Soviet Union and Eastern Front Rework

[The_Evil_Chicken]

I think it's pretty safe to assume that the USSR will be part of the next (non-countriepack) DLC. So in this thread I want to take a look at a potential focus tree and game balancing choices. Bear with me, this is going to be a long one, but I'll try to structure it decently.

1. Eastern Front

I think it's not controversial to say that the Eastern Front needs a rework...badly. To my knowledge the theatre has never worked as it should, both historically as well as game mechanics wise. There are two main reasons for this: The USSR being too weak, or the USSR being to strong.

Before Man the Guns and La Resistance, the Axis were absolute punchbags most of the time (AI wise). During this time period in HoI4 development, the Soviets would naturally win almost every war against Germany, because they simply had the numbers on their side. This wasn't very engaging of course.

Nowadays, it's a little better. The Soviets usually take until 41 or 42 to collapse in west russia, and then continue the fight in the rural parts of the heart of Russia. This is okayish/semi-historical. But what lacks, is a recovery. I mean they managed to get to Berlin OTL somehow.

Finally, I also want to say that I think the USSR is too strong for players. This applies in some form for every country, but with the USSR it's ridiculous. When playing historical, it's possible to get Poland and Romania before 39 and ahistorical sometimes even Turkey. This puts you easily over the Germany factory count pre 40. Also you have a huge army that you just need to refit, it's usually possible to build an entire battlegroup of medium tanks before the war with germany. Whenever I have played the Soviets, I managed to beat the germans before 42, mostly late 40 to early 41.

There are two (I think highly controversial) options to fix this problem. Of course it is a very difficult task to tackle, and many players won't like the restrictions, but that's my take at this. First of, the economy of the USSR should be way weaker at the beginning and way stronger at the end. Also, the player and the AI should be limited to justify war goals (at least for the historical part). This can either be done through focus tree, national spirits, decisions or events. Doesn't matter that much to me. However I will return to this topic later.

In addition, there should be a mechanic to make the germans push you/the AI quite hard until a certain point. This would allow for the game mechanic that the Eastern Front would be on time. There are already examples in mods how to do this. You could introduce an "offensive mechanic", basically starting a turn based game between the Axis and the USSR (the faction on the offensive gets serious buffs). Or you could do it by flat, time and objective based debuffs. I prefer the first option way more though, as it makes the game more dynamic. But I think it's essential to force the USSR to desperatly delay the Axis. This makes it more interesting for both sides.

2. Soviet Union Focus Tree

I am going to say something stupid. The Soviet Union should have 6 paths. Said it.

Path 1 and 2:
The first path should be the historical path. In this path, Stalin basically tries to get the political stuff under control. The Purge should get reworked, and the player shouldn't be forced to just "kick some ministers and shit or get a civil war". It would be way cooler, if you could exchange political buffs for military ones. There doesn't need to be a nondiscript uprising then. Just say, give me the option to choose between solidifying control in the central comitee (pp and stability) or to ensure Loyalty within the Army (more War support and preparation for WWII but debuffs for stability and pp). And so on. You get the point. Also you could add the game mechanic that you get civil unrest or even a civil war if you declare war on anyone before 39. This way there is a downside to early conquest. Or you could play the nice guy to get support and lend lease from the Allies later. After 39 it should be focussed on defending your country and for example getting better offensive or defensive buffs in certain territories and emergency industry focusses. I have listed path 2 here because I think it would be cool to be able to choose a different leader (a general or something) once the germans attack. I mean Stalin could have easily resigned after he locked himself in his house. However it should be still mostly the same tree, just for flavour.

Path 3:
Ye good olde Trotzky. I think it would be cool, if the return of Trotzky would be like the SCW. Trying to bring garrisons, generals and political figures on your side before you choose to come back when you're in a position of strength. Or maybe it could be possible to avoid a civil war at all. Anyway, after the return you should have the possibilty too be more agressive, but at the cost of economic strength.

Parts 4, 5, 6:
These are the democratic, fascist and non aligned paths. They should all start with an officers coup, backed by the allies. After you suceed to win the CW, you can then choose if either the Allies-friendly democrats or monarchists dominate, or the fascists, although they should be anti german anyway.

