How to make the Little Entente & Balkan Pact Alliances more fun

[Zeprion]

During the interwar era:
- Little Entente (1921 - 1938) was a defensive alliance between: Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia.
- Balkan Pact (1934 - 1941) was a defensive alliance between: Romania, Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey.
Notice that Romania and Yugoslavia are in both of these alliances.

The defensive pacts were aimed mainly against the losers of World War I: Hungary and Bulgaria who the winning nations feared have desires of retaliation (and they weren't wrong).

The way Little Entente & Balkan Pact are represented in the game is minimal.

A series of guarantees and improve relationships, who are not even completly covered:
Czechoslovakia guarantees: Romania and Yugoslavia.
Romania guarantees: Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.
Yugoslavia guarantees: nobody. (why?)

While the Balkan Pact represented by a series of +25 improve relationships, except for Romania:
Romania guarantees: Greece and Turkey. (why only Romania?)

I previously made a suggestion to expand on this and make the web of alliances more historically accurate and entertaining to navigate:

How could historical Little Entente and Balkan Pact work more realistically

Historically, the Little Entente was a defensive alliance between: Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia. While the Balkan Pact was a defensive alliance between: Romania, Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey. Their main targests were the losers of...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

However, I believe there is an even better way to make the Little Entente and Balkan Pact even more fun and flexible.
What if, instead of events to support them or tweaks to the focus tree we use decisions? Decisions are more flexible and can do just about everything the events and focus trees can do and more.
It will add a new diplomatic layer to the game, at least for those 5 (or 6) nations, in a game that is minimal on diplomacy.

I suggest that:
1. Everyone guarantees everyone.
2. Decision sets for the Little Entente and Balkan Pact are added, with multiple options.

1. The 1936 Guarantees:
- If you have Death or Dishonor DLC/Little Entente:
* Czechoslovakia guarantees: Romania, Yugoslavia.
* Romania guarantees: Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia.
* Yugoslavia guarantees: Czechoslovakia, Romania.

- If you have Battle for Bosphorus DLC/Balkan Pact:
* Romania guarantees: Yugoslavia, Greece, Turkey.
* Yugoslavia guarantees: Romania, Greece, Turkey.
* Greece guarantees: Romania, Yugoslavia, Turkey.
* Turkey guarantees: Romania, Yugoslavia, Greece.

In 1939: The Little Entente is fully gone. The Balkan Pact still has all 4 members.

2. The Decision Sets:

A. Little Enente:
Description: The Little Entente is a mutual defense agreement between Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Romania, supported by France, directed against the German and Hungarian domination in the Danube basin. It is intended to protect the member states' territorial integrity and political independence. A Permanent Secretariat and a Permanent Council have been established to discuss foreign policy matters and agree upon a common policy.

1. Gain Influence (10 pp/once every 30 days) -> Gains 10 points of influence in the Little Entente.
2. Suggest reforming into a Full Alliance (costs 100 influence/100 pp/once every 60 days) -> All member states gain event to turn the Little Entente into a faction with you.
* You must not be in any faction.
* All of the member states must be at peace.
* Whoever clicked this decision becomes the Faction Leader, the other memebers get an event they can accept or refuse.
* All 3 or 4 members must accept in order for the Faction to form.
* In order for the AI to accept, they must have a positive opinion of you.
3. Make Czecholsovakia Settle the Dispute with Poland (costs 50 influence/50 pp/once every 60 days) -> Unlocks the decision "Invite Poland to the Little Entente".
* If Czecholsovakia previously left the Little Entente, you can take decision 4 without having to take decision 3 previously.
4. Invite Poland to the Little Entente (costs 100 influence/100 pp/ once every 60 days) -> Poland is invited to the Little Entente.
* Poland AI must have positive opinion of you to accept.
* Poland must be democratic or non-aligned for this decision to be unlocked.
5. Leave the Little Entente -> Stop guaranteeing all the other members and lose your guarantees from all the other members.

- With 10 influence points possible every month, you can make 120 influence points a year.
- This means that in 25 months (By Februrary 1938 if you spam it constantly) you can have the Little Entente faction with: Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia.
- Or in 10 months (by the end of 1936) with only 3 members.
- You can create this faction as any country except Poland (not impossible but hard, since they are not an original member you have to rely on AI or another player to invite you).

