Austrian and Hungarian restoration

[Augustus93]

well that actually was the case historically with Austria-Hungary from 1867-1918. both the empire of austria and kingdom of hungary were extant and had their own parliaments. what was weird was that two countries consented to the notion of a unitary state under the same monarch.



this. so much this.

No, it was a single country. Croatia also had an independent government under Hungary and still the land belonged to Hungary. Hungarians just had more autonomy than other nationalities because the Austrians were really worried about the Hungarian drive for independence. They had to deal with 2 major independence wars, one was Rákóczi's War of Independence and the other one was the Hungarian revolution of 1848-1849. Especially the latter was worrying for the Austrians since they were basically beaten at one point, until the coward Habsburgs brought in their buddies the Russians to stump the glorious independence war.

 

[shri]

I would call the Hapsburgs clever not cowards, they managed to maintain their empire for over 800 years and were almost perennially at war. By the way despite the strong assertions of
@Magyar1988, there was a strong movement for "Monarchy" in Hungary in the 1920s and pro-Hapsburg movements, that is why- Admiral Nicolas Horothy was declared -REGENT and not as King or Dictator or President etc. Of-course, once he became Regent, Horothy was loathe to leave the throne and even made his son the deputy Regent.

In the Austrian Empire which lasted till 1867, the Hungarians, Croats and Czechs had some autonomy and from 1867 onward, the Hungarians had a lot of autonomy but the Croats, Poles, Jews and Czechs also had sizeable amount of autonomy. In light of that, Croat lands giving Hungary cores will become weird, but Transylvania getting Hungarian cores is natural.
The population distribution in Austrio-Hungarian Empire was slightly above 25% German and slightly below 20% Hungarian approx with the bulk i.e. over 55% being the others which included- Czechs, Poles, Slovaks, Slovenes, Croats, Serbs, Bosnians, Italians, Ruthenians (Ukrainians), Romanians and the Jews.
This meant that it became a multi-ethnic cauldron quite similar to the Russian Empire and its successor the USSR but unlike the Homogeneous nation states in Western Europe like- Germany, Italy, France etc.
Post WW1, with newly found Independence, the chances of a - "peaceful re-alignment was beyond impossible" and even a conquest would have created a lot of tensions though no one state had the wherewithal to conquer all the others. Though with the combined horrors of WW1 and WW2 and the further communist ruled iron fisted rule in many of these states, a substantial part of these people would have wished for a Hapsburg to rule them. Hindsight 20/20 is a strange thing.

 

[Augustus93]

I would call the Hapsburgs clever not cowards, they managed to maintain their empire for over 800 years and were almost perennially at war. By the way despite the strong assertions of
@Magyar1988, there was a strong movement for "Monarchy" in Hungary in the 1920s and pro-Hapsburg movements, that is why- Admiral Nicolas Horothy was declared -REGENT and not as King or Dictator or President etc. Of-course, once he became Regent, Horothy was loathe to leave the throne and even made his son the deputy Regent.

In the Austrian Empire which lasted till 1867, the Hungarians, Croats and Czechs had some autonomy and from 1867 onward, the Hungarians had a lot of autonomy but the Croats, Poles, Jews and Czechs also had sizeable amount of autonomy. In light of that, Croat lands giving Hungary cores will become weird, but Transylvania getting Hungarian cores is natural.
The population distribution in Austrio-Hungarian Empire was slightly above 25% German and slightly below 20% Hungarian approx with the bulk i.e. over 55% being the others which included- Czechs, Poles, Slovaks, Slovenes, Croats, Serbs, Bosnians, Italians, Ruthenians (Ukrainians), Romanians and the Jews.
This meant that it became a multi-ethnic cauldron quite similar to the Russian Empire and its successor the USSR but unlike the Homogeneous nation states in Western Europe like- Germany, Italy, France etc.
Post WW1, with newly found Independence, the chances of a - "peaceful re-alignment was beyond impossible" and even a conquest would have created a lot of tensions though no one state had the wherewithal to conquer all the others. Though with the combined horrors of WW1 and WW2 and the further communist ruled iron fisted rule in many of these states, a substantial part of these people would have wished for a Hapsburg to rule them. Hindsight 20/20 is a strange thing.

Nicolas Horothy, who is that? His name was Horthy Miklós. There was no strong movement for reinstalling a Habsburg king. The pro-Monarchy movement was as I said almost exclusively about installing a Hungarian King on the throne. Looking at the past and how it turned out does nothing as those people did not know how their future would turn out. Perhaps if we do something stupid in this generation like having a nuclear war then the following generations will all say that how stupid these 21th century humans were that they built weapons that killed over 90% of the people and basically reversed development to the stone ages.