So, that's it. What do you think about the topic?

Also I want to say that I am simply trying to give some constructive criticism here, and not Paradox bashing. In my opinion they have done great work as of late. The Eastern Front is an incredible difficult subject to work with.

 

[Áurum]

Also, the player and the AI should be limited to justify war goals (at least for the historical part). This can either be done through focus tree, national spirits, decisions or events. Doesn't matter that much to me. However I will return to this topic later.

This is simple: change Communist rules so that they can't justify until there is X% world tension, just like with other ideologies.
In fact, I would limit Fascism too. Being able to instantly justify in 1936 is ridiculous and biases the game towards being fascist or communist because they can justify earlier. All ideologies should be more similar in that regard. For example, fascist and communists can justify when WT is 25% (when Japan attacks China), non-aligned can justify at 33% and democracies at 50% or 67%. I would remove democracies being able to justify only on countries that generated WT.

 

[The_Evil_Chicken]

This is simple: change Communist rules so that they can't justify until there is X% world tension, just like with other ideologies.
In fact, I would limit Fascism too. Being able to instantly justify in 1936 is ridiculous and biases the game towards being fascist or communist because they can justify earlier.

Absolutely agree on this one. It's just too tempting to grab what land you can. Especially because almost every country is a complete push-over before 39...

 

[Emperor_Napoleon]

I definitely think there should be a complete restriction on early-game USSR for waging wars with war goals not given through the focus tree. Historically Stalin was a very cautious leader in terms of foreign policy, and completely reversed the "perpetual revolution" started by Lenin and supported by Trotsky. The only war goals that the USSR should get will be to take the Finnish territory that the USSR took historically after the Winter War (cannot be done before 1939); puppeting or annexing the Baltic states (cannot be done before 1939); annexing eastern Poland (can only be done after the Molotov-Rippentrop Pact as been signed, and after Germany has invaded Poland); and annexing Bessarabia (cannot be done before 1940). This restriction can be removed as soon as Germany invades the USSR, and at that point it won't be too relevant because the Soviets will be too busy fighting to stay alive to go and conquer other places. Alternatively, to avoid having to code in a restriction, just make it so that they can't justify until x amount of world tension has been generated. But for historical immersion purposes I'd prefer a national spirit related to Stalin's inherent caution in foreign policy.

In terms of the focus tree, I'll probably get a lot of flak for this, but I don't think there should be a fascist tree. The idea of Fascism succeeding in the Soviet Union 20 years after the Revolution is absurd and completely ahistorical. I know some people like playing alt-history but I think it should only be done if there's a reasonable historical basis for the possibility, and here I don't think there is. I'd rather have multiple communist branches, one being a more hardcore and oppressive Marxist-Leninist approach and the other being a somewhat more liberal socialism (though still a dictatorship). I'm also not that big on the idea of a monarchist restoration. Anti-monarchy sentiment was really extreme in the USSR for decades, and the utterly disastrous reign of Nicholas II reinforced that with solid evidence. A more realistic non-aligned path would be a standard centrist/right-wing military dictator, as most of the White Army leaders were.

 

[Marcin6669]

Who cares, more important is new Country Pack!

 

[The_Evil_Chicken]

I agree that this is pretty hefty alt-history, and doesn't have any historical connection, but to be fair, most Paradox focus trees are nowadays. I think it would still be cool to "have something to do" when finished with the historical stuff. Also my suggestions wouldn't be too offsetting game mechanic wise, as all would lead to a russo-german war...

 

[Metz]

There needs to be a mechanic where you evacuate factories and supply depots to supply the frontline armies.

 

[Shinkuro Yukinari]

I agree that this is pretty hefty alt-history, and doesn't have any historical connection, but to be fair, most Paradox focus trees are nowadays. I think it would still be cool to "have something to do" when finished with the historical stuff. Also my suggestions wouldn't be too offsetting game mechanic wise, as all would lead to a russo-german war...