- When one of the member states declares war, nothing happens.
- When war is declared upon one of the member states (that you guarantee), if you do not answer the guarantee within 30 days, you automatically leave the Little Entente.
- If you manually remove one of the guarantees, you automatically leave the Little Entente.
- If you change ideology to fascist or communist, you automatically leave the Little Entente.
- If you change ideology after the Little Entente becomes a fully fledged faction, nothing happens.
- If Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia (and Poland if it joins) are all in the same faction, the Little Entente is automatically disbanded. (redundancy)

B. Balkan Pact:
Description: The Balkan Pact is a treaty signed by Greece, Turkey, Romania and Yugoslavia in Athens, in 1934. It is aimed at maintaining the status quo in the region following World War I. The states in the region that seek territorial expansion such as Italy, Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary and the Soviet Union refused to sign the document. All the signatories agreed to suspend all disputed territorial claims and guarantee their collective protection against the states that consider their territorial disputes unsettled.

1. Gain Influence (10 pp/once every 30 days) -> Gains 10 points of influence in the Balkan Pact
2. Suggest reforming into a Full Alliance (costs 100 influence/100 pp/once every 60 days) -> All member states gain event to turn the Balkan Pact into a faction with you.
* You must not be in any faction.
* All of the member states must be at peace.
* Whoever clicked this decision becomes the Faction Leader, the other memebers get an event they can accept or refuse.
* All 3 or 4 members must accept in order for the Faction to form.
* In order for the AI to accept, they must have a positive opinion of you.
3. Give up Territorial Claims for Rearmament Rights (costs 50 influence/50 pp/once every 60 days) -> The Balkan Pact petitions UK (gains event) to give Bulgaria the right to rearm if they make non-aggression pacts with all Balkan Pact member states. If UK accepts, the event goes to Bulgaria, if Bulgaria accepts it happens.
4. Invite Bulgaria to the Balkan Pact (costs 100 influence/100 pp/ once every 60 days) -> Bulgaria is invited to the Balkan Pact.
* Bulgaria AI must have positive opinion of you to accept.
* Bulgaria must be democratic or non-aligned for this decision to be unlocked.
5. Leave the Balkan Pact -> Stop guaranteeing all the other members and lose your guarantees from all the other members.

- With 10 influence points possible every month, you can make 120 influence points a year.
- This means that in 25 months (By Februrary 1938 if you spam it constantly) you can have the Balkan Pact faction with: Romania, Yugoslavia, Greece, Bulgaria and Turkey.
- Or in 10 months (by the end of 1936) with only 4 members.
- You can create this faction as any country except Bulgaria (not impossible but hard, since they are not an original member you have to rely on AI or another player to invite you).

- When one of the member states declares war, nothing happens.
- When war is declared upon one of the member states (that you guarantee), if you do not answer the guarantee within 30 days, you automatically leave the Little Entente.
- If you manually remove one of the guarantees, you automatically leave the Little Entente.
- If you change ideology to fascist or communist, you automatically leave the Little Entente.
- If you change ideology after the Little Entente becomes a fully fledged faction, nothing happens.
- If Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia (and Poland if it joins) are all in the same faction, the Little Entente is automatically disbanded. (redundancy)

SUMMARY:
- The Little Entente/Balkan Pact start as a set of guarantees.
- If you go fascist/communist or click the "leave" button, you leave the defensive alliances.
- You can spend political power to invite one more nation to the alliance
- You can spend political power to turn the defensive alliance into a fully fledged faction - earliest possible is October 1936/Februrary 1938.

