Alternate History and asynchrony

[Big Blue Blob]

Alternate history is largely the point of the game, but communist USA is nonsense and should never happen unless the USA is conquered and made a communist puppet, which should also not be something seen too often. "Silly ahistorical" DLC should never be released. Never again shall a game be besmirched by Aztec doom fleets.

Japan attacking the USSR and escalating Khalkin Gol, by contrast, makes a lot more sense.

 

[Liquid Sky]

What you are really talking about is not having a Fascist USA (or communist)....

BUT for the Germans to influence the USA's government to the point where they would elect a fascist leader.

That's the part I don't like. Foreign involvement in local politics. Should I, as Stalin be able to (in the span of 3-4 years) influence a Democratic country into having a communist government that is friendly to me? Should Germany? In any sort of 'history'? All by sending a handful of 'spies'...and without any kind of backlash whatsoever from the foreign power.

 

[Opanashc]

Russia already lost to Japan in 1905.

Ever heard of reason why? Like, Revolution of 1905?

 

[Big Blue Blob]

What you are really talking about is not having a Fascist USA (or communist)....

BUT for the Germans to influence the USA's government to the point where they would elect a fascist leader.

That's the part I don't like. Foreign involvement in local politics. Should I, as Stalin be able to (in the span of 3-4 years) influence a Democratic country into having a communist government that is friendly to me? Should Germany? In any sort of 'history'? All by sending a handful of 'spies'...and without any kind of backlash whatsoever from the foreign power.

Not the USA. Not even Brazil. The USSR tried to mess with Brazil in 1935, failed and provoked harsh measures by the Vargas dictatorship. Staging coups should be very hard, unless against unpopular leaders who do not have the support of their armed forces (the democratic leaders in South America, like Goulart in Brazil in 1964, were easy for the CIA to topple because the local military did not like them very much).

 

[Axe99]

"Silly ahistorical" DLC should never be released. Never again shall a game be besmirched by Aztec doom fleets.

I'm not suggesting it'd be for everyone, but there are clearly HoI players out there that like the idea of some pretty ahistorical set-ups for their games, to ally Germany with the US and whatnot. It might not be for us, but if it served an audience would it be such a bad thing? As DLC, it'd only ever be optional.

 

[Hayro]

I'm not suggesting it'd be for everyone, but there are clearly HoI players out there that like the idea of some pretty ahistorical set-ups for their games, to ally Germany with the US and whatnot. It might not be for us, but if it served an audience would it be such a bad thing? As DLC, it'd only ever be optional.

Paradox should release alternate history maker dlc for hoi4 imo

 

[SpermCube]

Paradox should release alternate history maker dlc for hoi4 imo

I thought hearts of iron was alternate history maker

 

[Clueless636]

I thought hearts of iron was alternate history maker

+1

 

[Hayro]

I thought hearts of iron was alternate history maker

oh what i meant is dlc can customize the starting history borders/goverments/nations/cause of the war etc
like instead of soviet goverment, tsar nicholas II is still in charge howewer all europe and north africa (except britain and ottoman empire) fell under communism
something like that

 

[Clueless636]

oh what i meant is dlc can customize the starting history borders/goverments/nations/cause of the war etc
like instead of soviet goverment, tsar nicholas II is still in charge howewer all europe and north africa (except britain and ottoman empire) fell under communism
something like that

that would be interesting your right xD

 

[1alexey]

Ever heard of reason why? Like, Revolution of 1905?

Unless you want to seriously debate that the Revolution was not largely caused by Government`s failure to properly execute the "small Victorious war" to calm the masses, I`m not sure what you argue about. The fleets were lost before revolution, and Port-Artur was sieged as well. Russia didn`t lost the war due to revolution. It lost the war first, and then got a revolution. If it managed to win the opening of the war, the Revolution would very probably be delayed way longer than it would be needed to get a favorable peace.

 

[captainradish]

I would find a scenario like the doomsday one in HOI2 (I think) highly entertaining. At the same time, I would also like a grand campaign similar to the one that was introduced in the HOI2 mod that started in 1933 (I can't remember the name). I remember occasionally playing Germany against a Republican led USA after Roosevelt lost a re-election or a resurgent Russian civil war after Stalin was shot in '33. Rarely, a quasi-fascist USA would emerge usually because of a military coup. Sometimes a fascist England would emerge usually for the same reason. One game I remember playing had the UK join the Nazis and fight the USSR together.

It was sometimes a wild ride but usually played out the way one would expect. There was always the possibility, however. That's what I would like to see.

 

[Dinglehoff]

Its one thing for a player to take his country in a crazy direction, that's obviously something he finds interesting. Just as long as the AI doesn't do anything that's not historically plausible.

