Soviet content weirdness

[Te. Kenzo]

It is not about Soviets actually. A lot of nations had a bunch of weirdness. Princes of terror who actually were minister of education or economy. Generals and leaders with portaits after war ( like 1960 and etc), people which were fighting against nazi ideology in game begame it supporters and etc.

They do not ruin the game but break immersion from it.

Yeah this is true. The best thing of paradox games it's also the most problematic: the fact that even if are not academic works they hold a great news of historical information. Things not work everytime, but at least there feedback response even if is slow sometimes, very slow. I hope they can improve everytime for the better, reading the interesting and valid feedback that the forum always generate. (It's not only trolling or flaming but also a place that show competences and informations).

 

[Gort11]

New Soviet Man is an ahistorical National Focus - it's on a branch the historical USSR did not take. Feels like it's worth pointing out that the game is saying, "The Soviets might have used kamikazes if they'd made other choices" rather than "The Soviets used kamikazes".

 

[amalric de g.]

New Soviet Man - allows kamikaze strikes - What. A. Hell. Both USSR, 3rd Reich, Great Britain and USA were starved on pilots and never ever considered using kamikaze strikes, which were typical for Japan only. Nazi Fieseler Fi 103R suicide rocket plans were shelved as inappropriate and ridiculous. USSR had suicide attacks but only as a result of desperation, when doomed pilot directed his plane to deal as much damage as possible. This NF is on the level of absurdity of hamburger and bavarian sausages power-ups for american and german troops or french mime baguette divisions.

The Nazis had suicide pilots, google "Sonderkommando Elbe". I can´t support a link, because of forbidden Symbols. Or look on youtube there are several clips about them.

 

[Black5Raven]

New Soviet Man is an ahistorical National Focus - it's on a branch the historical USSR did not take. Feels like it's worth pointing out that the game is saying, "The Soviets might have used kamikazes if they'd made other choices" rather than "The Soviets used kamikazes".

Well.... it shouldnt be *ahistorycal branch*. Both of them were represented and thats a history with a lot of examples.
SU do not use kamikadzes. Ram attack - its positive heroism if we talking about in game realities but it =/= kamikadze.
Kamikadzes wanted to die and take enemy with them. SU pilots and etc. do that only when situation was unbeatable for them and that wasnt high command order like japanese did.

Sacrifice - not suicide.

 

[AEhere]

The reason is simple. It is a game so play balance is king.

I´d liken balance in hoi4 is more more to a count, or marquis... or the alpha hobo at a train station, judging by it´s quality, if I´m completely honest. That argument feels like grasping at straws to defend a pre-established position.

"Among the major traits of a new Soviet man was selfless collectivism. The selfless new man was willing to sacrifice his life for good causes."

And the (post-Franco!) Spanish army had a clause in their oath stating something long the lines of "sacrificing up to the last drop of blood for the motherland". But I probably shouldn´t mention it, or we´ll get kamikaze toreros for the SCW update...

 

[coffeelingfine]

How can Soviets ignore naval research? Only if they do want to stay in eurasia they can do that. On the same premise US too can ignore naval research and stay in Americas.

Most of the fighting done by the Soviets is on their own doorstep. US has to fight in Europe and the Pacific so it's kinda more important for them to go hard on naval research.

 

[ItWasNeverAbolished]

Most of the fighting done by the Soviets is on their own doorstep. US has to fight in Europe and the Pacific so it's kinda more important for them to go hard on naval research.

On their doorstep? I wouldnt call Stalingrad or Moscow a soviet doorstep
I know US should have the research and im not objecting against them having 4 to 6 tech teams. Im objecting to soviets having 3 to 5.

 

[Dalwin]

How can Soviets ignore naval research? Only if they do want to stay in eurasia they can do that. On the same premise US too can ignore naval research and stay in Americas.
Also US can (and historically did) receive a lot of tech from allies. So their advantage is in tech sharing inside their huge alliance. I can imagine no reason beside bias to give Soviets 3 tech slots putting them on same level as ie Greece or Slovakia and behind Italy in technology.

That may be true in SP world conquest games, but certainly not in any sort of MP.

If you are playing all the way to WC as the Soviets, that is some low hanging fruit isn't it?

 

[praftd]

Half of your questions can be answered with: "Because this is a work of fiction added as an ahistorical path for the sake of gameplay completeness".

 

[Dalwin]

On their doorstep? I wouldnt call Stalingrad or Moscow a soviet doorstep
I know US should have the research and im not objecting against them having 4 to 6 tech teams. Im objecting to soviets having 3 to 5.

How does the Soviet fleet help defend Moscow or Stalingrad?

Doing as you ask would just give the Soviets better tech than the Germans and pretty much everyone else in all other areas. To pretend they need an extra slot or 2 for naval (as does every other major except France) is just arguing to the benefit of the nation of which you are a fan with no thought to overall balance at all.

