oh please, norway is not a meber of EU and won't be until a few years ahead. We are, for the time being, just as anti-EU as switzerland... (but we are likely to join EU in a few years, if sweden and denmark gets the euro and such..)
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
oh please, norway is not a meber of EU and won't be until a few years ahead. We are, for the time being, just as anti-EU as switzerland... (but we are likely to join EU in a few years, if sweden and denmark gets the euro and such..)
They still have a decent military though, just not a lot of capacity to reach the Major's level of research. I've imagined them to be like a wildcard Italy, going for the side that bribes them the most and looks like it's winning.
Russia's horrible economy will make them a very weak country when it comes to research and production, but they STILL do have a powerful military. They aren't a major, but they are definitely not a minor, either.
A suggestion:
I think we should make all of the majors elections event-driven, like the U.S. is in the normal HoI. This would give us more flexibility and the possibility to add third-party candidates.
Good idea?
I think we should make all of the majors elections event-driven, like the U.S. is in the normal HoI. This would give us more flexibility and the possibility to add third-party candidates.
Good idea?
Yes, the majors should all get election events like the US does in regular HoI while the minors just get longer-serving Presidents.
There's a Bismarck quote that's fitting here:
Russia has serious economic and social problems (guess why I left that place?), most of them caused during the Gorby and Yeltzin eras. But they still have one of the world's largest armies, navies and airforces. While those are poorly supplied and its forces relatively poorly trained, they can still kick the ass of most major European powers in a one-on-one fight. No invasion of their country can succeed without suffering several setbacks and horrendous losses because of the Russian patriotism, military strength and endless landmass.
Russia is, despite its terrible internal problems, still a major player in global politics and military affairs. Not a minor or "something in between". Get it?
Yes, yes. We'll give them a comparable amount of DI and their large number of provinces puts them at an advantage when influencing smaller countries (especially with a certain foreign minister). I'm pretty certain they will play a significant role, but far from a main one.
You can be our Russia-balancing expert once we get an alpha
You can be our Russia-balancing expert once we get an alpha
I accept your fair offer, Lunar!
On the subject of Russia, how about having a Russian election event in 2004?
ELECT DEMOCRATS: Get Putin and his friends back into office. Gives the player vastly reduced dissent and some economic bonuses. Good if you want to forge alliances with either the US or the EU. Russia remains liberal/conservative.
ELECT COMMUNISTS: The communists were supported by 31% of the population when I last checked (2002), and with deterioating social and economic conditions they continue to gain strength. Get slightly reduced dissent (amount of angry conservatives are after all outnumbered by the happy troops, socialists, communists and nostalgics) and large IC bonuses (confiscation of private land, elimination certain of corrupt elements in Russia's economic and political sectors).
After electing KPRF you could get to choose whether to become standard socialist, which gives you good relations with both China and EU as you're labeled as a normal radical-leftist state with relatively good human rights records but still a socialist leaning. If you, on the other hand, decide to become extreme-communist, you're labeled as Stalinist and get a few new infantry units, totally pro-China stence and territorial claims on Ukraine, Belarus, Romania, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan and the other areas annexed by the USSR at one point or another.
ELECT FASCISTS: So they only have support from 5% of the population, you say. I say that it's a possibilty for a fun game!
Electing these insane fucktarts gives you a major dissent hit (as nazis are hated by pretty much everyone and everything). Good parts? You get national claims on every territory on earth that has been part of Russia at some point in history, including Alaska, the formed DDR and Finland! Some IC bonused are recieved as well as a result of the nationalizing of the industries.
Electing the fascists destroys your chances of joining China and EU, but you'll have a slight chance of joining the US. Needless to say, your government will be labeled as Fascist if you choose this option.
ELECT TZARISTS: Bring back the glory of Mother Russia and the memories of tyrants like Nikolai the Bloody (who sent more people to Siberia than Stalin - quite an achievement there!) and Ivan the Terrible be electing these loonies.
You get a major dissent hit (the Russian populace generally disikes the Tzars) and a slightly reduced IC level (mainly for building a palace worth 50B€ for Tzar Ivan Yeltzin IV made entirely of gold). But you get claims on all Russian territories from 1914, a slight chance of joining the EU and Coalition and a few new military units. You become labeled as Autocratic.
Opinions?
On the subject of Russia, how about having a Russian election event in 2004?
