the best (and most underrated) USSR events. Launching two simultaneous coups allows you
to set up countries for realignments, defend against US AR7 moves, or threaten multiple countries
at once. Consecutive Action Rounds are one of the holy grails of Twilight Struggle, and Che comes
close.
The best use of Che comes when you can make two threats and the US can only respond to one.
Most non-battleground countries are valuable for their connection to a battleground, and sometimes
the only response to an attack on a non-battleground is to coup it back. When you identify two such
non-battlegrounds, take advantage of the opportunity to double coup. Now the US must choose one
non-battleground to respond in, and you are free to leverage the other non-battleground against an
adjacent battleground (either by direct influence placement or realignment).
Che gets better as the game goes on and more influence is invested into non-battlegrounds. Most
games tend to have a pattern of low investment into non-battlegrounds (out of fear of being couped
out), followed by rapid investment into non-battlegrounds (where there is no longer enough “time”
/ Action Rounds to coup them all back efficiently). It is in that later stage that Che becomes so
powerful.
The fact that Che earns you Mil Ops (unlike Junta) is just icing on the cake.
As US
If you don’t have any targets (or only one target), it’s a relatively safe play, particularly since you
can coup back whatever Che coups. It’s also safe if your non-battlegrounds are 3-stability (i.e., Costa
Rica). But once you get into the stage of owning many non-battlegrounds, as described above, Che
is too dangerous to play (it is equivalent to 6 Ops for the USSR!) and better off sent to space.
Mid War 192
1941 – 1979
Replacing his deposed father, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi was central to first British
and then American plans for the Middle East. While Pahlavi undertook the mantle
of western reformer, he often chafed under neo-imperialist economic relationships,
particularly where oil was concerned. Nevertheless, Iran’s oil wealth spurred Pahlavi
into the center of global geopolitics and his association with the United States was
vital for both nation’s positions in the region. However, whatever outward elements
of reform Iran projected, Pahlavi also used a brutal internal police force, the SAVAK,
and turned despotic and megalomaniacal in the later years of his reign. This was all the
opening required for Iran’s seething revolutionary elements.
Our Man in Tehran hovers just at the border of send-to-space and suck-it-up. If I can spare the Ops,
I like to send it to space, but I rarely can, and so I often just end up playing it and hoping the US
doesn’t find anything good.
If you’ve already seen the important cards (good scoring cards or good USSR events like Lone
Gunman, We Will Bury You, Decolonization, Muslim Revolution, OPEC, etc.) go to the discard,
then it’s not a big deal. It’s also not a big deal in the rare situation where the US controls no Middle
East country, or only controls a single one (and you can use the Ops to break control of the country).
And although it is slightly less effective on Turn 6 then at other times, that alone is not enough reason
to feel safe about playing it.
As US
A very nice event and one I almost always trigger. It is worst on Turn 6, but even then it is better
than its 2 Ops, especially if you have not yet seen an important card you wish to discard.
Mid War 194
The cumulative table for both Early War and Mid War cards:
The average Mid War hand should have 19.71 Ops. Subtract headline and hold card, and you
normally expect to play about 15-17 Ops per turn.
Late War
Late War 196
1979 – 1981
A violent reaction to traditional US support for the repressive regime of the Shah of
Iran, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, 65 Americans were held for 444 days after Islamic
revolutionaries stormed the US embassy. The newly installed leader of the Iran’s
theocracy, Ayatollah Khomeini, was rabidly anti-American and had urged his followers
to take action against Western influences. President Carter undertook two scrubbed
rescue missions, one of which resulted in a humiliating accident for the US military and
for the Carter Administration. Carter’s failure to secure the release of the hostages prior
to the end of the 1980 campaign season is often credited with his sizable electoral defeat.
Ultimately, Iraq’s invasion of Iran in 1980 made Iran more amenable to ending the crisis.
Through the use of Algerian intermediaries, negotiations were finally successful. In a
final slap to Carter, the hostages were formally relinquished to US custody on January
21, 1981, minutes after Reagan’s inauguration.
As USSR
Clearly this is a quality event if the US still controls Iran, a rarity in the Late War. The Terrorism
effect alone is not worth triggering the event, but is a good bonus on top of flipping Iran to you
(which is at least a 2VP swing in final scoring, possibly more).
It’s important to keep in mind because if you are still attacking Middle East battlegrounds in the
Late War (or late in the Mid War), it’s probably best to go for Egypt and Iraq as opposed to Libya
(Reagan Bombs Libya), Saudi Arabia (AWACS Sales to Saudis), Israel (stability too high), or Iran
(Iranian Hostage Crisis).
One of the advantages of controlling Iran is that the US will be more willing to play this event, thus
allowing you to trigger a double Terrorism to really cripple a US Late War hand.
As US
It’s almost certainly worth it to send this to space if you control Iran. Even if it doesn’t affect
Domination, it definitely is at least 2 VP for Final Scoring, and at least 4 VP if the Middle East
gets scored one more time.
Sometimes even when the USSR controls Iran, you might be tempted to space this. A double
Terrorism discard is quite painful, and turning Iran from 0/2 to 0/4 essentially gives up any hope of
ever taking the country back. But it’s 3 Ops — so if Iran is already overcontrolled, or if you have no
interest in it, then I will risk possible subsequent Terrorism.
Late War 198
1979 – 1990
In many ways presaging the “Reagan revolution” in the United States, Margaret
Thatcher led a rejuvenation of the conservative movement in the United Kingdom.
An ardent anti-communist, Thatcher received the moniker “Iron Lady” from the Soviet
newspaper, “The Red Star.” Thatcher provided the perfect partner for Ronald Reagan,
and together, they renewed the “special relationship” that formed the lynchpin of the
post-war Atlantic Alliance. Thatcher’s finest moment may have been her vigorous
defense of Britain’s colonial outpost in the Falkland Islands. The military junta ruling
Argentina launched an invasion of what they referred to as the Malvinas Islands. In a
sharp, short military action, the UK expelled the Argentinian forces, and restored some
small luster to Britain’s former imperial pretensions. Thatcher reigned through the close
of the Cold War, and is Britain’s longest serving prime minister.
Along with Five Year Plan and Duck and Cover, a great US event for the USSR. The Iron Lady is more
explicitly and unconditionally favorable to the USSR, and a great choice for an AR1 Argentina coup.
Even if you have no intention of attacking Argentina, it’s a good source of initiative by creating
a small threat for the US while you do something else with the 3 Ops. The VP loss is minimal,
the UK influence loss is laughable, and the only real consequence is that you can’t play Socialist
Governments any more. Which is unfortunate (since a Socialist Governments headline + AR1 Europe
Scoring remains one of the best sources of VP for the USSR), but it’s a speculative cost, and at least
you have Pershing II Deployed to substitute in its place.
Rules clarification: you may not trigger The Iron Lady, then play influence adjacent to Argentina if
you did not previously have access to those countries. This is because the influence placement rules
restrict you to placing influence in countries adjacent to your existing influence at the beginning of
the Action Round.
As US
Better known in our gaming group as “Thatcher the Betrayer”, there is very little point to playing
The Iron Lady for the event. The usual caveats about being at +19 or -19 apply, but even in the Late
War, it is very dubious indeed to trade 3 Ops and potential loss of a critical battleground for 1 VP, a
speculative Socialist Governments block, and the elimination of USSR UK influence (usually 0).
If the USSR already controls Argentina, then the Socialist Governments block / 1 VP begins to look
a little more attractive, but on the whole I don’t think I’ve ever seen the US play this for the event.
Late War 200
1986
After the fall of Nasser, a petro-dollar empowered strongman, Muamar Qaddafi, sought
Libya’s day in the sun as leader of the Arab world. To prove his bona-fides Qaddafi be-
came the leading source for state supported terrorism against the west. As Iran provided
a new model for antiwestern resistance, Qaddafi took on an increasingly religious piety
in his defamations of the West. Following earlier show-downs involving the Gulf of
Sidra, the United States took swift retribution for Libya’s apparent involvement in a
West German discotheque bombing that killed an American serviceman. Targeting was
heavily focused on killing Qaddafi, and his personal residences were targeted. While he
escaped death, Qaddafi’s international prestige was much tarnished.
An uninteresting event. Usually it’s 2 Ops vs 1 VP, and usually that means the 2 Ops are more helpful
(especially as you surely have more pressing US events to space). Wargames and Final Scoring should
factor into this generally straightforward decision.
As US
In some cute instances you can put a little more influence into Libya, boosting it to 2/2 and prompting
the USSR to respond to 2/4, pushing this up to 2 VP. But on the whole it’s not a particularly interesting
event: sometimes you’ll want 2 Ops, and sometimes you just want 1 VP (particularly when concerned
about Wargames).
Late War 202
Star Wars
Star Wars
1983 – ?
More properly known as the Strategic Defense Initiative, President Reagan announced
this radical departure from the Cold War doctrine of “mutually assured destruction” in a
live television speech to the American public. The initial concept for the “space shield”
was developed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory by Dr. Peter Hagelstein.
Notionally, it would create a series of space based satellites powered by nuclear reactors
that would create an impenetrable field to block Soviet ICBM’s. While scientifically
sound on paper, the concept was never successfully engineered. Later iterations involved
“smart pebbles” and missile based interceptors. SDI is frequently credited as one of the
factors that convinced Gorbachev that the Soviet Union could not keep up the Cold War.
to the worst possible US event for the USSR because it gives the US the choice of any event in the
discard. Even putting aside the DEFCON suicide cards, the possibilities are too many to list. I have
never seen a discard pile safe enough to play Star Wars as the USSR.
You can try to space something else first, so that the US is not ahead of you in the space race, allowing
you to play Star Wars safely. But if you fail, then you can’t send Star Wars to space, so it’s a big risk
to take.
It goes without saying that if you are ahead on the Space Race, you should play this for Ops as soon
as you can before the US overtakes you.
As US
An astonishingly strong event, adaptable to just about any board situation. If I’m holding it, then I
keep it until I have a particularly strong event in the discard that I want to trigger. Sometimes this
means another event in my hand — being able to play East European Unrest or The Voice of America
twice can be game-ending.
If the prerequisite isn’t met, however, I usually give up on the card quickly. It is rare to overtake an
opponent on the Space Race once they are more than a single box away (One Small Step being the
main exception).
Late War 204
1980
While the first oil discoveries in the North Sea occurred in the 1960’s, it would take
the Iranian oil crisis to make the exploitation of North Sea oil economically viable.
The North Sea contains the majority of Europe’s oil reserves and has become one of
the leading non-OPEC producing regions in the world. Shared between the United
Kingdom, the Netherlands and Norway, the North Sea fields provided a welcome release
from the death grip in which OPEC had hitherto held Western Europe.
The event is a lot less threatening when the US does not have the China Card and you’re able to use
Aldrich Ames Remix and/or Terrorism to cut the US hand size.
As US
North Sea Oil probably makes most sense as a headline, but in a pinch you could play it during the
turn. The point is to give up one of your regular Action Rounds (or headline) and 3 Ops in exchange
for two consecutive Action Rounds at the end of the turn, which can be used for all kinds of nefarious
purposes. The OPEC block is just a nice bonus.
It is naturally most effective on Turn 10. It also tends to be better when you have the China Card or
SALT Negotiations, both of which would allow you to hold an extra card so you don’t have to play
every card in your hand.
In the Late War, I try (if reasonable) to not hold a problematic card and space it earlier in the turn
instead. This allows me to take advantage of a USSR AR7 play of North Sea Oil. (Reminiscent of the
US approach to a possible USSR Containment in the Early War.)
Late War 206
The Reformer
The Reformer
1985 — 1991
As USSR
An outstanding event. The standard effect is very strong (like Ussuri River Skirmish), and the
enhanced effect is irreparable in a single Action Round.
The Reformer can be used either on offense, defense, or both. It defends against the US Late War
incursion into Eastern Europe, and it can place a significant amount of influence into the Western
European battlegrounds. West Germany is probably too difficult to flip because of its stability, but
Italy and France are both vulnerable. Plus, you can dump extra influence into US non-battlegrounds
and break/gain Domination (and in the case of Canada, pause NORAD).
That being said, do not hold this too long waiting for that negative VP score, as otherwise the US
might draw and be able to play Glasnost as a -2VP ABM Treaty.
As US
Send Mr. Gorbachev to space, every time. Improving Glasnost is very bad for you, and adding 4-6
influence with only 3 Ops to counter is problematic as well.
Late War 208
1983
After the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the United States and France dispatched troops to
form a peace keeping force between the opposing sides. Terrorist attacks on the troop
barracks of both nations resulted in terrible losses. 241 US servicemen and 58 French
paratroopers were killed in the attacks. It was the worst single day of casualties suffered
by the US Marine Corps since Iwo Jima. While US suspicions have focused on Iranian
sponsored Hezbollah terrorists, precise responsibility remains unknown.
Generally not much of a problem, since you replace the two influence lost with the two Ops of
the card and give up on Lebanon temporarily. It is only really annoying when Middle East Scoring
is getting ready to be played, and the loss of Lebanon, even for a single Action Round, becomes
meaningful.
Late War 210
1983
Flying from New York City, to Seoul, South Korea, the doomed Korean Airlines Flight
007 strayed into Soviet Airspace due to a navigational error involving the plane’s
autopilot system. While the Soviets contemporaneously claimed that they did not know
that plane was civilian, tape releases after the Cold War indicate that little if any
warning was given to the airliner. The Reagan administration rallied global reaction
against the Soviets—even playing decoded messages before the UN Security Council. 269
passengers and crew were killed during the attack, including one member of Congress.
easily dealt with by first playing some influence into South Korea (and breaking US control) before
triggering the event.
As US
An extremely strong headline, Soviets Shoot Down KAL-007 accomplishes several things at once.
It:
Even if you don’t control South Korea, the 2 VPs and DEFCON degradation makes it a decent
headline in the Late War.
Soviets Shoot Down KAL-007 also makes both Five Year Plan and Missile Envy slightly more
dangerous to play in the Late War at DEFCON 2.
Late War 212
Glasnost
Glasnost
1985 – 1989
The Russian word for openness, Glasnost was introduced as a public policy by Mikhail
Gorbachev. While his long term aim may have been to improve the freedoms of the
Russian people, his more immediate goal was to increase pressure on conservative
apparatchiks to accept his “perestroika” economic reforms. While the US typically
equated Glasnost with freedom of speech, in fact it was an attempt to bring transparency
to the workings of the Politburo.
If The Reformer has been played, then Glasnost becomes a great headline. Playing it in an Action
Round is still a little inconvenient, because you can’t use the event to coup DEFCON back down to
2 in the same Action Round. But the chance to play 4 Operations in the headline and get 2 VP is
definitely worth starting AR1 at DEFCON 4.
As US
If The Reformer hasn’t been played, then this event turns into a quasi-ABM Treaty for the US, albeit
one that costs 2 VP. Whether this is a worthwhile investment depends on the situation, of course,
but if you can use it to flip a battleground it probably pays for itself.
If The Reformer has been played, then you’ll almost certainly send this to space. It’s not a DEFCON
suicide card, but using it as an ABM Treaty doesn’t work any more. You could conceivably use the
4 Ops of the card to repair the damage done by the USSR’s 4 Ops, but you’re still giving up 2 VP
(not to mention raising DEFCON for the USSR’s next AR).
Late War 214
1985 – 1990
A political dissident since age 16, Daniel Ortega Saavedra spent time in a Managua
prison. Upon his release, he fled to Cuba and established relationships which would
be vital for the Sandinista movement. When the Sandinistas ousted the Somoza regime,
Ortega maneuvered himself into the de facto presidency. Ortega’s close ties to the Castro
regime in turn prompted US support for the Contra rebels. Operating out of Northern
Nicaragua and drawing support from agricultural interests that had been collectivized,
the Contras were to prove a major hurdle to the success of Sandinista governance.
Ultimately, economic stagnation would prove the undoing of Ortega’s government.
Ops for it). Maybe you can headline it and coup Cuba to drop DEFCON in the headline or protect
Cuba from realignments. And it’s kind of funny to wipe out a lot of US influence from Nicaragua
if they over-couped it and had it at 6/0 or something. But I haven’t ever seen it played for the event
by the USSR.
As US
Everyone knows about Lone Gunman, but Ortega is the hipster’s DEFCON suicide card. If you have
any influence in Cuba, then Ortega is unplayable at DEFCON 2.
If you don’t have influence in Cuba, then Ortega is not much of a concern. The USSR usually gets
a coup against 3-stability Costa Rica with a 2 Ops card, Nicaragua gets emptied, and I can just play
back into Nicaragua if I really care about it (which I probably don’t).
Late War 216
Terrorism
Terrorism
1949 – ?
Ops: 2
Removed after event: No
A fine little event. At this stage of the game, 2 Ops is not a big deal compared to the possibility of
an instant win (by forcing your opponent to now play a card he had planned to hold to next turn).
It is especially strong if your opponent does not have the China Card.
Of course, you might hit a card you wish your opponent had held onto, but on balance, discarding
cards from your opponent’s hand is a good thing. You could compromise and at least be careful
about playing Terrorism when your opponent could have a scoring card favorable to you.
