Cordon Sanitaire vs Sudeten Crisis (Alternate vs Real History)

[Nuclear Elvis]

PDX Devs in support of HOI4, and HOI4 players;
This is an Alternate History vs Real History discussion to make attempt in helping the game's designer, project manager, and developers to consider ways of improving upon the nuances where Alternate History collides with Real History events in this game. This isn't just about my screenshots and the pop-ups that show there (as you'll see). This is about a very macro issue of improving upon the Alternate History gaming experience in Paradox games set in real world history timelines.

Bear with me, I'm a long-time PDX player (own nearly everything PDX has published) and only in recent days have bought and installed the HOI4 Ultimate Bundle so I have started my first play through and jumped into the fray of the game's interwar period.

I do my homework on PDX games and am aware of the push to improve upon Alternate History pathways for this game (as are typically done in other PDX games as well).

Except that I just ran into a real buzzsaw of a situation that in my opinion - should not have happened (or should be modified to account for Alternate History pathways).

Background on this play through: I'm playing Romania to see just how much I could help prevent or push back against both Germany/Axis and Fascism, while thematically holding the line as a Faction Leader over the Cordon Sanitaire that Poland and Czechoslovakia have both joined due to the National Focus that provides this Faction. From game start I am opposing Axis Powers while doing everything I can to improve my growing Romanian democracy (and tame our wild king who's out of control with his mistress and their spending habits). So every decision I make is anti-Germany/Axis, anti-Fascism, and pro-Democracy. In order to survive regionally, I must compromise and form Non-Agression Treaty with USSR and trade with USSR to keep a neutral posture on my northern border. I have not attempted to join the Allies but do have a guarantee of independence from UK due to yet another National Focus (I crawled down that branch of the National Focus Tree from "Renew Romanian-Polish Alliance" downward to the point where you cannot continue if not joining Allies as a Faction - cannot because I'm in a Faction - the Cordon Sanitaire). So while I cannot activate the "Join the Allies" National Focus due to being in a Faction (and am Faction Leader as well), I have created an Alternate History that places my Faction as a Peer (not subordinate) to the Allied Powers.

The screenshot helps explain the situation - please look at both, with the only difference being that I hovered my cursor over two separate icons - the one to show the Faction that I am in as Romania, with my allies Poland and Czechoslovakia; and the second screenshot merely to confirm that the Czech flag shows they're in the faction with me/Romania.

Reminder: Cordon Sanitaire, the faction with Romania (faction leader), Poland, and Czech is not Real History. If you want to see the real history of this term, see the wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cordon_sanitaire_(medicine)
And what you'll see there is that a Cordon Sanitaire was essentially a military enforced "social distancing" for pandemics, but also was a more formal military agreement to keep out those who are opposed to your ideals from your own borders. Translated - our Cordon Sanitaire is to keep the Axis out of our nations, and from influencing anything inside our borders (as in - stay away, Germany and Axis Powers, or it's going to be a war starting early in 1938).

So I'm cruising on my Alternate History pathway, but then the game injects the Sudeten Crisis that Germany tricked the Allies with in order to get an initial piece of Czech without even a fight (pop-up for this event is in the screenshots). Except here's the problem:

- This would no longer be a negotiation between Germany/Axis and the UK/Allied Powers, because the negotiation would be between myself as Faction Leader over the Cordon Sanitaire that represents the collective national interests of Czech, Poland, and my Romania. Even if Germany tries to leave Czech out of the negotiation (as they did in the Real World with Sudeten Crisis) - it's still me as Faction Leader doing the negotiation at a minimum, and I would not have given in as Neville Chamberlain foolishly did.
- The other consideration purely for game play and advantage/disadvantages for our Faction, is that the Czech Sudetenland comprises two separate provinces with a total of nearly 4 million people, so this is not just a small single county, it's quite a large land grab for this pop-up event (as it was in the Real World at that time). So if my Faction were negotiating with Germany, we wouldn't want to give away two provinces and 4 million people to Germany as Neville Chamberlain did. We need that land, the resources and the people for the expected fight against the Axis (regardless if they're of German heritage living on Czech land).

Further, a second pop-up simultaneously fired with this Sudeten Crisis, for Hungary being emboldened to claim that the Treaty of Trianon no longer applies to them.
- Again, my Alternate History pathway now has a 3-nation Faction that would be a more formidable force (and consideration) against Hungary making this proclamation. Is there a new metric, new RNG factoring that considers the Cordon Sanitaire as a whole against Hungary making this stand? Probably not.