 

[asdfsadf]

I would agree with you on many points, but Croatia was widely recognized as a historic part of Hungary since pretty much the middle ages. The region was also part of the Hungarian-administrated part of the Empire, so I would say it's fair to give them cores on the area.

Especially since Croatian relations with Hungary were pretty good, and relations with Serbia, not always so good.

 

[Augustus93]

I would agree with you on many points, but Croatia was widely recognized as a historic part of Hungary since pretty much the middle ages. The region was also part of the Hungarian-administrated part of the Empire, so I would say it's fair to give them cores on the area.

Especially since Croatian relations with Hungary were pretty good, and relations with Serbia, not always so good.

Hungary should indeed have cores on all its historical territory. It was the driving force behind Hungary siding with the Axis and wanting to have war. Even the short lived communist regime after the first world war attacked its newly formed neighbors (and it ended in a disaster for Hungary). Many Hungarians to this day want those territories back and it is not at all uncommon to see it being on cars etc.

 

[Kovax]

The phrase translates to something like "No, No, Never!", meaning that they will never consent to the terms of the Trianon Treaty and surrender claims to the land. At the time of the game, it was a very valid and crucial issue (probably more pressing than the Sudeten Germans), despite official efforts to constrain it (not only in those other countries, but by the Horthy government, who realized that war would be disastrous), but at this point in time, many of those areas have drifted culturally to the extent that they would hardly be recognizable as formerly Hungarian, although a few towns and enclaves STILL hold strongly to Hungarian traditions and church affiliations.

As for historical claims, note that the battle of Nandorfehervar (Hungary and Papal peasant recruits against the Turks - Catholic churches STILL ring the bells at noon every day in commemoration of the "miraculous" victory) was fought near modern Belgrade, which was a Hungarian border fortification at the time. The WWI boundaries extended somewhat short of that, though.

The other side of the issue was that factories were on one side of the border, their raw materials on the other. Farms were isolated from the cities they served. The boundaries were chosen to look good on a map, rather than on strictly ethnic lines (which were so intermixed as to be impossible) or on their impact, which was disastrous.

The incomplete wargoals system in HOI3 didn't even allow HUN to claim its own (ahistorically limited) cores in Romania; it was a choice between claiming "all" or "nothing".

Also note that the efforts in the early '30s to install Charles, the Hapsburg heir, to the vacant throne of Hungary met with fierce resistance both within the country and without, leading to the conclusion that to do so would inevitably lead to declarations of war by the Little Entente with French backing, and probably to an internal revolt. Horthy (Hungarian names always place the family name first, as do most Asian cultures) may have had personal motives for preventing Charles from taking the throne, but it was rather apparent that the alternative would probably have destroyed the country.

 

[aruon]

so i take it we all at least agree that Hungary should have a lot more claims and coring opportunities?

 

[shri]

@Magyar 1988
Sorry for the wrong spelling, though there was no need to take offense on that front.
Often names translated into English are different from the original-
Miklos is often translated in many books as Nicholas or Nicolas.
Similarly, Nicolai is also translated as Nicholas.
Rupprecht is similarly translated as Rupert
Karl as Charles and
Istvan as Stephen
and so on and so forth.

@Kovax
Thanks for the explanation on the name. Horthy Miklos and why it is so written.

 

[NsG.Strategist]

There is a very important reason Hungarians wouldn't join Austria in the restoration of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and that is Burgenland. The territory that belonged to Hungary before WW I was given to Austria at the Treaty of Trianon even thought Austria lost the war. Hungarian people even fought a gerilla war for it after the decision. So in theory to be an alliance between Austria and Hungary the issue of Burgenland needs to be settled.

 

[Gott mit uns]

No, it was a single country. Croatia also had an independent government under Hungary and still the land belonged to Hungary. Hungarians just had more autonomy than other nationalities because the Austrians were really worried about the Hungarian drive for independence. They had to deal with 2 major independence wars, one was Rákóczi's War of Independence and the other one was the Hungarian revolution of 1848-1849. Especially the latter was worrying for the Austrians since they were basically beaten at one point, until the coward Habsburgs brought in their buddies the Russians to stump the glorious independence war.

I would agree with you on many points, but Croatia was widely recognized as a historic part of Hungary since pretty much the middle ages. The region was also part of the Hungarian-administrated part of the Empire, so I would say it's fair to give them cores on the area.

Especially since Croatian relations with Hungary were pretty good, and relations with Serbia, not always so good.

While it might seem true, officialy Austria-Hungary were two countries sharing a same monarch and external politics. All internal politics of Hungary were its own to govern. It was also largely different than Croato-Hungarian Agreement of 1868, which wasn't really respected by the Hungarians.