Terrorism works best when you combine it with other hand-reducers like Five Year Plan, Grain Sales
to Soviets, or Aldrich Ames Remix. Losing two cards is much more painful than losing one, since
you can no longer hold a card even if you have the China Card, and moreover, you might have to
skip your AR7 for lack of cards. Accordingly, as USSR, this is an outstanding event if Iranian Hostage
Crisis has been played, one I almost always trigger.
I tend to play this relatively early in the turn (often on the headline), before my opponent has gone
to the Space Race, thus minimizing the chance that I force my opponent to discard a card he was
going to hold or Space anyway. Terrorism can also be good as your last play if you suspect that the
other side is up to something (especially against the US on Turn 10).
Holding the China Card and playing SALT Negotiations are both decent counters to Terrorism by
restoring your hand size.
Late War 218
Iran-Contra Scandal
Iran-Contra Scandal
1985
realignment rolls, including their rolls on your realignments. So it’s not a speculative event: you
headline it and then go nuts realigning the US in the Mid War regions. Suddenly, now that even
rolls are favorable, it is a lot easier to find good realignment targets. No need to hold onto both
Colombia and Brazil to realign Venezuela any more; just one of the two will suffice.
As US
Play it on your last Action Round, though you can sometimes get away with playing it merely very
late if the USSR doesn’t have time to set up a realignment.
Late War 220
Chernobyl
Chernobyl
1986
The Chernobyl accident was the worst disaster in the history of nuclear power.
Radioactive debris spread in a massive cloud that stretched throughout Western Europe,
and ultimately reached the eastern seaboard of the United States. 200,000 had to be
relocated from badly contaminated regions of Soviet controlled Ukraine and Belarus.
It is estimated that as many as 4,000 people may die from the deadly exposure they
received that day. Chernobyl displayed the kind of staggering incompetence that came
to reflect Soviet bureaucratic decision-making towards the close of the Cold War.
Chernobyl is one reason to overprotect your European assets a bit more. If you only control East
Germany and Poland at 0/3, then it costs the US 14 Ops to take them over and win with Europe
Control (and this is without considering events like East European Unrest or Tear Down This Wall).
But if you have been diligent in using your free eastern Europe influence from US-triggered plays
of Comecon and Warsaw Pact Formed to double- or triple-overprotect East Germany/Poland, then
you are effectively immune to a Chernobyl assault on Europe. (Of course, holding Warsaw Pact is
an even better defense against US intrusion into eastern Europe.)
If the US headlines Chernobyl, the response is similar to the response to Nuclear Subs — you try
to distract them with threats elsewhere, such that the US is never able to take advantage of the
Chernobyl ban.
As US
Chernobyl works best as a headline. Most players tend to headline it immediately and go gung-ho
for Europe, but I think this is in error. The USSR almost always overprotects East Germany/Poland,
meaning you might not have enough Ops to take them over. So unless those battlegrounds are
weakened, or if you have strong Europe events to help you, you’re unlikely to land that knockout
blow (especially considering potential USSR events like The Reformer and Warsaw Pact Formed).
I think Chernobyl is most effective when you line it up with any scoring card. If you can combine it
with Asia Scoring and make use of Chernobyl’s prohibition to swing Domination from one side to
the other, then Chernobyl is effectively a 8+VP swing for 3 Ops plus whatever board position you
lost elsewhere by focusing on Asia. (Assuming, of course, that the USSR lacks events that affect that
region.) This is much more feasible and less costly than trying to go for instant wins in Europe.
Of course, if you do draw Chernobyl with the right events, then by all means use it for the Europe
win. I usually hold it from turn to turn, trying to line it up with either a European opportunity, good
Europe events, or a high-value scoring card. Just be mindful that while you focus on the Chernobyl-
blocked region you don’t lose too much board position elsewhere. This is especially true for Europe
— it’s not uncommon to see people losing while controlling Europe, because they’ve sacrificed so
much of the rest of the world that they lose to autovictory before Europe was scored.
Rules clarifications: the prohibition applies only to “the play of Operations points to place influence”.
Coups, realignments, and events like The Reformer are unaffected.
Late War 222
1982 – 1989
A ripple effect from the rise of Middle Eastern oil, Latin American governments
experienced phenomenal growth from the 1950’s into the 1970’s. However, this came to
an abrupt halt. Unfortunately, even with impressive economic growth, Latin American
countries like Brazil and Ecuador continued to rack up external debt. Given the new
found global capital from petrodollars, Latin American governments found willing
lenders. External debt in Latin America rose 1,000% from 1970 to 1980. When a
global recession sparked by the Iranian oil crisis buffeted world economies, most Latin
American governments simply could not keep up. Eventually, these governments would
have to commit to significant restructuring of their economies to reduce their debt.
A bit of a weird event. It’s not nearly as good as an event that requires the US to discard a card (e.g.,
Aldrich Ames Remix), because the US will only discard to Latin American Debt Crisis if it doesn’t
lead to DEFCON suicide.
LADC tends to get better as more influence is added to countries — for example, it’s clearly a lot
better if Brazil is 6/4 rather than 3/1. But it’s rare to see South American countries with that much
influence from both sides. If they are, then this event can be an easy way to put some pressure on
the US if you don’t have many other options. If they aren’t (i.e., LADC doesn’t pose a threat to the
US position), then don’t bother with the event.
As US
You can usually find a time to play this event where it doesn’t have much effect. (“Oh darn, Chile is
now 0/10 instead of 0/5.”) It’s still annoying even when applied to a USSR-controlled battleground,
since it eliminates any possibility of temporarily breaking control, so it’s worth a trip to space, just
at very low priority.
Of course, you can also use this to voluntarily discard a bad USSR card. Ordinarily you don’t want
to cut your hand size, but if you’ve already spaced something else this turn and don’t want to hold
a card to next turn, this can be a good way to deal with Muslim Revolution, OPEC, etc.
Late War 224
1987
In a speech that hearkened back to Kennedy’s address in front of the Berlin wall, Ronald
Reagan challenged newly installed Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Reagan, with the
Brandenburg gate in the background, declared: “General Secretary Gorbachev, if you
seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek
liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev,
tear down this wall!” While provocative, the speech leveled a difficult criticism at the
Soviet Union. Successful countries do not have to wall their citizens in. Two short years
later, the Berlin Wall would come down.
The two best ways to guard against Tear Down This Wall are Warsaw Pact Formed and East
Germany overprotection. This event is another reason to fight for Poland against John Paul II Elected
Pope and Solidarity, since control of Poland defends against a realignment of East Germany. It is
also why Czechoslovakia is a common dumping ground for free USSR influence from Comecon or
Warsaw Pact.
As US
The defining card of the US Late War Europe onslaught. Tear Down This Wall all but guarantees the
takeover of at least one European battleground and is a key factor behind most US Late War Europe
Control victories.
You almost always want to realign, since only Italy among the battlegrounds has a low enough
stability to consider couping, and even then it’s not coupable at DEFCON 2. The most common
realignment targets are France and East Germany: France you should have significant positive
modifiers on, and East Germany is usually the last USSR battleground in Europe standing between
you and Europe Control.
To maximize Tear Down This Wall’s effectiveness, try to hold it to combine with other European
events like East European Unrest or Chernobyl. In addition, try to prepare your realignment
with better odds—if you plan to realign East Germany, you’ll want to take over Poland and
Czechoslovakia before doing so, lest you just realign away your own influence.
Rules clarification: the “free coup” only signifies that you are permitted to coup in Europe even if
DEFCON is lower than 5. It still degrades DEFCON if you coup a battleground.
Late War 226
1983
First used by President Ronald Reagan before the National Association of Evangelicals,
conservatives applied the term “evil empire” to the Soviet Union. This change in
terminology encapsulated the conservative movement’s rejection of Nixon’s morally
ambiguous policy of detente. The speech sparked controversy within the NATO alliance,
as many European leaders found the speech unnecessarily provocative. Domestically,
the left argued that the United States had no room to criticize Soviet actions during the
Cold War, and pointed to CIA involvement in places like Chile. The speech gave further
indication that the last phase of the Cold War would be a confrontational one.
irritating in the sense that all of the US +1 VP cards tend to show up right as you’re trying to win
by Wargames.
As US
Not a good event, unless you hold a lot of “war” cards and desperately need to cancel Flower Power,
or if that 1 VP matters for Wargames / autovictory / The Reformer.
Late War 228
1985 – 1994
The first known successful penetration of the CIA by the KGB, Aldrich Ames com-
promised hundreds of CIA operations and provided information that resulted in the
execution of 10 US sources. The CIA spent years looking for another explanation for the
leaks—in particular the possibility that the KGB had bugged CIA headquarters. Ames’
motivation was not ideological, and he and his wife enjoyed the extravagance that his
$2.5 million in bribes provided. Ames first walked into the Soviet embassy in 1985. At
that time, he oversaw the analysis of Soviet intelligence operations in Europe.
US event in their hand (ideally a scoring card) and see the US hand for the rest of the turn. All in
all, it makes Aldrich Ames Remix one of the best USSR headlines in the Late War, especially since
it’s almost impossible to backfire or be mitigated.
As US
This is typically painless if you play it in your last action round, and in fact is probably a boon as
you can use it to discard a strong USSR card (or even a bad scoring card), reminiscent of the USSR
Five Year Plan trick. It is not advisable to play Aldrich Ames Remix before your last action round.
Aldrich Ames Original
The original version of Aldrich Ames, included in pre-Deluxe Editions of the game, is a 4 Ops USSR
starred event with the following text:
US player must display his/her hand. USSR player then orders the US player’s cards. US
player must play hand in that order. US player may not play The China Card for the
rest of this turn.
I don’t recommend playing with the original Aldrich Ames, the simplest reason being that it is hugely
time-consuming as the USSR will likely spend quite a while planning out their turn to calculate the
best possible order of the US cards. It also cripples the US decision-making for that turn and is a
generally unpleasant experience (especially if it ends the game).
Late War 230
Pershing II Deployed
Pershing II Deployed
1984 – 1985
The Pershing II missile was designed as a direct counter to the Soviet Intermediate
Range Missile, the SS-20. The deployment of 108 of these missiles in West Germany,
Italy and the United Kingdom proved a major test for NATO’s resolve. Public protests
against the deployments were massive. However, despite the strains, the weapons were
deployed, providing NATO with a bargaining chip in the proposed Intermediate range
Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty discussions. These negotiations had been suspended in 1983,
and the successful deployment of the Pershing II’s provided impetus for restarting the
talks in 1985. Ultimately, the talks would succeed at the Reykjavik summit in Iceland in
1986.
Like a much weaker Socialist Governments, except with a 1 VP bonus and not cancellable by The
Iron Lady. It is worth playing if the VP matters for Wargames or if the influence loss affects scoring.
A decent headline in the Late War.
As US
If your European countries are overcontrolled (and you have nothing to fear from the event), then
it’s often worth losing a VP to have 3 Ops. But if you’re just going to spend your Action Round
repairing the damage done by the event, you may as well send this to space and save the VP.
Late War 232
Wargames
Wargames
1956 – 1995
Love it or hate it, Wargames is the most important Late War card in the game. No card so
dramatically affects the game depending on who draws it. The entire Late War is often dictated
by the struggle for this card, fueling the Cold War paranoia by giving you yet one more thing to
worry about. Does he have Wargames? Does he know I have Wargames? How close can I push
DEFCON this turn? Should I cash in this scoring card now to prevent a Wargames loss, or hold onto
it for an Action Round to get even more VP out of it?
The card is thus a brilliant fusion of theme and gameplay: it balances the allure of the instant
win against the fear of an opponent’s scoring card, set against the looming backdrop of potential
DEFCON suicide for the overeager Wargamer.
Although ostensibly a neutral event, Wargames tilts towards the USSR because Final Scoring usually
favors the US. If the US is able to build a +7 VP lead in the Late War, they are almost certainly going
to win anyway. Where Wargames tends to reverse the result are those boards where the USSR is
clearly destined to lose in Final Scoring despite a -7 VP lead.
This isn’t to say that the US doesn’t use Wargames; it does, but it usually does so later in the Late
War, and it usually doesn’t actually change what the outcome of the game would have been.
There are three main scenarios involving Wargames:
You hold Wargames and have (or are close to) a 7 VP lead:
• Congratulations, you win, provided you can degrade DEFCON to 2 safely. Depending on what
scoring cards remain for your opponent, you need to degrade DEFCON as quickly as possible.
– The USSR can degrade DEFCON in the headline and score Wargames on AR1 before
the US can do anything. This is probably best unless you are worried about DEFCON
suicide, and you don’t think the US can take away your Wargames win on their AR1.
– The US must give the USSR at least one AR before they could trigger Wargames.
Therefore:
* If the USSR is going to score on AR1 and take away your shot at Wargames, you may
as well not degrade DEFCON in the headline, and drop it on your Action Round
instead (with a coup)
* If the USSR isn’t able to take away your Wargames win on AR1, but could
potentially do so given multiple Action Rounds, then you do want to drop DEFCON
to 2 by your AR1. This may call for degrading DEFCON in the headline and risking
DEFCON suicide.
* If the USSR isn’t able to take away your Wargames win, period, then there is no
need to risk DEFCON suicide.
– If you don’t actually have the 7 VP yet, but you’re close, hold onto Wargames no matter
what. Even if you don’t have advantageous scoring cards, your opponent might.
Your opponent holds Wargames and has (or is close to) a 7 VP lead:
• If that’s out of the question, your best bet is now a DEFCON victory as your opponent
is probably trying to drop DEFCON as soon as possible. Hopefully you can catch him in
DEFCON suicide in the headline.
• Alternatively, you can attack their hand with Five Year Plan, Missile Envy, Grain Sales to
Soviets, Quagmire/Bear Trap, Terrorism, or Aldrich Ames Remix.
• You could always try to keep DEFCON above 2, but this is likely impossible since your
opponent can just coup it back down. Cuban Missile Crisis or Yuri and Samantha might help,
but this is a real long-shot.
• Nothing much to do here, then. That player will probably want to hold onto Wargames if they
expect to be able to swing back the score, but otherwise it is just 4 Ops.
Keep in mind that as you approach the Late War, there are things you can do to maximize your
chance of drawing Wargames. Our Man in Tehran can help get rid of it or get rid of cards in the way,
and emptying your hand allows you to draw more cards and hopefully find Wargames. Playing the
China Card or SALT Negotiations becomes a bit weaker since you draw one fewer card as a result.
Note that you are permitted to trigger Wargames without giving up the VPs and ending the game.
If you do so, the event is removed from the game.¹³ This is desirable if:
Finally, Wargames is a jarring event and can turn a beginner player off of the game. With
inexperienced players, I recommend either warning them about it up-front, or simply removing
it from the game altogether. But once you get better at the game, you should start appreciating why
Wargames is included, even if you find its swingness a bit distasteful.
¹³Keep in mind that if you trigger Wargames at DEFCON 3 or higher, you do not remove the event from the game, because its prerequisite was not
met. But you do remove it from the game if you trigger it at DEFCON 2 and choose not to give the VPs.
Late War 235
Solidarity
Solidarity
1980 – ?
Assuming that John Paul II has been elected Pope, then Solidarity falls into the “empty action round”
category of US events; it’s worth sending to space, but you can also just repair its damage (assuming
you’ve overprotected Poland).
The main drawback of repairing rather than spacing is that it makes you more vulnerable to East
European Unrest: if the US only has their John Paul II Elected Pope influence in Poland, then EEU
can’t grant them control no matter how many times they play it.
The main advantage of playing it for Ops is that you might be able to later use Warsaw Pact Formed
to more efficiently purge eastern Europe of all US influence.
Regardless, it is annoying no matter what to draw Solidarity, which is even further reason to send
John Paul II to space if you draw it.
As US
A fine event, suitable for AR7 or headline, especially if you can combo it with Truman Doctrine or
some other Europe-affecting event (Chernobyl, East European Unrest, etc.). It even works well with
Tear Down This Wall by potentially removing a USSR modifier on East Germany realignments.
And as noted earlier, Solidarity is a great way to establish enough influence in Poland so that a
subsequent East European Unrest can grant you control.
I do always try to play John Paul II for the event; even if I don’t draw Solidarity later, or don’t intend
to contest Poland, it’s still nice to leave a strong US event in the deck.
Late War 237
Iran-Iraq War
Iran-Iraq War
1980 – 1988
Commenting on the war, Henry Kissinger famously remarked, “Too bad they can’t both
lose.” Sparked by simmering land disputes over the Shatt al-Arab, Saddam Hussein
sought to establish Iraq as a true regional power, and also check the export of Shia
fundamentalism from Iran. Initially, Iraq scored limited gains, but Iranian forces rallied
and began a counter offensive into Iraq. Without set allies in the conflict, the United
States played a cynical game of attempting to keep both sides sufficiently supplied for
the war to continue. Ultimately, the US began to tilt to Iraq as an Iranian victory in
the war would have been an unacceptable outcome. Iran also utilized oil as a weapon
necessitating the US flagging of Kuwaiti tankers to ensure oil supplies. After 8 years
of war, the border returned to its ante bellum status. However, both nations had been
severely weakened by the conflict.
Towards the end of the game, this area’s countries are usually dominated by the same superpower,
and so the odds of Iran-Iraq War succeeding are rather low. Unlike earlier Wars, it’s not commonly
played for the Mil Ops, since by this point you should be able to find a non-battleground to coup
with the card itself.