So this is a microcosm of a macro issue in HOI4, for you PDX Dev's to consider as you try to improve the game for Alternate History pathways. You need to try and accomplish one of two things:
1. Change Real World pop-up events that could have Alternate History factors against them depending on what Alternate History is built to the left of Real-world events in timeline, to have a scaling metric that improves upon whether the event fires or not, with further consideration to refire the event later in game if the Alternate History denial conditions are undone, or to potentially deny the Real History event entirely for the game's duration.
and/or
2. Keep the event in place, but make it Alternate History relevant and interactive to provide the player a chance to insert themselves in the role where the Real History figures made the key decisions (good or bad). In other words, put me in Neville Chamberlain's place, as the Cordon Sanitaire Faction Leader, with a multi-choice negotiation selection to make in my response to Germany/Axis demands, even if it risks that I trigger World War 2 earlier than expected in timeline. That's how Alternate History pathways are supposed to be built, after all.

What say you, PDX Devs or Players?

 

[Ossiv]

I doubt Hitler had asked Romania permission to annex the Sudetenland, if the UK and France said yes. Hitler was not ready for war against the UK and France, but he was ready for war against Czechoslovakia. Do you really think he would have cared if Romania opposed, alliance or not?

 

[kettyo]

I would not have given in as Neville Chamberlain foolishly did.

I wouldn't call trying to avoid a world war costing more than 30 millions of lives foolish.

 

[Eudoxe]

I doubt Hitler had asked Romania permission to annex the Sudetenland, if the UK and France said yes. Hitler was not ready for war against the UK and France, but he was ready for war against Czechoslovakia. Do you really think he would have cared if Romania opposed, alliance or not?

Who knows, Romania was the main supplier of oil at that time.
Moreover, I think the idea behind the first post is not that it would be Romania alone but a league of minors.

Anyway, this doesn't seems more foolish than some alt history path from the game like the Habsburg restoration in Hungary or in Poland

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

I wouldn't call trying to avoid a world war costing more than 30 millions of lives foolish.

Neville wasn't trying to avoid a war - he was a diplomatic pawn in a larger scheme, but I won't list all of those details here or the PDX Admins would permanently block my account. If anything, the land giveaway of Sudetenland provided Germany with much manpower and land that accelerated their plans - arguably, more lives were lost in total in the European theater, because Germany had a larger manning and resource pool to kick off the war.

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

I doubt Hitler had asked Romania permission to annex the Sudetenland, if the UK and France said yes. Hitler was not ready for war against the UK and France, but he was ready for war against Czechoslovakia. Do you really think he would have cared if Romania opposed, alliance or not?

I would kindly ask that you re-read my original post, as I am not implying that Romania alone would be asked for permission, but instead - the Alternate History alliance/faction named Cordon Sanitaire is at play here. If you start the game as Romania in HOI4, you can see more details about this in the National Focus tree, as this Faction is an optional pathway for the player to bring together Poland, Czech, and Romania in a 3-nation alliance. Since I'm playing Romania, by default my Romania starts as the Faction Leader, and the point about Romania in lead for negotiations with Germany is not that it's bilateral -- it's multilateral diplomacy to represent the collective interests of 3 nations in the Faction/Alliance. As such, the game's default Real History should be null and void to a point, on this matter. Germany's concern would be larger than just the UK and the Allied Powers, as Germany would then be dealing with two separate alliances - both the Allied Powers and the Cordon Sanitaire, and the diplomatic negotiation would have a completely different tone to it (Germany wouldn't be able to simply deny Czech or the Cordon Sanitaire from the negotiations). But even if the negotiation was only between the leader of Germany (Hitler) and the leader of Romania (myself as gamer role playing) -- I would not be representing Romania, but instead I would be negotiating as the Faction Leader of the Cordon Sanitaire -- and that's quite a different role to be in, rather than merely as a single nation's leader (and Hitler would be representing the Axis, not just Germany).

And even if the UK gave an "ok" to it, the Cordon Sanitaire may not - and would have the option to go to war to defend the Czech interests in retaining Sudetenland.

These are intended as Grand Strategy games, so let's not remove the Grand Strategy gaming options, right? The player should have more control when on an Alternate History pathway, to not have Real History continually appearing as if World events are on rails for Real History. As the Alternate History gamer, I switched the tracks prior to the Sudetenland Crisis, so I should be on a different track in the game.

 

[davidc929]

Who knows, Romania was the main supplier of oil at that time.
Moreover, I think the idea behind the first post is not that it would be Romania alone but a league of minor akind miedzymorze - the alliance proposal made by some Polish leader.

Anyway, this doesn't seems more foolish than some alt history path from the game like the Habsburg restoration in Hungary or in Poland

It would seem to me that if Czechoslovakia is already in a faction then the faction leader should be asked if they want to come to their aid or not. I'm not sure if the mechanics are flexible enough to allow that but would be the solution.