ELECT DEMOCRATS: Get Putin and his friends back into office. Gives the player vastly reduced dissent and some economic bonuses. Good if you want to forge alliances with either the US or the EU. Russia remains liberal/conservative.
ELECT COMMUNISTS: The communists were supported by 31% of the population when I last checked (2002), and with deterioating social and economic conditions they continue to gain strength. Get slightly reduced dissent (amount of angry conservatives are after all outnumbered by the happy troops, socialists, communists and nostalgics) and large IC bonuses (confiscation of private land, elimination certain of corrupt elements in Russia's economic and political sectors).
After electing KPRF you could get to choose whether to become standard socialist, which gives you good relations with both China and EU as you're labeled as a normal radical-leftist state with relatively good human rights records but still a socialist leaning. If you, on the other hand, decide to become extreme-communist, you're labeled as Stalinist and get a few new infantry units, totally pro-China stence and territorial claims on Ukraine, Belarus, Romania, Bulgaria, Kazakhstan and the other areas annexed by the USSR at one point or another.
ELECT FASCISTS: So they only have support from 5% of the population, you say. I say that it's a possibilty for a fun game!
Electing these insane fucktarts gives you a major dissent hit (as nazis are hated by pretty much everyone and everything). Good parts? You get national claims on every territory on earth that has been part of Russia at some point in history, including Alaska, the formed DDR and Finland! Some IC bonused are recieved as well as a result of the nationalizing of the industries.
Electing the fascists destroys your chances of joining China and EU, but you'll have a slight chance of joining the US. Needless to say, your government will be labeled as Fascist if you choose this option.
ELECT TZARISTS: Bring back the glory of Mother Russia and the memories of tyrants like Nikolai the Bloody (who sent more people to Siberia than Stalin - quite an achievement there!) and Ivan the Terrible be electing these loonies.
You get a major dissent hit (the Russian populace generally disikes the Tzars) and a slightly reduced IC level (mainly for building a palace worth 50B€ for Tzar Ivan Yeltzin IV made entirely of gold). But you get claims on all Russian territories from 1914, a slight chance of joining the EU and Coalition and a few new military units. You become labeled as Autocratic.
Opinions?
I love it!
Sounds like you put A LOT of thought into it, and it sounds pretty good.
Could make a pretty fun scenario
Oh, and I like your usage of "F***tards"
One thing, though. By becoming fascists, they would lose all credible with the CotW/CTF/China. The U.S. has always fought the Black Serpent (Fascism), and The U.S. would never side with a fascist-regime. As much as any anti-Bush person would disagree with me, Bush would never have the power to support Fascism, EVEN if he wanted to (which I doubt he does).
Thanks for that, we'll have to take that into account once we start doing election events. I'm not sure if there is a limit to the options in an event, but it wouldn't hurt to assume it's four. Also, is there another major democratic candidate besides Putin?
Added: Marty, it might be more of a Paternal Autocrat, and I think there is a good chance that the US will be looking everywhere they can for Allies. A military regime "temporarily" suspending elections in an emergency situation might not put Bush in hot water.
Added: Marty, it might be more of a Paternal Autocrat, and I think there is a good chance that the US will be looking everywhere they can for Allies. A military regime "temporarily" suspending elections in an emergency situation might not put Bush in hot water.
There is a limit. The limit is four, If my memory serves me right.
ADDED: U.S. may support the Czars (doubt it), but they would never support Nazi-Fascist like regimes.
I don't think we'll even have a Nazi-esque ideology, closest thing might be a military regime or whatever we have that represents a despotical regime.
Last edited:
Actually, I didn't. I'm just full of ideas and has a top degree in political knowledge and history in high school. Oh yeah, I'm an official think-tank. And I really, really need to get some sleep, did I mention that?
You failed pretty badly in history, didn't you?
The US has supported corrupt FASCISTS. And not just a few of them...
Spain: Franco dictatorship. Strongly anti-communist... Guess why they supported him?
Chile: CIA-backed coup ousted democratically elected Salvador Ellande and got the FASCIST Augusto Pinochet into power. The US sold him plenty of arms despite knowing of the countless attrocities committed by the Augusto regime. And if they didn't, they have to be the dumbest people in history.
Saudi Arabia: A fucking Taliban-like religious dictatorship. Need I say more?
Iraq: Saddam was your beloved friend back in the 80's when he gassed those Iranian's and Iraqi communists to death. Maybe that's why the US sold him $3B worth of US arms, including equipment to create chemical weapons like sarin and mustard gas?