Regarding the relations, it was quite the opposite. Croatian-Hungarian relations were desperately low, mainly because Hungary treated Croatia as an southern extension of Hungary rather than as a sovereign state within Lands of St. Stephen. On the other hand, relations with Serbia were high mainly because of the dissatisfaction and pan-yugoslavism, which again got really low soon after Kingdom of Yugoslavia was formed, reasons for it the authoritan rule from Belgrade and Serb dominance in the so called union.

 

[Noctoras]

Core creation doesnt exist in Hearts of Iron. There is only your core-territory and your non-core-territory and no way to convert it.

Then there need to be more cores. Germany'S boarders from 1871 plus Western Czech Republic, Southern tirol and Austria should be potential cores for Germany, same for Austria Hungary. Norway could also be a core for Sweden historically, Corse for Italy and more. The coring in HoI sometimes is really really ridiculous. I would prefer a game till 1990 with coring after ~15 years anyway

 

[Augustus93]

Then there need to be more cores. Germany'S boarders from 1871 plus Western Czech Republic, Southern tirol and Austria should be potential cores for Germany, same for Austria Hungary. Norway could also be a core for Sweden historically, Corse for Italy and more. The coring in HoI sometimes is really really ridiculous. I would prefer a game till 1990 with coring after ~15 years anyway

I thought that Germany already had cores on whole of Austria and the Sudetenland. Why would Sweden have Denmark as a core? Too much time have passed since and also Sweden never had control over Norway to begin with, they only had unions. If anything Sweden could potentially have cores on Finland, but again the time that have passed would be too much.

 

[Augustus93]

Then there need to be more cores. Germany'S boarders from 1871 plus Western Czech Republic, Southern tirol and Austria should be potential cores for Germany, same for Austria Hungary. Norway could also be a core for Sweden historically, Corse for Italy and more. The coring in HoI sometimes is really really ridiculous. I would prefer a game till 1990 with coring after ~15 years anyway

Well Croatia sided with the Austrians against Hungary in 1848-1849 Hungarian Independence war. So, it makes total sense to ignore any agreements with Croatia. And the Austrians afterwards supported Hungary so Hungary could basically get away with lot without anyone caring all too much. It was supposed to be a personal union under Hungary and basically Hungary had total control but Croatia still had quite a bit of autonomy if we compare to other regions. Also actually come to think of it, the agreement was actually respected. It was just that Croatia had much less power than Hungary and just like a business with over 50% of control means essentially total control.

 

[Gott mit uns]

Well Croatia sided with the Austrians against Hungary in 1848-1849 Hungarian Independence war. So, it makes total sense to ignore any agreements with Croatia. And the Austrians afterwards supported Hungary so Hungary could basically get away with lot without anyone caring all too much. It was supposed to be a personal union under Hungary and basically Hungary had total control but Croatia still had quite a bit of autonomy if we compare to other regions. Also actually come to think of it, the agreement was actually respected. It was just that Croatia had much less power than Hungary and just like a business with over 50% of control means essentially total control.

Well, it was respected to a degree, yes, however the Croatian ban was regulary a Magyar (with and exception of Ivan Mažuranić) like Khuen Hedervary who were very keen on magyarisation of the population. Such acts, like stating that Rijeka(Fiume) are a direct part of Hungary, made Croatian population quite angry with the Hungarian government, with ensued into (although unsuccesful) revolts like the one at Rakovica, or the anti-bilingual protests of 1905.

However, I do agree that, by a degree of autonomy in the Monarchy, Croatia was second in line, right after Hungary. Which is also why modern opinion in Croatia of the Austria-Hungary is becoming more and more positive, especially when compared to the following Kingdom of Yugoslavia and because of the idea of trialism (Austria-Hungary-Croatia) would have happened if hadn't WWI started (or United States of Greater Austria as Franz Ferdinand viewed it).

Regarding the in-game cores, I do agree that Hungary should get some cores on the territory, Slavonia most likely. Mainly because, if German player decides not to form a fascist Croatian state, he should be able to give it to either Italy or Hungary, or split it between them. After all, there are first and second 'Ljubljana Awards' in German NF tree, implicating that the player could go for Yugoslavia instead of Czechoslovakia.

Or if the player is Hungary, and since Hungary is already Fascist in game, I don't see why shouldn't the player be able to start a war with Yugoslavia over territory, preferably with some unique NF that would greatly improve flavor.

 

[Sir Garnet]

There should be a Hungarian focus to reassert, and a different one to renounce, historical and ethnic claims. Obviously the effects would be very different on neighbors.

Austria was always a German state - part of historical Germany and the HRE and often dominant. There already being a modern dominant German state founded by Prussia, for what good reason would Austrians wish to remarry their country with an assertive Hungary in what would doubtless be a Magyar-dominated union rather than join the existing German state?

