Historical inaccurates

[DaddySugar331]

By the way, I noticed that there are no battles on Khalkhin Gol in the game, although they were 3-4 times larger than the battle on Lake Khasan. There is never an occupation of Iraq and Iran. No Peruvian-Ecuadorian War. There is no coup in Yugoslavia, and the war between the Axis and Yugoslavia happening for some vague reasons. No attack on Pearl Harbor. Mongolia and Tuva are represented by independent countries.

Also the Rhineland zone should be completely on the border with France, and not half. The Free City of Danzig is missing, and Germany declares war on Poland under a different pretext than in life. Most of the occupation borders in Poland, Yugoslavia, Greece, Iran, Germany, USSR and even Austria don't look like real. Provinces like Zara, Malta, Ivodzima is too huge, than they in real life. No Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, General Governate, German Zone of Protection in Slovakia.

I am already silent about the total inconsistency of flags, names and borders of countries with real ones. I don't understand why developers should try to create alternative options for countries and add modern border when historical ones have not been worked out? The game is about the Second World War, and not about the modern world. There are mods for the modern world.

 

[Shaka of Carthage]

The game is about the Second World War

Actually it isn't. It has a WWII flavor.

 

[DaddySugar331]

Actually it isn't. It has a WWII flavor.

Oh... So that's why we have a nation from 1492? Ok.

 

[TalyonUngol]

Because it's very minor details that don't do anything. It's unimportant compared to improving gameplay and breathing life into the game.

 

[GSS_]

About what you said, there's some things that could make a better WW2 experience (Khalkhin Gol, occupation of Irak and Iran, coup in Yugoslavia, Pearl Harbor or the Free City of Danzig). I mainly agree (by the way, some mods add the Free City of Danzig with even a specific Focus Tree). Some other minor changes doesn't have a 'huge' impact on the game and are less important.

 

[Áurum]

By the way, I noticed that there are no battles on Khalkhin Gol in the game, although they were 3-4 times larger than the battle on Lake Khasan. There is never an occupation of Iraq and Iran. No Peruvian-Ecuadorian War. There is no coup in Yugoslavia, and the war between the Axis and Yugoslavia happening for some vague reasons. No attack on Pearl Harbor. Mongolia and Tuva are represented by independent countries.

Also the Rhineland zone should be completely on the border with France, and not half. The Free City of Danzig is missing, and Germany declares war on Poland under a different pretext than in life. Most of the occupation borders in Poland, Yugoslavia, Greece, Iran, Germany, USSR and even Austria don't look like real. Provinces like Zara, Malta, Ivodzima is too huge, than they in real life. No Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, General Governate, German Zone of Protection in Slovakia.

I am already silent about the total inconsistency of flags, names and borders of countries with real ones. I don't understand why developers should try to create alternative options for countries and add modern border when historical ones have not been worked out? The game is about the Second World War, and not about the modern world. There are mods for the modern world.

About flags, there are mods, I'm making the most historically accurate flag mod myself.

The other things, yes, they should be fixed. Some may take a longer time to code, but others are solvable in a few minutes.

 

[DaddySugar331]

Because it's very minor details that don't do anything. It's unimportant compared to improving gameplay and breathing life into the game.

Is Yugoslavian coup and Anglo-Iraqi War is very minor details? Free City of Danzig is one of the causes of WWII. About 100,000 fought in the Battles on Khalkhin Gol, while in the battle on Lake Khasan - only 30,000. But there is only Hasan in the game. I agree that flags, names and leaders of countries may not be very important, but such large and important events should be in the game.

 

[TalyonUngol]

Yes. I consider a yugoslavia coup and Danzig as minor details that just make things more complicated. So you want Yugoslavia to split into three at some point with two joining either axis or allies? Seems like needless complex things.

The iraqi invasion of the UK? Sure. Fine whatever. Itll just add another front that won't matter to Germany. They won't care about Iraq and Iran being invaded.

Free city of Danzig? So basically you want that to be a seperate easy conquest like Luxembourg while nerfing Poland's manpower since it won't br part of Poland. This is alrrady in the game because Poland wont give it up. Just adding complexity for complexitys sake.

The battle of thid lake would just be another optional border skirmish. Seems likr a waste of resources to put in that wont do anything other than add another minor thing that won't extend the games life.

Sorry. I don't think any of these are important for a games life. You know what historical thing would br cool. A fuel embargo against Japan. And pearl harbor already has an event in the game if Japan attacks and takes it.



And the reason developers are adding in alternative options is cause the majority of the community enjoys the alternate history. Most of us believe a straight historical accurate game gets boring after ten games cause youve seen it all. Nothing is new.

 

[DaddySugar331]

Yes. I consider a yugoslavia coup and Danzig as minor details that just make things more complicated. So you want Yugoslavia to split into three at some point with two joining either axis or allies? Seems like needless complex things.

The iraqi invasion of the UK? Sure. Fine whatever. Itll just add another front that won't matter to Germany. They won't care about Iraq and Iran being invaded.

Free city of Danzig? So basically you want that to be a seperate easy conquest like Luxembourg while nerfing Poland's manpower since it won't br part of Poland. This is alrrady in the game because Poland wont give it up. Just adding complexity for complexitys sake.