Iran: Oh yeah, CIA sold a crapload of weapons to them as well. With the money they funded the TERRORIST Contras in Nicuragua (or however that's spelled). This eventually lead to the Iran-Contra scandal.
Taliban: Back in the 80's, CIA gave bin Laden and his "resistance fighters" countless of weaponry to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. What goes around comes around, eh?
But hey, that's the Cold War for ya! One sick fuck of a warlord could say that he was supporting communism and the Soviets would give him weapons and money. If another sick fuck of a warlord claimed to be an opponent to Communism then he'd get weapons and support from the US.
Bush is an ultra conservative whose security policies are slowly turning the US into a police state. You got the biggest prison population in history (6M, compared to Stalin's 2.4M and this despite a decreasing crime rate), a CIA that has gone internal and a ruling party that's even considering creating a national data base on all citizens. Face it, you may be closer alligned to fascism than you
But anyway, like I said the chances of US allowing a fascist Russia to join is small. They'll probably end up isolationist or the actual starters of WWIII if they elect fascist. Mmm... 4th Reich starts WWIII... Interesting!
"You failed pretty badly in history, didn't you?"
First off, I didn't fail in history. Actually, Quite different. I have won history medals before (all joking aside, this is true), so I doubt anybody would consider winning a medal being a failure.
"The US has supported corrupt FASCISTS. And not just a few of them..."
Did, and maybe still will.
"Spain: Franco dictatorship. Strongly anti-communist... Guess why they supported him?"
That was WWII, when things were VERY different here in The U.S. If anybody fought hard against fascism, it was the U.S.
"Saudi Arabia: A fucking Taliban-like religious dictatorship. Need I say more?"
Yes. More please. Trust me, There isn't as much support in the U.S. for Saudi Arabia as you think, just right now, The U.S. is trying to make themselves look good by quasi-supporting multiple Middle Eastern nations.
"Iraq: Saddam was your beloved friend back in the 80's when he gassed those Iranian's and Iraqi communists to death. Maybe that's why the US sold him $3B worth of US arms, including equipment to create chemical weapons like sarin and mustard gas?"
He wasn't MY beloved friend, and he wasn't the U.S.'s beloved friend, either. It was more of an unholy anti-Iran alliance.
"Iran: Oh yeah, CIA sold a crapload of weapons to them as well. With the money they funded the TERRORIST Contras in Nicuragua (or however that's spelled). This eventually lead to the Iran-Contra scandal."
Hmm, never heard this one, before. I'm sure we have sold Iran weapons, but probably not at the scale you are thinking of.
"Taliban: Back in the 80's, CIA gave bin Laden and his "resistance fighters" countless of weaponry to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. What goes around comes around, eh?"
Hmm, you aren't very good at history, neither.
There was no Taliban in the 80's, actually, there wasn't even a Taliban in the early 90's. The U.S. DID support the Mujdahadeen, but they NEVER supported the taliban.
"But hey, that's the Cold War for ya! One sick fuck of a warlord could say that he was supporting communism and the Soviets would give him weapons and money. If another sick fuck of a warlord claimed to be an opponent to Communism then he'd get weapons and support from the US."
Maybe true, maybe true.
"Bush is an ultra conservative whose security policies are slowly turning the US into a police state. You got the biggest prison population in history (6M, compared to Stalin's 2.4M and this despite a decreasing crime rate), a CIA that has gone internal and a ruling party that's even considering creating a national data base on all citizens. Face it, you may be closer alligned to fascism than you"
You might want to look-up the definition of fascism. Stalin didn't have a huge prison population because he was too busy killing every damn citizen who went against him! The CIA isn't actually internal, that's what we have the FBI and Homeland Sec. Dept. for. I'm not going to "face" something that isn't true.
"But anyway, like I said the chances of US allowing a fascist Russia to join is small. They'll probably end up isolationist or the actual starters of WWIII if they elect fascist. Mmm... 4th Reich starts WWIII... Interesting! "
Agreed.
But, let's not turn this into a bash-fest, so hopefully all argument could be avoided.
First off, I didn't fail in history. Actually, Quite different. I have won history medals before (all joking aside, this is true), so I doubt anybody would consider winning a medal being a failure.
"The US has supported corrupt FASCISTS. And not just a few of them..."
