In most of my games where the SU defeats the nazis, they hold onto all of Europe, which I find a little unrealistic. Is the AI programmed to liberate in HOI3?
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
somehow i have to disagree, I can imagine every single nation to create puppet states, except one: USSR
they would hang on to every inch of Europe in case of a total victory, in RL the difference was there because of the semi-alliance russia and the Allies had, thus they had to establish an image of freedom and independence in their own zone
ofcourse, the german partiation forced the major powers to create their variants of an "Independent" nation, I could imagine whatever nation gets splitted by temporary allies before end of war, it would happen the same, be it Sermany, Hungary, Sweden, France, UK, or whatever
they would hang on to every inch of Europe in case of a total victory, in RL the difference was there because of the semi-alliance russia and the Allies had, thus they had to establish an image of freedom and independence in their own zone
ofcourse, the german partiation forced the major powers to create their variants of an "Independent" nation, I could imagine whatever nation gets splitted by temporary allies before end of war, it would happen the same, be it Sermany, Hungary, Sweden, France, UK, or whatever
jorian said:
Hrm.... This always seemed rather odd too me, but the USSR was rather ambiguous when it came to complete annexation versus puppeting.
On one side you had pretty much puppets like Mongolia, the DDR, and Poland.
And on the other you have states incorporated into the USSR like the Baltics and Ukraine.
I think this came about mostly due to Stalin's personal preferences and not an official policy. It seems that he mostly wanted to retain the borders that the Tsarist Russia had more than anything else and saw eastern Europe more of a bother and a buffer zone than a part of the USSR.
Had the USA not had nukes, he might have acted differently and annexed Poland and East Germany but we don't really know how that would have played out.
jorian said:somehow i have to disagree, I can imagine every single nation to create puppet states, except one: USSR
they would hang on to every inch of Europe in case of a total victory, in RL the difference was there because of the semi-alliance russia and the Allies had, thus they had to establish an image of freedom and independence in their own zone
ofcourse, the german partiation forced the major powers to create their variants of an "Independent" nation, I could imagine whatever nation gets splitted by temporary allies before end of war, it would happen the same, be it Sermany, Hungary, Sweden, France, UK, or whatever
I must disagree with you. As far as I can see USSR under Stalin was only out there to get what had been part of the Russian empire for centuries. They never added anything more into the Union (except for eastern Poland, but thats a clear bufferzone for you).
The leadership of USSR were smart enough to understand that having puppet would make it much easier to govern the buffer states than trying to take the power directly.
It would be interesting to have an AI that liberates useless pieces of land as well... and maybe Great Britain won't give up Northern Ireland every time... (no offense, people of Ireland )
)
candyman82 said:
Hmm. I think if the Soviets took ALL of Europe they wouldn't be inclined to liberating. Pretty much the whole reason the Allies even invaded Normandy was to avoid completely dominance of Europe by the Soviets. Probably incorporate everything but maybe France into the Soviet Union.
The Baltics would identify more with the Soviet Union than, say, Italy. That's why it was incorporated. If the USSR rolled over Europe, there is no way in hell it'd be able to keep the Italians, Germans, etc. from revolting because they'd have nothing in common with the Soviet Union.
People forget that we're talking about the USSR, not Russian SFSR. The USSR was created to give self-rule to various ethnically diverse parts of the Russian SFSR, which ceded parts of its territory left over from the Russian Empire to things like a Turkmen SSR, Ukrainian SSR, etc. If the Baltics got annexed to the Russian SFSR as a permanent thing (this would lack autonomy compared to SSR status) then it wouldn't have gone over very well.
This is why if the USSR ever falls in game, all the SSRs (assuming it isn't a total victory and many SSRs remain untouched as the Russian SFSR falls) should go independent and either continue fighting the invaders or surrender. Because regardless of how much freedom each SSR had foreign-policy wise (and it wasn't much of course), it was a Union of various independent (at varying degrees) Republics. To treat the USSR as its own 'country' (like Germany or Bulgaria) in the case of defeat and such makes no sense.
People forget that we're talking about the USSR, not Russian SFSR. The USSR was created to give self-rule to various ethnically diverse parts of the Russian SFSR, which ceded parts of its territory left over from the Russian Empire to things like a Turkmen SSR, Ukrainian SSR, etc. If the Baltics got annexed to the Russian SFSR as a permanent thing (this would lack autonomy compared to SSR status) then it wouldn't have gone over very well.
This is why if the USSR ever falls in game, all the SSRs (assuming it isn't a total victory and many SSRs remain untouched as the Russian SFSR falls) should go independent and either continue fighting the invaders or surrender. Because regardless of how much freedom each SSR had foreign-policy wise (and it wasn't much of course), it was a Union of various independent (at varying degrees) Republics. To treat the USSR as its own 'country' (like Germany or Bulgaria) in the case of defeat and such makes no sense.
Last edited:
well i preffer su annexing all it can
but i can't stand watching some like usa or uk to do the same
but i can't stand watching some like usa or uk to do the same
Why would the SU want to annex all it can? Their policy was spreading socialism across the world, not annexing other nations to form a glorious single world government or whatever. And I already said that if the Soviets took control of Italy or whatever, they would have to make it independent or else face decades of protests, militants, and utter hatred towards foreign rule.
Lazy_Boy said:
Stalin was offered northern Norway by the allies, and the red army had also liberated this part of Norway when Germany surrendered. However Stalin refused because they had no historical territorial claims on the area, and it was no natural place for the allies to launch an invasion of the Soviet Union from. In other words, he wanted a bufferzone, not to conquer the world.
One must remember that Russia had been invaded many times, and that with eastern europe as puppets he would avoid that. They also did withraw from Greece and Northern Iran without spreading communism.
At the end of WW2 Russia was in a bad way. Thier industry and society was still up in arms. They were still putting down peasants rebelions and food riots. They were still rooting out White Army hold outs.
Stalin wanted a strong Communist country. Not world revolution (one of the reasons he an trotsky had a problem.) He placed importance on areas with historic Russian ownership because he was most likely to keep them without Allied intervention. Remeber that it was less the 20 years since the Bolshivic Revolution when the US,UK, French, Japan, Italien, and even Serbian Armies held some of the traditional russian land so the White Army could try to pry the Red army out of Petrograd and its locals. This led to 3 years of running battles with the Red Calvary winning it for the Commies.
I know an unwanted history lesson but this is why the USSR annexed some while creating puppet states out of others.
Stalin wanted a strong Communist country. Not world revolution (one of the reasons he an trotsky had a problem.) He placed importance on areas with historic Russian ownership because he was most likely to keep them without Allied intervention. Remeber that it was less the 20 years since the Bolshivic Revolution when the US,UK, French, Japan, Italien, and even Serbian Armies held some of the traditional russian land so the White Army could try to pry the Red army out of Petrograd and its locals. This led to 3 years of running battles with the Red Calvary winning it for the Commies.
I know an unwanted history lesson but this is why the USSR annexed some while creating puppet states out of others.