Form the Reichskommissariats Monarchist

[zalk12]

@podcat I take no credit for suggesting this but maybe you could allow if Germany goes Monarchist for the Form the Reichskommissariats focus to allow Germany to install monarchies into conquered lands like Ukraine or Lithuania

All credit goes to @Gamengervi

 

[LiberiusX]

Yeh I was a little confused by this. Imperial Germany did something just like this at the treaty of Brest Litovsk 1918. I don’t know why Germany has to be fascist to do it again in 1943?

 

[Tom D.]

Or just in general let non-aligned Germany be able to install puppets in other countries, or even increase its ideology in other countries. Non-aligned feels very restricted now despite it being more than just 'non-aligned' with WtT.

 

[Meglok]

@podcat I take no credit for suggesting this but maybe you could allow if Germany goes Monarchist for the Form the Reichskommissariats focus to allow Germany to install monarchies into conquered lands like Ukraine or Lithuania

All credit goes to @Gamengervi

Heck of a good suggestion. Please post it in the suggestion sub-forum so it gets noticed and implemented. Podcat might be a little busy these days.

 

[Spartanlemur]

"Non-aligned" is becoming increasingly inaccurate as Paradox allow for more alt-history.

Perhaps if they do a politics update, they'll overhaul how factions work.

 

[LiberiusX]

"Non-aligned" is becoming increasingly inaccurate as Paradox allow for more alt-history.

Perhaps if they do a politics update, they'll overhaul how factions work.

Yeh I would be ok with Monarchist becoming its own ideology.

 

[Wolfsgeist]

Definetly. The concept of the ideologies was a little wacky to begin with. Non-aligned for example is Neutrality in the game files, so basically an ideology for countries, who should not get actively involved in the great war, like Switzerland for example, but is now a melting pot ideology for everything that is neither a Western Democracy nor a Fascist or Communist dictatorship, which is...well...problematic.
It's also kind of odd, what countries can or cannot do, because of ideologies. Britain was a democracy for like 200 years before the game started, but that did not prevent them from declaring dozens of wars around the world, why? And non-aligned, what ever that means, can not puppet other countries, or spread their ideology or send volunteers because...???
And why is only one party per country democratic? Even the US have at least two (^^), so why is it for example in Germany only the Zentrum, not the SPD (the only party that did not bow to Hitler), or the German People's Party etc. etc.? Those are all democratic, but have different ideologies none the less.

 

[Dryhad]

Definetly. The concept of the ideologies was a little wacky to begin with. Non-aligned for example is Neutrality in the game files, so basically an ideology for countries, who should not get actively involved in the great war, like Switzerland for example, but is now a melting pot ideology for everything that is neither a Western Democracy nor a Fascist or Communist dictatorship, which is...well...problematic.

Switzerland has never been Non-Aligned in this game so inferring that role for Non-Aligned is kind of begging the question. The role that you find "problematic" has a much clearer provenance, and I would argue is a necessary element of the game as we know it. The ideological division between Democracy, Fascism, and Communism makes sense and is pretty standard for the setting, but as there are many countries which do not fall into these categories there must be a miscellaneous category to hold them (because adding extra ideologies for every historical regime would bloat the system, leaving some ideologies with only a single country and no realistic support base elsewhere). Unless I'm misunderstanding you, your objection to this is that the code refers to it by an inappropriate label, but the term the code uses isn't visible on the front end so this doesn't matter. Neutrality in the sense you assume based on the code's labelling is already represented by the Neutral Foreign Policy national spirit, and Non-Aligned has always been a misc category unrelated to military neutrality.

