Alternative history becoming too invasive?

[Vohen]

I don't have much of a problem with it as long as there is a Historical Focus option. If you want a relatively standard WW2, you can always make it happen.

Podcat has vented out the idea of having a menu for rules and such, similar to ck2, so an option would be to do a configuration for alt history as well, where one option would be the standard historical, another would be light ahistorical (focus aren't taken on a particular order, but only within specific branches, so Britain going to war with Iran and Iraq would be allowed), and a complete ahistorical (so monarchist/democratic Germany or communist/democratic Japan would be ok).

 

[Dalwin]

Dumb thing X is already possible, so that justifies adding dumb things Y and Z! Y and Z here being 2CW and Hapsburgs, not the Kaiserreich as that was extremely improbable (particularly by 1936) but not in the same league as the others.

This is a game and not an entry level college course for history majors. As long as a more or less historical play through is still possible it matters not one iota that PDX is also catering to the not insignificant portion of their customer base who like to play outlandish scenarios. None of these are "dumb" merely because the chance of them was exceedingly close to zero.

ACW2 is a popular theme in sci-fi literature, though I'd rather they covered instead the other of Harry Turtledove's series, the one where aliens invade at the height of WWII.

No not in this regard. There is only so much extent of "What if" can happen in terms of a historic based title and setting. Especially when your basing that what if on the actions and thoughts generated by people in order to counter man another action by a rival or formulate a plan achieve a specific objective. Restoring the dead empires like the Kaiser, or the Austro Hungarian empire are implausible because it equates to a pipe dream with no backing what so ever. The new Roman empire, is one that falls in the realm of plausibility because Mussolini wanted to do that and that is based around his historic aims and views. Whether the likelihood he would achieve it is obviously based on the context of his leadership and nations ability which can be measured through historic fact and analysis. Thats the difference.

Seriously dude, randomness and outrageous scenarios doesn't make a enriching experience, just because its a plausibility doesn't mean its gonna suddenly sprout into the reality. Sure I guess it is a plausible a giant Tsunami could've hit Japan during the war, killing the emperor and utterly demoralizing the Japanese people in which they give up because their god died. Do you think that would make a good scenario to include? No of course not because that is as unlikely to have happened as the other scenarios Paradox has forged in some of its DLC design choices.

In no way is PDX constrained to providing only historically plausible material. In fact, even with zero detours because of NFs or events this game is only loosely based on WWII to begin with.

What they have here is a game, an electronic entity for entertainment. If a significant portion of their customer base finds the outlandish scenarios to be entertaining, it would be foolish for the company to not cater to them. As long as the engine still supports a mostly historical game for those of us who prefer that, there is no real reason to complain. I am not even sure that this latter group is the majority, tbh.

Be glad this stuff is being developed and hope that it turns a profit. Enjoy those improvements that fit your preference in the free material. If it goes well enough then another and yet another update will follow which will include at least some material that fits your vision for what the game should be.

 

[Robosoldier1]

True enough: But what you measure you use to determine plausability? There were Habsurg proponents in former Constitutent states, specially the Austrian Jews, who thought that a Restoration would prevent the Anschluss. The problem is that i do believe implausability is not really an issue, its implausible and "a pipe dream" that the Germans could defeat the Allies and the Soviets at the same time. Yet an skillful Player can pull that up.

I

By the measure of the actions taken, who it pertains to, what it pertains with and how that overall impacted the surroundings to produce said outcome. Ya the axis taking over the entirety of the world may have been a long shot, but a pipe dream? Not at all. There is a reason why the world at a time was terrified of what those three major powers and their respective leaders could accomplish. It took the actions of those said Axis powers as well as differentiation in strategy, technology, resources, and much more to significantly tip the scales between the Allies and Axis.

