Opposing Munich agreement as UK

While what you write is true I think this is working as intended. I'm no expert at reading scripts, but the Treaty of Munich includes this

#######################
# The Treaty of Munich #
########################

# United Kingdom decides.
country_event = {

id = 1210

is_triggered_only = yes

title = "EVTNAME1210"
desc = "EVTDESC1210"
picture = "Munich"

option = {
ai_chance = { factor = 100 }

name = "EVTOPTA1210" # Peace in our Time
neutrality = -5
relation = { who = GER value = -25 }
social_conservative = {
organisation = 25
popularity = 25
}

CZE = { country_event = 1201 }
}
option = {

ai_chance = { factor = 0 }

name = "EVTOPTB1210" # Oppose Agreement
USA = { neutrality = 20 }
AST = { neutrality = 20 }
CAN = { neutrality = 20 }
NZL = { neutrality = 20 }
SAF = { neutrality = 20 }
national_unity = -20
threat = { who = all value = 10 }
FRA = { country_event = 1211 }
CZE = { join_faction = allies }
}

}

country_event = {

id = 1211

is_triggered_only = yes

title = "EVTNAME1211"
desc = "EVTDESC1211"
picture = "Munich"

option = {
name = "EVTOPTA1211" # France will Fight
neutrality = -10
national_unity = 10
relation = { who = CZE value = 20 }
FRA = { war = { target = GER } }
}

}

Click to expand...

In bold you will note only France gets the war target. While the allies probably should go to war, it appears the devs wanted to let France twist in the wind.

What irritates me about this is that I thought the defining principle of the Allies was "one for all, all for one", so there would always be UK involved once France is, even on offensive wars. Apparently, I was wrong.

That, or guarantee the independence of countries that are soon to be attacked....

gunstickuncle said:

What irritates me about this is that I thought the defining principle of the Allies was "one for all, all for one"....

Click to expand...

Ask a Pole about that. They were certainly underwhelmed by the amount of support they got from UK and France after joining the Allies. But in the context of UK and France standing with each other (as opposed to with certain other Allies) you make a fair point. IMO that decision is kind of bass ackwards. France and the UK were pretty much on the same page with Munich, except that France was less eager to appease Hitler. So why indeed would UK's moving closer to France's position of non-appeasement suddenly result in the UK abandoning France? To my thinking the only way that should happen is if France chose to oppose the Munich Agreement while the UK chose appeasement, not the other way around. In the OP's situation, if there is to be a split in the Allies, then it should be UK at war with Germany while France sits it out.

The decision to guarantee Poland was seen as lunacy to some in the know, like Churchill. Britain couldn't guarantee their independence and everyone knew it.

Chamberlain overcompensated. Austria, the Rhineland, and Munich were all different crises. The incompetence of him and his foreign minister peaked when they guaranteed Poland.

Can't you DoW Germany seperately? If UK, as faction leader, goes to war, I think the rest of the Allies will have to join you. You might be sinking your relations with USA in the process, though.

You can do that if your neutrality is low enough. But usually British neutrality is higher than (25+German threat) in 1938.

gunstickuncle said:

You can do that if your neutrality is low enough. But usually British neutrality is higher than (25+German threat) in 1938.

Click to expand...

Increase threat on Germany. This, along with an inevitable rise in German armed forces, should do the trick. Let's hope it's soon enough.

FWIW, in this game I think early war for Britain is bad. They're just not ready. By '38 you can build INTs and fill out your inf with support brigades, but you won't have the tank army you need.

France, on the other hand, could deal a swift blow. At least they should be able to historically.

You can always add:
ENG = { war = { target = GER } }

But Im pretty sure the Devs overlooked something. They were right with having only France DOW Germany and not the Uk, since France wat the Ally that guaranteed the independence of Czechoslovakia. But it wasn’t just the French, the USSR had also guaranteed their independence. It was the Munich agreement that led Stalin astray and why the MLR was signed in the first place….So maybe
SOV = { war = { target = GER } }
should be added as well. It would certainly make a very interesting game

Oof said:

It was the Munich agreement that led Stalin astray and why the MLR was signed in the first place.

Click to expand...

No, it was the failure of alliance talks between SU and FRA/ENG in summer of 1939. Munich showed Stalin, that FRA/ENG didn't wish to fight.
On the other hand, if Munich gets opposed, Poland should side with Germany.

Oof said:

But Im pretty sure the Devs overlooked something. They were right with having only France DOW Germany and not the Uk, since France wat the Ally that guaranteed the independence of Czechoslovakia.

Click to expand...

I don't see how you logically got there. Look at it this way, the two choices from the English POV:

1. Agree to Munich as historically was done. Then France is going to go along, presumably because they do not feel strong enough with UKs backing to take on Germany alone. Fine. Makes sense both logically and historically.

2. Oppose Munich. This basically means UK is threatening to go to war with Germany if they don't back off the Czechs. Now just how, in that scenario, would it be logical in any manner for the result to be that France ends up at war with Germany and the UK does not?