The battle of thid lake would just be another optional border skirmish. Seems likr a waste of resources to put in that wont do anything other than add another minor thing that won't extend the games life.

Sorry. I don't think any of these are important for a games life. You know what historical thing would br cool. A fuel embargo against Japan. And pearl harbor already has an event in the game if Japan attacks and takes it.



And the reason developers are adding in alternative options is cause the majority of the community enjoys the alternate history. Most of us believe a straight historical accurate game gets boring after ten games cause youve seen it all. Nothing is new.

I understand your point of view and partly agree with it, but I think that history should come first. And I am not against alternative history.

I bet that adding Danzig to the game will help solve the landlocked problem for Poland. Historically, Germany demanded the transfer of Danzig to the German Reich, the construction of autobahn through the Polish corridor and free passage along it.
So, if Paradox want to make an alternate story, then this is a good version. Poland transfers Danzig, but retains access to the sea. You can also add infrastructure construction missions, similar to those in the US, where you need to build factories and shipyards to support the Senate.

A rebel victory in Iraq is also a good alternative history. Germany could use Iraq as a staging ground for an attack on Egypt and later on the USSR. Isn't it an alternative history?

 

[squid_hills]

There is never an occupation of Iraq and Iran.

Actually these are in the game, its just an option on the National Focus tree that UK AI doesn't usually choose to take. It comes up a little more frequently with historical settings turned off (oddly enough) but it isn't terribly common because the AI doesn't prioritize that NF.

 

[him_15]

These incidents might get addressed when the relevant nations focus tree are out in the future.

 

[TalyonUngol]

I understand your point of view and partly agree with it, but I think that history should come first. And I am not against alternative history.

I bet that adding Danzig to the game will help solve the landlocked problem for Poland. Historically, Germany demanded the transfer of Danzig to the German Reich, the construction of autobahn through the Polish corridor and free passage along it.
So, if Paradox want to make an alternate story, then this is a good version. Poland transfers Danzig, but retains access to the sea. You can also add infrastructure construction missions, similar to those in the US, where you need to build factories and shipyards to support the Senate.

A rebel victory in Iraq is also a good alternative history. Germany could use Iraq as a staging ground for an attack on Egypt and later on the USSR. Isn't it an alternative history?

Danzig is in the game as part of poland and its a port. Poland's not land locked.

 

[DaddySugar331]

Danzig is in the game as part of poland and its a port. Poland's not land locked.

If Poland gives Danzig to Germany, then it become a landlocked. I offer a solution to this problem. Also, Danzig was not part of Poland.

 

[TalyonUngol]

If Poland gives Danzig to Germany, then it become a landlocked. I offer a solution to this problem. Also, Danzig was not part of Poland.

Then Poland will be landlocked if Danzig is not part of Poland. Game limitations. And Poland in my exp doesn't give uo Danzig. Ive seen it maybe 3 times in my thousand houds

 

[Dlin369]

By the way, I noticed that there are no battles on Khalkhin Gol in the game, although they were 3-4 times larger than the battle on Lake Khasan. There is never an occupation of Iraq and Iran. No Peruvian-Ecuadorian War. There is no coup in Yugoslavia, and the war between the Axis and Yugoslavia happening for some vague reasons. No attack on Pearl Harbor. Mongolia and Tuva are represented by independent countries.

Also the Rhineland zone should be completely on the border with France, and not half. The Free City of Danzig is missing, and Germany declares war on Poland under a different pretext than in life. Most of the occupation borders in Poland, Yugoslavia, Greece, Iran, Germany, USSR and even Austria don't look like real. Provinces like Zara, Malta, Ivodzima is too huge, than they in real life. No Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, General Governate, German Zone of Protection in Slovakia.

I am already silent about the total inconsistency of flags, names and borders of countries with real ones. I don't understand why developers should try to create alternative options for countries and add modern border when historical ones have not been worked out? The game is about the Second World War, and not about the modern world. There are mods for the modern world.

IIRC the current game engine can't support border wars between countries that don't share a border which means Khalkin Gol can't be represented directly. Japan with Waking the Tiger can border war with the Soviets on the border with Korea which more or less works outs for now.

Yugoslavia does have a coup event programmed if you have Death or Dishonor and Yugoslavia joins the Axis without taking the focus tree.

Peru-Ecuadorian war and the Iran-Iraq invasions will probably have to wait for a DLC on those regions.

Pearl Harbor isn't something you can really program into focus trees. Japan gets a big boost to port strike missions at the start of the war with the US which you can use to set up pearl harbor

Free city of Danzig shouldn't be tag - at best it should be a province modifier or a national spirit for Poland. It's too small to be represented as an independent country, and in any case it'll end up either under German or Polish control by the end of the war.

Zara, Malta and Iwo Jima are big because you need to fit in divisions and map icons onto them, so for most war games it's acceptable to show them larger than real life for ease of viewing

The Devs do alt-history options because it sells and sells well according to the statistics they release. The game might be about WW2 but that doesn't mean everything has to follow the path WW2 set

 

[DaddySugar331]

IIRC the current game engine can't support border wars between countries that don't share a border which means Khalkin Gol can't be represented directly. Japan with Waking the Tiger can border war with the Soviets on the border with Korea which more or less works outs for now.