As opposed to proponents In Austria that while may have had a presence, didn't have the capability or the support to propel their ambitions to make a difference. Restoring a Monarchial power isn't as simple as a 2 month to 1 year in game process to truly be a viable outcome. I mean just look at what it took to get Hitler into power. Time, ambition, personnel, luck and the right environment. Which you can argue wasn't there enough to justify a power like the Austro Hungarian empire to be restored, especially since many people within that country was running to the right (as was the case for alot of countries) due to political and economic pressures imposed on them because of the same actions from the Monarchial power from the past. "Hey guys I know the crown dragged ya into that wee World War, but hey I can do better I swear!" Ya doesn't seem like it would go over very well.

 

[Ryousan2k]

As opposed to proponents In Austria that while may have had a presence, didn't have the capability or the support to propel their ambitions to make a difference. Restoring a Monarchial power isn't as simple as a 2 month to 1 year in game process to truly be a viable outcome. I mean just look at what it took to get Hitler into power. Time, ambition, personnel, luck and the right environment. Which you can argue wasn't there enough to justify a power like the Austro Hungarian empire to be restored, especially since many people within that country was running to the right (as was the case for alot of countries) due to political and economic pressures imposed on them because of the same actions from the Monarchial power from the past. "Hey guys I know the crown dragged ya into that wee World War, but hey I can do better I swear!" Ya doesn't seem like it would go over very well.

The problem is that if you apply that standard you have ditch all ideology changes within a nation, something that require a radical change of world view from a significant portion of the pupolation of a country to be even plausible, as per you Hitler example, who led a rather marginal movement until the opportunity arose. You can headcannon the opportunity in the A-H case, but I will agree taht some flavor events would be greatly welcomed. SOme people would like to see Tsarism path for Russia: Based on the fact that the White Movement was still extant abroad Russia, they had a clear sucessor to the throne, Soviet Russia was i na bit of turmoil at the the time, yet for some people that wouldnt be enough and say Russia should stick to be red forever. The question is not about if we should het Trotsky or the Tsar. but, why not both?

I say , as a rule of thumb, that enough for a path to be possible. The charm of the game lies in challenging plausibility.

 

[Robosoldier1]

This is a game and not an entry level college course for history majors. As long as a more or less historical play through is still possible it matters not one iota that PDX is also catering to the not insignificant portion of their customer base who like to play outlandish scenarios. None of these are "dumb" merely because the chance of them was exceedingly close to zero.

ACW2 is a popular theme in sci-fi literature, though I'd rather they covered instead the other of Harry Turtledove's series, the one where aliens invade at the height of WWII.


In no way is PDX constrained to providing only historically plausible material. In fact, even with zero detours because of NFs or events this game is only loosely based on WWII to begin with.

What they have here is a game, an electronic entity for entertainment. If a significant portion of their customer base finds the outlandish scenarios to be entertaining, it would be foolish for the company to not cater to them. As long as the engine still supports a mostly historical game for those of us who prefer that, there is no real reason to complain. I am not even sure that this latter group is the majority, tbh.

Be glad this stuff is being developed and hope that it turns a profit. Enjoy those improvements that fit your preference in the free material. If it goes well enough then another and yet another update will follow which will include at least some material that fits your vision for what the game should be.

Loosely based on? Right cause taking the time period, figures, equipment, tactics, politics, economics, internal country issues, resources, key events and much more during 1936 to 1945 is simply a loose interpretation of things, ya? NO. They marketed this game as a grand strategy title based on one of the most prominent conflicts within world history, and thats what most if not all people inherently were looking for when buying this game.

As compared to, "what meme can we come up with that falls in the realm of history but has no applicability here in this era in which this conflict takes place in?" Ya I must've completely overlooked that session in history class when the Byzantine Empire didn't really fall to Seljuk turks, they were there the whole time, Greece just needed to take a few bits of territory and they will uncover an empire that was founded during the age of antiquity.

Or better yet lets establish a communist dictatorship in an ancient asiatic culture that has had dedication for hundreds of years to a set of beliefs and figures who they view as literal gods among men, to what some Russian is saying about equal rights for workers.

