Im trying to ally with china instead because they are much more powerful than japan and are pushing them out off Manchuko also do you have to keep influencing Hungary Romania and Bulgaria to get them into the axis?
-
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.
It would be nice for Hitler, I'm sure. But I would say that Chiang Kai Sheck would never ally with the Nazi's...besides, they had already put so much in their relationship with Britain and America. The relationship with Nazi Germany was purely business.
On the contrary, Nationalist China was pro-Fascist given Hitler was their first (and only) open ally for a while...at least, until Germany withdrew their advisers and supported Japan. Although, funnily enough, Nationalist China was also pro-USSR since they got covert (secret) USSR aid. Chaing accepted help regardless of what faction as long as they did not support Japan. Although, I don't think it should be easy for there to be a Sino-Axis alliance, the official view of the KMT was that they needed at least 10 more years to fully modernize and be able to wage war successfully. Jiang Jie shi was a pragmatist.
So i cant ally with china but how do i ally with romania,bulgaria,hungary.
Nothing serious says you cannot ally with China if you really want to. "Acceptall" followed by an alliance deal will always work, unless you really care for the plausability of your game.
So? If the guy wants to ally up with China and see where that road'll take the world, why not use a little bit of cheating to get it. Cheats don't always ruin a game, man.
There's no real satisfaction in saying "I did that!" if you cheated to get there.
I support a little cheating to assist enacting plausible outcomes. If German player boosts relations with China, opposes Manchukuo recognition and perhaps defeats the UK I would say China would realistically join up with the Axis.
This game is so eager to force feed you with historical outcomes, I don't see where it hurts to do a little ahistoricalness if the player can restrain himself enough to go through it realistically.
This game is so eager to force feed you with historical outcomes, I don't see where it hurts to do a little ahistoricalness if the player can restrain himself enough to go through it realistically.
I support using acceptall in one situation: where you demand vasallisation of a country. They'll very likely turn your offer down, despite you controlling of all their lands, all their armies wiped out, and you could easily annex them and liberate them anyway. (Which you don't want to in some cases, as some countries lose their cores.)
I think in terms of what was at stake (their relationship with the more powerful USA), Chiang could weigh the pros and cons up well. The US was also closer.
I don't think China was exactly pro Fascist or Stalinist. Chiang himself wasn't against democracy...his wife certainly believed in it. Sun Yat Sen instructed Chiang to unite China "the Soviet way" which, though obviously not agreeing with communism, didn't require democracy as a hindrance to this process until it's outcome.
Only discuss the game range
The neutrality value is too high will led to China not join any military alliance
Possible way is to have a common enemy
Such as Germany declared war on Japan