Bring back the Emperor

[Shootist]

I have no intention of ever playing a fascist nation or aligning with one. I know it's just a game, but I won't do it, so a mod like this would be very welcome.

History and such must be mighty tough. Deutschland, Deutschland über alles, über alles in der Welt. Государственный гимн СССР 「和（わ）を以（もっ）て貴（とうと）しと為（な）す。」America, the beautiful! God save the Queen! Britannia rules the waves! Vive la France!

 

[Merrick Chance']

The impression I'm under is that recent scholarship on the USSR has in the early period of Stalin's rule shifted in the emphasis away from Stalin personally and towards the Party as a whole. Trotsky under this system fails because world revolution is an insane policy for the semi-industrial Soviet Union in the 1920s and the party membership recognised this, rather than because Stalin was more cunning than Trotsky.

In contrast, a USSR run by Bukharin (who was still alive by 1936 and in the USSR) would be genuinely interesting.

I mean, I could see some places where worldwide revolution would have worked out better. It's hard to underestimate how bad Stalin's policy to the other Communist parties was. The goal wasn't for the USSR to invade every other country in the world. Rather, world revolution was about supporting other communist parties in their goals. A world where the German, Chinese, French, and Italian Communist parties weren't hamstrung by a series of awful directives from the top would likely look very different than Stalin's Russia. And I mean it's not like "Socialism in One Country" was a great policy, it was a strategic dead end which left the USSR in military opposition with the whole rest of the world, which wasn't a feasible battle even at the high point of Bolshevism.

Note though that I don't think that the USSR would have gotten off significantly lighter under Trotsky.

 

[LtGenPayton]

Every time I open this forum, I end up throwing my wallet at the screen...sadly this has been ineffective...perhaps there is a focus group for sad HOI4 deprived souls such as ours?

 

[soldier2975]

Why make a WWII game when you can completely skip WWII?

 

[Secret Master]

Would averting WWII completely and having Hitler overthrown count as a "win" for the Allies?

 

[unmerged(437521)]

Hitler successes had more to do with being bold and decisive when no one else was. Everything else was a complete failure, honestly:
Dunkirk
Battle of Britain
Sealion
Barbarossa
Leningrad
Moscow
Stalingrad
Kursk
North Africa
Normandy
All Hitler's blunders. Sure, some other people deserve blame for these events, but it's Hitler 'decisive' actions that really seal his fate as a terrible leader.

 

[shierholzer]

North Africa

To be fair, North Africa is accountable to Mussolini.

 

[unmerged(437521)]

To be fair, North Africa is accountable to Mussolini.

Hitler could've easy won the region by sending more help to the Afrika Corp. The only reason that the Germans had any success was the military genius of Rommel.

Again, Hitler's failures in strategic planning. Had he taken the Suez and expanded into Palestine and Iraq, Britain would've have been in a much weaker position (separated from her colonial holding of India) and given Germany a source of petroleum.

 

[shierholzer]

Hitler could've easy won the region by sending more help to the Afrika Corp.

The main reasoning behind the Africa Korps was not to win the entire theater, but to contain the British advance. The Nazis felt, that keeping Libya was crucial for keeping Italy in the war, and they're perfectly right about this.
Owning Suez and the Levant would've meant local petroleum supplies, yes. Airlifting larger quantities of petroleum is impossible during WW2, while shutting down British naval superiority would've meant either German Panzers in London, or German Panzers in Madrid.
((Btw, Germany virtually downed it's airborne troops to concentrate enough transport planes on Sicily to be able to supply Rommel's troops there. Sending more German troops would've either meant less Italian troops, or a horrible supply situation.))

(separated from her colonial holding of India)

Nah. Most non-urgent wartime traffic UK <-> Far East went via the more secure Cape route anyways.

 

[Pugmak]

Not in the vanilla game. It starts in 1936. Who knows though, maybe modders will take up the mantle, or we'll do a DLC at some point perhaps.

You hear that, guys!??!

A kaiserreich DLC!!!

hehehe

 

[BBBD316]

Just with the change from Stalin to Trotsky, I don't think it was Trotsky's intention to immediately DOW on the world. However they would have been far more active in helping other communist organisations throughout Europe during the same time.

Even if the Comm-intern just manage to create a Red Spain it would have created issues for the Germans as it may have potentially opened a new front by which the Brits and Americans could land safely in Spain and simple attack Southern France.