Did, and maybe still will.
"Spain: Franco dictatorship. Strongly anti-communist... Guess why they supported him?"
That was WWII, when things were VERY different here in The U.S. If anybody fought hard against fascism, it was the U.S.
"Saudi Arabia: A fucking Taliban-like religious dictatorship. Need I say more?"
Yes. More please
. Trust me, There isn't as much support in the U.S. for Saudi Arabia as you think, just right now, The U.S. is trying to make themselves look good by quasi-supporting multiple Middle Eastern nations. "Iraq: Saddam was your beloved friend back in the 80's when he gassed those Iranian's and Iraqi communists to death. Maybe that's why the US sold him $3B worth of US arms, including equipment to create chemical weapons like sarin and mustard gas?"
He wasn't MY beloved friend, and he wasn't the U.S.'s beloved friend, either. It was more of an unholy anti-Iran alliance.
"Iran: Oh yeah, CIA sold a crapload of weapons to them as well. With the money they funded the TERRORIST Contras in Nicuragua (or however that's spelled). This eventually lead to the Iran-Contra scandal."
Hmm, never heard this one, before. I'm sure we have sold Iran weapons, but probably not at the scale you are thinking of.
"Taliban: Back in the 80's, CIA gave bin Laden and his "resistance fighters" countless of weaponry to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. What goes around comes around, eh?"
Hmm, you aren't very good at history, neither
.There was no Taliban in the 80's, actually, there wasn't even a Taliban in the early 90's. The U.S. DID support the Mujdahadeen, but they NEVER supported the taliban.
"But hey, that's the Cold War for ya! One sick fuck of a warlord could say that he was supporting communism and the Soviets would give him weapons and money. If another sick fuck of a warlord claimed to be an opponent to Communism then he'd get weapons and support from the US."
Maybe true, maybe true.
"Bush is an ultra conservative whose security policies are slowly turning the US into a police state. You got the biggest prison population in history (6M, compared to Stalin's 2.4M and this despite a decreasing crime rate), a CIA that has gone internal and a ruling party that's even considering creating a national data base on all citizens. Face it, you may be closer alligned to fascism than you"
You might want to look-up the definition of fascism. Stalin didn't have a huge prison population because he was too busy killing every damn citizen who went against him! The CIA isn't actually internal, that's what we have the FBI and Homeland Sec. Dept. for. I'm not going to "face" something that isn't true.
"But anyway, like I said the chances of US allowing a fascist Russia to join is small. They'll probably end up isolationist or the actual starters of WWIII if they elect fascist. Mmm... 4th Reich starts WWIII... Interesting! "
Agreed.
But, let's not turn this into a bash-fest, so hopefully all argument could be avoided.
Remember that Presidents no longer can have an easy time doing side-deals and covert operations without the public being aware of it. Communism is much more accepted in America than fascism. A president can't say "All communists are evil!" but he can say something like "All dictators and fascists are evil".
I think the US would probably be willing to ally itself with a lesser threat to defeat a greater one.
I think the US would probably be willing to ally itself with a lesser threat to defeat a greater one.
"First off, I didn't fail in history. Actually, Quite different. I have won history medals before (all joking aside, this is true), so I doubt anybody would consider winning a medal being a failure."
I didn't expect some one who's an active member of something like the MDS to be a failure in that area either. Ever heard of sarcasm, friend?
"That was WWII, when things were VERY different here in The U.S. If anybody fought hard against fascism, it was the U.S."
No, that was after WWII that you supported that loony.
"Yes. More please. Trust me, There isn't as much support in the U.S. for Saudi Arabia as you think, just right now, The U.S. is trying to make themselves look good by quasi-supporting multiple Middle Eastern nations."
The alliance between US and Saudi Arabia has lasted since the sometime around the 60's. And I know that there isn't much support for you in Saudi Arabia. Only 1% of the population there supports you, but the government has been pro-you until pretty much now.
"He wasn't MY beloved friend, and he wasn't the U.S.'s beloved friend, either. It was more of an unholy anti-Iran alliance."
What a smart anti-Iran alliance. Give a brutal murderous dictator large quantities of weapons and give the nation that he's fighting and you were in an alliance against weapons as well! Smart. Very smart.
"Hmm, never heard this one, before. I'm sure we have sold Iran weapons, but probably not at the scale you are thinking of."
You never heard of Iran-Contra?!! That was a massive scandal for Christ sake!