Pro_Consul said:

I don't see how you logically got there. Look at it this way, the two choices from the English POV:

1. Agree to Munich as historically was done. Then France is going to go along, presumably because they do not feel strong enough with UKs backing to take on Germany alone. Fine. Makes sense both logically and historically.

2. Oppose Munich. This basically means UK is threatening to go to war with Germany if they don't back off the Czechs. Now just how, in that scenario, would it be logical in any manner for the result to be that France ends up at war with Germany and the UK does not?

Click to expand...

That is eminently logic. I'm with you on that one.

Opanashc said:

No, it was the failure of alliance talks between SU and FRA/ENG in summer of 1939. Munich showed Stalin, that FRA/ENG didn't wish to fight.
On the other hand, if Munich gets opposed, Poland should side with Germany.

Click to expand...

Nope, Czechoslovakia had military alliances with France and the Soviet Union at the time of the Munich agreement. When Chamberlain didn’t invite/include the Soviets for the talks about Sudetenland, Chamberlain basically destroyed the military alliance of the Soviets with Czechoslovakia without consultation. Something Stalin never forgave him.

Munich was the final nail in the coffin of Soviet-French/British military relations. After being ignored at Munich Stalin slowly began his rapprochement towards Hitler. The failed talks in the summer of 1939, for a military alliance between the Allies and the USSR, were bound to fail. First of all because of what happened at Munich (ignoring the Soviets and giving in to Hitler). Second because the Allied delegation couldn’t negotiate, they had to confer any proposal to Paris/London. Third because the Allied delegation came by boat, which took a lot of time. This was an affront to say the least since the Allies had been pushing Stalin for quick talks and when he finally agreed, yes they took the boat. The first three arguments are enough to be insulted. And when Ribbentrop came to Moscow, while the British and French were also in Moscow, and he could negotiate on his own on his own and offered Eastern Poland and the Baltic states, it was enough to tip the scales. But all this started at Munich when Stalin was ignored.

Pro_Consul said:

I don't see how you logically got there. Look at it this way, the two choices from the English POV:

1. Agree to Munich as historically was done. Then France is going to go along, presumably because they do not feel strong enough with UKs backing to take on Germany alone. Fine. Makes sense both logically and historically.

2. Oppose Munich. This basically means UK is threatening to go to war with Germany if they don't back off the Czechs. Now just how, in that scenario, would it be logical in any manner for the result to be that France ends up at war with Germany and the UK does not?

Click to expand...

Historical facts got me there (see also above): Czechoslovakia had a military alliance with France and the USSR. Not with the UK! So if Munich means war, Germany should be at war with FRA and SOV. In game it’s safe to say that this would also mean that ENG declares war on GER. It’s hard to say what would have happened in reality. Though it’s a real “what if” question, I doubt the UK would have gone to war over Czechoslovakia if the French and Russians would have honored their alliance with Czechoslovakia. Maybe something for a mod

Opanashc said:

On the other hand, if Munich gets opposed, Poland should side with Germany.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. Poland did take land from Czechoslovakia.

Oof said:

Nope, Czechoslovakia had military alliances with France and the Soviet Union at the time of the Munich agreement.

Click to expand...

If UK/French delegation could negotiate in summer of '39, and Poland agreed to let Soviet troops in, to fight the Germans (else the whole point was moot), MR probably would not have happened.

Opanashc said:

If UK/French delegation could negotiate in summer of '39, and Poland agreed to let Soviet troops in, to fight the Germans (else the whole point was moot), MR probably would not have happened.

Click to expand...

Exactly and that was my point in my reply to your post. If the French would have acted more independently from the British and would have talked with the Soviets, since both had a military alliance with Czechoslovakia, and would have stand tall together to Hitler’s demands , it’s very unlikely Hitler would have actually invaded Czechoslovakia and risk a war on two fronts. He intended to do so before Munich, but at that time it was already clear that the Soviets were taken out of the equation by Chamberlain, so there was no risk of Soviet intervention anymore.

And with the Communist and part of the Allies both opposing Germany, countries like Poland and Hungary would have granted transit rights without any question. Not granting transit rights would probably have meant that they would have stood alone against Germany, the French and the Soviets!

If we get the Munich agreement in game, we automatically reckon that the Munich conference was either successful or unsuccessful. What’s not taken into account by most players, is that when Munich starts off WWII, it might not have taken place at all. For instance if the above would have happened. In that sense it’s strange that Czechoslovakia doesn’t start with a military alliance with the French and Soviets. Those alliances should be ended if Munich is successful, but would trigger war if unsuccessful. It would definitely make the game more interesting in the 30ies and I guess it would in game change WWII. With the Soviets intervening in Europe and Germany beaten by them and the French, I reckon they would make good use of the opportunity and create a couple of puppets in Eastern Europe (East Germany, Poland and Hungary(?)) and with those actions trigger WWII and we get the “West Germany or peace event” which would trigger a British DOW (with Britain guaranteeing West Germany instead of Poland).

The more I think of it, the better this sounds for a mod