Unique decisions for Romania and Yugoslavia: Since Romania and Yugoslavia are the only members to be both in the Little Entente and the Balkan Pact, they can technically form both alliances, but if they are the ones to form a fully fledged Little Entente and Balkan Pact. They should have the option to invite the members of the other defensive alliance in the fully fledged alliance.
Yugoslavia or Romania form Little Entente faction -> Adds Balkan Pact decision to invite Greece and Turkey to Little Entente faction (100 pp)
Yugoslavia or Romania form Little Entente faction -> Adds Balkan Pact decision to invite Czechoslovakia to Little Entente faction (100 pp)

Certain alt-history/history focuses will cause member countries to automatically leave both alliances:
* Czechoslovakia: "Go Left" or "Go Right" on the "Political Direction" path. And "German Puppet" on the "Strategic Decisions" path.
* Romania: "Join Comintern" or "Join Axis" on the "Preserve Greater Romania" path. And "Balkan Domination". And "Appoint Pro-Axis Government" or "Appoint Pro-Soviet Government" on the "Institute Royal Dictatorship" path.
* Yugoslavia: "Sign the Tripartite Pact" or "Recognize the Soviet Union". And "Fortify Banat" on the "Attract Allied Capital" path.
* Greece: "Ressurecting the Mengali idea" or "Request Communist Support" on the "Bring Home the Exiled Republicans" path. And "Recruit the Fascists" on the "The King's Government" path.
* Turkey: "Pivot to the Past" or "Reconfigure Turkish Foreign Policy" when you have 3 choices in the middle of the focus tree.
- When this happen, the country in question will remove all their guarnatees on: CZE, ROM, YUG, GRE, TUR and have all their guarantees from CZE, ROM, YUG, GRE, TUR removed.
- This will not happen if they are already in a fully fledged alliance like the: Czech Entente or Balkan Entente.

Special Events:
- Little Entente: When Germany demands Sudetenland (event), all other members of the Little Entente get an event to either stand by Czechoslovakia or leave them to their fate. If they choose the latter they automatically leave the Little Entente.
- Balkan Pact: When Germany demands Transylvania (event), all other members of the Little Entente get an event to either stand by Romania or leave them to their fate. If they choose the latter they automatically leave the Little Entente.
- Balkan Pact: When USSR justifies on Romania (demand Bessarabia), all other members of the Little Entente get an event to either stand by Romania or leave them to their fate. If they choose the latter they automatically leave the Little Entente.
- Balkan Pact: When Germany justifies on Yugoslavia, all other members of the Little Entente get an event to either stand by Czechoslovakia or leave them to their fate. If they choose the latter they automatically leave the Little Entente.
- Balkan Pact: When Italy justifies on Yugoslavia, all other members of the Little Entente get an event to either stand by Czechoslovakia or leave them to their fate. If they choose the latter they automatically leave the Little Entente.
The purpose of these is to make the Little Entente and Balkan Pact fall like this did in real life. These 5 events will only happen under those specific circumstances. If a member states choose to stand by their allies, they remain in the defensive alliances. If a member state choose to leave them to their fate, they automatically leave the defensive faction, like they did in real life. The only variation is whether USSR or Germany goes first for Romania and whether Germany or Italy goes first for Yugoslavia, the historical AI ressult is the same regardless.

In a historical game for Little Entente, it will happen as following:
- German goes "Demand Sudetenland".
- England and France refuse support.
- Romania and Yugoslavia refuse support.
* Since they refused support, Romania won't be guaranteed by Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia anymore, and they stop guaranteeing Romania.
* Since they refused support, Yugoslavia won't be guaranteed by Czechoslovakia and Romania anymore, and stop guaranteeing Yugoslavia.
- This effectively destroys the Little Entente alliance.
This is how it happened in real life.

In a historical game for Balkan Pact, it will happen as following:
- Germany goes "Demand North Transylvania" or USSR justifies wargoal on Romania, whichever is faster as this thing changes depending on the game.
- Yugoslavia, Greece and Turkey refuse support.
- This effectively destroys the Balkan Pact alliance.
This is not completly how it happened in real life. Romania was left out but the Balkan Pact remained with 3 members. Then Yugoslavia was threatened by Germany and Greece with Turkey refused support, this effectively destroied the Balkan Pact alliance. But it's just a small thing that makes no real difference to a historical game.

Notes:
- Because of redundancy (If all members are in the same faction, the defensive alliance (effectively the decisions and guarantees) is disbanded. This is the caase for when: Either member forms a fully fledged alliance. Turkey makes the Balkan Entente via focus. Czechoslovakia makes the Czech Entente via focus and successfully invites Yugoslavia and Romania. France makes the Entente focus and successfully invites Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Romania.
- A player can respect a guarantee, but AI will be reluctant to respect it. Much like in the previous suggestion.