I would disagree on this one, as most trees tend to have at least a tiny bit of historical basis in them. Nazi officers having monarchist sympathies, the marriage crisis of Edward etc. IMO there is very little possibility for anything other than socialism to be in power in USSR at that point. At most, an NKVD coup, as they were extremely powerful at that point and even they would maintain some semblance of socialism. There simply wasn't a way to diverge from socialism within the USSR barring a catastrophic event. At most, you could have alternative versions of socialism, whether it be Stalin, Bukharin or Trotsky, or perhaps someone else.

 

[xsmilingbanditx]

This is simple: change Communist rules so that they can't justify until there is X% world tension, just like with other ideologies.
In fact, I would limit Fascism too. Being able to instantly justify in 1936 is ridiculous and biases the game towards being fascist or communist because they can justify earlier. All ideologies should be more similar in that regard. For example, fascist and communists can justify when WT is 25% (when Japan attacks China), non-aligned can justify at 33% and democracies at 50% or 67%. I would remove democracies being able to justify only on countries that generated WT.

I'm in on the change for communist justification. But you need a "driver" for WT and that's the bad guys you can justify in anybody. Otherwise, if things do get wonky, the game is rather boring. And those baddies are the fascists so it does make sense.

 

[opsircrocodile]

I would disagree on this one, as most trees tend to have at least a tiny bit of historical basis in them. Nazi officers having monarchist sympathies, the marriage crisis of Edward etc. IMO there is very little possibility for anything other than socialism to be in power in USSR at that point. At most, an NKVD coup, as they were extremely powerful at that point and even they would maintain some semblance of socialism. There simply wasn't a way to diverge from socialism within the USSR barring a catastrophic event. At most, you could have alternative versions of socialism, whether it be Stalin, Bukharin or Trotsky, or perhaps someone else.

I kind of agree. there could be a Historical Stalinist path, a alternative Stalinist path, a NazBol path (maybe even this one with Stalin as leader) and a Trotskyst path.

 

[Crecer13]

There are a lot of good suggestions here. But apart from them, I would very much like the infantry skins rework. Better, more detailed, authentic skins. Skins for the Marines and Paratroopers.

 

[Iskulya]

I find a lot of people's suggestions for the Soviet Union are really unimaginative.

It's really weird that everyone always wants a fleshed out Trotskyist path, but no one ever mentions Bukharin. There were two major oppositions to Stalin: the left opposition, led by Trotsky, and the right opposition, led by Bukharin.

I've mentioned it multiple times before, every once in a while when one of these kinds of threads appears.

For political paths, I essentially ideally would want to see this, by way of simplified outline:

Historical path: Great purge, Stalin stays

Quasi-Historical: Great purge, Stalin's inner circle loses confidence and has Stalin killed and the Caucasian Clique comes to power. At the start date of the game it is led(not withstanding Stalin) by Sergo Ordzhonikidze; Beria was essentially a complete nonentity in 1936. Ordzhonikidze held a variety of positiosn at various times including the head of Rabkrin(Worker and Peasants' inspectorate, originally intended as a check on bureaucratic power which it obviously failed to fulfill), chariman of the Supreme Soviet, and during the game's start date, minister of heavy industry.

Plus, Ordzhonikidze would make for a baller portrait in the game. He looks like Stalin from an alternate reality where he became a happy and successful pastry chef. Who needs that creep Beria anyway?

Left Opposition: The great purge is avoided or does not decimate the army. Army officers lose confidence in Stalin's regime and instigate a civil war, and invite Trotsky to the country. Left Opposition path should have the most aggressive foreign policy and, like anarchist spain, be geared towards world conquest and the establishment of a World Socialist Republic.

Right Opposition: The great purge is avoided, dissatisfied elements in the bureaucracy and army agree to depose Stalin and Bukharin comes to power, reversing the excesses of Stalin's policies of 'super industrialization'. This path avoids the devastating damage caused by the civil war and provides the greatest variety of advisors, generals, and high command, but should be at least in the short term economically the weakest.