Weapons sales were at a few hundred millions (between 200-350 if I remember it correctly) according to declassified Reagan-era documents, btw.
"Hmm, you aren't very good at history, neither.
There was no Taliban in the 80's, actually, there wasn't even a Taliban in the early 90's. The U.S. DID support the Mujdahadeen, but they NEVER supported the taliban."
Muhajedin! Yes, sorry. Mixed them up.
But fact is, I still think that giving away hundreds of millions to a bunch of religious extremists isn't a very smart thing to do. Don't you agree?
"You might want to look-up the definition of fascism. Stalin didn't have a huge prison population because he was too busy killing every damn citizen who went against him! The CIA isn't actually internal, that's what we have the FBI and Homeland Sec. Dept. for. I'm not going to "face" something that isn't true."
Wait a minute here - did I say that they WERE? I only said that the US is slowly turning into a police state and that you aren't the sole saviors of democracy, freedom of speech and civil liberties that you may think. The US today isn't the old US we used to know. You think I'm making all this up because of my "insane hatred for democracy and fanatic Islamic communism" or something? I can assure you, I'm not some sort of misfit looney, democracy hater, anti-liberty promoter or something in those lines.
All that I'm doing is voicing a strong concern over the actions of your government and the way that they're heading.
"But, let's not turn this into a bash-fest, so hopefully all argument could be avoided."
Bash-fest? I think you should look up that term.
We're having a political discussion, my friend. Not quite a bash-fest.
I didn't expect some one who's an active member of something like the MDS to be a failure in that area either. Ever heard of sarcasm, friend?
"That was WWII, when things were VERY different here in The U.S. If anybody fought hard against fascism, it was the U.S."
No, that was after WWII that you supported that loony.
"Yes. More please
. Trust me, There isn't as much support in the U.S. for Saudi Arabia as you think, just right now, The U.S. is trying to make themselves look good by quasi-supporting multiple Middle Eastern nations."The alliance between US and Saudi Arabia has lasted since the sometime around the 60's. And I know that there isn't much support for you in Saudi Arabia. Only 1% of the population there supports you, but the government has been pro-you until pretty much now.
"He wasn't MY beloved friend, and he wasn't the U.S.'s beloved friend, either. It was more of an unholy anti-Iran alliance."
What a smart anti-Iran alliance. Give a brutal murderous dictator large quantities of weapons and give the nation that he's fighting and you were in an alliance against weapons as well! Smart. Very smart.
"Hmm, never heard this one, before. I'm sure we have sold Iran weapons, but probably not at the scale you are thinking of."
You never heard of Iran-Contra?!! That was a massive scandal for Christ sake!
Weapons sales were at a few hundred millions (between 200-350 if I remember it correctly) according to declassified Reagan-era documents, btw.
"Hmm, you aren't very good at history, neither
.There was no Taliban in the 80's, actually, there wasn't even a Taliban in the early 90's. The U.S. DID support the Mujdahadeen, but they NEVER supported the taliban."
Muhajedin! Yes, sorry. Mixed them up.
But fact is, I still think that giving away hundreds of millions to a bunch of religious extremists isn't a very smart thing to do. Don't you agree?
"You might want to look-up the definition of fascism. Stalin didn't have a huge prison population because he was too busy killing every damn citizen who went against him! The CIA isn't actually internal, that's what we have the FBI and Homeland Sec. Dept. for. I'm not going to "face" something that isn't true."
Wait a minute here - did I say that they WERE? I only said that the US is slowly turning into a police state and that you aren't the sole saviors of democracy, freedom of speech and civil liberties that you may think. The US today isn't the old US we used to know. You think I'm making all this up because of my "insane hatred for democracy and fanatic Islamic communism" or something? I can assure you, I'm not some sort of misfit looney, democracy hater, anti-liberty promoter or something in those lines.
All that I'm doing is voicing a strong concern over the actions of your government and the way that they're heading.
"But, let's not turn this into a bash-fest, so hopefully all argument could be avoided."
Bash-fest? I think you should look up that term.
We're having a political discussion, my friend. Not quite a bash-fest.
Could we please limit political debates to only the discussion stuff that directly relates to the MDS? Off topic forum with ye if you wish to discuss supplying Afghanistan aid against the Soviets and whatnot. It could be a very interesting discussion that I would be tempted to read myself, but just not here
Thanks
Thanks