The VPs are therefore the only thing about the card that really matters, and you’ll see people trigger
this event when desperate for VPs. There’s no downside risk, and if you already control all the
countries in the area, then it’s upwards of a 50% chance of 2 VPs. (Yes, you may trigger the war even
if you control both countries.)
Iraq is typically a more popular target, because its neighbors (Iran/Saudi Arabia/Jordan/Gulf States)
are usually less filled than Iran (Iraq/Afghanistan/Pakistan), and because it is a higher stability
country.
Late War 239
1982 – 1985
In one of the many bizarre, human moments of the Cold War, Samantha Smith, a ten-
year-old American school girl, wrote the newly appointed General Secretary of the
Soviet Communist Party, Yuri Andropov a letter. Andropov had recently succeeded
Brezhnev, and as one of the architects of Prague Spring, his ascension was taken as
a very inauspicious development for East-West relations. To everyone’s great surprise,
Samantha received a personal reply, including an invitation to the Soviet Union. Despite
concerns expressed by the US State Department, Samantha accepted and traveled to the
Soviet Union. Her trip was heralded as important early thaw in relations and improved
Andropov’s public perception in the West. Tragically, Samantha was killed in a plane
crash in 1985.
A surprisingly good headline for the USSR. Given the value of VPs at this stage, it essentially blocks
the US from all but the most essential coups. This allows you to spread aggressively through the Mid
War non-battlegrounds, safe in the knowledge that the US is unlikely to coup.
Of course, if you are not interested in the Mid War regions, then this card loses a lot of value, since
that was where the US was going to coup anyway. But it is also very powerful if you combine it
with improving DEFCON or use it to counter Nuclear Subs.
As US
Play it on your last Action Round for no effect. You can also play it slightly earlier if you need to
and it won’t be disastrous.
Late War 241
1981 – 1987
The E3 “AWACS” aircraft is one of the most sophisticated early command and surveil-
lance platforms available to the United States Air Force. Imagine Congress’ surprise
when President Ronald Reagan announced plans to sell 5 of them to Saudi Arabia after
they have only recently entered service in the United States. The “Airborne Warning and
Control System” sale was, at that time, the largest military sale ever. While it met with
Congressional resistance, as well as resistance from the Israeli government, ultimately,
the objective was to cement Saudi Arabia as the US new anchor against Tehran. The high
profile political risk associated with this arms sale would draw the two governments
together long after the Cold War was over.
Scoring is not going to be reshuffled into the deck. (Or if I have more important things to send to
Space, which I probably do.)
If the US controls Saudi Arabia already, then I usually play this without a second thought since it
doesn’t affect the scoring of the region. (Though Muslim Revolution might be just what you need
to win back the Middle East.)
As US
There are four possible scenarios:
If Muslim Revolution is still in the deck and the USSR controls Saudi Arabia, this is a very good
event with two positive benefits.
If Muslim Revolution isn’t in the deck and the USSR controls Saudi Arabia, AWACS depends on on
whether you possibly wresting control (which would involve at least 4 Ops after AWACS) is really
worth it to you. Does it affect Domination scoring, or just the battleground’s VP?
If Muslim Revolution is still in the deck but I control Saudi Arabia, this is an OK event since Muslim
Revolution is guaranteed to take out at least 5 influence. But I am probably willing to chance it and
just play AWACS for Ops.
If Muslim Revolution isn’t in the deck and I control Saudi Arabia, then there is definitely no point
to wasting the 3 Ops.
Late War 243
Regions: Europe
Europe Scoring
Some Cold War historians view the entire struggle, costing millions of lives, untold
trillions of dollars, and conflict around the globe, as a struggle for the future of Germany.
While that view may be too myopic, it is clear that Europe always remained in the
forefront of strategy and emphasis. Defeat in Europe ultimately meant defeat in the
Cold War.
opponent starts to make a push for Europe, and you can’t defend your position (because you’re
under Chernobyl or Red Scare/Purge), give some serious thought to giving up Europe Control in
exchange for the rest of the world, and aim to win the game before Europe gets scored.
Early War
Each side typically starts with “their” battlegrounds: East Germany and Poland for the USSR; West
Germany and Italy for the US. The USSR is sometimes able to alter this situation early on: for
instance, a successful Turn 1 Comecon Trap / Italy coup, a successful Blockade, or a well-timed
Socialist Governments can all allow the USSR to score a relatively easy Domination from just East
Germany and Poland.
These considerations aside, Europe Domination tends to depend on two things: who controls France,
and who controls the 2-stability Mediterranean countries. US players are generally hesitant to play
into France before Suez Crisis and De Gaulle Leads France are played, since they can cripple the
US position. At the same time, without De Gaulle, the USSR is unable to play into France without
either spending 2 Ops for 1 influence in West Germany or Italy first, or playing Decolonization into
Algeria.
The 2-stability Mediterranean countries are critical, because the odd number of battlegrounds means
that one side will be able to score Domination unless the other side has more countries overall. All
of the other non-battlegrounds in Europe are significantly more expensive, though the US is slightly
better positioned in this fight (with the aid of Canada, the UK, and Independent Reds).
Mid War
At this point, Europe tends to be the most static region on the board. If Truman Doctrine has
already been triggered, the USSR is sometimes willing to engage in an Ops war for France. Italy
can sometimes be the target of Brush War, but with some preparatory investment in its neighbors,
your opponent will generally look elsewhere with his Brush War. John Paul II Elected Pope will play
a crucial role for the US, but he is primarily a springboard for the US in the Late War, rather than
an agent of immediate change.
Late War
Unless the USSR has already established a dominant position in Europe, it will have a very
difficult time in Europe in the Late War. Although The Reformer can provide some help, it pales
in comparison to Tear Down This Wall, Chernobyl, Solidarity, and East European Unrest. With
Chernobyl, the US will often sacrifice the rest of the board in pursuit of Europe control, but it must
be careful of autovictory and/or Wargames! The one beacon of light for the USSR is Warsaw Pact
Formed, as it can singlehandedly wipe out all of the US work in Eastern Europe. It is therefore critical
for the US to trigger Warsaw Pact as early as possible, removing it from the game, so that it cannot
come back as a much stronger card in the Late War.
Regions 247
Middle East
In 1946, Truman had to threaten to send warships to the Mediterranean to compel the
Soviets to remove troops from Iran. Thus began the Cold War struggle in the Middle
East. Since this region provided Western economies with their lifeblood—oil—it also
provided the USSR with an irresistible opportunity to meddle. US support for Israel
gave the Soviets an opening to the Arab world that they would repeatedly exploit.
1) The USSR Turn 1 headline: if the USSR can headline Suez Crisis (or Arab-Israeli War with a 50/50
shot), it can knock out the US base in Israel and cut off most US access to the western half of the
region.
2) The Iran coup: this almost always goes the way of USSR. With a Suez Turn 1 headline, the US
would be lucky even to get Presence in the Middle East. If the US is knocked out of Iran but can stay
in Israel, the US has a fighting chance to avoid Domination if it can mitigate …
3) Nasser, which really determines the outcome of two Middle East battlegrounds, since Egypt is the
only meaningful Early War path to Libya.
4) Also important are Jordan and Lebanon. Both of them mitigate Arab-Israeli War, and Jordan more
importantly is usually the only US route into Iraq/Saudi Arabia.
What usually ends up happening is that the US is out of Iran but finds a way to get presence in the
west, either with just Lebanon, or by making its way over to Jordan or Libya. Occasionally, the US
can hang onto Iran and possibly score a quick and dirty Domination if they also take Lebanon. The
flip side of that scenario is that the US loses both Iran and Israel, and is forced to coup in just for
Presence.
Either way, the best the US can hope for is usually just escaping the Early War having stopped USSR
domination.
Mid War
Muslim Revolution is the great specter looming over the Middle East in the Mid War. If the US had
been counting on Iraq and Saudi Arabia, that’s seven influence lost and irreparable with a single
play. In addition, if the US had relied on Libya and/or Egypt, there’s a very real possibility the US
can’t get back into either country if it has no adjoining influence in Israel or Tunisia. OPEC just
kicks the US while they’re down, essentially equivalent to a Domination scoring for the USSR only.
Accordingly, the US will be desperate to send either or both off to space.
The sole ray of light for the US is Egypt, where Sadat Expels Soviets and Camp David Accords can
undo the effect of Nasser. Since Sadat in particular is a 1Op card, it’s very difficult for the USSR
to mitigate or discard on the Space Race, and is therefore almost certain to happen at some point
during the Mid War.
Shuttle Diplomacy is generally less helpful than it appears. The reason is that the USSR typically
leads in battlegrounds 4-2, in which case the saved battleground is rather meaningless. Even if the
battlegrounds are split 3-3, Shuttle Diplomacy does not usually give the US domination unless the
US has enough countries overall. It is essentially an uncertain 3VP card at best, and so the US will
usually not play it for the event barring special circumstances. Of course, if the USSR plays Shuttle
Diplomacy (and it usually will, since there are far worse US events to be sending to space), then
there is no reason for the US not to take advantage of it.
Generally, the USSR will keep some combination of Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia (optional). As long as
they can take (or hang onto) one of the western Mideast battlegrounds (often Egypt/Libya, sometimes
Israel), they should score an easy Domination. Control is difficult but not entirely out of reach.
Regions 249
The US goal is to survive. This is much easier if they had already stolen Libya in the Early War: so
long as Sadat comes out before Middle East Scoring, they only need one more battleground to stop
Domination.
Late War
Muslim Revolution and OPEC are likely to strike again, but this time can be prevented with AWACS
Sales to Saudis and North Sea Oil, two mediocre events made somewhat good by their indirect effect
on the Middle East. Nevertheless, the USSR is likely to continue dominating the region, one of their
few bright spots in a world tilting heavily towards the US. Iranian Hostage Crisis, Marine Barracks
Bombing, and maybe Iran-Iraq War add a little fuel to the fire, but generally they only slam the door
shut on the US rather than leading to any cataclysmic change in the region.
Regions 250
Regions: Asia
Asia Scoring
While Europe may have been the object of the Cold War, Asia was the battleground.
From the Chinese Civil War, to the Korean War to Vietnam and Afghanistan, Asia was
the place where the Cold War came closest to growing hot. For this reason, Asia is the
second most significant region for scoring.
The key to Asia lies in the very first Action Round of the game — the Iran coup. If the USSR is able
to rid Iran of US influence before the US has a chance to spread into Afghanistan or Pakistan, then
the only question is whether the USSR is also able to grab Thailand or South Korea and therefore
score domination. But if the USSR is unable to keep the US out of Iran, then the tables are turned,
and it is the USSR that must successfully defend both Thailand and South Korea to prevent the US
from dominating Asia.
In other words, whichever side comes out of Iran by the end is likely going to be able to take Pakistan
and India. The USSR starts with North Korea, and the US has de facto control of Japan. Accordingly,
South Korea and Thailand are the keys to Asia, and are therefore much of the focus of Turn 1. The US
has easier access to these countries, but the USSR will look to make use of the Korean War, Vietnam
Revolts, and Decolonization to even the playing field.
The one wild card in all of this is the Indo-Pakistani War, which can dramatically change western
Asia. Skilled players that suspect an Indo-Pakistani War will make sure to shore up Pakistan’s and
India’s neighbors before committing to Pakistan and India entirely. But you won’t always have the
tempo to do all of this before Asia Scoring, and India in any event can never be entirely safe from
the War.
As the US, it is also possible to deny domination to the USSR by grabbing all the cheap countries and
ending up with a higher overall country count. As there are 15 countries on each side, the US only
needs to grab 7 countries in addition to Australia to guarantee that it cannot be dominated, even if
it loses the battleground war 4-2. This is easily achieved if you take Thailand and its neighbors in
Southeast Asia, and possible (though unlikely) if the USSR took Thailand.
Formosan Revolution can sometimes turn the tide in favor of the US, but it’s only relevant if the two
sides split the battlegrounds 3-3 and Asia Scoring triggers before the US uses the China Card. It is
generally a harmless 2Ops for the USSR and not worth the event for the US.
Mid War
In the Mid War, several important Asian events enter the deck. Southeast Asia Scoring raises the
stakes, and the China Card cards (Nixon Plays the China Card, Ussuri River Skirmish, and Cultural
Revolution) all make their presence felt. Of these, Ussuri is easily the most influential; although it’s
not very important if the US is already dominating, it can quickly turn USSR domination into US
domination when followed up with the China Card.
On the whole, however, the Mid War is mostly a fight for the new regions: Africa and the Americas.
By this point, Asia is frequently already locked down, and you need a gamechanger (Brush War,
Red Scare/Purge, Ussuri River Skirmish, or the China Card) as well as high Ops cards to make any
headway. Nevertheless, Asia is sufficiently high-scoring that it’s probably worth overcontrolling
your key battlegrounds as a prophylactic measure against such gamechangers.
The fact that there is an even number of battlegrounds means that it is very difficult to flip your
opponent’s Domination into your Domination. Therefore, Asia tends to be most contested when
neither side exits the Early War with Domination.
Shuttle Diplomacy is generally less helpful than it appears. The reason is that the USSR typically
Regions 252
leads in battlegrounds 4-2, in which case the saved battleground is rather meaningless. However, if
the battlegrounds are split 3-3, then Shuttle Diplomacy can be a nice one-time domination if the US
has enough countries overall. It is essentially an uncertain 5VP card, depending on the board, how
the USSR responds, and which scoring card triggers first. Although it’s not much of a big deal for
the Middle East, it can be rather more potent in Asia.
Late War
No Late War event explicitly targets Asia. (Soviets Shoot Down KAL-007 gives the US an outstanding
headline if they control South Korea, but doesn’t necessarily help them in Asia.) Although it is
possible for Asia to flip from one side to another, in practice, at this point Asia is just as locked
down as it was through the Mid War. The China Card (and its associated events) continue to ensure
that Asia is never entirely decided until the end of the game, but Asia is generally the least volatile
region in the Late War.
Battlegrounds: Thailand
Experienced players know that the road to Asian domination begins and ends in Thailand. Assuming
that the USSR keeps Pakistan, India, and North Korea (generally safe assumptions in the Early
War), the US needs both South Korea and Thailand to stop Asian domination. (Japan is never really
contested by the USSR.) These countries share the common characteristic of being the only Asian
battlegrounds that both sides will have reasonably easy access to in the Early War.
Unlike South Korea, however, Thailand is much easier to flip, especially with the China Card.
Overcontrol is a must against a player with the China Card, because 5Ops can flip a 2/0 country into
2/4. (For the US, sometimes double overcontrol is needed against China + Vietnam Revolts.) Even
3/0 turns into 3/3 after the China Card.
Thailand is usually taken on Turn 1. There are some complications involving DEFCON, but generally
both sides are keen to get to Thailand as soon as possible. In the Mid War, Thailand’s low stability
combined with Southeast Asia Scoring makes it a frequent target for influence wars (and Brush
War!), and whoever flips Thailand is often able to flip the Asia scoring card to their advantage.
As USSR
The easiest way to get to Thailand is with Decolonization or Vietnam Revolts. With Decolonization,
you must be wary that you don’t just get immediately couped out of Thailand. On the other hand,
if you coup DEFCON to 3, even with Decolonization, you won’t be able to stop the US from taking
Thailand first. If DEFCON is still at 4 on Turn 2, you can headline Decolonization into Malaysia and
then reinforce it so that the US never even has access to Thailand, later securing Thailand at your
leisure.
With Vietnam Revolts, you’re a bit safer, as your +1 to Ops in Southeast Asia means that it’s difficult
to coup you out of Vietnam. When DEFCON drops to 3, you’ll be able to take Thailand first, and in
any event a 6Ops China Card will be difficult for the US to defend against.
Regions 253
De-Stalinization can also place influence into Thailand, but this is strictly a desperation move: De-
Stalinization is in general fairly weak on Turn 1, and especially weak if you are wasting 25-50% of
it in Southeast Asia.
Without these events, your best bet for Thailand is to crawl across Asia (assuming the US doesn’t
expose itself to being couped in Southeast Asia). You are thus very unlikely to gain control of it
on Turn 1. Nevertheless, Vietnam Revolts will eventually come out and guarantee you access to
Thailand; you can fight for it then.
As US
The US is usually able to get to Thailand first, because you need no events in order to get into
Thailand: you can just walk right through Malaysia. Generally, you try to wait until DEFCON
drops to 3 lest you get couped right out of Malaysia. It is equally critical to play into Malaysia
as soon as DEFCON drops to 3, because if you wait a turn, you allow the USSR to play Vietnam
Revolts/Decolonization and then take Thailand while you are still in Malaysia. If you do get Thailand
taken from you, play into Malaysia to ensure access to this critical battleground, and consider using
your AR6 play to break Thailand control so that the USSR is forced to choose between shoring up
Thailand and couping on his next Action Round.
After securing Thailand, it is important to sooner or later take Malaysia and Laos/Cambodia so that
Thailand is not an automatic target for Brush War in the Mid War. And since the USSR starts with
the China Card, you absolutely need to overcontrol Thailand so that the China Card doesn’t just
flip the country. Even if the USSR doesn’t immediately have access to Thailand, he will sooner or
later, and you don’t want to be caught off guard by a Vietnam Revolts headline followed up with
the China Card to steal your Asian Domination.