Gameplay worth? You can make a lot of Eastern European factions with this and play them under a lot of different nations. Being only democratic and non-aligned, this path encourages you to fight both Germany and/or USSR depending who is in the faction. In the coolest case scenario, you can play as Yugoslavia and Romania and spend a lot of political power to make a behemoth Alliance with 7 nations: Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Yugoslaiva, Greece, Bulgaria and Turkey. Imagine that fighting both Germany and USSR.

A lot more decisions could be added for the defensive alliances, such as to spend influence to buy military equipment or make a common military exercise and so on.

 

[walt526]

As is often the case, there is a tension between historical accuracy (I largely agree with your points on that front) and game balance. Because of how World Tension and justifications work, it would actually be a boon to Germany to have extensive defensive alliances among these countries because then a single justification could allow it to consolidate Central/Eastern Europe before the onset of WWII because World Tension will be too low for the Allied majors to guarantee any of those countries.

That is, it's not necessarily to Germany's disadvantage to find itself in a "pre-war" with Central Europe in 1937 or 1938 because those countries--even if united--will not be strong enough to present any sort of threat to Germany against a competent player. Consequently, more often than not I think that you'd just wind up having a stronger Germany in that it will increase its industrial base as well improved access to resources (namely Romania's oil as well as Turkey and Yugoslavia's chromium) prior to total war against the Allies. That would have the effect of buffing Germany.

A way around this would be to mix in a guarantee from a major (e.g., France) so that WWII could begin if an ahistorical Germany declared war on any in the defensive alliances before the Polish invasion, but then it's ahistorical. As a historical question, I don't know that it's clear that the Allies would have responded to an invasion by Germany of a country other than Poland. But because of how resources are distributed and how non-aggression pacts work (i.e., you want to hold off on sharing a border with the USSR for as long as possible), it's to Germany's advantage to consolidate Central Europe prior to taking on Poland (and triggering WWII with the Allies).

 

[Sublime Sultan]

I would also like to have some mechanics on faction merger, just like how France's Little Entente can eventually merge with the UK-led Allies. Merging the Little Entente and Balkan Entente would make sense as they are formed to contain the irredentism of the former Central Powers. When the UK and/or Poland join the war, another round of merger with the Allies and/or Międzymorze would be sensible unless their political goals are somehow incompatible. The same goes for the Italian Novus Imperium Romanum with the Hungarian Pact of Rome and the Turkish Covenant of the Mediterranean. It's the simplistic mechanic design and interlocking focus trees that make potentially enjoyable alt-history gameplay full of gridlocks.

 

[Zeprion]

As is often the case, there is a tension between historical accuracy (I largely agree with your points on that front) and game balance. Because of how World Tension and justifications work, it would actually be a boon to Germany to have extensive defensive alliances among these countries because then a single justification could allow it to consolidate Central/Eastern Europe before the onset of WWII because World Tension will be too low for the Allied majors to guarantee any of those countries.

That is, it's not necessarily to Germany's disadvantage to find itself in a "pre-war" with Central Europe in 1937 or 1938 because those countries--even if united--will not be strong enough to present any sort of threat to Germany against a competent player. Consequently, more often than not I think that you'd just wind up having a stronger Germany in that it will increase its industrial base as well improved access to resources (namely Romania's oil as well as Turkey and Yugoslavia's chromium) prior to total war against the Allies. That would have the effect of buffing Germany.

A way around this would be to mix in a guarantee from a major (e.g., France) so that WWII could begin if an ahistorical Germany declared war on any in the defensive alliances before the Polish invasion, but then it's ahistorical. As a historical question, I don't know that it's clear that the Allies would have responded to an invasion by Germany of a country other than Poland. But because of how resources are distributed and how non-aggression pacts work (i.e., you want to hold off on sharing a border with the USSR for as long as possible), it's to Germany's advantage to consolidate Central Europe prior to taking on Poland (and triggering WWII with the Allies).

