Not always: if the needs of the many are a "false need" and damages a "primary need", the minority is just and it only means that that majority does not understand. In my country we have an expression for this mass "ox people".
What is the false need? Have other memes.
What is the real need: Having a game with fewer bugs, features that work, more diplomatic interaction etc ... things I think you would like too ... but it seems you don't want to understand that a team either does a thing or does a other (and it comes back to the fact that even the developers of Hoi4 themselves say that there are too few!)
Heres the problem with your statement.
A game with fewer bugs/features that work etc, come at the expense of both 'memes' and historical stuff. I have an issue with you saying that memes are only the false need. Everything is a false need when we need balance updates, bug fixes, etc etc.
We don't need more focus trees/memes when we need fixes but saying ONLY memes is where I have an issue.
This what we call willful ignorance.
Wow, a quote from halfway decent star trek movie, from 40 years ago. No way to come back from that. Never mind alluding to bedrock psychological experiments or other things that demonstrate a classical education. Oh no, that is an absolute incontrovertible rebuttal there.
And again, with popularity of things like Expert AI, do not be so sure idiotic, absurdist altf-UNhistory do cater to the clear majority.
Not that I care. Just because the majority is wrong (and ain I do not xoncede this sftuff does represent the majority) has no sway in the imperative to speak out for want is right, what is better.
And YOU know what is right and what is better? Quite humble you are aren't you?
I don't feel like reading pages of increasingly unreadable discussions. Just wanted to say that I would like for the "alternative" history to have some basis e.g. ones that depict political plans that were proposed by some factions but not realized due to outside/inside factors.
Having an option to restore the Hittite Empire or unite Patagonia and Jan Mayen might make for a fun "alt" history, but I don't feel like it fits with the narrative of a WW2-centered game.
Nothing 'fits' in a WW2 centered game except... WW2. The problem with that is, it doesn't leave alot of room for growth as history is a set defined path. Alt-history is EXTREMELY arguable abotu what is plausible or not. Historians have argued for many many years if WW2 could have went a different way, I.E Germany actually winning but theres never been a complete consensus on it and never will be because thats a good thing. Debates are nice.
But how do we determine what is proper Alt-history? Is it only if its been debated?
By your logic, because Mussolini DID want to recreate the Roman Empire, should we say that is proper alt-history and plausible? While I love Roman History and love the Total War series, I have to say it was never going to be plausible and it's outright meme history, but I also think the same for Germany winning WW2. Even if I allow the idea that Germany could be the soviets, America alone would have beaten Germany with superior manpower and factory production. It may have taken a long time with the Germans completely focused on the Western Front, but I don't thijnk America would have given up and would have went all out against Germany. But thats also up for debate.
While I find all of this implausible 'memes' I find it a good thing to include in this game as a game that is railroaded to follow the historical path every single time, is a game that will not last long. Its why Germany having the ability to actually win the war, and Italy too, gives the game growth and replayability.
I also have no issue with the alt-history provided in the game, from Al Andalus to Communist Japan to Austria Hungary. It's not that I don't agree they are complete and utter nonsense, because they are, I think that saying that they have no business in this game opens up a dangerous can of worms that we do not want. Who determines what belongs in the game and what doesn't? You? Me?
The issue that I have is poorly designed alt-history. I think the communist Japan alt-history is completely and utterly terribly designed. Then again, I just think Japans tree is poorly designed. It feels way too short and... well it just feels bad.
Anyways, nothing but historical stuff belongs in a WW2-centered game if we're really going to make it a WW2 game but that is dangerous to me as I do not want to play a WW2 simulator. I might as well just recall the game, 'Allies Win 2.0' if we're going to make it a historical simulator.
Anyways. Im off to work so ill continue this discussion tonight.