I'll be more glad they prioritize elements within their focus tree more for actual WW2 era plausibilities as opposed to the offshoot BS, they seem to keep ramping up because people like you disregard the value of history and just enjoy doing the outrageous simply because you don't see the intriguing complexity and interest that so many people have come to appreciate this moment in history emulates. Which is still shaping our society and the globe to this very day.

 

[Ryousan2k]

Loosely based on? Right cause taking the time period, figures, equipment, tactics, politics, economics, internal country issues, resources, key events and much more during 1936 to 1945 is simply a loose interpretation of things, ya? NO. They marketed this game as a grand strategy title based on one of the most prominent conflicts within world history, and thats what most if not all people inherently were looking for when buying this game.

So, in your assessment of the time period, figures, equipment, tactics, politics, economics, internal country issues, resources, key events and much more during 1936 to 1945 was possible for Luxemburg to pull a World Conquest? Becasue that was what you signed for when bought the game

P.S: The Byzantines werre felled by the OTTOMAN Turks/the 4th Crusade

 

[Dalwin]

Loosely based on? Right cause taking the time period, figures, equipment, tactics, politics, economics, internal country issues, resources, key events and much more during 1936 to 1945 is simply a loose interpretation of things, ya? NO. They marketed this game as a grand strategy title based on one of the most prominent conflicts within world history, and thats what most if not all people inherently were looking for when buying this game.

As compared to, "what meme can we come up with that falls in the realm of history but has no applicability here in this era in which this conflict takes place in?" Ya I must've completely overlooked that session in history class when the Byzantine Empire didn't really fall to Seljuk turks, they were there the whole time, Greece just needed to take a few bits of territory and they will uncover an empire that was founded during the age of antiquity.

Or better yet lets establish a communist dictatorship in an ancient asiatic culture that has had dedication for hundreds of years to a set of beliefs and figures who they view as literal gods among men, to what some Russian is saying about equal rights for workers.

I'll be more glad they prioritize elements within their focus tree more for actual WW2 era plausibilities as opposed to the offshoot BS, they seem to keep ramping up because people like you disregard the value of history and just enjoy doing the outrageous simply because you don't see the intriguing complexity and interest that so many people have come to appreciate this moment in history emulates. Which is still shaping our society and the globe to this very day.

Loosely based indeed. Even the fact that you include equipment in your list tells me you have not put much thought into this. Regardless of what names they put on them all medium tank II's are exactly the same for all nations as are light fighter III's etc. Any historical names are merely there for color and immersion. There is no basis in history for the equipment or for the stats on it other than the fact that WWII used tanks and planes.

Then you have things like a highly abstract supply system. While I find this to be playable and better than what was in HOI3 it is not without its problems. There is really nothing that slows German expansion as they get deeper in Russia. Lacking such an obvious and major part of the war, how can anyone claim it is more than simply loosely based? Even the company says that this is a "sandbox game set in the WWII time period."

So by all means feel free to prefer that the game be even more historical (as I do), but that does not make it necessary or even right for anyone to attack or even ridicule those who instead prefer a game that is speculative to the point of being sheer fantasy.

 

[Robosoldier1]

So, in your assessment of the time period, figures, equipment, tactics, politics, economics, internal country issues, resources, key events and much more during 1936 to 1945 was possible for Luxemburg to pull a World Conquest? Becasue that was what you signed for when bought the game

P.S: The Byzantines werre felled by the OTTOMAN Turks/the 4th Crusade

I signed up for a game that encompasses WW2. It was paradox prerogative to have meme outcomes such as super tiny powers become super powers. Overall why is it such an issue for some people to want more WW2 in a obviously WW2 aimed game? I just don't get why people get so mortified when I dare suggest enhancing the historic experience and not the crazy Alt-history scenarios, as if somehow they will be worse off for doing so. Would it be nice to see a Germany actually develop tiger tanks and spice up their tank production instead of wasting all their techs on 1939 medium 1s? Would it be nice to see America and the Allies as a whole actually launch a coordinated D-day? Would it be nice to see Vichy and Free France get more of a role and not have Vichy outright join the war even though it shouldn't? Would it be nice to see the Ai actually defending its strategic points like the Suez, Malaya, and being proactive in other fronts? Would it be cool to actually have a resistance system in place where spy networks, information wars, partisans had a more active role then park cavalry on X number of titles to stop the population from being pissy? Would It just be nice to delve more into the layers that made WW2 what it is and not waste peoples money when it comes to one of the most pinnacle decision making systems in the game?