In historical games, the alliances are bound to fail like they did in real life. If Germany and Italy attacks one of them, they won't honor their guarantee and the defensive alliance fail. I tried to make this with some special events for "Demand Sudetenland", "Second Vienna Award", etc. But outside of those focuses, the AI could have a low desire to join a war which is clear their ally would lose (taking into account size of army and number of factories), I think this is already implemented in the game, as I have games were an ally won't want to join the war. And I recently saw a thread where someone complained that Romania won't join Greece if he (Yugoslavia) attacks Greece.

In unhistorical games, it would be interesting to see these countries defend each other. There is also France's guarantees on Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia before going for "Buy Time" (in late 1938 I think) that acts as another layer of guarding against this situation. If the German player wants to take the whole Little Entente, he would have to take France as well.

Italy and USSR could try to do this with the Balkan Pact since 2 of them are not guaranteed by a major. But in the event that their allies accept to defend them, I think it will be more difficult for them to fight 4 nations at the same time than it is for Germany.

I forgot to add this in the original post:

 

[ThaHoward]

1) Little Entente can be formed by France and Czechoslovakia. Balkan Pact by Bulgaria and Turkey.
2) Give focus for Romania, Yugoslavia, Greece to form it.
3) Countries going on revisionist path already make them quit a pact. I.e Greece when bringing back the Allies.
4) They lose the modifiers after the Munich Agreement and similar events.
5) The Pacts are aimed at resurgent Habsburg Hungary and Bulgaria, not Germany. They would not stand up to Germany. Instead they would intervene if Hungary started to move around without a patron. Again, they did not defy Hungary... because Germany.

In sum these changes (barring mutual guarantees) add little substance, and is not historical.

A accurate portrayal would be a Balkan Pact intervention if Bulgaria become irrendistic or remilitarize prematurely. If Hungary restore the Habsburg or become revisionist without GP support.

And that will make a Bulgarian and Hungary much more difficult, and would likely dissatisfy most. It is an example of great powers vs regional ones. The regional players must gang up to contain potential threats, but they will curb once a great power threaten them, or they lose support of great powers. The Little Entente could not have withstood the Axis alone, when France abondoned them it was game over.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

That is, it's not necessarily to Germany's disadvantage to find itself in a "pre-war" with Central Europe in 1937 or 1938 because those countries--even if united--will not be strong enough to present any sort of threat to Germany against a competent player. Consequently, more often than not I think that you'd just wind up having a stronger Germany in that it will increase its industrial base as well improved access to resources (namely Romania's oil as well as Turkey and Yugoslavia's chromium) prior to total war against the Allies. That would have the effect of buffing Germany.

This is mostly because the AI is bad though. Germany fighting the entire Balkans + Czechs by themselves in 1937 would be a hell of a fight if both sides are operated at similar skill on each country. Starting factories are similar and Balkans can get a lot through focuses, so it's not clear Germany's production advantage would be significant. If they coordinated production to focus on specific assets and lend-leased to distribute it they'd also have more research slots towards advanced equipment than Germany.

The contrast with this in AI hands is immense, you could instead defeat the same alliance in its entirety as Iran or similar strength nations.

To what extent the game should balance around the reality of its AI is an open question.

 

[Áurum]

As is often the case, there is a tension between historical accuracy (I largely agree with your points on that front) and game balance. Because of how World Tension and justifications work, it would actually be a boon to Germany to have extensive defensive alliances among these countries because then a single justification could allow it to consolidate Central/Eastern Europe before the onset of WWII because World Tension will be too low for the Allied majors to guarantee any of those countries.

That is, it's not necessarily to Germany's disadvantage to find itself in a "pre-war" with Central Europe in 1937 or 1938 because those countries--even if united--will not be strong enough to present any sort of threat to Germany against a competent player. Consequently, more often than not I think that you'd just wind up having a stronger Germany in that it will increase its industrial base as well improved access to resources (namely Romania's oil as well as Turkey and Yugoslavia's chromium) prior to total war against the Allies. That would have the effect of buffing Germany.

A way around this would be to mix in a guarantee from a major (e.g., France) so that WWII could begin if an ahistorical Germany declared war on any in the defensive alliances before the Polish invasion, but then it's ahistorical. As a historical question, I don't know that it's clear that the Allies would have responded to an invasion by Germany of a country other than Poland. But because of how resources are distributed and how non-aggression pacts work (i.e., you want to hold off on sharing a border with the USSR for as long as possible), it's to Germany's advantage to consolidate Central Europe prior to taking on Poland (and triggering WWII with the Allies).