In real life Nikolai Bukharin was a complex and contradictory figure. During the Russian Civil War, he was the leader of the "left communist" faction of the Bolsheviks who advocated a "revolutionary people's war" against the Central Powers and a Napoleonic style campaign of wars to violently destroy the world's capitalist states. After the Civil War, Bukharin had become the most visible and influential supporter of the NEP, the Soviet Union's then program of state capitalism/market socialism. He initially sided with Stalin against the Left Opposition because the latter had planned on a program of super-industrialization similar to what Stalin later did actually implement.

I would give the Right Opposition two sub-branches: a United Opposition branch and a "dengist" branch.

United Opposition: Bukharin reconciles with the former left opposition and Trotsky grudgingly agrees to return and join the new government under Bukharin, potentially returning as the head of the Red Army again. In this branch, the NEP/state capitalism is just a temporary expedience for the Soviet Union to gather its strength before launching a new grand crusade to destroy world capitalism and create a new world communist state.

The Revolution in Retreat: basically a 'what if' if Bukharin had decided that the 'experiment' of world socialism had failed and that there was no prospect of a communist society being achieved. The Soviet state is reformed along lines of what China underwent in the late 1980's/1990's with 'socialism' defined as state controlled capitalism. This branch should have options for foreign investment. In real life, despite the Soviet Union's negative reputation among the major capitalist countries, the Soviets did succeed in attracting a substantial amount of American investment and technical assistance from American engineers. A Soviet Union reformed to embrace the capitalist market should have far more opportunities here. It should also, potentially, have the option to join forces more directly with capitalist alliances.

This would basically be your go-to option if you wanted a mostly historical game, but with avoiding the Great Purge.


Separate from the political branches, potentially, are a variety of foreign policy orientations.

Realpolitik: The historical and quasi-historical branch focusing on dominating the Soviet Union's neighbors, accommodation with Japan, etc. This could also deal with some plausible what-ifs. The annexation of Tannu Tuva, is a given, but there should be an option to do the same for Mongolia as well. The position of Mongolia was close, if not identical to Tannu Tuva. Both had governments that were more or less appointed directly by Moscow, were economically completely reliant on the Soviet Union, and were totally integrated economically.

We should also have the ability to directly demand Sheng Shicai's submission as a Soviet puppet. Historically he actually did demand to be made a member of the Soviet Union's communist party and asked to be annexed. This was denied because it conflicted with Stalin's policy in China, which was of an alliance with the KMT. However, giving the player the choice here in a Soviet rework would be better. Furthermore, I can see two interesting options:

1. Annexation of Sinkiang and its incorporation as a new soviet socialist republic of Ugyurstan
2. Puppetting of Sinkiang with the purpose of having it be the focal point of a new Chinese puppet government under the Soviets.

Expanding on the second option, there could be the option for a kind of "Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of the East" in which the Soviets and Japan agree to split China between each other, with western China going to the new Soviet puppet government. This would give Japan an easier time in the war, give the Soviets land, and buy both some more time in a potential war against each other. I think it'd be a fun, somewhat plausible option.

Anti-Imperialism: In 1919, the Soviet Union hosted the first "Congress of the Peoples of the East". Historically, it was not very significant. On paper, it was to be an organization of what today we would call Third World countries dedicated to opposing 'western imperialism'. The actual Congress that occurred was mostly a sock-puppet show: something like over two thirds of the delegates were Bolsheviks from Soviet Republics like Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, etc. However, in 1936 the Soviet Union is in a much better position to make good on its promise of "holy war" against the imperialists. Historically the Soviets courted leaders even such as king Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia in the framework of hoping for an eventual alliance directed against Britain and France for the creation of a pan-arab state.

This path could involve alliances with countries like Iran, Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and could furthermore utilize a decision system to agitate in the colonies in Africa and India. Any countries that join the Soviet's "anti-imperialist" alliance should be able to be subverted through decision to increase communist support culminating in the ability for the communists of the given country to launch a coup.

For a Soviet Union of the left or right opposition that is focusing on world revolution, it would also be great to see a potential for a white peace between the Axis and Allies and them merging into one faction to fight the Soviets under certain circumstances. I believe something of this nature was created for Anarchist Spain, but I have never seen it happen. Plus mounting a plausible threat of world conquest as Anarchist Spain is beyond the capability of the vast majority of players. A Soviet world-conquest oriented path would be accessible for a lot more people.