 

[hkrommel]

This is a game and not an entry level college course for history majors. As long as a more or less historical play through is still possible it matters not one iota that PDX is also catering to the not insignificant portion of their customer base who like to play outlandish scenarios. None of these are "dumb" merely because the chance of them was exceedingly close to zero.

ACW2 is a popular theme in sci-fi literature, though I'd rather they covered instead the other of Harry Turtledove's series, the one where aliens invade at the height of WWII.

I admittedly overstated my objection. It's less that Paradox is doing alternate history at all, and more that they're doing alternate history before they even have history itself (and its plausible ofshoots) functioning halfway properly. It gives the impression that their priorities are in the wrong place.

 

[Ryousan2k]

I signed up for a game that encompasses WW2. It was paradox prerogative to have meme outcomes such as super tiny powers become super powers

My friend HOI ALWAYS gets silly. In my latest Run, WW2 was done by 1940 and there was another War going between the Allies and the Comintern. The French COmmune spawn out of thin air, which borked the AI. Long History Short, somehow ended up with Democratic France in the Comintern and Global War still raging, and taht was on Historical. Such things will not be fixed in a single update. And probably will never get fixed completly. Because the sandbox element is the allure of the game. And it will never be 100% historically accurate

You are in for a long haul in the best case, as those problems will take the Game`s life cycle to be adressed. Or , in the worst case, you will just keep waiting

 

[Robosoldier1]

My friend HOI ALWAYS gets silly. In my latest Run, WW2 was done by 1940 and there was another War going between the Allies and the Comintern. The French COmmune spawn out of thin air, which borked the AI. Long History Short, somehow ended up with Democratic France in the Comintern and Global War still raging, and taht was on Historical. Such things will not be fixed in a single update. And probably will never get fixed completly. Because the sandbox element is the allure of the game. And it will never be 100% historically accurate

You are in for a long haul in the best case, as those problems will take the Game`s life cycle to be adressed. Or , in the worst case, you will just keep waiting

Good job man your just summarizing the core problem I have with the game, it isn't doing enough to ensure a WW2 playthrough. Either by lack of challenge by the AI, lack of refinement in current systems, lack of sufficient historical choices and challenges to not only drag the game on a bit more but also not make it an utter steam roll. Or memey stuff plays out like the French commune utterly side swiping the whole session and just shoots the fun of trying to play out the biggest conflict known to man.

 

[Dalwin]

I admittedly overstated my objection. It's less that Paradox is doing alternate history at all, and more that they're doing alternate history before they even have history itself (and its plausible ofshoots) functioning halfway properly. It gives the impression that their priorities are in the wrong place.

I can find no flaw in that statement.

Now some of the things that I think we both want to see included have nothing to do with NFs or events and won't be mentioned this early in the development of a DLC. If I had to pick one thing that I think is most blatantly missing to make this a better WWII game it would be some aspect of the supply system that slows Germany down as they push deeper into Russia. It was the terrain and the weather that stopped the initial push as much as it was the Red Army. The game simply does not reflect that. Currently, once they get across the main fortified river line, German progress actually accelerates and continues to do so until capitulation. That bothers me a lot more than some ACW2 scenario that I will almost certainly never play.

 

[Robosoldier1]

Loosely based indeed. Even the fact that you include equipment in your list tells me you have not put much thought into this. Regardless of what names they put on them all medium tank II's are exactly the same for all nations as are light fighter III's etc. Any historical names are merely there for color and immersion. There is no basis in history for the equipment or for the stats on it other than the fact that WWII used tanks and planes.