A solution might be that each country joining a war increases world tension caused by the aggressor, as if it had declared war on all of them individually. Germany declaring war on half of Europe would start WW2 immediately.

 

[walt526]

This is mostly because the AI is bad though. Germany fighting the entire Balkans + Czechs by themselves in 1937 would be a hell of a fight if both sides are operated at similar skill on each country. Starting factories are similar and Balkans can get a lot through focuses, so it's not clear Germany's production advantage would be significant. If they coordinated production to focus on specific assets and lend-leased to distribute it they'd also have more research slots towards advanced equipment than Germany.

Maybe, although it seems to me that it's historically plausible that Germany could have quickly conquered the Balkans by force prior to Poland given the level of mobilization that those countries were at in 1937-38 compared to Germany. Plus they would have been as unprepared for Blitzkrieg tactics as the Polish, French, etc.

Germany would just need to hold the Czech border so that they can attack Yugoslavia through Slovenia and then have the entire border of Romania's southern border to invade (Romanian forces would be spread pretty thin to defend all of it). Once Germany has Yugoslavia and Romania, they would need to hold the border against Turkey (pretty straightforward) while invading Czech from the south (where its fortifications are weakest) and then take out Turkey after Czech.

A solution might be that each country joining a war increases world tension caused by the aggressor, as if it had declared war on all of them individually. Germany declaring war on half of Europe would start WW2 immediately.

Yeah, that could work here. But developers would have to think through the impact that tweaking World Tension in that way would have on Japan's activities in China.

 

[Áurum]

Maybe, although it seems to me that it's historically plausible that Germany could have quickly conquered the Balkans by force prior to Poland given the level of mobilization that those countries were at in 1937-38 compared to Germany. Plus they would have been as unprepared for Blitzkrieg tactics as the Polish, French, etc.

Germany would just need to hold the Czech border so that they can attack Yugoslavia through Slovenia and then have the entire border of Romania's southern border to invade (Romanian forces would be spread pretty thin to defend all of it). Once Germany has Yugoslavia and Romania, they would need to hold the border against Turkey (pretty straightforward) while invading Czech from the south (where its fortifications are weakest) and then take out Turkey after Czech.




Yeah, that could work here. But developers would have to think through the impact that tweaking World Tension in that way would have on Japan's activities in China.

China is tricky because theoretically it was just one country in a civil war, not seven different countries.

 

[ThaHoward]

China is tricky because theoretically it was just one country in a civil war, not seven different countries.

Yeah, because Japan was totally part of China.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Maybe, although it seems to me that it's historically plausible that Germany could have quickly conquered the Balkans by force prior to Poland given the level of mobilization that those countries were at in 1937-38 compared to Germany. Plus they would have been as unprepared for Blitzkrieg tactics as the Polish, French, etc.

Which again shows another issue with the game's dynamics. In history if the Germans did that, it would most likely have started WW2 rather than a pre-war.

 

[Áurum]

Yeah, because Japan was totally part of China.

I mean the different warlords. Japan declaring war on all warlords is declaring war on just one country.

 

[Zeprion]

1) Little Entente can be formed by France and Czechoslovakia. Balkan Pact by Bulgaria and Turkey.
2) Give focus for Romania, Yugoslavia, Greece to form it.
3) Countries going on revisionist path already make them quit a pact. I.e Greece when bringing back the Allies.
4) They lose the modifiers after the Munich Agreement and similar events.
5) The Pacts are aimed at resurgent Habsburg Hungary and Bulgaria, not Germany. They would not stand up to Germany. Instead they would intervene if Hungary started to move around without a patron. Again, they did not defy Hungary... because Germany.

In sum these changes (barring mutual guarantees) add little substance, and is not historical.

A accurate portrayal would be a Balkan Pact intervention if Bulgaria become irrendistic or remilitarize prematurely. If Hungary restore the Habsburg or become revisionist without GP support.