Affected by:
• Brush War
• Southeast Asia Scoring
• The China Card
• Decolonization / Colonial Rearguards
Regions 254
The regional penchant to turn to strong men or military juntas to resolve questions of
instability made South America ripe for leftist reaction throughout the Cold War. Rising
nationalism and the world-wide wave of anti-imperialist sentiment also characterized
the relationship with the United States and the nations of South America. The Soviets
sought to exploit any openings offered, and established close relations with nations
like Argentina. The greatest potential realignment in the region was squashed by an
allegedly CIA-instigated coup of Chile’s Salvador Allende.
The eventual trend of the continent is to tilt towards the United States. The USSR must rely on
either De-Stalinization, coups, or neutral events in the Mid War, while the US has a plethora of
events (including OAS Founded, one of the most irritating 1 Ops events in the game). Accordingly,
it is important for a USSR that did manage to De-Stalinize into South America to lock up the region
securely, so as to defend against an eventual US onslaught.
South America is also rife with potential for realignments, as it is the only region where every
battleground can be subject to an easy realignment. Common scenarios include Chile/Uruguay
realigning Argentina, Colombia/Brazil realigning Venezuela, Venezuela/Uruguay realigning Brazil,
and Peru/Argentina realigning Chile.
Early War
The USSR has the easier job of getting into South America, but if and only if he draws De-
Stalinization. If he does, then South America control should be easy; otherwise, the USSR’s only
hope is to attack the US with coups and events.
The US has only one Early War option for South America, and that’s the AR7 play into Colombia
(AR6 in this case, since this is the Early War). Personally, I’m not a fan of this move. As USSR, I’m
totally happy to just coup Colombia and give up a battleground coup; usually, in the Early War, the
US is not terribly interested in battleground coups anyway, and certainly not at the cost of letting the
USSR into South America with a strong Colombia coup. On the other hand, if the USSR is already
in South America thanks to De-Stalinization, then the AR7 play into Colombia is still unlikely to
succeed but at least has little downside.
Mid War
Many Mid War events directly or indirectly target South America. The USSR, however, has very few
options, with its only events being:
• Allende
– A good desperation way to get into South America if De-Stalinization has not come out.
• Che
– A nice way of responding to two threats at once, creating two threats at once, or
responding to one and creating your own simultaneously.
The US has:
• Puppet Governments
– If played early enough, this serves as a psuedo-De-Stalinization, perfect if South America
is still empty.
• Panama Canal Returned
– A straightforward way to get into Venezuela, very useful as an AR7 play or to get into
an empty South America
• Nuclear Subs
Regions 256
– Although not as persuasive as in Africa, Nuclear Subs offers the US a rare opportunity
at multiple battleground coups.
• OAS Founded
– A total pain for the USSR to deal with, and a good way to get into an empty South
America (though make sure DEFCON is at 2, lest you get couped out immediately).
• Alliance for Progress
– The “US OPEC”. Usually, however, it’s not worth very much when it first comes out;
better to let it stew and collect more points in the Late War.
• The Voice of America
– Extremely effective at eliminating the USSR from subregions of South America, espe-
cially as Venezuela and Brazil are both 2-stability countries.
• Brush War
• Junta
• ABM Treaty
– The Holy Trinity of Mid War neutral events, with each serving its own purpose: Brush
War attacks isolated battlegrounds, without regard for overcontrol; Junta is a flexible
card that allows you to either get access to a region, create realignment opportunities,
or coup in the headline phase; and ABM Treaty is … well, it’s a 4Ops battleground coup!
What more could you ask?
• Latin American Death Squads
– This is usually a non-factor, since it’s mainly useful on non-battlegrounds, and South
America does not feature many non-battleground coups.
If the USSR did not draw De-Stalinization, and did not draw the neutral events to contest South
America, then coups are their only real chance to contest the continent, and absent extraordinary
luck they are probably going to break even at best on the region.
In the Mid War, the region can change hands surprisingly quickly. Realignments are a key aspect to
controlling South America: a US player that controls Colombia/Venezuela/Brazil/Uruguay, with no
Soviet influence in any of those four countries, will be very difficult to knock out.
In general, Venezuela tends to be the most contested country, for two reasons: it scores on OPEC,
and Colombia is somewhat difficult to hold onto long enough to realign Venezuela.
South America is a region where consecutive plays are critical: taking over a battleground often
involves two steps, and so it’s a one of the most tense regions on the board, as you and your opponent
jockey in attempts to set up a critical realign. This is why Junta and Che are such strong events: Junta
lets you prepare for and realign in a single Action Round, and Che allows the USSR to do two things
at once, be it respond to a threat or create one of their own.
Late War
Regions 257
In the Late War, the USSR gets a little help in the way of events, and the US must rely on their
continued Mid War events:
Regions: Africa
Africa Scoring
African history throughout the Cold War reflects the promise and tragedy that go hand
in hand with that continent’s experience. At first buoyed by the political success of rapid
decolonization, the jubilation would devolve into cynicism. One after another, newly
independent governments would give way to “presidents for life”, political corruption,
economic chaos, and ethnic violence. Lacking resources, African governments quickly
took advantage of the superpower rivalry to maximize economic and military support
for their regimes. In the post-colonial era, a variety of proxy civil wars were fought on
the continent. Angola, Mozambique, Chad and Ethiopia were but a few of the nations
that experienced violence, theoretically in the name of the global struggle between
communism and capitalism.
The key theme of Africa is its low stability. It has all three of the map’s 1-stability battlegrounds,
meaning they are quite susceptible to being couped or even direct influence placement—it only takes
a 3 Ops to flip control of a 1-stability battleground. Overcontrol is therefore highly recommended
in Nigeria / Zaire / Angola.
Given the lopsided scoring potential and low stabilities, it should be no surprise that Africa tends to
be one of the “hottest” regions on the board. As Jason Matthews noted¹⁴, this accurately echoes the
historical Cold War reality:
Africa has a disproportionate number of battlegrounds, but that was reflective of a stark
reality—there was no other continent where the Superpowers played so frequently or
so freely as Africa. You can make a case for Asia, but there the powers needed to play
carefully. In Africa, it was a no-holds-barred game.
Africa’s battlegrounds are conceptually divided into three regions: Algeria, Nigeria, and Zaire/An-
gola/South Africa. They are separated by volatile, easily-couped non-battlegrounds. The most
important non-battleground is Botswana: it plays a central role in potential realignments against
Angola and South Africa. A player trying to break into this subregion must account for the ample
realignment opportunities down there, since it is very easy to get realigned out and have no way
back in.
Morocco presents another interesting non-battleground, as it is the only non-battleground that offers
meaningful stability. If you are desperate to score Domination and cannot afford to spend time
couping back and forth, then Morocco may be the non-battleground you need.
Early War
The US starts in South Africa and should, before the end of the Early War, move out into Angola
and then Zaire. This is because if the USSR successfully takes Angola first, then it will also nab
Zaire while trapping the US in South Africa, leaving it vulnerable to a realignment from Angola and
Botswana. If the Soviets get into France, the US should look to claim Algeria first if it has influence
in France: Algeria is a costly 2 Ops, but it is one of the most difficult battlegrounds to flip in Africa.
The USSR’s primary entry point into Africa is Decolonization. Algeria can be infiltrated through
Soviet presence in France, and of course if the US does take Angola/Zaire, the USSR can coup into
those countries.
Mid War
Many Mid War events directly or indirectly target Africa. The USSR has:
– A nice recurring event that can get you into a subregion if you are locked out. The 1
influence in South Africa and 2 in a neighbor is usually the better choice, since it can
flip Angola if it is not overcontrolled or take Botswana.
• Decolonization
– The Early War Decolonization establishes you access; the Mid War Decolonization can
de-stabilize a whole series of battlegrounds, or grab a ton of non-battlegrounds to deny
Domination. It’s extra-powerful because of all the low-stability battlegrounds. Ideally
you will have played this twice by the time Colonial Rear Guards comes out.
• Che
– Being able to coup two non-battlegrounds at once is a gamechanger: a US player might
move towards Nigeria by playing into Cameroon and Saharan States simultaneously,
figuring that even if you coup one of those countries they can still make it into Nigeria.
Che is the perfect counter.
The US has:
• Puppet Governments
– If played early enough, this serves as a psuedo-De-Stalinization. In Africa, this can
usually get to Nigeria without having to go through coupable non-battlegrounds.
• Nuclear Subs
– If you have a hand conducive to it, Nuclear Subs will essentially win you every African
1-stability battleground by allowing you to freely coup away.
• Colonial Rear Guards
– See Decolonization, though the fact that it comes out in the Mid War instead of the Early
War hurts a lot.
• The Voice of America
– Although it can target any non-European country in the world, it is particularly effective
in Africa because it offers the potential to eliminate the USSR’s presence in certain
subregions of Africa. Unlike most other regions, it is difficult to move between African
subregions, and so therefore it is much easier to deny entire swaths of battlegrounds to
the USSR. Can be followed up nicely with Puppet Governments.
The focus of the Mid War shifts according to the timing of the Scoring Cards, but in general Africa
takes high priority due to its high scoring potential and volatile low stability.
Late War
No new event targets Africa in the Late War. Nevertheless, it continues to be a hot spot in the Late
War for the same reasons as before. Many of the key Africa events are recurring (in particular,
Decolonization / Colonial Rear Guards) and can be a nasty Turn 10 surprise.
Regions 261
Central America and the Caribbean were frequently termed America’s “backyard” and
“lake.” With the advent of Fidel Castro in the 1959, Americans could no longer take the
region for granted. The US reaction to communist influence in the area provoked direct
US military intervention in the Dominican Republic (1965) and Grenada (1983). In the
closing years of the Cold War, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Honduras, became frontline
states in the struggle between the superpowers.
score double. And although the US theoretically has easier access to those battlegrounds, Fidel in
practice often sews up Cuba for the USSR, and an early game coup of Panama can leave the Gulf of
Mexico feeling very communist indeed.
Central America does offer the potential for one of the easiest Dominations in the game. As US, a
fortified Panama with control of Costa Rica can easily keep the USSR out of the region and allow
an easy +4VP. More commonly, both sides get into the region, and one country will control two
battlegrounds, while the other tries to take a lot of non-battlegrounds to stop Domination.
The USSR often ends up with difficulty getting out of Cuba; without a coup or Liberation Theology,
they don’t really have a shot at Panama or Mexico from Cuba. In addition, Cuba and Mexico are
extremely vulnerable to US realignment, made all the more volatile by their adjacent 1-stability
realignment-modifying non-battlegrounds.
Early War
The USSR has Fidel, which is a pretty easy route into Cuba. Although theoretically De-Stalinization
could place influence here, it is not worth it: Panama is more easily couped, Mexico is easily
realigned, and Cuba is likely yours anyway.
The US rarely plays here in the Early War. Once in a while you might shore up Panama, or add an
influence into Costa Rica, but otherwise that’s that.
Mid War
The primary USSR event here is Liberation Theology This is like Decolonization for Central America,
in a way, and it is often a lifesaver because the USSR has a difficult time moving out of Cuba and
into Panama or Mexico without a coup. Che ostensibly provides some support for the region, but
the USSR’s chances are really somewhat defined by their coup success and Liberation Theology.
The US does not really need events for Central America: their Mid War events (OAS Founded,
Nuclear Subs, and The Voice of America) are often better used in other regions. The main exceptions
are Panama Canal Returned though even that is most useful for getting into Venezuela; Puppet
Governments which if it comes out late enough is probably best used to just grab a whole bunch
of Central American non-battlegrounds; and Alliance for Progress the “US OPEC” which just gets
better and better as the game goes on.
Likewise, the neutral events are often too valuable to be used in Central America, but Junta, ABM
Treaty, and Brush War can all flip a country very easily. Junta in particular can be used for some
brutal realignments by either side.
Latin American Death Squads is theoretically most helpful here, because a Domination fight often
ends up turning on who controls more non-battlegrounds, as both sides coup the 1-stability non-
battlegrounds back and forth.
Late War
The only events of note here are Yuri and Samantha, which accomplishes much the same thing that
Latin American Death Squads did in the Mid War, and Ortega Elected in Nicaragua, which is a
pretty lousy event but a DEFCON-suicide card for the US if the US has influence in Cuba.
Regions 263
Since Asia is probably the most fought-over region in the Early War, Southeast Asia can’t help but
get dragged into the fight. Thailand is obviously of critical importance, but both sides also have an
interest in taking Laos/Cambodia (limit access from Southeast Asia into western Asia) and Burma
(ditto, plus Indo-Pakistani War modifiers). Malaysia is not frequently contested, since it’s more of
a stepping stone to Thailand, nor are the Philippines, but Indonesia often gets a little visit from
Decolonization.
Usually the US ends up doing better in the region, but Vietnam Revolts and/or an early Decoloniza-
tion will usually sew it up pretty securely for the USSR.
Occasionally, you will see an Early War Asia fight that boils down to total country count, and here
you’ll see one side (usually the US) down battlegrounds but able to deny Domination by controlling
lots of Southeast Asia countries.
Mid War
The battle for Southeast Asia is usually already decided in the Early War. As the USSR, try to play
Southeast Asia Scoring before the US can spare Ops to secure Malaysia and the Philippines.
The main fight will be over Thailand, easily the most valuable country, amplified by the fact that
this will also affect Asia Scoring as a whole. Expect Brush War, ABM Treaty (if used at DEFCON 3),
the China Card, and Ussuri River Skirmish to all play a role in deciding Thailand’s fate.
Late War
No Late War event explicitly targets Southeast Asia, and more to the point, Southeast Asia Scoring
is usually no longer in the deck.
Annotated Game #1
Annotated Game #1 266
Early War
This is an analysis of a game against a strong opponent where the US emerges triumphant despite
poor luck and no influence adjustment. Contrary to popular opinion, it is my firm belief that between
experienced players, the Deluxe Edition of Twilight Struggle is adequately balanced with Optional
cards and no additional adjustments. And although luck shapes the course of the game—sometimes
unevenly—it is exceedingly rare that bad luck cannot be overcome with skillful play.
The game is played on Wargameroom¹⁵. Optional cards are included. The save game itself can be
downloaded here¹⁶, if you wish to replay the game on Wargameroom. As an alternative, there is a
complete record of play here¹⁷ as well.
1 Wargameroom.com Presents:
2
3 Twilight Struggle 6.0
4 Game by Ananda Gupta, Jason Matthews, and GMT Games
5 Program by Bruce Wigdor
6
7 ** The Server chooses to use the following optional rule: **
8 Optional Cards
9 The server chooses to have the sides selected randomly...
10 The server will be playing the USA
11 The client will be playing the USSR
12 ************************************************************
13 ** The deck is being shuffled. **
14 ************************************************************
My opening hand:
¹⁵http://www.wargameroom.com/index.html
¹⁶http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17269972/Twilight%20Strategy%20Annotated%20Game%20%231.wgr
¹⁷https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ai0msB3_N-FhdDVCemZraFJJUmlxa2FmZXBLUElJZ2c
Annotated Game #1 267
Annotated Game #1 268
The first question is how to deal with Blockade. When you discard to Blockade, you end the turn
with no cards held in your hand. This is bad if I am holding Decolonization or De-Stalinization,
because those are the two cards the US desperately needs to keep out of the Turn 3 reshuffle. But
since I have neither of those cards, assuming I don’t get Red Scare/Purged, this will be a good turn
to trigger Blockade and discard freely.
The card I will discard to Blockade will be Socialist Governments, which is preferable over the other
two USSR cards because Warsaw Pact and Suez Crisis can be eliminated from the deck this turn at
relatively little cost. This is the same reason I do not want to use UN Intervention with Blockade:
I would rather Blockade to be gone permanently, rather than deal with it later under possibly less-
advantageous circumstances.
I normally love the NORAD event, which meshes nicely with my play style, but given the scarcity
of Ops in my hand I will almost certainly play it for Ops. (This is generally true of NORAD on Turn
1 or 2. On Turn 3, you are more likely to be able to spare the Ops.) Indo-Pakistani War might end
up getting used for the event, if I’m desperate to get into western Asia. As discussed earlier, I do not
want to use UN Intervention with Blockade, and there is nothing else that I would consider using
UN Intervention on, so that will also be played for Operations. Olympic Games is a poor event and
will lose me the game if I play it at DEFCON 2. So as is typical for US in the Early War, it is almost
certain that my entire hand will be played for Operations.
I have poor options for my headline. As stated earlier, I want all my cards played for Ops instead of
Events: the only event I may be interested in is Indo-Pakistani War, and obviously that’s a pointless
play right now. So normally, in situations like this, you headline your lowest Op card, because that
gives up the fewest Ops. But headlining Blockade here would be devastating if he headlines Red
Scare/Purge, as Red Scare/Purge would trigger first and then I would have nothing to discard to
Blockade. UN Intervention is not allowed as a headline play, and so I have no choice but to play
Olympic Games for the event. It is an awful event, but I have no better option.
Well that was unlucky. I am mildly surprised to see him punt Middle East Scoring, since it’s relatively
easy for USSR to pick up an Early War domination there. I assume this means he has a low-Ops hand.