Spitballing for a whackier meme path because people like that sort of thing: Worker's Opposition Soviet Union. In the Russian Civil War, there was an opposition that emerged from within the Bolsheviks to the course of the Soviet government, in particular the party's banning of internal factions, crackdown on the left SRs, and similar restrictions and attacks on politics outside of direct party control and on the independence of trade unions. They were led by veteran old Bolshevik Alexander Shliapnikov(Solzhenitsyn referred to him as the "Real leader of the Bolsheviks while Lenin was in exile" which is an exaggeration, but gives readers an inkling as to how important this obscure historical figure actually was).

(also would make for a good looking portrait, a bonus!)

It's the path expects: a new Russian workers revolution and civil war, directed this time against the Stalinists. The revolt could attract some defecting officers, soldiers, and politicians to its cause. Shliapnikov died in 1937, his internal exile by Stalin brought a decline in his health. He could offer some powerful bonuses while he is alive, and be replaced by Alexandra Kollontai after he dies, which would also be an interesting leader to see in the game in any case as there are very few women leader options in the game. Historically, the platform of the 'worker's opposition'(they never called themselves this, but were called such by Lenin as a perjorative in what is today an arcane reference to an obscure bit of pre-WW1 party factional struggles but a faction Lenin opposed also called the Workers' Opposition) was similar to what in Kaiserreich is called syndicalism. Shliapnikov and his supporters proposed a system in which the political life of the country would still be monopolized by the communist party, but in which trade unions would essentially form the structure and control economic and social life.

I only float this half-jokingly to demonstrate this point: you really don't need some fantasty Russian monarchy path to have a fully fleshed out and fun Soviet rework. Even sticking with socialism, there's still a huge amount of possibilities, more than enough for a complete rework.

Of course, if Paradox really wants to go above and beyond, what they'll do is do all of this AND somehow a renewed White Guard civil war with a resurrected Russian Empire. That would require the biggest focus tree the game has ever seen, something that dwarf even Spain's. This would basically require the Soviet Rework to contain the equivalent of two full blown focus trees within it. Since this is what would make everyone happy, then, ideally, this is what they should do. Failing that, they should focus entirely on socialist/communist options for the Soviet rework's political choices.

Another issue is that the White Guard 'movement' at this point was completely moribund. Most of its surviving members were extremely old. People like ROVS leader Yevgeny Miller and others like Mikhail Diterikhs would die of old age within 18 months of the game's start. Almost all of the historical figures who could be involved in a new White Guard Civil War are geriatrics who would die of old age before the civil war even finished. This is a bit of a problem in my opinion, putting it mildly. A few like Anton Denikin lived a few more years, but still, these were already very OLD people who were well past retirement age.

Edited Addendum: All the Soviet civil war stuff is also a compelling reason as to why a Poland rework should accompany the Soviet one: no country in the game is better poised to exploit/intervene in a Soviet civil war than Poland. It would also make playing them a more viable and appealing option.

 

[ClavintheGreat]

I find a lot of people's suggestions for the Soviet Union are really unimaginative.

It's really weird that everyone always wants a fleshed out Trotskyist path, but no one ever mentions Bukharin. There were two major oppositions to Stalin: the left opposition, led by Trotsky, and the right opposition, led by Bukharin.

I've mentioned it multiple times before, every once in a while when one of these kinds of threads appears.

I am in favor of this. Soviets need the largest tree out of everyone. No question.

 

[squid_hills]

Plus, Ordzhonikidze would make for a baller portrait in the game. He looks like Stalin from an alternate reality where he became a happy and successful pastry chef. Who needs that creep Beria anyway?

View attachment 638480

I agree with this statement so much. Also, I think your statement that a re-worked USSR tree should only have communist/socialist paths (but each one a very different flavor of communism/socialism) is the best suggestion anyone has ever made for a potential USSR re-work.