 

[Fulmen]

The Nazis had suicide pilots, google "Sonderkommando Elbe". I can´t support a link, because of forbidden Symbols. Or look on youtube there are several clips about them.

Sonderkommando Elbe was a ramming unit, not a suicide unit. The pilots were supposed to parachute to safety after impact.

Hitler specifically refused the creation of suicide units.

 

[Gort11]

How does the Soviet fleet help defend Moscow or Stalingrad?

Doing as you ask would just give the Soviets better tech than the Germans and pretty much everyone else in all other areas. To pretend they need an extra slot or 2 for naval (as does every other major except France) is just arguing to the benefit of the nation of which you are a fan with no thought to overall balance at all.

Question is, should the game be built so that the Axis have a 50-50 shot at simultaneously defeating the Allies and Comintern, or should it be built to model history?

 

[ItWasNeverAbolished]

How does the Soviet fleet help defend Moscow or Stalingrad?

Doing as you ask would just give the Soviets better tech than the Germans and pretty much everyone else in all other areas. To pretend they need an extra slot or 2 for naval (as does every other major except France) is just arguing to the benefit of the nation of which you are a fan with no thought to overall balance at all.

What are you talking about? Do Germans not start with 4 tech slots? Then how would making Soviets start with 4 tech slot give them better tech than Germans ? Is 4 not equal to 4?

 

[ItWasNeverAbolished]

Question is, should the game be built so that the Axis have a 50-50 shot at simultaneously defeating the Allies and Comintern, or should it be built to model history?

Yes and even if the goal was balance and for axis to have 50-50 chance of winning then it would make much more sense to make pacific war more balanced

 

[Dalwin]

What are you talking about? Do Germans not start with 4 tech slots? Then how would making Soviets start with 4 tech slot give them better tech than Germans ? Is 4 not equal to 4?

Don't be obtuse. 4 is not equal to 4 in this sense if one has more things they need to research and the other can quite easily get away with totally ignoring a number of categories.

 

[Dalwin]

Question is, should the game be built so that the Axis have a 50-50 shot at simultaneously defeating the Allies and Comintern, or should it be built to model history?

I would prefer modeling history, but I might just as well say that I'd prefer to date a different super model every night. The modeling history boat sailed long before release. That concept was well and truly dead the day they decided that every country in the world should be a potential empire builder and that most minors should have 10 times the power in game that they did in the real world.

 

[Darkrenown]

New Soviet Man is an ahistorical National Focus - it's on a branch the historical USSR did not take. Feels like it's worth pointing out that the game is saying, "The Soviets might have used kamikazes if they'd made other choices" rather than "The Soviets used kamikazes".

Indeed.

 

[Darkrenown]

This phrase
a) does not correspond to reality.
B) Very reminiscent of German propaganda against the USSR about the "Eastern Barbarians".

Now it is not surprising why the USSR in the game is so terrible represented. Maybe your opinion coincides with colleagues from Dice about *fact* that SU swapping a side for a few times?

The Soviet pilots ram their planes to enemy positions only when they were sweeping to the ground in flames, when they were unable to return to the airfield or survive.

They committed air ramming when ammunition ran out. But they did not try to die - the only thing they did was trying to cut off the tail section of the enemy with a screw.

Does it look like jap kamikadze ?

Well it's cited as "Richard Overy, The Dictators: Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Russia, p301", perhaps you can take it up with him.

It's an ahistorical focus so giving me historical examples of how the USSR didn't use kamikaze tactics doesn't really help anything.

Still it's a nice change to be called out as having a German propaganda bias, pre-release it was all about calling me a commie symp for saying the German tanks and indeed German army performance was over-rated due to most people growing up with all the German accounts of the Eastern front being treated as facts while the recently opened Russian sourses told a different story. Perhaps I am just biased against every side... or maybe it's stupid to make broad generalistations about people because you disagree with them over a focus tree.

 

[HolyAmericanEmpire]

Still it's a nice change to be called out as having a German propaganda bias, pre-release it was all about calling me a commie symp for saying the German tanks and indeed German army performance was over-rated due to most people growing up with all the German accounts of the Eastern front being treated as facts while the recently opened Russian sourses told a different story. Perhaps I am just biased against every side... or maybe it's stupid to make broad generalistations about people because you disagree with them over a focus tree.

Calling someone a German sympathizer because they believe a national focus works well in a video game is such a pathetic tactic. I'm on the fence as to whether or not it belongs in the game, but I'm not going to call people with different opinions "German sympathizers."

 

[amalric de g.]

Sonderkommando Elbe was a ramming unit, not a suicide unit. The pilots were supposed to parachute to safety after impact.

Hitler specifically refused the creation of suicide units.

Sure and ramming a stratbomber with a Me 109 was not suicide? The Luftwaffe told the 300 pilots that they have a 10% chance to survive the impact. Out of the 23 successfull ramming attacks only a handfull of pilots survived the impact.