As is standard on Turn 1, the USSR coups Iran. The point of this play is to eliminate US access to
western Asia, far more critical than control of Iran itself.
However, short of a totally failed coup (not possible with a 4 Ops card), this is the best possible result
for the US. If he had rolled a 1, then Iran would be empty and I would have nothing to coup. But
with a 2, he puts in 1 influence and I can coup Iran back. I will do so with the highest op card in my
hand. Warsaw Pact is a good candidate, as it is a fantastic USSR Late War event that I wish to get
rid of as soon as possible, and in addition its early play may expose him more to Independent Reds.
Well that was unlucky. I am unable to restore access to western Asia with my coup, and my opponent
is unlikely to allow me a second chance at couping Iran.
Annotated Game #1 271
This is the ideal coup result for him. Any higher and he would have gained influence in a Mid War
region, meaning he would be exposed to DEFCON suicide by CIA Created. As USSR I generally do
not coup Panama in the Early War for that reason.
Now that I am out of Iran and cannot enter western Asia, my priorities shift. The number one US
game board priority on Turn 1 after DEFCON drops to 3 or lower is to get to Thailand. My top hand
priority is to take care of Suez Crisis while it costs me only 3 influence (instead of 4). I can address
both with one play: two into Egypt (two instead of one so that even if he plays Nasser, I still have
1 influence left, influence in the Middle East, and access to Libya), and one into Malaysia. I will
trigger the event after my Operations, because after my Israel influence is gone I will have no more
access to the Middle East. (This is why Suez Crisis is such a fantastic headline for the USSR on Turn
1, because coupled with a strong Iran coup, the US will be wiped out of the Middle East and have
an extremely difficult time contesting the region.)
Well, that was unlucky (that he drew Decolonization). Now he has a dominating position in Asia as
well as access to France.
Thailand here is more important than France. France will suffer more from De Gaulle, and I have
other options to fight for it later (as you will see shortly). Thailand, on the other hand, scores for
both Asia and Southeast Asia. Because he has locked me out of western Asia by knocking me out of
Iran, he is likely assured access to Pakistan and India. Coupled with North Korea, it means I cannot
allow him to take any more battlegrounds in Asia or else he will score Domination easily.
Ordinarily, I would use a 4 Op card to take Thailand, because at 3/1 he can play the China Card to
flip it back. Since I have no 4 Op card, I must play NORAD and hope he is not good enough to know
about the China Card trick.
Oh well. Hoping your opponents are bad does not get you very far in Twilight Struggle (or life, for
that matter). At least I forced him to give up the China Card.
My hand is now: UN Intervention, Indo-Pakistani War, Blockade, and Socialist Governments. I wish
to hold Indo-Pakistani War as late as possible, to see if I can make use of the event, so that means
I’m playing one of the 1Ops now. I choose Blockade, and use it to take Laos/Cambodia, a 2VP swing
when Southeast Asia scoring comes out as well as threatening play into Burma and then India.
Annotated Game #1 273
Saw the France takeover coming, but not much I could do about it there. He also wisely seals me off
from access to India.
Since I’m still saving Indo-Pakistani War, I am playing the 1 Op of UN Intervention here. My best
option is to return to the Middle East, and play into Libya while I still have access. I would not want
him to do something like headline Nasser and then take both Libya and Egypt before I can react.
When you are behind, you gamble. Triggering the Indo-Pakistani War here is about as good a gamble
as I’ll get: 50/50 shot of 2VP and access to three critical battlegrounds (Iran, Pakistan, India).
Annotated Game #1 274
Well that was lucky. This is the first truly gamechanging moment.
My hand:
Annotated Game #1 276
I am very glad I drew De-Stalinization. I will not be discarding it this turn on the Space Race; I will
do that next turn instead so that it doesn’t go in the Turn 3 reshuffle. Everything else in my hand
is best played for Ops. None of the USSR events are truly dangerous: Nasser is the worst, but I can
manage that as long as I take Libya before he has a chance to. Fidel is typically played for Operations
by the US on Turns 1-2, and sometimes sent to space on Turn 3.
Like Turn 1, I have no 4 Ops cards. On average, the Early War cards are 2.2 Ops (including Scoring
Cards), so in each Early War hand you should expect about 17.7 Ops on average. Of course, you
can’t actually play all 17.7 Ops, since you headline one card, hold another, and discard some more.
This turn I drew 15 Ops; Turn 1 I was at 18 Ops. Not great, but not terrible.
Also like Turn 1, I have nothing worth headlining. Again, I will therefore headline the lowest Op
I can get away with. Certainly not Asia Scoring, as I have a chance to contest the continent still.
Certainly not Nasser, since that would allow him to take Libya before I can. Certainly not Truman
Doctrine, as that would be a colossal waste of the card. Between Fidel and Arab-Israeli War, it is
basically a tie. I go with Arab-Israeli War, because while I still have control of Egypt, his chances of
“victory” and 2VP are reduced.
Presumably he wanted to coup, but this is one of those situations where there are more important
things on the USSR agenda than lowering DEFCON. He wisely overprotects Thailand so I can’t flip
it with the China card (like he did). Pakistan, on the other hand, is vulnerable to such a play right
now, but the empty India is a more important target for me right now. Maybe I can flip Pakistan
after I secure India first.
Even though he doesn’t know I have Asia Scoring, Asia’s the only Early War region yet to be scored,
and so we’re both playing heavily into it. Given that he’s now shored up Pakistan too, there’s only
one way for me to stop his Domination: take South Korea. This is a huge risk considering Korean
War is yet to come out, but I have no better choice. Since I have the China Card, I can take Taiwan
too, to further reduce the risk of losing the Korean War.
I think this was a mistake. Domination in Asia is not going to happen so long as I have 3
battlegrounds, so better look elsewhere rather than fight for Asian non-battlegrounds. More
importantly, this is a move I do not have to react to, thus allowing me some time to do what I
need to do.
What do I need to do? I could play Asia Scoring. But Iran is wide open. Why not coup it? I have a
3Ops, DEFCON is at 3. But there is a pretty decent chance I will fail, since anything short of control
and he will just take it on his turn. I’d have to roll a 4 or higher with my 3Ops to control it. Rather
than risk the 50/50, I simply take the country with the 3Ops card instead.
Annotated Game #1 279
That was lucky. And also why I didn’t gamble on the coup.
There being no immediate threat or opportunity on the board, I take this chance to play Asia Scoring,
now that I’ve ended his domination.
A wise way to get rid of Marshall Plan. As the US, Marshall Plan is a near-guarantee that you won’t
get Dominated in Europe if you can get it into the three 2-stability Mediterranean countries. But if
you can’t, then it’s not very helpful at all. Accordingly, 4 Ops of the card make it easy for the USSR
to dramatically limit its efficacy by taking two of the Mediterranean countries first.
Now seems like a good time for me to take care of Nasser as well. As stated before: the primary
threat here is that I’d have lost Libya, not that I’d lose Egypt. I’m content losing Egypt because I will
get it back later with Sadat Expels Soviets. Also, I have a plan for my remaining cards.
My hand is De-Stalinization, Truman Doctrine, and Fidel. I am holding two cards this turn because I
played the China Card. Clearly I am holding De-Stalinization. I can either hold Fidel as well, and get
rid of him next turn, or use Fidel to do a sneaky Truman Doctrine play. I go with the latter, because
I don’t want him to play Truman Doctrine for Ops and then watch him draw it later.
Annotated Game #1 281
Now that he doesn’t have control of France, a Truman Doctrine headline will wipe out his French
influence and force him to choose between retaking France or couping on AR1.
My hand:
Annotated Game #1 283
20 Ops in hand: this is going to be a good turn. I see no particular reason to deviate from my Truman
Doctrine headline plan. I plan to send De-Stalinization to space, or hold it if I can’t spare the Action.
As for the rest of my cards, they are all being played for Operations as usual. However, NORAD
might be a decent event if I find myself with some breathing room, because the way the board is
shaping up there are many USSR-controlled countries that I have influence in.
There are a couple of specific play considerations. Vietnam Revolts will be played at the end of the
turn to minimize its effect. De Gaulle is easy to manage if I end up controlling France, and a nice
punt if I don’t. The Cambridge Five is ideally played as late as possible in the turn: I don’t have any
scoring cards, but this way I can minimize the amount of information he receives.
I know that he has the following cards in hand: Korean War, Comecon, Duck and Cover,
Containment, CIA Created. (I know this because these are Early War cards that have not yet been
played and are not in my hand, so therefore I know he must have drawn them.) If he is good, he
Annotated Game #1 284
will predict my Truman Doctrine move and play Duck and Cover (or maybe CIA Created) on the
headline in order to drop DEFCON to 2, so that he can recover France on AR1 without worrying
that I will coup a battleground in response.
Nicely played by him. I might as well dispose of De Gaulle, then, and resign myself to a USSR Europe
Domination. Before I trigger the event, though, I should take Algeria before he does. I currently have
access to it, and will no longer after De Gaulle.*
*It should be noted that in-game, I mistakenly played the De Gaulle event first, and my opponent
was kind enough to allow me to take back the move and play my Ops before playing the event.
A difficult choice. Do I coup the Saharan States to stop him from getting to Nigeria? Or do I shore
up India? I decide to coup the Saharan States, since if I succeed and replace his influence with some
of mine, then if he fights for India I take Nigeria as a consolation prize. Plus I’ll need the Mil Ops
anyway. I use a low Ops card as Saharan States has a stability of just 1. (Small mistake here: I should
have used Formosan Revolution instead of Cambridge Five, for the reasons discussed earlier. Oh
well.)
At least he didn’t play 4Ops into the country, which means I can use my 4 Ops to take it back.
Annotated Game #1 286
Not a great play, since he already dominates Europe and this is unnecessary. Again, it places no
pressure on me and is something I don’t have to react to.
I know he has Containment, and he’ll likely play it at the end of the turn, which means my last AR
will get a +1 Ops boost. I plan to play Vietnam Revolts at that point, since the end of the turn is
the best time to get rid of that card. So this means that I can now either trigger NORAD or space
De-Stalinization. I choose to play NORAD so I can have its effect next turn, and I have plenty of
good NORAD targets.
As predicted. Since he returned the China Card to me, I will threaten Thailand (to try and fix Asia
for myself) by removing his overcontrol, and I will move into Zaire (as discussed above). If he coups
on AR1, a combination of NORAD and the China Card will flip Thailand for me. Algeria can wait
for later. He can coup Algeria on AR1, but he cannot coup Thailand. If he repairs Thailand, then I
can coup Algeria myself.
Annotated Game #1 288
Mid War
1 ************************************************************
2 ** The deck is being shuffled. **
3 ************************************************************
4 DEFCON Level raised to 3
5 ** Turn 4 Headline Phase **
I’m currently at -7VP. This is not great: usually US after Early War is hoping to be within -5 or so.
-7 means the USSR is clearly ahead, but at least I’m not being steamrolled.
My Turn 4 hand:
Annotated Game #1 290
Annotated Game #1 291
Ordinarily I like to hold Ask Not What Your Country Can Do for You… to get rid of bad scoring
cards and DEFCON suicide cards, and manage the other problematic events as long as I can. But in
this hand, there are just too many problems for me to deal with them all and hold Ask Not … to next
turn. So I’m just going to headline it now and discard all my USSR events. I’ll also discard Captured
Nazi Scientists in hopes of getting slightly more Ops. A 5-card discard to Ask Not … is pretty good
even if there’s no bad scoring cards or DEFCON suicide cards.
Annotated Game #1 292
My new hand:
Annotated Game #1 293
Annotated Game #1 294
This is a far superior hand, and a rare hand where I will focus on events:
But for now, I must address this Algeria issue, since he’s broken my control. I’ll coup it and try to
use NORAD either to patch up a failed coup or create a crisis elsewhere.
Annotated Game #1 295
Now for Puppet Governments into Nigeria and South America. (Nigeria because if I play into
Cameroon or Saharan States to get to Nigeria he’ll coup me right out immediately.) In general, with
events like these that provide access to critical regions, you want to play them as early as possible
so you can have as many options as possible for your subsequent Operations.
18 The Soviets use the Special Relationship card for realignment rolls:
19
20 Realignment roll in Brazil: USSR modifier = +0, USA modifier = +1
21 ** USSR die roll = 5 (+0) = 5
22 ** USA die roll = 6 (+1) = 7
23
24 Realignment roll in Brazil: USSR modifier = +0, USA modifier = +1
25 ** USSR die roll = 4 (+0) = 4
26 ** USA die roll = 4 (+1) = 5
A good attempt, but unsuccessful. Now I need to expand out of my South American position, while
simultaneously taking South Africa to score Africa control.
Perhaps he will try to realign Algeria at +1. Now that the rest is taken care of, time for me to try my
Five Year Plan gambit. Maybe this will win me the game right here.
Well, my plan worked, but he countered with the perfect response. Now CIA Created won’t lose
him the game because my coup won’t lower DEFCON.
My current hand: Quagmire, Defectors, Brush War
Annotated Game #1 298
I decide to space Quagmire instead of defending Nigeria. Reason being, I know he’s playing CIA
next turn, so I can use the Op point from that to coup Nigeria back. Plus I want the Brush War event
and to hold Defectors to next turn in case I have no better headline.
Gah.
My hand:
Annotated Game #1 301
Annotated Game #1 302
Seems like Defectors will have to wait. When the US has the China Card, Ussuri River Skirmish
creates all sorts of problems for the USSR. Whichever country he defends, I’ll take over the other
with the China Card. He could theoretically repair both at once with a 4Ops, but that’s a costly
AR1 play that gives me a coup. In any event, just having influence in the Koreas exposes them to
NORAD.
As for the rest of my cards, Panama Canal Returned and OAS Founded is a nice way to break some
USSR control in Americas. The combination of Ussuri, Cultural Revolution, and Nixon Plays the
China Card means that I will likely play Ussuri, use the China Card, punt Cultural Revolution when
it’s least effective, and then use Nixon to take the China Card back if I don’t need Nixon’s 2 Ops.
The fact he played into Mexico as well communicates to me that he’s got Central America Scoring.
By giving up South Korea, he costs himself with Asia Scoring in the long run, but I think this is the
right call. Otherwise, I would have couped Mexico or Panama, and then he would have had to work
a lot harder for Central America Scoring.
In fact, I briefly consider fighting for Central America, but decide I would rather have South Korea
instead. (Interesting tidbit: the difference here between taking North Korea and South Korea is that
North Korea scores an extra +1 on each Asia Scoring, but South Korea lets the US headline Soviets
Shoot Down KAL-007 in the Late War, one of the best headlines around. I think he made the right
call by defending North Korea.)
Naturally. Delaying any longer might mean that I would dislodge him from a battleground, meaning
he would have to either retake it or defend a non-battleground to get Domination. Much easier to
just score the Control and deny me Presence.
This means I get a nice little coup. I will seek my revenge against Nigeria. I will use a small Ops
card, and since I might want to use OAS Founded or Panama Canal Returned later, I choose Willy
Brandt because it’s currently a harmless event as I already overcontrol West Germany.
Annotated Game #1 304
Well that was bad. Now the two of us are contesting South America as it is the only Mid War
region left to be scored. As discussed earlier, I will use Cultural Revolution now, since the -1VP is
way preferable to handing over the China Card (even just holding onto the China Card and never
playing it is worth at least 2VP, since whoever holds it at the end of the game gets 1VP).
Annotated Game #1 305
I need a non-battleground for Domination, now that I can no longer get Control.
A lucky break for me. Since I have a chance to breathe, I will take back the China Card from the
USSR, which is both strong in its own right and also limits his ability to get rid of DEFCON suicide
cards.
Annotated Game #1 306
This must have been an awful hand for him, since he had three scoring cards. I go ahead with my
plan to create a little Panamanian crisis for him.
Annotated Game #1 307
My hand:
Annotated Game #1 308
Annotated Game #1 309
There are two obvious headline candidates: Defectors and Red Scare/Purge. (Junta, too, is ordinarily
an awesome headline, but in this particular situation not as strong as Defectors or Red Scare/Purge.)
Typically, in this situation, I would headline Defectors and headline Red Scare/Purge next turn: this
is because we’re on Turn 6, and I want Defectors to make it back in for the Turn 7 reshuffle.
But when you also have Bear Trap in the same hand, the potential for abuse is just staggering. Played
together with Red Scare/Purge, it is absolutely crippling to discard 3+ Ops cards. More importantly,
there’s a very real possibility you’ll end up just having to skip Action Rounds if you run out of 3+
Ops cards to discard. I once won a game after falling behind -18, because a combination of repeated
Red Scare/Purges and a never-ending Bear Trap cost my opponent 19 (!) straight Action Rounds.
There’s an art to the timing, though. The earlier you play it, the more effect you can get (i.e., the
more rounds your opponent might be forced to skip), but the later you play it, the more likely it is
that he will have no 3+ Ops cards to discard.
Annotated Game #1 310
As for the rest of the hand: We Will Bury You will likely be unplayable, but is an easy Space Race.
