Alright, why Civil War bails Germany out?

[DicRoNero]

The whole story is covered by 6 pics arranged here: https://imgur.com/a/Hn0yC

I'm fascist Sweden. Hungary guarantees Austria and shortly creates Pact of Rome, Italy is there. Germany declares war on Austria (and effectively on Hungary+Italy). I join Pact of Rome and get into the fight too.

Shortly after that, Germany completes her Czech focuses and declares on the Czechs (who insta-join Allies). Somewhere in between I justify and attack Denmark (who joins Axis Germany, despite being 100% democratic - why such things still happen is beyond my comprehension).

Germany is obviously getting smashed, but a plot pops-up and Himmler is now in power, fighting off yet another Allies member - German Republic.

We as Pact of Rome score some 31% of war participation. Not so much - German Republic (of Allies) alone got more than that for simply emerging behind the fronlines - yet it's SOMETHING and I would expect that we as a separate entity are entitled to some gains. All the more is my astonishment when ensuing peace conference comes and the whole deal is sealed in ONE TURN by few participants.

Apparently, by normal rules me occupying Northern Germany should already make it next to impossible for anyone else to pick these lands for himself, let alone do it in just one turn. WTF?

Seriously, how we are supposed to play wars like that? I'm perfectly fine with the Allies deciding to invest all their collective score into turning the occupied Germany into their democratic battle puppy, but why should their decision affect the whole of those vanquished, including the areas they have never set their foot on?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Puppets/giving cores bypasses the 10x rule.

As for why, Pdox doesn't care. That's blatantly obvious since wrong-occupations, war contribution, and focuses continue to gut standard gameplay as broken core mechanics. You can take every victory point a target nation holds and not have 50% war contribution in some cases, then get shafted. Civil wars are a convenient bypass of otherwise established rules too, who actually holds the nation in question barely matters if you're not fighting both sides of the civil war.

 

[Jorge Firebomb]

Civil wars trump regular wars for taking land, so if you are involved in a civil war situation and aren't one of the main participants, you cannot take their land.

 

[Ironside121]

Player-Led Peace Conferences is a mod every HoI4 player needs in his template

 

[DicRoNero]

Huh, so in vanilla the only way to rectify it is to set the whole world ablaze and declare war on any other party spotted at that little strip of land that I crave?

 

[Ironside121]

Huh, so in vanilla the only way to rectify it is to set the whole world ablaze and declare war on any other party spotted at that little strip of land that I crave?

Yes.

Or only fight people who no one else is fighting.. and have no allies.

Peace Conferences have been trash since release- and haven't been touched.

 

[Alliegorical]

Somewhere in between I justify and attack Denmark (who joins Axis Germany, despite being 100% democratic - why such things still happen is beyond my comprehension).

This is completely working as intended. Denmark is under attack and would love an ally right now. No democratic faction will have them, so they turn to Germany. Germany is in a war on several fronts, and they're already at war with the country attacking Denmark, so they have nothing to lose, and an ally to gain.

I don't understand why people have a problem with things like this. You're supposed to be able to join factions of differing ideologies. If you need any proof of that, look at the US national spirit that expressly forbids it. If the Axis wins this war, rest assured that Denmark will leave the faction almost instantly. The AI will join opposing ideologies out of necessity during a war, but cannot abide being a part of them while at peace.

TL;DR not only is it intended, it's good design and should remain the way it is.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

This is completely working as intended. Denmark is under attack and would love an ally right now. No democratic faction will have them, so they turn to Germany. Germany is in a war on several fronts, and they're already at war with the country attacking Denmark, so they have nothing to lose, and an ally to gain.

I don't understand why people have a problem with things like this. You're supposed to be able to join factions of differing ideologies. If you need any proof of that, look at the US national spirit that expressly forbids it. If the Axis wins this war, rest assured that Denmark will leave the faction almost instantly. The AI will join opposing ideologies out of necessity during a war, but cannot abide being a part of them while at peace.

TL;DR not only is it intended, it's good design and should remain the way it is.

People don't like this mechanic because it's inconsistent and broken.

Peru and Brazil will join Axis in WW2, even if their attacker is fighting exclusively in South America. These days Hungary will join Japan's faction too, to whatever purpose either of those can muster across the worlds with their power projection.

I cannot agree that the shoehorned, internally inconsistent farce that is how the AI joins (and accepts) factions is somehow "good design" lol. Evidence to the contrary is too strong. The AI will throw wars helping allies that have no potential to benefit them in any capacity. Throwing is not "good design", even if it's a "wad" of something.

Nevermind that we're not addressing how the OP fought over territory, holds it presently, allegedly contributed just under 1/3 to the war (though WC itself is a joke), and has no negotiating power whatsoever magically.

 

[a_sophist]

People don't like this mechanic because it's inconsistent and broken.

Peru and Brazil will join Axis in WW2, even if their attacker is fighting exclusively in South America. These days Hungary will join Japan's faction too, to whatever purpose either of those can muster across the worlds with their power projection.

I cannot agree that the shoehorned, internally inconsistent farce that is how the AI joins (and accepts) factions is somehow "good design" lol. Evidence to the contrary is too strong. The AI will throw wars helping allies that have no potential to benefit them in any capacity. Throwing is not "good design", even if it's a "wad" of something.

Nevermind that we're not addressing how the OP fought over territory, holds it presently, allegedly contributed just under 1/3 to the war (though WC itself is a joke), and has no negotiating power whatsoever magically.

Regarding European minors joining Japan's faction, at least in 1.4.2 the problem was that once they were officially fascist, Japan sometimes simply offered before Germany (I know this via reloading and tag switching).

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Regarding European minors joining Japan's faction, at least in 1.4.2 the problem was that once they were officially fascist, Japan sometimes simply offered before Germany (I know this via reloading and tag switching).

I know, and that's still the reason now. It's an inane reason, gameplay wise. Peru has nothing to offer Germany. Germany sending 10 divisions across the Atlantic that made it (more likely that didn't) and getting absolutely bulldozed by USSR is so lacking in sanity that it makes IRL Hitler look like a brilliant political strategist.

This isn't a matter of history. There's an in-game causal question that *needs* to be answered for factions to make sense for both sides:

"What does this nation joining the faction have to offer for the joining nation, and what does the faction stand to gain from it?" Both sides of this equation should be positive, or it should not happen. Accepting new enemies to no benefit from across the world is inane, and that's not *just* from a historical perspective. That stuff shouldn't be happening, even with historical focuses off.

 

[DicRoNero]

While this is actually a side-track, I can't help asking:

TL;DR not only is it intended, it's good design and should remain the way it is.

Should Estonia join the United Chinese Front too upon being attacked by Sweden?

I'm fairly sure it's just as reproducible in 1.5.1 as it was in 1.4.2, given what I've seen so far.

 

[SnowHawkKiller]

While this is actually a side-track, I can't help asking:

Should Estonia join the United Chinese Front too upon being attacked by Sweden?

I'm fairly sure it's just as reproducible in 1.5.1 as it was in 1.4.2, given what I've seen so far.

Bulgaria now regularly joins the Co East Asian Prosperity Sphere, so given current trends...

 

[Alliegorical]

Should Estonia join the United Chinese Front too upon being attacked by Sweden?

lol no