And that will make a Bulgarian and Hungary much more difficult, and would likely dissatisfy most. It is an example of great powers vs regional ones. The regional players must gang up to contain potential threats, but they will curb once a great power threaten them, or they lose support of great powers. The Little Entente could not have withstood the Axis alone, when France abondoned them it was game over.

1) France can form the Little Entente, but if this suggestion is added in the game. France's faction could be renamed simply Entente. After all, it's no longer little with France and possibly UK in it. While Czechoslovakia's faction is called Czech Entente. Turkey's faction is called Balkan Entente.
2) That's another way to do it, adding focuses to create the faction for every country. But I feel making decisions to work inside the Little Entente and Balkan Pact with the ultimate possibility of turning them into a fully fledged alliance much more flexible and interesting. As long as possible bugs are taken into account.
3) If a country takes an alternative path, they could automatically leave the Little Entente/Balkan Pact, effectively losing the guarantees and decisions.
4) That's what would happen with this suggestion in the historical timeline as well. Romania and Yugoslavia refuse to support Czechoslovakia and the Little Entente is disbanded.
5) Technically, the pacts were against any threat, practically it was mostly against Hungary and Bulgaria. In real life they failed as the nations cowardly refused to help one another when a major threatened to invade one of them, but in an alt-history scenario, the player could make those alliances work.

You make a good point historical-wise, if Hungary or Bulgaria would have taken action to rearm, the Little Entente and Balkan Pact wouldn't shy from an intervention. But gameplay-wise, I think that would simply make a Hungary or Bulgaria singleplayer game too difficult and not so fun, you already start from a less than favorable position.

During its formation, the Little Entente had to prove its determination of being a safeguard against any restoration sponsored by the Habsburgs.

Firstly, Charles I of Austria returned to Hungary from Switzerland on March 26, 1921. He reclaimed the Hungarian throne, but his action earned neither the support of Milkos Horthy nor the consent of the Little Entente. Thus, Charles was forced to leave the country on April 1, 1921. On October 20, 1921, however, he returned to Hungary and renewed his claims. The situation was complicated by the fact that Charles had managed to gain the support of a certain part of the army.

The Little Entente reacted promptly, under the guidance of Beneš. Its member states began to mobilize their armies, and the threat of direct involvement from them was imminent. Moreover, other European powers expressed their opposition to Charles's attempts at restoration. The Hungarian government defeated Charles's followers and arrested him on October 24, 1921. That was followed by the Hungarian reluctance to deprive Charles of his titles and the increasing danger of a military incursion of the Little Entente into Hungary. Finally, the Hungarian government passed an act abrogating Charles's sovereign rights on November 10, 1921.

Little Entente officials in Bucharest, 1936. Prince Michael (ROM), Edvard Benes (CZE), King Carol II (ROM), Prince Regent Paul (YUG), Prince Nicholas (ROM).

Balkan Pact officials in Ankara, 1938. Ataturk (TUR), Stojadinović (YUG), Metaxas (GRE), Commen (ROM).

 

[ThaHoward]

Devil's in the details with such alliances. When they agreed to make a Little Entente to contain Hungary, that is who it is aimed at. Take Italy, did not join the Central Powers as it was defensive in nature, and therefore argued they were not alliance bound to join the Central Powers. Same with the Little Entente, they are bound to contain Hungary not every other threat. That is beyond their agreement.

There's plenty other such alliances where they say "we will help eachother against X in a defensive war, but not in an offensive war nor against country Y in a defensive war".

But for me it is fine as it is, just add mutual guarantees and make sure that every nation that become revisionist lose the guarantee.

 

[Ketchup & friends]

Decisions vs Focus:

forming the LE and BP Factions via focus is better:

• The other factions are also formed by focus.
• their focus trees need some rework.
• decisions might be too much micro.

3. Make Czecholsovakia Settle the Dispute with Poland (costs 50 influence/50 pp/once every 60 days) -> Unlocks the decision "Invite Poland to the Little Entente".
* If Czecholsovakia previously left the Little Entente, you can take decision 4 without having to take decision 3 previously.

This should also be a focus for Czechoslovakia. (It would mean giving Zaolzie to Poland).