 

[kettyo]

Neville wasn't trying to avoid a war - he was a diplomatic pawn in a larger scheme, but I won't list all of those details here or the PDX Admins would permanently block my account. If anything, the land giveaway of Sudetenland provided Germany with much manpower and land that accelerated their plans - arguably, more lives were lost in total in the European theater, because Germany had a larger manning and resource pool to kick off the war.

I respect your opinion but disagree. I think Neville was one of the very few who understood there will be a brutal, bloody war in case it comes to that. Most people thought Germany could easily be tackled in case it's needed as on paper Germany was quite weak. That's why he rearmed and modernised the British forces like mad and in parallel tried to avoid stepping onto a path to war. But ultimately it was not him but Hitler who made that critical step by occupying the rest of Chehoslovakia a few months after München. That was the point of no return.

But anyway this has little to do with the topic so let we have this off-topic discussion be closed here.

 

[vermicious knid]

Tricky to accomodate all the possible complications with alt-history in the national focus-driven diplomacy system.

If the diplomacy AI worked like EU4 and was built to evaluate the situation it would be considerably easier.

 

[PorkchopSandwiches247]

Unfortunately tge AI has a bad habit of acting completely illogically if its hard coded to make decsions like these sometimes.

Reminds me of when Romania constantly gave up Bessarabia to the Soviets…even when Romania if actively fighting them and winning the war. Now Yugoslavia also has this issue, where the AI will give up the Dalmatian Coast by Italian request even if theyre youre puppet.

 

[Anaraxes]

Reminder: Cordon Sanitaire, the faction with Romania (faction leader), Poland, and Czech is not Real History. If you want to see the real history of this term, see the wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cordon_sanitaire_(medicine)
And what you'll see there is that a Cordon Sanitaire was essentially a military enforced "social distancing" for pandemics

I agree on the origin of the term. But like so many phrases, it was reused in a different context. Your Wiki link is close. Try this one:

Cordon sanitaire (international relations) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Iron Curtain was neither iron nor a curtain. It's a metaphor. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization at one point had some geographical connection with the North Atlantic, but that ocean is not particularly central to their diplomatic function today. Same with this usage of Cordon Sanitaire. Clemenceau no doubt chose that term as it helps to label both the Fascists and the Soviets as a disease that needs to be sealed off. Never pass up a chance to disparage your chosen enemies. But Real History did include French alliances with Czechoslovakia, Romania, Yugoslavia, and Poland under that rubric, along with other treaties between various subgroups of those four.

 

[Eruth]

Unfortunately tge AI has a bad habit of acting completely illogically if its hard coded to make decsions like these sometimes.

Reminds me of when Romania constantly gave up Bessarabia to the Soviets…even when Romania if actively fighting them and winning the war. Now Yugoslavia also has this issue, where the AI will give up the Dalmatian Coast by Italian request even if theyre youre puppet.

It’s not hard coded, it’s scripted, and script can very easily be changed to accommodate alternate scenarios if the person doing the script just bothers to think about it. Source: I am a modders who scripts such events and decisions.

 

[davidc929]

Unfortunately tge AI has a bad habit of acting completely illogically if its hard coded to make decsions like these sometimes.

Reminds me of when Romania constantly gave up Bessarabia to the Soviets…even when Romania if actively fighting them and winning the war. Now Yugoslavia also has this issue, where the AI will give up the Dalmatian Coast by Italian request even if theyre youre puppet.

I suppose that one at least makes sense. After all the Soviet Union putting pressure on an ally to give up territory does not seem far fetched.

And Germany did force Romania to give territory to Hungary.

 

[jpd]

It would seem to me that if Czechoslovakia is already in a faction then the faction leader should be asked if they want to come to their aid or not. I'm not sure if the mechanics are flexible enough to allow that but would be the solution.

If I remember correctly, Czechoslovakia gets an event if it agrees to give up the Sudetenland.

With historical AI on, the AI will (nearly) always agree to give it up. This event could be modified to make the AI more reluctant if Czech is in a different faction than the Axis. Similar to how Yugoslavia is more reluctant to cave to germany in the Fate of Yugoslavia NF event when a foreign nation guarantees it's independence.

When Czech refuses to give up the sudetenland, Germany gets a war goal on Czech. And when it makes good on that war goal, Czech's faction members can be called to arms.

 

[PorkchopSandwiches247]

And Germany did force Romania to give territory to Hungary.

No, Romania would consistently give up Bessarabia while THEY were at war with the Soviets and beating them, ie in faction with Germany. Not while Romania was allied with Soviets. It was goofy to say the least.

I think they solved this via checking if Romania was at war with them, but Im not sure if its fully logically fixed…ie as Germany you can have conquered all of the Soviet land up to the Urals, to the point where Romania shares no border with them at all, and I think they still give up the land. Its a bit silly.