Yugoslavia does have a coup event programmed if you have Death or Dishonor and Yugoslavia joins the Axis without taking the focus tree.

Peru-Ecuadorian war and the Iran-Iraq invasions will probably have to wait for a DLC on those regions.

Pearl Harbor isn't something you can really program into focus trees. Japan gets a big boost to port strike missions at the start of the war with the US which you can use to set up pearl harbor

Free city of Danzig shouldn't be tag - at best it should be a province modifier or a national spirit for Poland. It's too small to be represented as an independent country, and in any case it'll end up either under German or Polish control by the end of the war.

Zara, Malta and Iwo Jima are big because you need to fit in divisions and map icons onto them, so for most war games it's acceptable to show them larger than real life for ease of viewing

The Devs do alt-history options because it sells and sells well according to the statistics they release. The game might be about WW2 but that doesn't mean everything has to follow the path WW2 set

After 1.9, I have never seen a coup in Yugoslavia. The only thing that has changed with the last update is that Yugoslavia create Croatian Banovina, which is generally historical, but completely breaks the occupation, because you can't make Independent State of Croatia.

I also see no reason not to add Danzig to the game. Just like Luxembourg, it is captured by Germany, and they are about the same in size. They did not influence the war, except that Danzig was one of the causes of the war.

The attack on Pearl Harbor can be done in the form of a decision in which, in a random way, with a certain probability, Japanese aircraft can destroy or damage the US fleet, while receiving a bombardment bonus.

 

[yezhanquan]

What I don't understand is how a major Allied power and an Axis power haven't had their mission trees revamped where so many minor nations already had their turn.

 

[GSP Jr]

YOU are in command, if you want some historical event to just 'happen', you are really missing the point.

I mean, we all (think) we know all about Pearl Harbor, Stalingrad, etc etc. The game should NOT force those events (or similar ones) to happen, you have to MAKE them happen.

Who knows, in-game Japan may choose to 'go north' and attack the Soviets, wouldn't a Pearl event seem rather stupid if they do?

 

[Dlin369]

After 1.9, I have never seen a coup in Yugoslavia. The only thing that has changed with the last update is that Yugoslavia create Croatian Banovina, which is generally historical, but completely breaks the occupation, because you can't make Independent State of Croatia.

I also see no reason not to add Danzig to the game. Just like Luxembourg, it is captured by Germany, and they are about the same in size. They did not influence the war, except that Danzig was one of the causes of the war.

The attack on Pearl Harbor can be done in the form of a decision in which, in a random way, with a certain probability, Japanese aircraft can destroy or damage the US fleet, while receiving a bombardment bonus.

Pearl Harbor used to be a decision/focus but it was removed because it's not really fair and very railroaded to have America park all their ships at exactly the same place and then have them randomly sink because of a decision. The current system works better because the US has a chance to maneuver their vessels the way they wish to and the Japanese get several months of advantage in sinking them with naval aircraft. This keeps the US away from the Pacific for a few months and gives the Japanese an upperhand for their conquests. Unfortunately the AI doesn't do as well with Naval invasions but a player can strike the Southern Resource area fairly easily.

The real problem with the Pacific is the whole Indochina occupation leading to oil embargo isn't well represented. Japan escalating the war in China increases world tension but doesn't lead to the actual consequence that said WT caused - the US, UK and Netherlands all embargoed Japan and threatened to deprive them of critical oil supplies. In the future I'd like the devs to add choices for Japan such as attempt to compromise with the Chinese to save face (unlikely to work), continue the war in China and risk running out of oil quickly, strike only the European colonies and gamble the US won't intervene (depends on WT), and of course the historical all out strike on the Southern resource area

 

[squid_hills]

YOU are in command, if you want some historical event to just 'happen', you are really missing the point.

I mean, we all (think) we know all about Pearl Harbor, Stalingrad, etc etc. The game should NOT force those events (or similar ones) to happen, you have to MAKE them happen.

Who knows, in-game Japan may choose to 'go north' and attack the Soviets, wouldn't a Pearl event seem rather stupid if they do?

Tell me about it. I'm sick of Fascist France getting the popup for the Fourth International after I've gone and banned Communism. How is Trotsky hosting his Socialist back-patting smarty party in Paris if he's already been ejected from the country?

Or how about when I capture Moscow as Fascist Greece, but don't get a popup news blurb solely because I'm not Germany? Is Moscow falling to the Greeks somehow less newsworthy than when it falls to the Germans? Or when I, as Germany, puppet Poland instead of eating it, then get a popup about the "liberation" of Warsaw and how it spells disaster for Germany. Liberation? I still own the bloody country. Nobody got liberated, son.

The events system that HoI4 has is less than optimal. I see no reason for the devs to add more. You want a Peral Harbor event? Just port strike Pearl Harbor on your own initiative. Or better yet, don't attack the US at all. That's how Japan lost the war, after all.