If another country forms the Little Entente, they should get a focus or decision to mediate between Czecholsovakia and Poland.

Devil's in the details with such alliances. When they agreed to make a Little Entente to contain Hungary, that is who it is aimed at. Take Italy, did not join the Central Powers as it was defensive in nature, and therefore argued they were not alliance bound to join the Central Powers. Same with the Little Entente, they are bound to contain Hungary not every other threat. That is beyond their agreement.

the mutual guarantees would prevent everyone in the region from starting a war in 1936 and gobbling up eastern Europe too early.

 

[Zeprion]

Decisions vs Focus:

forming the LE and BP Factions via focus is better:

• The other factions are also formed by focus.
• their focus trees need some rework.
• decisions might be too much micro.

This should also be a focus for Czechoslovakia. (It would mean giving Zaolzie to Poland).

If another country forms the Little Entente, they should get a focus or decision to mediate between Czecholsovakia and Poland.


the mutual guarantees would prevent everyone in the region from starting a war in 1936 and gobbling up eastern Europe too early.

- That doesn't mean we can't have factions formed by decisions.
- True, but if anything, the idea that we can add all this Little Entente + Balkan Pact mechanics without tempering with the focus trees is a plus.
- It might be, if you take the cases of Bulgaria and Turkey, but in Little Entente + Balkan Pact mechanics nothing happens if you just play the game completely forgetting those decisions exist. You can ignore them and will have no influence on your game.

Why forming the Little Entente + Balkan Pact via decisions is better:
These alliances already existed in 1.1.1936 but they broke in 1938, 1939 and 1941. I imagine a decision system won't cost you 70 days, so instead you can focus on something that's worth more, and you have the alt-history decisions to not only hold these alliances together but turn them into fully fledged factions, of course it will cost political power. The catch is that they are democratic and non-aligned alliances, so you can only turn fascist, communist after you created a fully fledged faction, so you are going to lose some momentum.

 

[AlextheSwift]

This would be a lot more fun to play than the current incomplete guarantees between Czechoslovakia, Romania, Yugoslaiva, Greece and Turkey we have.

With full guarantees on the Little Entente / Balkan Pact, it would be a lot harder to expand in the Balkans early game, which was precisely the point of those alliances.

It will also be cool to start as a Little Entente member and then slowly, by using a lot of political power overall, turn the Little Entente into a fully fledged faction and invite Poland.

If you manage to create the faction, probably the members should not drop as soon as Germany, Italy or USSR starts demanding some land from one of its members.

I also love the fact that it's clearly designed for a democratic or non-aligned path, as soon as you go fascist or communist you leave the alliance, which makes it more realistic.

I also like how Yugoslavia and Romania cand invite Czechoslovakia to the Balkan Pact or Greece and Turkey to the Little Entente. With Poland being joinable to the Little Entente and Bulgaria joinable to the Balkan Pact. If you play as Yugoslavia and Romania and focus excusively on these decisions, by 1940 - 1941 maybe something you may be able to create a monster of alliance made up of: Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Greece, Turkey.

- You can spend political power to turn the defensive alliance into a fully fledged faction - earliest possible is October 1936/Februrary 1938.

Seems reasonable, so you make the alliance as early as 1936 if you spend all your PP in these decisions completely ignoring everything else. But if you want to spend all your PP in these decisions completely ignoring everything else and have the extra memember Poland/Bulgaria, it will take you 2 more years.

 

[Glassius]

From the gameplay perspective, it is possible to create such a big faction as Poland. There are some drawbacks to it, as Czechoslovakia is not possible to be invited peacefully, Albania surrenders to Italy, Bulgaria changes to Axis neverless, Hungary needs agents to decrease fascism support. I've made AAR from a testing rung how big Międzymorze can be, without any conquering prior to Danzig or War.

Nice Poland: how to fix Międzymorze faction with La Résistance

TLDR Polish Focus Tree from United and Ready DLC contains option to create Międzymorze faction. Unfortunately, it had very weak option to expand, containing only Baltic states by default. With the help of Polish Revanchism and La Resistance DLC...

forum.paradoxplaza.com

Your ideas are great, neverless!

I use exploit to achieve it. But I treat it as a way to achieve things developers forgot to implement