Then you have things like a highly abstract supply system. While I find this to be playable and better than what was in HOI3 it is not without its problems. There is really nothing that slows German expansion as they get deeper in Russia. Lacking such an obvious and major part of the war, how can anyone claim it is more than simply loosely based? Even the company says that this is a "sandbox game set in the WWII time period."

So by all means feel free to prefer that the game be even more historical (as I do), but that does not make it necessary or even right for anyone to attack or even ridicule those who instead prefer a game that is speculative to the point of being sheer fantasy.

Why is equipment a loosely based point? Just because the historic performance features don't pertain to each and every piece of equipment? Even though the logic behind the decision clearly is a reason of balance and not because there trying to separate themselves away from WW2? You ever play coh2? Or men of war? Those are WW2 strategy games and not everything does as the historic counterparts did well. Yet it still is considered a WW2 game, set in WW2. In terms of supply system that lack of refinement doesn't dissuade the game from falling out side the WW2 setting. Just because the engine of a plane is not running as well as it should does that make it any less of a plane? No, of course not.

Also I'm not trying to ridicule anyone. I only want Paradox to stop trying to go so beyond the threshold of alternative history that it just overwhelms the game when it has no basis for it. Unless they can show any major evidence for the possibility of the Kaiser coming back, the communists taking over Japan and whatever crab shoot idea they come up with, then I'm gonna be skeptical and annoyed.

 

[Dalwin]

What I am saying is that all of the equipment in game, every piece of it, is abstract and uniform across all nations. None of it is based on historical performance in any way. That does not make it bad. Hell, I love this game, but it does make it not an historical WWII simulation. It is a game set in the WWII era and loosely based on the capabilities of the participants. Were this not the case the Axis would lose 90-95% of games instead of roughly 50%.

They have said many times that given a choice between history and playability they are going to choose the latter.

 

[Ironside121]

It's an option. Whats wrong with (keyword here) Alternative Scenarios. Hell you can even start a war with Russia after you finish off Germany. I don't mind as long as they dont take anything away from the scenarios that actually happened, and even improve upon them at the same time even.

Operation Unthinkable WAS a possibility though. The Cold War happened for a reason.

 

[safe-keeper]

Operation Unthinkable WAS a possibility though. The Cold War happened for a reason.

Plus, the player doing wacky stuff is one thing, you can do crazy things in all games. The problem is when the AI is also running around doing them, whether you want it to or not.

So, in your assessment of the time period, figures, equipment, tactics, politics, economics, internal country issues, resources, key events and much more during 1936 to 1945 was possible for Luxemburg to pull a World Conquest? Becasue that was what you signed for when bought the game

See above :/ . Sure, if I play Mario Kart 8, I have the option to drive backwards and try to crash into other racers for fun. Doesn't mean I want the AI to do the same.

This thread isn't about gaming the system and taking over the world as Luxembourg anyhow, of course but just saying.

 

[BulgarianFocusTree]

Why wouldn't you want alternate history content? I know what happened in history. I want to lead Bulgaria or Greece to glory.
Meanwhile, there is a regular focus tree for every country that allows you to engage in the non-alt history content. Why ruin my fun when your fun is already accommodated?

 

[Liquid Sky]

Operation Unthinkable WAS a possibility though. The Cold War happened for a reason.

And there is a reason it stayed cold.

 

[acur123]

And there is a reason it stayed cold.

Yeah, the allies got nukes. Anthony Beevor discovered that Stalin was planning an offensive against the West for about September 1945, to push them off the mainland. The nuking of Hiroshima and Nakasaki put him off that, and the war ended happily with a somewhat vapid friendship instead of WW3 a few months after WW3 lol.

 

[Ironside121]

And there is a reason it stayed cold.

And as we all know, it nearly escalated. Maybe not in the games timeframe, but both sides can have a shitload of nukes by the end of the game anyway- so the general situation is still the same.