I'd think uniting with Croatia would seem safer and more reasonable.

 

[Augustus93]

Well, it was respected to a degree, yes, however the Croatian ban was regulary a Magyar (with and exception of Ivan Mažuranić) like Khuen Hedervary who were very keen on magyarisation of the population. Such acts, like stating that Rijeka(Fiume) are a direct part of Hungary, made Croatian population quite angry with the Hungarian government, with ensued into (although unsuccesful) revolts like the one at Rakovica, or the anti-bilingual protests of 1905.

However, I do agree that, by a degree of autonomy in the Monarchy, Croatia was second in line, right after Hungary. Which is also why modern opinion in Croatia of the Austria-Hungary is becoming more and more positive, especially when compared to the following Kingdom of Yugoslavia and because of the idea of trialism (Austria-Hungary-Croatia) would have happened if hadn't WWI started (or United States of Greater Austria as Franz Ferdinand viewed it).

Regarding the in-game cores, I do agree that Hungary should get some cores on the territory, Slavonia most likely. Mainly because, if German player decides not to form a fascist Croatian state, he should be able to give it to either Italy or Hungary, or split it between them. After all, there are first and second 'Ljubljana Awards' in German NF tree, implicating that the player could go for Yugoslavia instead of Czechoslovakia.

Or if the player is Hungary, and since Hungary is already Fascist in game, I don't see why shouldn't the player be able to start a war with Yugoslavia over territory, preferably with some unique NF that would greatly improve flavor.

The ultimate problem is that with non-cored you get ridiculously low percentage of the manpower and it would simply be wrong. A national focus tree(but unfortunately there is no such thing for "minor" powers) would be a good alternative to give the player an option to reassert the claims of the different territories. The problem with Hungary's cores is much bigger than Yugoslavia, in HoI3 it didn't get any cores on Slovakia(which it should have) and only had cores on northern Transylvania. Sure it made sense to only give those as cores to Hungary for gameplay reasons (since those were the territories that Hungary received historically). But there were a lot of options for alternative historical paths, like Hitler offered the whole of Slovakia to Hungary for alliance but Hungary denied that and Hungary demanded the whole of Transylvania from Romania. Hungary was backed by Italy and Romania was more favored by Germany so the Second Vienna awards was a compromise, which nether Hungary or Romania was happy with but had to accept.

 

[Lamahorse]

I put the word plausible here. Why shouldn't we be able to restore it!

 

[Augustus93]

I put the word plausible here. Why shouldn't we be able to restore it!

For the exact same reason why people oppose world conquests with Luxembourg(regardless this will still happen). It is not at all plausible.

 

[Gott mit uns]

The ultimate problem is that with non-cored you get ridiculously low percentage of the manpower and it would simply be wrong. A national focus tree(but unfortunately there is no such thing for "minor" powers) would be a good alternative to give the player an option to reassert the claims of the different territories. The problem with Hungary's cores is much bigger than Yugoslavia, in HoI3 it didn't get any cores on Slovakia(which it should have) and only had cores on northern Transylvania. Sure it made sense to only give those as cores to Hungary for gameplay reasons (since those were the territories that Hungary received historically). But there were a lot of options for alternative historical paths, like Hitler offered the whole of Slovakia to Hungary for alliance but Hungary denied that and Hungary demanded the whole of Transylvania from Romania. Hungary was backed by Italy and Romania was more favored by Germany so the Second Vienna awards was a compromise, which nether Hungary or Romania was happy with but had to accept.

HoI3 was basically history railroaded, so it doesn't surprise me about the lack of cores. We'll have to wait and see about HoI4, perhaps it does have more cores now, or simply not having a core isn't so severe as it was.

Also, the aim of HoI4 is in fact sandbox gameplay, so I wouldn't be surprised if more national focuses for minors will be patched in (like national ideas in EU4). I would very much like to do an fascist Hungary playthrough, among others.


To respond to the whole OP topic, I do not believe restoring Austria-Hungary would be plausible at all. Restoring Austrian Empire by force however… that does make more sense.
And creating a new Hungary-Croatia? Well, it is an interesting topic, mainly the question - would Croats let bad blood with Hungary go? Was the situation in Yugoslavia so bad? Quite hard to answer.

 

[Lamahorse]

For the exact same reason why people oppose world conquests with Luxembourg(regardless this will still happen). It is not at all plausible.

I disagree, the Luxembourgian national foci are set on world conquest. They have peacefully got a good chunk of Europe to transfer powers to EU institutions based within Luxembourg so it isn't implausible had Luxembourg turned their diplomatic focus into military means!