Supremacy 1991?

Hmm. That is an interesting scenario. Would there be lethal amounts of fallout that spread all over the planet in this?
You can't have a good WW3 without fallout.

I mean like spreading to other countries that weren't involved in the initial exchange. You know, just to balance things out and to add some realism. So say, Malta doesn't take over the world. (ok fine, not Malta but you get what i mean)

And i feel like 1983 would be better, as that is when a resurgence in Cold War hostilities happened. Everyone seems to want this to be a nuke centered game, so how about we make manpower got down a lot, and decline after the nukes fall. You can build say, fallout shelters/bunkers to keep yourself from losing as much, and food storage and such. If you want WW3, LETS MAKE IT GOOD

*Presses nuclear bomb button repeatedly* Are you trying to tell me this isn't the button for coffee???

Yes, i do mean that. Nuclear winter that makes food production and manpower go down and morale goes down a bit. By a bit i mean to about 40% and the food shortages cause rioting etc, so you need all of your troops (that probably have low morale also) at your provinces to keep order. This would also be an optional feature that you can toggle at game creation, because no, not everyone will like this.

That's what i meant it as, except it would occur nationally.

What if in this game, instead of building up your country and trying to produce more resources and troops, everything is already built up to the max and you have to try to destroy the other player's economy with strategically placed nukes?

Also you could limit trades and production to prevent other people from building nuclear weapons. It would be more about economic warfare, but I think it could still work as a Call of War style game.

That sounds really good. I still want conventional warfare though.

Of course. I think it would be a great feature to have to use up your armies and invade quickly so they actually get a use before they die of radiation.

Lol, what about nuke proof tanks?

Sounds impressive and useful!

Yep. Now we can nuke without worrying for our men.

Maybe if it was like Men of War assault squad,
Capture a certain point then get a certain unit
E.g Merica get USSR Berlin then Merica gets Full heavy tanks to produce and so forth

No, I don't like that. Why would a country not give themselves an advantage until they captured a certain area? I know why they do it in MoW but it wouldn't make sense in something like this.

I like a mix of conventional warfare and economical destruction. I have seen many times players grouping huge armies together into one unit. Makes it a lot easier for me nukes.

Player one creates a new game. Ah, lets select the US this time. Ok, fire ICBM's, get the bombers in the air. Subs in reserve.
Wait...wait...ok, rest of the world is obliterated.
Hmm, its getting dark. Morale in all my provinces is dropping. Rebellion? Now I know what the conventional troops are for.

Player two logs on. I'll pick France. No industry, little left of the army, few people and not really happy ones. But we still have our subs. Player one is US? Oh, I'll get him. 10 SSBN's x16 SLBM's x6 MIRV's = lots of opportunity to get even. Eat that!

Game over.

That was fun, lets do it again!