Brezhnev Doctrine is readily taken care of by playing it on the last Action Round. Junta has potential:
I can play it into Costa Rica and realign him out of Panama, where he cannot get back in. And
Portuguese Empire Crumbles will be easy to manage and dispose of. Hopefully I will be able to hold
Defectors for next turn …
I decide it’s a little too early for Bear Trap, and instead look to kick the USSR out of Panama with
Junta before I am couped out of Colombia. I get to roll at +1; if I succeed on the first roll, I can realign
Chile at +2 and negate Allende.
Annotated Game #1 311
A bit unlucky for him, but it wasn’t really the time for Che.
Now my trigger finger gets itchy and I gamble on the Bear Trap, hoping he’s out of 3+Ops cards.
Annotated Game #1 312
Darn. Incidentally, this was his last 3Ops card in hand, so if I had waited a bit longer …
Time to take Zaire and Panama.
Probably should have done this last turn, but hey, North Korea is still open. I should grab that as
well. I use the China Card because I have no good 3 or 4Ops card to play to take North Korea. The
extra Op goes to Colombia, as I still need a non-battleground for Domination in South America.
Annotated Game #1 313
Since he’s under Purge, I would probably win the coup back-and-forth on Colombia. Here I give up
Defectors, because my hand is Defectors, Portuguese Empire Crumbles, Brezhnev Doctrine, OAS
Founded, and We Will Bury You. Portuguese Empire Crumbles doesn’t give me any Ops, since I
need to use it to defend against itself; Brezhnev goes at the end of the turn; WWBY is unplayable,
and I’d like to save OAS for a rainy day. So I’m going to hold WWBY and OAS, and play Defectors.
Time to take care of Portuguese Empire Crumbles. I don’t want to space this and see it come back
in the Turn 7 reshuffle.
And as the last play, I play Brezhnev Doctrine harmlessly. I solidify Nigeria and Zaire, as 1-stability
countries can be flipped with a 3Ops. I also take the UK, for no real good reason other than I think
Special Relationship might make a comeback, and with NATO in effect it’s pretty good.
Annotated Game #1 315
My hand:
Annotated Game #1 317
So many great cards! The headline is going to be Grain Sales to Soviets, which is pretty much the
best possible US headline, period. Voice of America and ABM Treaty are going to be great events,
and if I choose to I can reclaim one with SALT Negotiations. And I have only one problematic USSR
card (We Will Bury You), as U-2 Incident is an auto-play-for-Ops every day of the week and twice
on Sunday. One bad card is rarely a problem. Two can be, and three is often deadly.
The Mid War cards I know he has in his hand, because they haven’t shown up yet and aren’t in
mine: Lone Gunman, South America Scoring, Sadat Expels Soviets, Summit, Our Man in Tehran.
Theoretically, I should also know he has East European Unrest and Arab-Israeli War, because those
were disposed of prior to Turn 3 and therefore should also be drawn somewhere between Turn 3
and Turn 7, but I am not such a savant to track that in-game. The Mid War cards are easier because
it’s fairly easy to remember, for instance, that South America hasn’t been scored. But this illustrates
that given disciplined focus, you should be able to identify nearly all of your opponent’s hand on
Turns 3 and 7.
Annotated Game #1 318
Oof, the Purge (one of two cards I could not theoretically account for in his hand) hurts. Luckily I
have many events I plan to play, thereby lessening its impact.
When you draw your Grain Sales card, you should almost always play it. The handsize reduction
hurts just as much as playing the card, generally. The only exceptions are when playing the card
will kill you (because it’s an opponent’s event that degrades DEFCON), or when you draw a scoring
card (sometimes). Here, Our Man in Tehran happens to be a fantastic event at the best possible time
(the card is very strong on Turn 7, because its discards are basically permanent now), so I’m willing
to give up the potential Ops benefit (namely, couping in headline phase) to trigger the card.
Trust me when I say this was the only bad card of the bunch. Oh well.
Annotated Game #1 319
A wise choice, as Lone Gunman is normally played for Ops so that it can end up in the US hand
and cause DEFCON suicide. But if discarded on Turn 7, it isn’t going to end up in my hand again.
So triggering the event is strictly superior than playing it for Ops.
Unfortunately his coup doesn’t really get him anywhere. Time for me to launch a coup of my own:
on Brazil, as I know he has South America Scoring and I’d like to grab Control.
A critical mistake, and one that a seasoned USSR player would not make. Always leave 5 in a
region when you are worried about Voice of America! The real threat of Voice of America is not
just the influence loss: it is the loss of access. Here, I will use VoA to kick him out of Brazil and
Uruguay, stranding him without access to Brazil. He will not be able to retake Brazil before I do.
Had he instead maintained 5 influence in Uruguay and Brazil, Voice of America would not be able
to eliminate him from the subregion.
It’s all the worse because he should know that I have Voice of America.
Now, of course, I should take Brazil. Unfortunately I can’t patch up both Brazil and Argentina, but
I have OAS Founded at least to salvage Argentina later.
I decide to keep fighting for Argentina. At this point my hand is: OAS Founded, Latin American
Death Squads, SALT Negotiations, and We Will Bury You. I decide to perform the SALT trick as US:
SALT ABM Treaty back to my hand as the last Action, raising DEFCON to 4. DEFCON then rises to
5 on the headline, where I headline ABM Treaty and get to do 4 realignments in Europe: specifically,
France at +2.
So my best bet to fight for Argentina is OAS Founded for 2 into Argentina. Not the best use of the
card, but I’m thankful that I didn’t need it that much this game.
Hurts, especially since I can’t get back into Libya. With my 1 Op of Latin American Death Squads,
though, I can either recontrol Argentina or make an ineffectual play for the Middle East. As I know
he has Sadat left in his hand, I go for the former. (Incidentally, he should have played Sadat and then
Muslim Revolution.)
Now time for the aforementioned SALT trick. There were tons of great candidates to draw from the
discard (Red Scare/Purge, Grain Sales, Voice of America) but I like this one the best as Europe is my
biggest threat: an early Europe Scoring + Wargames next turn is the most likely way I can lose at
this point. Plus a higher DEFCON means more VP loss for the USSR on Mil Ops.
Entering the Late War at -1 is great for me, considering that the board heavily favors me. As
mentioned above, my biggest danger is dropping 6VP quickly to something like Europe Scoring
and then getting Wargamed before I can make up the deficit.
Annotated Game #1 324
Late War
1 ** The Late War cards are added to the deck **
2 ************************************************************
3 ** The deck is being shuffled. **
4 ************************************************************
5 DEFCON Level raised to 5
6 ** Turn 8 Headline Phase **
My hand:
Annotated Game #1 326
Annotated Game #1 327
I see no reason not to proceed with my ABM Treaty headline as planned. There is no possible
headline that can interfere with me, because 4Ops cards go first and the US headline always takes
priority over the USSR. Not always a good thing, but definitely a good thing here.
The rest of my hand is not terribly tricky to play. I plan to space one of Quagmire / South African
Unrest, maybe use Iran-Iraq War on Iraq for the potential VPs and battleground flip. Central America
Scoring is the main threat: I need to figure out a way to cut my losses from that so I don’t lose to
Wargames.
Annotated Game #1 328
Well, that was unlucky. I had planned to use 3 rolls to knock out France and one more on
Spain/Portugal.
14 gains 3 VP.
15 DEFCON Level lowered to 4
This is bad, since now it’s even more likely I can succumb to Wargames.
Because DEFCON is at 4, I can either coup an Asian battleground or save my coup to respond to
his. I choose the latter, since the 2 Ops from my Missile Envy coup is not very convincing.
Given a choice between couping Zaire back and couping Mexico, I decide that Zaire is more likely
to succeed.
Annotated Game #1 330
Time to make a play for Central America. Let’s go for Nicaragua, which would allow me to realign
Cuba at +1. I need only one Op and luckily have a harmless 1Op USSR event to use.
14
15 The Soviets play the following card for a coup attempt:
16 #93 Ops 2: Iran-Contra Scandal * (USSR)
17 Coup attempt in Nicaragua (stability 1):
18 ** USSR die roll = 1 (+2) = 3
19 The modified roll exceeds the doubled stability by 1.
20 American influence in Nicaragua reduced by 1, now at 0
21 Soviet Military Operations for this turn increased to 4
He’s not going to let me keep Nicaragua, and this couping back-and-forth takes time that I do not
have because I have the scoring card. So I will gamble on the Iran-Iraq War instead.
This was quite fortunate. This means that absent any other VP shenanigans, Central America Scoring
at -3 will take me to -6, so I can’t lose on Wargames.
My hand is: Central America Scoring, Defectors, Quagmire, and South African Unrest. I decide I
want to flip Zaire with the China Card at some point, so I will hold Defectors and one more card
to next turn. I will play Central America Scoring as late as possible since he won’t be improving his
position and I don’t want to give away how close he is to Wargames. I will therefore space South
African Unrest (or Quagmire, not much difference, though I suppose Quagmire is more unplayable).
Annotated Game #1 332
Time to flip Zaire. Just like Thailand can be flipped with the China Card, 1-stability countries can
be flipped with a 3 Ops. I use all 4 Ops to overcontrol the country and make sure he can’t do the
same to me.
My hand:
Annotated Game #1 334
Annotated Game #1 335
I’m thrilled that I drew Wargames. I won’t be able to use it this turn, so I will hold it until next turn
in hopes of using it then.
Everything is getting played for Operations here, especially The Iron Lady aka Thatcher the Betrayer.
Iranian Hostage Crisis and Quagmire are both problematic, Quagmire more so. Since I’m holding
Wargames, I’ll just have to swallow Iranian Hostage Crisis. Flower Power could be problematic, but
I doubt that it will make much difference. Although I could use Formosan Revolution to squeeze an
extra VP out of Asia Scoring, I’d probably rather play it for Ops. I don’t want him to catch on that I
have Asia Scoring and use the China Card to start a fight with me for Asia.
Since I have no other compelling candidates, Defectors is the clear Headline choice.
Repair the damage, and try to flip Libya, as Middle East Scoring has yet to come out.
I get the sense he is chasing some Space Race VPs, as the next box is 2/0. So I’ll space Quagmire now.
If I were not holding Wargames, then right here I would immediately cash in Asia Scoring. But since
I know he can’t play Wargames on me, I take Libya first.
Annotated Game #1 337
I need a non-battleground to get Domination. I choose Lebanon, since I can flip it with a 3Ops. I lose
Iran, but I was going to lose it no matter what if I’m holding Wargames to next turn.
Annotated Game #1 338
I think he misplayed this hand, possibly out of fatigue, possibly out of frustration. Clearly The
Reformer should have been played first, and while the score is still negative. Then Glasnost becomes
even better. As it stands, The Reformer is like Ussuri River Skirmish: reparable with a 4Ops, but you
don’t have the equivalent of the China Card to help.
My next move is a mistake. I should have instead used Formosan Revolution to coup somewhere
and gain 2 Mil Ops. Instead I needlessly lose 2 VP by playing into France.
My hand:
Annotated Game #1 341
Annotated Game #1 342
The rest of the game is a formality. So long as I cash in Africa Scoring for +10VP and drop DEFCON
to 2, I will win handily with Wargames. Given the US Late War advantage, this is not all that unusual;
the later Wargames comes out, the more likely it is to benefit the US instead of the USSR.
25
26 American influence in France reduced by 1, now at 0
27 American influence in West Germany reduced by 1, now at 6
28 American influence in Italy reduced by 1, now at 3
29 VPs down 1, now at -3
30 ** Turn 10 Action Phase **
31
32 Turn 10, USSR action round 1
33
34 The Soviets play the following card to place influence:
35 #78 Ops 3: Alliance for Progress * (USA)
36 3 USSR influence added to Poland, now at 4
37 The Americans use the USA event played by the USSR
38
39 ** The Alliance for Progress card is permanently removed. **
40
41 VPs up 5, now at 2
42
43 Turn 10, USA action round 1
44
45 The Americans play the following card as an Event:
46 #79: Africa Scoring
47
48 *** Scoring in Africa ***
49 USSR: 1(presence) = 1
50 USA: 6(control) +5(battlegrounds) = 11
51 VPs up 10, now at 12
52
53 Turn 10, USSR action round 2
54
55 The Soviets play the following card as an Event:
56 #3: Middle East Scoring
57
58 *** Scoring in Middle East ***
59 USSR: 3(presence) +2(battlegrounds) = 5
60 USA: 3(presence) +3(battlegrounds) = 6
61 VPs up 1, now at 13
62
63 Turn 10, USA action round 2
64
65 The Americans play the following card for a coup attempt:
66 #34 Ops 4: Nuclear Test Ban
Annotated Game #1 344
• Although Europe and Asia are technically the most valuable regions, in practice it is often
South America and Africa that are the highest-scoring and decides the game.
• In a tight game, Wargames can often swing from one side to the other. With a better draw,
the USSR could have won with it on Turn 8. Instead, by Turn 10, it is a US card.
• At the start of each turn, you should have a plan for each of your cards: which to play for
the event, which to play for Ops, which to hold, and whether you’re playing any cards in a
particular order or time in the turn. As the turn progresses, you then adapt your plan to the
changing board situation.
• Pressure is everything! The game is about crisis management, and you must create crises for
your opponent to deal with. Parrying your opponent’s threats is important, but no one ever
won a game just by putting out fires.
• Controlling reshuffles is critically important. Being able to discard De-Stalinization after the
Turn 3 reshuffle dramatically changed the power alignments in South America.
Annotated Game #2
Annotated Game #2 347
Early War
This is an annotated game I played as USSR against Gabor Foldes, the 2012 Internet Twilight Struggle
League champion¹⁸. We play with Optional Cards and +1 influence for the US player (to be placed
in any country where the US already has influence).
The game is played on Wargameroom¹⁹. The save game can be downloaded here²⁰, if you wish to
replay the game on Wargameroom. As an alternative, there is a complete record of play here²¹ as
well.
1 Wargameroom.com Presents:
2
3 Twilight Struggle 6.1
4 Game by Ananda Gupta, Jason Matthews, and GMT Games
5 Program by Bruce Wigdor
6
7 ** The Server chooses to use the following optional rule: **
8 Optional Cards
9 ** The server awards 1 extra starting influence to the US **
10 The server chooses to have the sides selected randomly...
11 The server will be playing the USSR
12 The client will be playing the USA
13 ************************************************************
14 ** The deck is being shuffled. **
15 ************************************************************
My opening hand:
¹⁸http://www.wargameroom.com/itsl12.htm
¹⁹http://www.wargameroom.com/index.html
²⁰http://dl.dropbox.com/u/17269972/Twilight%20Strategy%20Annotated%20Game%20%232.wgr
²¹https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ai0msB3_N-FhdGFOWWVFQTBIQXB2SnNmZ0F2QnJJNXc
Annotated Game #2 348
Annotated Game #2 349
I have 22 Ops, which is far above average (17.7) for the Early War. Even better, I’ve drawn
De-Stalinization, the most important starred event in the game. My Ops strength is somewhat
overstated, though, since 3 of my Ops are tied up in De-Stalinization, and 4 in Marshall Plan, which
is one of the few very strong Early War US events. Still, I have an extremely strong hand.
Aside from Marshall Plan, I have no particular problem cards to deal with. Containment will be
played on the final Action Round to minimize its effect for the US. As is usual for the USSR, Turn 1
is going to be about placing maximum pressure on the US and expanding over the empty board as
much as possible. As such I might hold De-Stalinization until next turn, when things quiet down a
little bit.
This is an extremely unusual US opening setup, which leads me to believe that he is trying to
avoid Blockade. In other words, he wants to be able to play Blockade without discarding to it. The
main reason you would want to do this is either if you have no 3+ Ops cards (rare) or if you are
holding either Decolonization / De-Stalinization and would like to hold it to Turn 3. Since I have
De-Stalinization, I assume it’s Decolonization that he holds.
None of my headline options change as a result of his setup, since none of them affect Europe.
(It does mean that I have to be even more careful about playing Marshall Plan, because it will be
maximally effective for him.) My headline will be Arab-Israeli War: as described earlier, it’s one of
the best Turn 1 headlines. Not quite as good as Suez Crisis, but almost as good.
I’m not terribly concerned about Defectors. As USSR, you should distinguish between bad headlines,
headlines that are good because they combo with your AR1, and headlines of “necessary” events. It is
only the last (events like Decolonization and De-Stalinization) where you should be concerned about
Defectors: this is one of the reasons I will not headline De-Stalinization right now. (Others being me
not having enough influence to De-Stalinize, and the risk that my influence may get couped out.)
Arab-Israeli War is an example of a headline that can be Defected without much harm to you.
Annotated Game #2 351
Unfortunately, my Arab-Israeli War does not work out. Now I have an interesting choice: do I coup
Iran (buffed to 2, thanks to the +1 influence adjustment), or do I coup Italy and go for a Europe
knockout? The Asia Scoring card in my hand tilts me towards couping Iran; if I can knock him out
with a 4Ops coup (anything other than a 1), then I can hopefully keep western Asia secure for the
rest of the game.
The worst possible coup result here would have been a 1. A 3 is the second-worst, because it allows
him to coup me back easily.
Annotated Game #2 352
Now this is troubling. I could use another 4 Ops to coup, but now I need to roll at least a 3 to deny
the US access to western Asia. Rolling a 1 or 2 would cripple me.