Maybe.

 

[unmerged(437521)]

The main reasoning behind the Africa Korps was not to win the entire theater, but to contain the British advance.

In other words, a tactical failure of Hitler's.
Hitler didn't put any priority on North Africa. Rommel's failures at the Battle of Alam el Halfa were a result of supply shortages. Complete failure on the part of the Germans and the Italians to seize Malta meant that it was used as a staging base for attacks on supply convoys to North Africa. "Rommel originally intended to begin a major offensive against British forces on 26 August but had to postpone due to a shortage of fuel, thanks to the sinking of two tankers in the Mediterranean." (http://goo.gl/cBZtHx).

while shutting down British naval superiority would've meant either German Panzers in London, or German Panzers in Madrid.

Sealion was never really the main goal. Hitler was far more interested in a peace deal with Britain so he could focus all his effort on the Soviets. In other words: terrible losses in North Africa, loss of the Suez, revolts in India ---> popular support for the war fades in England ---> Churchill out of power ---> Great Britain peaces out of the war.

 

[Merrick Chance']

But the whole USSR oriented strategy comes into the failure of Hitler's grand strategy, which was bent on the assumption of weak enemy resolve. Once Britain and Russia didn't peace out of the war Hitler was already in an impossible position, because no matter how powerful he could be in Europe he could not conduct a worldwide war.

 

[Ricox]

The problem would be the fact that most (if not all) of event chain leading up to World War II would have to be re-made completely. Even the World War II chains would need to be re-made accordingly, and Germany would probably be stronger in terms of research and whatever else because Jews would still be allowed to have their positions.

 

[LodovicoAriosto]

The problem would be the fact that most (if not all) of event chain leading up to World War II would have to be re-made completely. Even the World War II chains would need to be re-made accordingly, and Germany would probably be stronger in terms of research and whatever else because Jews would still be allowed to have their positions.

yes. the idea to simply replace nazi Germany with imperial or socialist Germany in 1936 and keep most other things, decisions, factions, events etc. untouched would basically be a fantasy scenario.

 

[shierholzer]

The problem would be the fact that most (if not all) of event chain leading up to World War II would have to be re-made completely. Even the World War II chains would need to be re-made accordingly, and Germany would probably be stronger in terms of research and whatever else because Jews would still be allowed to have their positions.

Germany's defeat in WW1 and the harsh economic conditions created by the Treaty of Versailles made a extremely jingoistic movement like the NSDAP possible. With the Emperor winning WW2 (or White Peacing), German economy would've been far better during the 20s and early 30s - and employed people rarely elect extremistic parties. While antisemitism was a thing in the early NSDAP (as it was in almost all european right wing parties, btw), it wasn't why Hitler got elected. Hitler held brilliant speeches, promised work (and therefore money+food+housing) and a repeal of the entire Versailles treaty.
((Even if the Versailles treaty just relinquished to claim Germany the sole aggressor of WW1 - which was mostly for economic reasons, btw - there are significant chances, that WW2 (at least as we know it today) would've never happened.))

 

[Secret Master]

Hitler held brilliant speeches, promised work (and therefore money+food+housing) and a repeal of the entire Versailles treaty.

The "socialist" part of national socialism, as practiced in Germany combined with jingoism.

I agree that just replacing the NSDAP with a monarchy of some sort with Kaiser whomever-you-want would render most of the lead up to 1939 obsolete. A Germany with a different outcome from WWI would also render the lead up to WWII obsolete. Either the terms are less harsh, making it less likely that NSDAP or other extremists look viable, or the terms are so harsh that Germany has ceased to exist and Bismark's work was completely undone, in which case we aren't really talking about Germany at all.

 

[tommylotto]

Germany's defeat in WW1 and the harsh economic conditions created by the Treaty of Versailles made a extremely jingoistic movement like the NSDAP possible.

Not so sure. Italy was on the winning side. That did not stop the fascists from gaining power there. As long as the Brits and French had the global order rigged in their favor, Germany was going to be jingoistic.

 

[Marximus1]

Bring back Atlantis as the Commintern leader

 

[Opanashc]

Just with the change from Stalin to Trotsky, I don't think it was Trotsky's intention to immediately DOW on the world.

Where did you get that idea?