I love alt-history options in this game, but I want them to be at least semi-plausible. A fascist revolution in Russia is not plausible. A monarchist one is much the same. There's a very good reason Germany doesn't have a communist branch on its tree. All the plausible alt-history options for Russia involve exploiting the power struggles within the communist party, so I really hope PDX takes that idea and runs with it. In real life, there were several different flavors of communism (and fascism and democracy) and the new Russian tree could show off how diverse communism could be, politically.

The one thing that makes me think PDX might not go this way is that changes in government would be hard to model on the political pie, what with it only having 4 colors. Maybe they map the "conservative" communists to fascism's yellow (but keep all the hammer and sickle iconography), and the unionist commies to democracy's blue (again keeping the communist symbols and flags and such) or something, but unless they change the political pie and add in a bunch of new colors its going to be very awkward.

And I don't think they want to change the political pie.

 

[The_Evil_Chicken]

I find a lot of people's suggestions for the Soviet Union are really unimaginative.

It's really weird that everyone always wants a fleshed out Trotskyist path, but no one ever mentions Bukharin. There were two major oppositions to Stalin: the left opposition, led by Trotsky, and the right opposition, led by Bukharin.

I've mentioned it multiple times before, every once in a while when one of these kinds of threads appears.

For political paths, I essentially ideally would want to see this, by way of simplified outline:

Historical path: Great purge, Stalin stays

Quasi-Historical: Great purge, Stalin's inner circle loses confidence and has Stalin killed and the Caucasian Clique comes to power. At the start date of the game it is led(not withstanding Stalin) by Sergo Ordzhonikidze; Beria was essentially a complete nonentity in 1936. Ordzhonikidze held a variety of positiosn at various times including the head of Rabkrin(Worker and Peasants' inspectorate, originally intended as a check on bureaucratic power which it obviously failed to fulfill), chariman of the Supreme Soviet, and during the game's start date, minister of heavy industry.

Plus, Ordzhonikidze would make for a baller portrait in the game. He looks like Stalin from an alternate reality where he became a happy and successful pastry chef. Who needs that creep Beria anyway?

View attachment 638480

Left Opposition: The great purge is avoided or does not decimate the army. Army officers lose confidence in Stalin's regime and instigate a civil war, and invite Trotsky to the country. Left Opposition path should have the most aggressive foreign policy and, like anarchist spain, be geared towards world conquest and the establishment of a World Socialist Republic.

Right Opposition: The great purge is avoided, dissatisfied elements in the bureaucracy and army agree to depose Stalin and Bukharin comes to power, reversing the excesses of Stalin's policies of 'super industrialization'. This path avoids the devastating damage caused by the civil war and provides the greatest variety of advisors, generals, and high command, but should be at least in the short term economically the weakest.

In real life Nikolai Bukharin was a complex and contradictory figure. During the Russian Civil War, he was the leader of the "left communist" faction of the Bolsheviks who advocated a "revolutionary people's war" against the Central Powers and a Napoleonic style campaign of wars to violently destroy the world's capitalist states. After the Civil War, Bukharin had become the most visible and influential supporter of the NEP, the Soviet Union's then program of state capitalism/market socialism. He initially sided with Stalin against the Left Opposition because the latter had planned on a program of super-industrialization similar to what Stalin later did actually implement.

I would give the Right Opposition two sub-branches: a United Opposition branch and a "dengist" branch.

United Opposition: Bukharin reconciles with the former left opposition and Trotsky grudgingly agrees to return and join the new government under Bukharin, potentially returning as the head of the Red Army again. In this branch, the NEP/state capitalism is just a temporary expedience for the Soviet Union to gather its strength before launching a new grand crusade to destroy world capitalism and create a new world communist state.

The Revolution in Retreat: basically a 'what if' if Bukharin had decided that the 'experiment' of world socialism had failed and that there was no prospect of a communist society being achieved. The Soviet state is reformed along lines of what China underwent in the late 1980's/1990's with 'socialism' defined as state controlled capitalism. This branch should have options for foreign investment. In real life, despite the Soviet Union's negative reputation among the major capitalist countries, the Soviets did succeed in attracting a substantial amount of American investment and technical assistance from American engineers. A Soviet Union reformed to embrace the capitalist market should have far more opportunities here. It should also, potentially, have the option to join forces more directly with capitalist alliances.