My case for Monarchism, given this, is that the focus trees which boost Non-Aligned position it as a fourth ideological force in the war(s). From a gameplay standpoint there's a number of irritations involved in playing a major power as Non-Aligned, which spinning off Monarchism would solve, but on a conceptual level also the Hungarian, German, and Japanese Non-Aligned branches depart from the role of Non-Aligned as a miscellaneous category. We can assume that more such branches will be added as more NF trees are added/revamped. Germany's path includes flipping Italy and France (kind of) so we can guess that when those trees get revamped there might be options for players to flip by themselves (and even if not, they exist in this state now). A Tsarist restoration in the Soviet tree is the kind of thing Paradox would do, although Non-Aligned is currently used for Purge-related revolts so it might require spinning off Monarchism or else be fluffed as Fascism similarly to how Manchukuo's Chinese Empire is. It's also vaguely plausible that when Spain gets a NF tree there are Monarchist options; Carlists fought on the Nationalist side in the Civil War and although Franco ultimately did not restore their claimant (for fear of alienating the legitimists) it seems a likely what-if to include in such a tree. And of course historically (albeit as late as 1975) he did end up restoring the Legitimist monarchy in his will so bringing the King back early might be another potential option for Nationalist Spain.

The point of all this is that Monarchism in the guise of Non-Aligned is already trying to be an ideological force on par with the other three, and will likely increase this role in future DLC, but the game mechanics are fighting against it. Non-Aligned as a misc category needs to exist in something resembling its current form, but these focus trees which all share the flavour of Monarchy should be split off into their own ideology.

 

[Aule_the_creator]

The point of all this is that Monarchism in the guise of Non-Aligned is already trying to be an ideological force on par with the other three, and will likely increase this role in future DLC, but the game mechanics are fighting against it. Non-Aligned as a misc category needs to exist in something resembling its current form, but these focus trees which all share the flavour of Monarchy should be split off into their own ideology./

This. So much this. Monarchism needs to be split off into its own thing, because otherwise you are limited by the game mechanics designed to make ai minors not go bananas.

The strangest thing about non-aligned monarchism is the inability to puppet. How else are you supposed to establish client kingdoms and, more importantly, set up personal Unions (because FU, Border Gore).

 

[Wolfsgeist]

Switzerland has never been Non-Aligned in this game so inferring that role for Non-Aligned is kind of begging the question. The role that you find "problematic" has a much clearer provenance, and I would argue is a necessary element of the game as we know it. The ideological division between Democracy, Fascism, and Communism makes sense and is pretty standard for the setting, but as there are many countries which do not fall into these categories there must be a miscellaneous category to hold them (because adding extra ideologies for every historical regime would bloat the system, leaving some ideologies with only a single country and no realistic support base elsewhere). Unless I'm misunderstanding you, your objection to this is that the code refers to it by an inappropriate label, but the term the code uses isn't visible on the front end so this doesn't matter. Neutrality in the sense you assume based on the code's labelling is already represented by the Neutral Foreign Policy national spirit, and Non-Aligned has always been a misc category unrelated to military neutrality.

You're right of course. What I meant, is that Non-aligned was originally planned to be "Neutral" as an ideology for not-active countries in this period (and therefore does not have very many abilities, so can't puppet, can't push it's ideology etc.), but ended up as miscellaneous ideology for random countries, with really varying ideologies, like authoritarian regimes in Greece or Poland, strong monarchies like Saudi-Arabia or Iran and even democracies, like Finland and Turkey. And of course China.

So I'm all for Monarchism as a new ideology, as for Authoritarianism or Despotism something like that, for Portugal, Greece etc.

 

[Dryhad]

You're right of course. What I meant, is that Non-aligned was originally planned to be "Neutral" as an ideology for not-active countries in this period (and therefore does not have very many abilities, so can't puppet, can't push it's ideology etc.), but ended up as miscellaneous ideology for random countries, with really varying ideologies, like authoritarian regimes in Greece or Poland, strong monarchies like Saudi-Arabia or Iran and even democracies, like Finland and Turkey. And of course China.

So I'm all for Monarchism as a new ideology, as for Authoritarianism or Despotism something like that, for Portugal, Greece etc.

What I meant is I don't believe it was originally planned to be that, at least not in the sense you're using it. I believe it was intended to be a miscellaneous category for anything that couldn't be classified as one of the main three ideologies. Of course, the gameplay intent is that Non-Aligned countries don't play a major role in the war (at least not without first shifting to another ideology) and it's this that the Non-Aligned focus trees are fighting against. But I don't believe this is based on a conceptual link between the miscellaneous category and some broader sense of neutrality, I think you're reading too much into the terminology used in the code.