I'd be ok with the AI having a 0<___% chance of doing something like that if the player chooses ahistorical event choices, leading away from conventional WWII initiation.

 

[scroggin]

I'd be ok with the AI having a 0<___% chance of doing something like that if the player chooses ahistorical event choices, leading away from conventional WWII initiation.

Yes I'm with you there if the player goes ahistoric AI countries should respond accordingly

 

[Big Blue Blob]

Yes I'm with you there if the player goes ahistoric AI countries should respond accordingly

Yes, and that will not involve the USA going communist, unless the player conquers it and makes it so.

 

[Kovax]

The one problem that I had with the previous political implementations was not only that it was "easy" to change the political balance of another country with a few short years of espionage, but also that any changes which did occur either had no real effect, or a radical one. If, for example, the US went from a Democratic party controlled government to a Republican controlled one, there was no real change in policies, and the same ministers remained in place. If FDR lost the election, why would the Republicans leave him in office? Political drift and other effects should be moderated by shifts in the cabinet and in the ruling party: if a left-leaning democratic party is elected, they should be more sympathetic to Communists than Fascists, while if a right-leaning democratic party is chosen, they should view the Communists as a bigger threat than the Fascists. In HOI3, there was no difference.

Go one step toward a Right-wing Republic or Autocratic government in HOI3, and suddenly the Nazis are treated as fine upstanding members of the international community and the Communists are Satan incarnate. The reverse holds for left-wing equivalents. It's "all or nothing".

An election should either result in a cabinet chosen by the newly elected party (with the heads of State and Government being members of the leading party), or consist of a proportional mix of all organized parties which got enough votes to be represented, depending on the type of government. Each minister should contribute a small amount of "drift" in favor of his own faction, so an equally-divided cabinet should exert little influence on the overall country's direction, while a cabinet almost exclusively from one party would cause a stronger effect.

In addition, one should be able to have some effect on the political direction of one's own country, not only by selecting ministers, but by manipulating public sentiment, changing laws, and generally strengthening public support for one or another course of action.

Politics should matter more, but it should be harder to change.

 

[Moppy771]

On the other hand, the IJA was all kinds of terrible whenever they actually did fight the Soviets in the 1930s-40s, and I doubt the kind of reforms you'd get out of the Imperial Way Faction would improve things. Now, if the Japanese were free to concentrate everything against the Soviets, the logistics might allow them to eek out a victory, but that depends on no conflict with either China or the West.

And conflict with China is likely to break out whether the Japanese want it or not by this point; the Chinese aren't going to forget the Manchurian Incident and related Japanese aggression. Tensions will still be high, and it will be easy for something like Marco Polo to spiral out of control. Just because the new government claims it wants to restore peace with China doesn't mean anyone in China is going to believe them. And I'm dubious about how much control the Imperial Way Faction would be able to exert over the sort of junior officers who instigated many of those incidents anyway.

That said, I agree that they would probably pursue significantly different agendas (and doctrines). And of course, the cast of characters would be extremely different.

I have to add that if Japan were to attack the Soviet Union, the USA would not embargo them, plus I even think the British and Americans would supply help in the form of tanks and other equipment (like lend lease, but now Japan is getting all the junk to hit the USSR with), remember, everyone was still pretty anti Soviet during the 30s, Germany was an afterthought up until 1938. This can be a strategy for a player who does not want to end up embargoed and basically forced to attack South-East Asia for resources.

 

[Gremper]

Thing is, the world was coming from the rather large depression, and lives were slowly, but still gradually improving, thus there was relativly little change for major powers flipping their political system.

Very good point. I'm all in favour of alternative history in HOI, but it should be plausible. Even in non-democratic countries, the government needs a certain level of public acceptance, and unhappy populations are more likely to consider a radical system change an attractive option. This was very unlikely in the USA at that time due to its high standard of living, but in countries that were poor (or unhappy for other, perhaps war-related reasons), it might well have happened, I think.

Being hungry just gives people ideas, like overthrowing their government. I often feel like that myself, before lunchtime.

 

[Dinglehoff]

Yes, and that will not involve the USA going communist, unless the player conquers it and makes it so.

Where's the fun in that?
What kinds of Ahistorical USA deviations would you consider acceptable, even at a very low probability?

 

[Big Blue Blob]

Where's the fun in that?
What kinds of Ahistorical USA deviations would you consider acceptable, even at a very low probability?

Give me a plausible, well explained deviation from 1936 that would result in communist USA and I will change my mind.

Even Republicans beating Roosevelt is quite hard to explain. Communists? Poland steamrolling Germany in 1939 is about as likely, even more so.