As a result, I decide to pass on this risk, and instead start attacking Asia through other means. I want
to place an influence into Afghanistan, so that I can reach Pakistan, and also place influence into
South Korea. I also want to play into the empty West Germany: I don’t really intend to take it, but
at least I am threatening to take it (and also threatening France) with a single 3 Ops. This may force
him to respond.
Unfortunately I don’t have a good card with which to do this. De-Stalinization and Marshall Plan
are out. I want to save Korean War until later in the turn to deter him from playing into South
Korea. Containment has to be played on the final Action Round. As such, I have no choice but to
use US/Japan Mutual Defense Pact, which is rather annoying given that we are contesting Asia.
Annotated Game #2 353
He’s now dominating Asia. I have an opportunity here to use the China Card’s 5 Asia Ops to flip
Pakistan, because it is not overcontrolled. If I can flip Pakistan, then even if he takes India I can still
dominate Asia with North Korea + South Korea + Pakistan + Afghanistan before he gets to Thailand.
Normally as USSR I don’t like using the China Card on Turn 1, because that means that if the US
draws both De-Stalinization and Decolonization on Turn 2 they can play the China Card and be able
to hold both until Turn 3. But I don’t have to worry about that here since I hold De-Stalinization
myself.
There is, of course, one risk to this move…
Annotated Game #2 354
This is a crippling blow to me. I decide to take South Korea to temporarily stop his Domination; he
can take India to regain Domination, but it is cheaper for me to take South Korea than it is for him
to take India. Plus, if I ever do get Thailand, having both Thailand and South Korea will protect me
from being Dominated in Asia.
Since he did not take India, this is my chance to get away with a neutral Asia Scoring. I think my
South Korea move should have tipped him off to playing into Asia now, and waiting to respond in
Europe later.
Annotated Game #2 355
Now I’ll play Containment as my final Action. Asia was just scored, so that’s out. I’d like to fight for
European battlegrounds, but not only am I already behind, I run the risk of getting all my influence
killed by Truman Doctrine. (This is one of the advantages of the empty West Germany setup: USSR
is often so intimidated by the threat of Truman Doctrine that they’re not willing to engage in an
Ops war in Europe.) So I look to the Middle East. Because DEFCON is at 3, I could coup Iran with
Containment, but then I’d need 4 or higher. Better to make the safer play and build towards an
eventual Domination. I secure Iraq and take Lebanon, a crucial cheap non-battleground in the Middle
East that aids me in future Arab-Israeli Wars.
My hand:
Annotated Game #2 357
Annotated Game #2 358
This hand also has 22 Ops, though again, a lot of the Ops are tied up in De-Stalinization and Marshall
Plan. Nevertheless, I’ve definitely had the Early War luck in terms of stronger hands.
A couple of play considerations:
• I need to make sure I play NATO as soon as possible, before Warsaw Pact or Marshall Plan
are triggered. I’d rather not have it in effect, and if the US draws it they’ll never play it for the
event. So if I can punt it away now there’s a good chance it’ll never come back in. And it’s
relevant because …
• I want to be able to play Special Relationship under any (preferably all) of these circumstances:
– ideally when the UK is not US-controlled
– hopefully after he controls Canada, so the influence is somewhat wasted
– definitely before NATO is in effect (if NATO does go into effect).
• CIA Created is ordinarily a DEFCON suicide card. But right now it’s perfectly harmless
because I have no influence in a Mid War region. So as long as he doesn’t play Fidel (and
I play it before I De-Stalinize), I can play this late in the turn.
• Vietnam Revolts is going to get me into Thailand, which can save me from Asia Domination.
• This is a good time to play Formosan Resolution, while the US has the China Card.
The headline is clearly going to be Red Scare/Purge. I have enough Ops that I don’t need its 4 Ops, and
I have no other decent headline choices anyway (since I don’t want to De-Stalinize until DEFCON
reaches 2 so I am not immediately couped out, and since DEFCON is at 4 I might get couped out if
I play Vietnam Revolts).
Annotated Game #2 359
NORAD is going to be a pain. I must try to minimize the number of countries with both US and
USSR influence (easier said than done).
What I’d really like to do is play Vietnam Revolts for the event so that I can start spreading
communism in Southeast Asia. Unfortunately, if I do that, DEFCON 4 means that I might get couped
out. Of course, I’d hold the upper hand in a back-and-forth coup war (both because of Red Scare
and Vietnam Revolts’ +1), but the risk is that Vietnam gets couped out exactly, to 0, in which case I
have nothing to coup back.
So the first thing I do is drop DEFCON. Keeping in mind the CIA Created restriction from earlier, I
choose to coup Iran, even though Panama offers better odds. I use Formosan Resolution, so that if
the US plays the China Card this turn it’ll be cancelled. In addition, the 2 Ops card is all I need for
Mil Ops at the end of the turn (assuming DEFCON goes to 2). Using a 4 Ops is a bit of a waste when
I’m not actually all that interested in the coup and have influence to place later.
11 country for any other game purpose. This card is discarded after US play of The \
12 China Card.
13
14 The Soviets use the Formosan Resolution card for a coup attempt:
15 Coup attempt in Iran (stability 2):
16 ** USSR die roll = 6 (+2) = 8
17 The modified roll exceeds the doubled stability by 4.
18 American influence in Iran reduced by 3, now at 0
19 Soviet influence in Iran increased by 1, now at 1
20 DEFCON Level lowered to 3
21 Soviet Military Operations for this turn increased to 2
22
23 Turn 2, USA action round 1
24 The Americans play the following card for Ops:
25 #7 Ops 3: Socialist Governments (USSR)
26 They also play UN Intervention to cancel the Soviet event
27
28 The Americans play the following card to place influence:
29 #7 Ops 3: Socialist Governments (USSR)
30 2 USA influence added to Egypt, now at 2
31
32 The Americans play the following card as an Event:
33 #32 Ops 1: UN Intervention
34 Play this card simultaneously with another card that has your opponent's associat\
35 ed event.
36 The event is canceled, but you may use its Operations value normally. The cancel\
37 ed event
38 card returns to the discard pile.
It was an unexpectedly good coup result. Now I will trigger Vietnam Revolts, so that I can gain
access to the subregion.
So much for punting NATO. Oh well. Now I will shore up Thailand — keeping in mind both that I
have a +1 thanks to Vietnam, and that I need to overcontrol it to protect against the China Card.
Luckily, he just controlled Canada (in anticipation of DEFCON dropping to 2 this turn), so I
will use Special Relationship, which is perfectly-suited Ops-wise. Now his influence from Special
Relationship is mostly wasted.
23 *** NORAD -- the US may place 1 influence anywhere they already have influence ***
24 American influence in South Korea increased by 1, now at 2
That was an annoying coup result, and the NORAD influence was irritating. Now I’ll start spreading
in Southeast Asia, shore up South Korea, and make a play for India by forcing myself into Pakistan.
I can force him to respond; even if I don’t actually get India, he probably has to use the China Card
to defend it.
My prediction is accurate. Now seems like a good time to safely play CIA Created, before he plays
Fidel and makes it unplayable. I’ll use it in Southeast Asia, taking advantage of my Vietnam bonus.
Annotated Game #2 363
I certainly would prefer to play De-Stalinization rather than Marshall Plan, and now that DEFCON
is safely at 2, I can start my expansion into the Mid War regions. Because I don’t have Decolonization
(and don’t expect to get it), I will split my De-Stalinization influence between South America and
Africa.
His Fidel play is a common AR7 move and a good one. Next turn I will face a bit of a crisis with
respect to couping to drop DEFCON and protecting Venezuela.
Annotated Game #2 365
My cards in hand:
Annotated Game #2 366
For the first time, I draw a slightly below-average Ops hand. But I have little reason to complain: I
drew Defectors, which means that I’ll have worry-free headlines between now and Turn 6, and Five
Year Plan, which is a great way to discard unwanted US scoring cards. Since I have none of those at
the moment, I plan on holding Five Year Plan to next turn.
The cards I know he has in hand: Europe Scoring, Nasser, Olympic Games, Suez Crisis, and
Decolonization. I’ll keep in mind the Europe Scoring and Nasser (relevant for Marshall Plan and
Middle East scoring, respectively, though I doubt I will contest Europe at this point); I assume he
will space Decolonization.
I have nothing especially worth headlining, so I headline Captured Nazi Scientist. If I didn’t have
Captured Nazi Scientist, I might have headlined Defectors to save 1VP.
Annotated Game #2 367
Vaguely risky as a headline, since I could have headlined Socialist Governments, but it worked out
all right. Now my Marshall Plan is rather meaningless, and I may as well let him have the event.
I now have a choice of couping a battleground (probably Libya, given my Middle East scoring card),
or couping Colombia to protect South America. Given said scoring card, and the fact that I would get
one of my African battlegrounds couped if I couped Colombia, I decide to go for Libya. Unfortunately
this means that I will not be able to stop him from taking Venezuela. (The ideal card in this scenario
would have been Duck & Cover, which would have allowed me to place influence into Venezuela
or coup Colombia while simultaneously dropping DEFCON.)
I don’t need that many Ops for the coup (since I will need to save my Ops for South America
influence placement), so I use Defectors.
Annotated Game #2 368
This was a very fortunate roll. Now I have two goals: shore up South Korea and take Brazil to stop
his southward expansion into South America. This requires a 4 Ops card, and so I use Marshall Plan.
The event text is powerful but isn’t possibly going to change the scoring any more.
I don’t want to move into Uruguay just yet, since that allows the US to coup it and gain Mil Ops
to save VPs at the end of the turn. Instead I will begin to threaten the Middle East. If I take Saudi
Arabia he must take Israel in response to stop Middle East domination, and that is vulnerable to
Arab-Israeli War. Likewise, Nasser in his hand will complicate things for him.
I’ll play East European Unrest here. Although theoretically I need to replace the influence he
removes, in practice I don’t care about Europe very much any more. I have much more pressing
obligations: first, to take Saudi Arabia; second, to expand out of Angola into Zaire; third, to shore
up South Korea against future NORADs so I am not perpetually faced with a crisis there.
Annotated Game #2 370
The Middle East is now even. I’m playing Middle East scoring next and holding Five Year Plan to
next turn. Before I play the scoring card I may as well take a gamble on the Arab-Israeli War.
The score is currently at -3, which is OK for the USSR but not great.
My hand:
Annotated Game #2 374
Annotated Game #2 375
I don’t have much in the way of headlines. Che is a great USSR event but one that is not worth
triggering right now.
Of the US cards in my hand, OAS Founded is the most irritating. But Five Year Plan is a good way
to dispose of it: if I play Five Year Plan with just OAS Founded in my hand, I effectively have 3 Ops
with which to respond to OAS, rather than just 1. Kitchen Debates is not a problem as I currently
control more battlegrounds. Nor is Alliance for Progress, which I can dump right now for minimal
loss. Shuttle Diplomacy can turn the tide of Asia Scoring, but unfortunately I probably need its 3
Ops. One Small Step and Summit are useless to me.
As a result, I headline Lone Gunman. I normally hope that the US will draw this card, but this won’t
be until Turn 7 at the earliest. Plus it lets me save Brazil in the headline phase and get a sense of
whether I should delay Shuttle Diplomacy for later in the turn in case he has Asia Scoring.
Annotated Game #2 376
There’s nothing in here that is especially damning. Whether or not he uses Ask Not… this turn is
the big question: on the one hand, it’s best when used to discard truly awful cards (DEFCON suicide
cards and bad scoring cards), and none of these cards qualify (though they are certainly very bad,
Quagmire, Nasser, and Muslim Revolution especially). On the other hand, Lone Gunman is already
out, and I know what the rest of his hand is right now and can adjust my play accordingly. I think
it can go either way depending on the needs of the turn: Ask Not has to be played early in the turn,
and early in this turn the fight for South America might be too hectic to allow for it.
I will use my Lone Gunman influence to shore up Brazil so that I can coup Venezuela. I’ll coup
Venezuela with Alliance for Progress, triggering the event after I use the Ops to hopefully punt the
“US OPEC” for 0VP. (This is why Alliance for Progress is substantially worse than OPEC.)
Annotated Game #2 378
I am somewhat surprised he was willing to just eliminate himself from the Middle East like that, but
Middle East scoring did just come out, and Nasser in his hand would have only made matters worse.
Muslim Revolution is devastating, but as he shows, sometimes it is better to just bite the bullet and
accept it. Sometimes it is better to lose the Middle East instead of fighting for it, losing, and losing
the other regions too.
I will shore up Brazil, naturally. I don’t have enough Ops to take both Brazil and Uruguay, and in
any event I have access to Argentina via Chile anyway.
Annotated Game #2 379
Now is the time for Che, a fantastic USSR event. It can be better than this, but this is a good enough
use of it. Its ideal use is to create two threats at once for the US. Here, if successful, it will create
one threat (a realign against Venezuela), and defend against one at the same time (by denying him
access to Argentina). Even if my Uruguay coup is not successful, he will have to choose between
Argentina and Venezuela.
Obviously, I will use Che on Colombia first, then Uruguay.
I now opt to realign Venezuela, on the theory that I will likely be successful, and he will not have
enough Ops to simultaneously take back Venezuela and also take Argentina.
Given that I have Shuttle Diplomacy, two 1 Ops cards, and then my Five Year Plan / OAS Founded
plan, I must use Shuttle Diplomacy. Hopefully I’ll still be able to avert Asia domination when it
comes.
However, my plan backfires. In retrospect, this was a not-insignificant risk that I should have planned
for. But now the US can use a 4 Ops to take both Venezuela and Argentina, and what should have
been USSR domination of South America has turned into a dead heat (and likely US domination).
Now I have two turns of 1 Op plays. Although I’m in danger of being realigned out of Brazil, my
1 Op won’t do anything. Probably the correct move here would be either to pressure South Africa,
build up Chile, or go for Middle East control. (I could also realign Venezuela, but I prefer realigning
with more Ops rather than risk a null result.) But I play into Nicaragua instead, on some vague
theory of achieving Central America domination. Maybe I can scare him into thinking I have CA
scoring, but I think this is a dubious move in retrospect.
Annotated Game #2 382
With my final play, I do the Five Year Plan/OAS Founded trick. Depending on where he adds
influence, I can choose to respond to it, or just use the 3 Ops to take South Africa. Since he places
one into Chile, meaning I can’t get Chile with my 3 Ops, I place into South Africa instead.
40
41 ** Turn 5 Headline Phase **
My hand:
Annotated Game #2 385
I know he’s held Ask Not… to this turn. Perhaps he will headline it. My headline is going to be Junta,
one of the three key neutral Mid War cards (along with ABM Treaty and Brush War). I will try to
punt Asia Scoring ASAP, as even with Shuttle Diplomacy I’m currently not being Dominated (but
will be as soon as he grabs another country or two).
John Paul II and Special Relationship (which is NATO-activated) are both somewhat problematic. I
plan to space one of them for sure, and if I’m successful I will space the other too. If not, then I will
use UN Intervention (though I’d prefer to save it for next turn in case I draw a worse US card).
My plan with Junta is to parachute into Mexico, which is otherwise inaccessible, and then coup
Argentina. Later on, I will realign Venezuela.
Annotated Game #2 386
This was quite fortunate for me, but it does cut my hand size and leave me unable to UN either
Special Relationship or John Paul II.
Since I can no longer coup, I will just realign Venezuela.
The realign went way better than it should have. I will now use a 4 Ops to take both Venezuela and
Panama. I need to take Panama now because he might coup me out of Colombia and then I will no
Annotated Game #2 387
longer have access. (In retrospect, I should have just used U2 Incident to place 1 Op into Panama
and 2 into Venezuela, saving my 4 Ops for later. Oh well.)
Given that I no longer have access to Chile, I need to play Allende now so I can get back into that
subregion. It will also prevent him from being able to take Chile in a single Action Round.
I must respond by defending both Panama and Venezuela. Hopefully he lets up on the pressure soon
so I can start spacing my problem cards.
Annotated Game #2 389
This time I make no mistake and take Chile, ensuring USSR domination of South America. (Note
how quickly, in this game, South America has swung from one side to the other.)
Annotated Game #2 390
As the only cards left in my hand are John Paul II and Special Relationship, it’s time to look to the
stars. I space John Paul first, because my position in Europe is rather precarious and I’d really like
to not have to deal with the Pope + Solidarity in Poland.
I could defend the Middle East, but it doesn’t really affect the scoring of the region, and besides I’d
rather he not get the 2VP from Special Relationship.
Annotated Game #2 391
My hand:
Annotated Game #2 393
Annotated Game #2 394
I have several viable headlines. The Cambridge Five is the one I choose, because there’s a very high
probability that he has either Africa or South America scoring in his hand. Liberation Theology
is the other choice, though since I already control both 2-stability countries (and Central America
scoring just came out) it’s not as important as it usually is. SALT Negotiations is a possibility, but
there’s not that many great finds in the discard right now and I’d rather not let him coup me out of
Thailand. Socialist Governments is ordinarily a good one, though I’m so far behind in Europe that
it won’t even make a difference.
The Voice of America, as always, is a giant problem. I can either send it to space this turn, or I can
try to hold onto it for next turn so that it misses the reshuffle. Nuclear Subs can be disposed of on
the last AR (rather than risk the US drawing it and punishing me for a whole turn with it). Truman
Doctrine makes matters worse for me in Europe, but who cares about Europe at this point. Southeast
Asia Scoring I must trigger ASAP, since it won’t get any better for me but potentially another 2VP
for him to claim (plus the threat of Colonial Rear Guards). People often forget about it, because
it’s such a low priority compared to regions that are scored multiple times, but sooner or later he’ll
remember to take Indonesia/the Philippines.