 

[davidc929]

No, Romania would consistently give up Bessarabia while THEY were at war with the Soviets and beating them, ie in faction with Germany. Not while Romania was allied with Soviets. It was goofy to say the least.

I think they solved this via checking if Romania was at war with them, but Im not sure if its fully logically fixed…ie as Germany you can have conquered all of the Soviet land up to the Urals, to the point where Romania shares no border with them at all, and I think they still give up the land. Its a bit silly.

Ah sorry I misread that this morning.

 

[DystopianAlphaOmega]

It’s the Czechs that makes the decision. IIRC the ai does consider whether it is in a faction and the relative strength of that faction compared to Germany when deciding whether to concede. Each is just a modifier to the chance of what the Czechs do. That said, a more robust system where a nation could back up or threaten to abandon an ally if it comes to war when one is brewing would be useful.

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

It’s the Czechs that makes the decision. IIRC the ai does consider whether it is in a faction and the relative strength of that faction compared to Germany when deciding whether to concede. Each is just a modifier to the chance of what the Czechs do. That said, a more robust system where a nation could back up or threaten to abandon an ally if it comes to war when one is brewing would be useful.

Not true. Look at this specific Sudeten Crisis, in the OP Screenshot. This was a specific event in Real History where the Czechs were not even invited to the negotiation table between Germany, Italy, France and UK (with Germany and UK in lead roles for the negotiation, not shown in screenshot text). So even if the game AI was running this event outside my specific scenario, Czech should not have a choice (even if the Player started as Czech) because this was a unique situation where the affected nation lost out without presence for negotiations, without a voice. So if the event runs with a player as UK - then an argument could be made that the UK role-playing gamer should get a vote (just as Neville Chamberlain did at the time, for the UK).

As for my Cordon Sanitaire Alternate History pathway - Czech is also not supposed to get the single/only vote. That's not how Factions/Alliances work. It's not Bilateral (one-on-one with other nation) at that point. It's Multi-lateral. Faction Leader takes lead in the negotiations.

This entire post/thread, as a reminder - is about how to improve upon Real vs Alternate History paths, but even the Real History path probably does not have enough player interaction and decisions along the way (and PDX Grand Strategy games should improve to match their GS intentions for immersive game play).

 

[Eruth]

Not true. Look at this specific Sudeten Crisis, in the OP Screenshot. This was a specific event in Real History where the Czechs were not even invited to the negotiation table between Germany, Italy, France and UK (with Germany and UK in lead roles for the negotiation, not shown in screenshot text). So even if the game AI was running this event outside my specific scenario, Czech should not have a choice (even if the Player started as Czech) because this was a unique situation where the affected nation lost out without presence for negotiations, without a voice. So if the event runs with a player as UK - then an argument could be made that the UK role-playing gamer should get a vote (just as Neville Chamberlain did at the time, for the UK).

As for my Cordon Sanitaire Alternate History pathway - Czech is also not supposed to get the single/only vote. That's not how Factions/Alliances work. It's not Bilateral (one-on-one with other nation) at that point. It's Multi-lateral. Faction Leader takes lead in the negotiations.

This entire post/thread, as a reminder - is about how to improve upon Real vs Alternate History paths, but even the Real History path probably does not have enough player interaction and decisions along the way (and PDX Grand Strategy games should improve to match their GS intentions for immersive game play).

Except Czechoslovakia could have decided to ignore the Munich agreement and militarily resist Germany without Britain's help. In the end, it was still the Czechs' decision. The way it should work is that anyone with guarantees/in a faction with CZE gets an event where they can choose to revoke the guarantee/alliance or maintain it. Once everyone has decided, CZE gets an event telling them what everyone else ahs decided, and then they decide whether to hand over the Sudeten. If they refuse, Germany can now go to war.

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

Except Czechoslovakia could have decided to ignore the Munich agreement and militarily resist Germany without Britain's help. In the end, it was still the Czechs' decision. The way it should work is that anyone with guarantees/in a faction with CZE gets an event where they can choose to revoke the guarantee/alliance or maintain it. Once everyone has decided, CZE gets an event telling them what everyone else ahs decided, and then they decide whether to hand over the Sudeten. If they refuse, Germany can now go to war.

I agree that "anyone with guarantees/in a faction with CZE gets an event" -- but in this case, Romania was Faction Leader, and that's where the difference lies. Faction Leader makes the call in the negotiation. Sure, Czech AI (or role-playing gamer as Czech) could still reject the deal (if the Faction Lead gave away their land - although I would not have, as Romania/Faction Lead), but if for arguments sake Czech did reject - they could withdraw from the Cordon Sanitaire and then fight Germany solo (not a logical choice whatsoever).

The more important thing that should change in the game is the specific authorities that Faction Leaders should hold for these negotiations, rather than just having yet another pop-up event fly by that affects a member of their Faction/Alliance.