12 **
13
14 The American player discards the following cards to be replaced:
15 #79: Africa Scoring
16 #61 Ops 3: OPEC (USSR)
17
18 USSR Headline Event: #110 Ops 2: The Cambridge Five (USSR)
19
20 The Soviets play the following card as an Event:
21 #110 Ops 2: The Cambridge Five (USSR)
22 The USA has the following scoring card:
23 South America Scoring
24 1 USSR influence added to Argentina, now at 1
25 ** Turn 6 Action Phase **
Spectacularly unluckily for him, he discards one scoring card only to draw another. With my
Cambridge Five influence, and knowledge that he has the only outstanding scoring card, I go all-out
for Argentina, the only South American battleground I do not control.
I could fight him back on Chile, but I’d have to use the China Card and he might have Ussuri River
Skirmish. I decide that I’ll let him take Chile, while I dispose of some other cards that need my
attention. Trading position for tempo, is in some sense, one of the keys of the game.
My next move is a mistake. I play Liberation Theology in order to secure a future Central America
domination. What I should have done instead, though …
15 The Americans use the South African Unrest card for realignment rolls:
16
17 Realignment roll in Argentina: USA modifier = +2, USSR modifier = +1
18 ** USA die roll = 3 (+2) = 5
19 ** USSR die roll = 5 (+1) = 6
20
21 Realignment roll in Argentina: USA modifier = +2, USSR modifier = +1
22 ** USA die roll = 2 (+2) = 4
23 ** USSR die roll = 4 (+1) = 5
…is defend against the Argentina realignment, made possible by the Chilean takeover. But I am
stupidly lucky and get away with it. I take Paraguay to make sure it does not happen again. Oddly,
I have no 2 Ops cards, I have an extra influence, and no particularly obvious place to put it. Egypt
will get purged with Sadat, Yugoslavia won’t matter for scoring anyway. I choose Afghanistan, to
protect myself from the US taking it for +1 VP on Asia scoring. Probably overcontrolling Venezuela
would have been wiser, though.
I suppose the question of what to do with SALT Negotiations has resolved itself. As I must play
Missile Envy for Ops, and since DEFCON is 4, I use it to coup, and Nigeria is the obvious target.
17
18 ** The Bear Trap card is permanently removed. **
19
20 On the next action round, USSR player must discard an Operations card worth
21 2 or more and roll less than 5. Repeat each USSR player phase until successful
22 or no appropriate cards remain. If out of appropriate cards, the USSR Player may
23 only play scoring cards until the next turn.
He must be somewhat desperate, hoping to salvage South America by any means necessary. I usually
prefer headlining Bear Trap.
The question of what to discard is not trivial. The Voice of America is the obvious choice, but holding
it to next turn keeps it out of the reshuffle. I end up going with the cautious choice and discarding
VoA, out of concern that next turn I may draw multiple bad US cards, and then I wouldn’t be able
to deal with all of them at once.
South America is no longer USSR-dominated. But I know that he has South America scoring and
must play it next AR. So if I break control of Chile with my 2 Ops Nuclear Subs, not only is he unable
to take advantage of Nuclear Subs, he must also score South America without being able to respond
to my play. In any other Action Round, he could easily repair my Chile damage, and I’d be wasting
Ops, but here he is helpless to react.
This is an extremely powerful and somewhat cruel move. It can be done even outside of the final
Action Round; if you can continually pressure him every turn, and if he can’t stop you from this
Annotated Game #2 400
with an overcontrol, then the fact that he has the scoring card means he has no choice but to give
you the last word. It is a good illustration of how scoring cards are liabilities, especially when your
opponent knows you have them.
My hand:
Annotated Game #2 402
The Mid War cards I know he must have in his hand: Brush War, Ussuri River Skirmish, and Colonial
Rear Guards. In addition, Red Scare/Purge was played on Turn 2 and has not yet shown up, so it
must also be in his hand. I am not that affected by this knowledge, except I will hold the China Card
for a bit longer until Ussuri comes out.
Special Relationship is, once again, a bit of a pain. Our Man in Tehran is a chancy event that is
nevertheless something I will try to avoid playing. Sadat I will hold for as long as possible, hoping
he gets impatient and tries to take over Egypt before I play it. And Che and Decolonization will be
very powerful for me, so I’m overall quite happy with the hand.
My headline is clear: Quagmire. Quagmire is a fantastic USSR headline: not only because it cancels
NORAD, but also because it guarantees two AR’s in a row. In particular, with DEFCON at 4, and
me holding Duck and Cover, I can coup twice, or I can coup and then use Duck and Cover to place
influence while dropping DEFCON to 2. I also have Middle East scoring which I might be able to
score advantageously during my consecutive AR’s.
Annotated Game #2 403
Given the choice of allowing him Duck and Cover, or Che (and therefore a free three Ops), I choose
Duck and Cover.
(As a side note, I’m not entirely sure why he didn’t just headline Red Scare/Purge.)
1 The Soviet exchanges the following card for the Missile Envy:
2 #4 Ops 3: Duck and Cover (USA)
3
4 The Americans play the following card as an Event:
5 #4 Ops 3: Duck and Cover (USA)
6 DEFCON Level lowered to 3
7 VPs up 2, now at -8
8 ** Turn 7 Action Phase **
Well, I don’t have Duck and Cover any more, and I have to use Missile Envy for a coup. I will go for
Iran, and hope to roll well.
Annotated Game #2 404
Revenge of the Muslim Revolution: I rolled just what I needed, and now I can score the Middle East
and deny the US even presence points. This was a huge swing for me. (In retrospect, I could have
accomplished the same with zero risk by using the 2 Ops to place 1 influence into Iran. But such a
move allows him the battleground coup.)
Well, this was unlucky, but it’s not a huge loss. I should have been realigned out of Brazil earlier
anyway, and it was only luck that I had held onto it for so long.
Now, in fact, is a very rare and very good opportunity to get rid of Our Man in Tehran while the US
does not control any Middle East country. I coup Peru with an eye towards potentially realigning
Chile.
With no particular urgencies on the board, I send Special Relationship to space and hope for VPs.
I am so close now to autovictory that I must push for VPs as hard as I can before the US Late War
advantage kicks in.
Alas, I have no more VP-granting cards right now. Currently Che is kind of useless, since I only
have one decent target (Peru). I don’t want to use the China Card, not while he still has Ussuri in
his hand. So I play Decolonization, which will get me Nigeria and also allow me to threaten Algeria.
Where the other Decolonization influence goes is not particularly important.
Oddly, he did not defend Algeria, in which case I will gladly take it.
His control of Guatemala allows him to potentially realign me out of Mexico. So I respond in turn. I
use Truman instead of Sadat because Sadat actually affects scoring right now, whereas Truman does
not.
My hand:
Annotated Game #2 410
I have a very terrible hand, but it doesn’t matter because I have enough VPs to win with Wargames.
I choose to headline The Reformer only because headlining We Will Bury You (to drop DEFCON to
2 for Wargames, and maybe for the instant win) could potentially lose me the game if he headlines
Soviets Shoot Down KAL-007 (extremely unlikely). There is no rush, since it is unlikely he can get
all the way down to -6 before I trigger Wargames.
Annotated Game #2 411
Remember back on Turn 3, when I commented that his Europe Scoring headline was a bit risky? He
got away with it last time, but this time his headline is unlucky and runs straight into Mr. Gorbachev.
It doesn’t make a big difference, though. I play We Will Bury You to drop DEFCON to 2 for
Wargames, and maybe he doesn’t have UN Intervention, in which case I don’t even need Wargames.
13 ********************************************************
14 The USSR player wins the game!!!
15 ********************************************************
Concluding thoughts:
• This game is a good example of how to play, and play against, unusual US opening setups.
He ended up dominating Europe anyway — Truman Doctrine was much of the reason why,
because even though he never played it I couldn’t get into an Ops war with him in Europe for
fear of it.
• Manipulating the timing of scoring cards is just as important as board position. South America
swung from US domination to USSR domination back to US domination, but the key was that
it got scored during USSR domination. Likewise, Middle East scoring wasn’t really that bad
for the US, but it played a critical role towards -20 because I was able to score it when he had
no presence.
• Realignments played a significant role in South America this game.
• A good opponent does not let up on you. Here, I had several crises/opportunities that I simply
never found the time to address because the US was pressuring so hard. In an ideal world, I
would have taken Iran for a Middle East control, I would have shored up Israel and made a play
for Europe. But because of his pressure, I was unable to do any of those things. Offense can
be a good defense in TS, by forcing your opponent to choose between creating opportunities
and responding to your threats.
Designer’s Notes
The Long Twilight Struggle
Like most freshman game designers, we spent many years putting this game together. Twilight
Struggle, more than anything else, is a game designed to meet our needs. We are both huge fans
of the card driven wargame, and how it has breathed new life into wargaming in general. Like a
modern day Lazarus, card driven wargames have brought our hobby back from the grave. Yet even
five years ago, when Ananda and I first decided we wanted to try our hand at design, the writing
was on the wall. Card driven games were going to become less and less like We The People, and
Hannibal, and more and more like Paths of Glory and Barbarossa to Berlin. That is not a critique
of Mr. Raicer’s work. In fact, we think that it took Paths of Glory to demonstrate just how rich a
card driven game might be. But it conflicted with another reality. We were getting older. Our lives
were less like the gaming rich days of college, and more like the work-a-day world of the “nuclear”
family. Eight hours for a single game was becoming less and less likely. So selfishly, we designed a
game to fit our schedules. You can play Twilight Struggle from beginning to end in the same time
it takes to play the “short” scenario of many other games. Heck, you can switch sides and play the
Cold War from both angles if you are really ambitious. That is a long way of saying the number one
constraint on the design was time.
The second question that we had to answer was the subject area. I believe that civil wars are the
perfect subject for the influence system. So initially, I convinced Ananda to try a Spanish Civil War
design. A couple of books on the subject quickly convinced us that it would takes years to master
the politics of that war, and frankly, we weren’t going to wait years to start. So Ananda, in a stroke
of genius, suggested the Cold War as a replacement. It was a great topic. There are very few games
that deal with the political aspects of the Cold War in a serious way—there were not that many of
them even when we were fighting the Cold War. The basic influence system translated well. The
history was a non issue, for as an International Relations major in the 1980’s, I basically spent four
years studying the Cold War. Finally, one of the best gaming experiences that I ever had was Chris
Crawford’s Balance of Power. It was a game about Cold War politics, and even more so, about the
brinksmanship of a crisis between the superpowers. To this day, computer gamers look back on
its innovation. I’ll never forget the game’s immortal line when you brought the world to nuclear
destruction over something ridiculous like funding guerillas in Kenya.
You have ignited a nuclear war. And no, there is no animated display or a mushroom
cloud with parts of bodies flying through the air. We do not reward failure.
Designer’s Notes 414
Had I failed my senior year of high school, it really would have been Chris Crawford’s fault. So,
Ananda’s golden idea provided us the chance to try and recreate some of the magic of that game.
We use the term “game” advisedly. Twilight Struggle does not reach beyond its means. Wherever
there were compromises to make between realism and playability, we sided with playability. We
want to evoke the feel of the Cold War, we hope people get a few insights they didn’t possess, but
we have no pretensions that a game of this scope or length could pretend to be a simulation.
Also important for players to understand is that the game has a very definite point of view. Twilight
Struggle basically accepts all of the internal logic of the Cold War as true—even those parts of it that
are demonstrably false. Therefore, the only relationships that matter in this game are those between
a nation and the superpowers. The world provides a convenient chess board for US and Soviet
ambitions, but all other nations are mere pawns (with perhaps the occasional bishop) in that game.
Even China is abstracted down to a card that is passed between the two countries. Furthermore,
not only does the domino theory work, it is a prerequisite for extending influence into a region.
Historians would rightly dispute all of these assumptions, but in keeping with the design philosophy,
we think they make a better game.
One very notable difference between Twilight Struggle and other Cold War games is that we assume
nuclear war would be a bad thing. Many other designs make the whole idea of letting the nuclear
genie out the bottle irresistible. From our vantage point of hindsight, nuclear war was unthinkable,
and that is why it did not happen. Yes, we came close, but we believe that rational actors would veer
away from the button. Once the button was pushed, nuclear war would have taken on a grim logic
of its own, and human extinction might have been the result.
There were many decisions made for playability, but we will touch upon two. First, not all countries
that are geographically adjacent are connected to one another. There are three reasons for this.
For instance, many countries are amalgamations, so that messes with geography from the get go.
Secondly, and most importantly, we wanted there to be a real impact to the domino theory, with
players spreading their influence slowly across the map. Think of the old documentaries with red
animated arrows streaming from the Soviet Union in all directions. Finally, and most rarely, the lack
of a connection between countries reflects the local antagonisms between two presumed allies.
The second decision that warrants a bit more elaboration is what nations were labeled “battleground
state.” Basically, there were three ways to attain this status. First, recognized regional powers got
it. The South American battlegrounds reflect this well. Secondly, if a nation possessed important
strategic resources, that also meant battleground status. Obviously, most battlegrounds in the Middle
East, as well as Angola and Venezuela, would qualify here. Finally, if a nation was an actual
battleground between the superpowers, like South Korea, it received battleground status. So, for
our English and Australian cousins, please know that we are not ranking you behind our French
allies. Instead, you are anchors of US influence in Europe and Asia at the start of the game.
There are many aspects of the game about which we are proud, but the most amusing is how
the game can capture the psychology of the Cold War. Areas become important just because your
opponent thinks they are important—he must be going there for some reason! Also, we are proud of
the interaction of the DEFCON chart with military operations. It really compels each turn to have
Designer’s Notes 415
a diversity of actions that makes for a more tense and exciting game.
At the end of the day, Twilight Struggle represents a bit of Cold War nostalgia. In a world of stateless
enemies, for whom our destruction is an end in itself, the Cold War seems a quaint disagreement
about economics. As religious chauvinism shoves aside ideology, we yearn for a simpler time absent
of invisible menaces, fighting for cherished principle against an enemy that we understood. So let
us once more pound our shoes, grab the hotline, and stand watch in Berlin. The Cold War is over,
but the game has just begun.
Glossary
Some of the terms and abbreviations commonly used in the Twilight Struggle community include:
Term Definition
_/_ Shorthand for describing the influence in a country. France at 2/3 would
mean that the US has 2 influence in France and the USSR has 3.
AR Action Round. AR1 refers to the first Action Round of a turn; AR6/7 generally
means the last Action Round of a turn
BG Battleground country. By extension, non-BG refers to a non-battleground
country.
CCW The Chinese Civil War, an optional variant
COMECON Trap A particular USSR opening setup and headline that aims to take over Europe
with Turn 1 realignments
Decol Decolonization
DEFCON suicide card A card that, if played, will cause that player to lose by thermonuclear war
because
DEFCON dropped to 1 on his turn.
DEFCON restrictions The current DEFCON affects what regions are able to be couped / realigned.
Europe at DEFCON 5 only, Asia at DEFCON 4 and higher, Middle East at
DEFCON 3 and higher. The Mid War regions can always be couped or
realigned. Note that this is distinct from DEFCON dropping each time you
coup a battleground. At DEFCON 3 you may coup a Middle East or Mid War
region battleground, but not an Asian non-battleground. At DEFCON 2, you
may only coup in Mid War regions, and even then, couping a battleground on
your turn will lose you the game because DEFCON will drop to 1. At
DEFCON 2, you may also conduct realignments in Mid War regions, but not
any other region.
De-Stal De-Stalinization
Early War regions Europe, Middle East, and Asia.
Hold card Ordinarily, you will play all of your cards except one, which becomes your
“held card” for next turn. If you play the China Card, you will hold two cards;
if you are forced to discard a card (e.g., via Blockade or Grain Sales to
Soviets), you won’t hold any.
Mid War regions South America, Central America, and Africa. Sometimes Southeast Asia, in
context.
Ops Operations. “Playing a card for Ops” refers to playing it for the Operations
points value, rather than for the event.
Overcontrol To control a country with more influence than necessary. Usually refers to
controlling the country with one more influence than necessary; double
overcontrol means controlling with two more. For example, if Thailand is at
3/0, then the US has overcontrolled it; if India is at 1/6 then the USSR has
double-overcontrolled it.
The Pope Refers to the Mid War event John Paul II Elected Pope
Glossary 417
Term Definition
RS/P Red Scare/Purge
Third World Another term for the Mid War regions: South America, Central America, and
Africa.
Turn 3 / Turn 7 reshuffle The draw deck tends to reshuffle on Turns 3 and Turn 7. This has a
considerable strategic impact on the game.
VoA The Voice of America
Copyright/Contact
Twilight Struggle is copyright GMT Games. The game was designed by Jason Matthews and Ananda
Gupta. Cover art copyright belongs to RBM Studios.
If you have any questions, comments, suggestions, please email me at twilightstrategy@gmail.com,
or contact me at the Twilight Strategy Forum²².
²²http://forum.twilightstrategy.com