This would basically be your go-to option if you wanted a mostly historical game, but with avoiding the Great Purge.


Separate from the political branches, potentially, are a variety of foreign policy orientations.

Realpolitik: The historical and quasi-historical branch focusing on dominating the Soviet Union's neighbors, accommodation with Japan, etc. This could also deal with some plausible what-ifs. The annexation of Tannu Tuva, is a given, but there should be an option to do the same for Mongolia as well. The position of Mongolia was close, if not identical to Tannu Tuva. Both had governments that were more or less appointed directly by Moscow, were economically completely reliant on the Soviet Union, and were totally integrated economically.

We should also have the ability to directly demand Sheng Shicai's submission as a Soviet puppet. Historically he actually did demand to be made a member of the Soviet Union's communist party and asked to be annexed. This was denied because it conflicted with Stalin's policy in China, which was of an alliance with the KMT. However, giving the player the choice here in a Soviet rework would be better. Furthermore, I can see two interesting options:

1. Annexation of Sinkiang and its incorporation as a new soviet socialist republic of Ugyurstan
2. Puppetting of Sinkiang with the purpose of having it be the focal point of a new Chinese puppet government under the Soviets.

Expanding on the second option, there could be the option for a kind of "Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of the East" in which the Soviets and Japan agree to split China between each other, with western China going to the new Soviet puppet government. This would give Japan an easier time in the war, give the Soviets land, and buy both some more time in a potential war against each other. I think it'd be a fun, somewhat plausible option.

Anti-Imperialism: In 1919, the Soviet Union hosted the first "Congress of the Peoples of the East". Historically, it was not very significant. On paper, it was to be an organization of what today we would call Third World countries dedicated to opposing 'western imperialism'. The actual Congress that occurred was mostly a sock-puppet show: something like over two thirds of the delegates were Bolsheviks from Soviet Republics like Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, etc. However, in 1936 the Soviet Union is in a much better position to make good on its promise of "holy war" against the imperialists. Historically the Soviets courted leaders even such as king Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia in the framework of hoping for an eventual alliance directed against Britain and France for the creation of a pan-arab state.

This path could involve alliances with countries like Iran, Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and could furthermore utilize a decision system to agitate in the colonies in Africa and India. Any countries that join the Soviet's "anti-imperialist" alliance should be able to be subverted through decision to increase communist support culminating in the ability for the communists of the given country to launch a coup.

For a Soviet Union of the left or right opposition that is focusing on world revolution, it would also be great to see a potential for a white peace between the Axis and Allies and them merging into one faction to fight the Soviets under certain circumstances. I believe something of this nature was created for Anarchist Spain, but I have never seen it happen. Plus mounting a plausible threat of world conquest as Anarchist Spain is beyond the capability of the vast majority of players. A Soviet world-conquest oriented path would be accessible for a lot more people.


Spitballing for a whackier meme path because people like that sort of thing: Worker's Opposition Soviet Union. In the Russian Civil War, there was an opposition that emerged from within the Bolsheviks to the course of the Soviet government, in particular the party's banning of internal factions, crackdown on the left SRs, and similar restrictions and attacks on politics outside of direct party control and on the independence of trade unions. They were led by veteran old Bolshevik Alexander Shliapnikov(Solzhenitsyn referred to him as the "Real leader of the Bolsheviks while Lenin was in exile" which is an exaggeration, but gives readers an inkling as to how important this obscure historical figure actually was).

View attachment 638484
(also would make for a good looking portrait, a bonus!)

It's the path expects: a new Russian workers revolution and civil war, directed this time against the Stalinists. The revolt could attract some defecting officers, soldiers, and politicians to its cause. Shliapnikov died in 1937, his internal exile by Stalin brought a decline in his health. He could offer some powerful bonuses while he is alive, and be replaced by Alexandra Kollontai after he dies, which would also be an interesting leader to see in the game in any case as there are very few women leader options in the game. Historically, the platform of the 'worker's opposition'(they never called themselves this, but were called such by Lenin as a perjorative in what is today an arcane reference to an obscure bit of pre-WW1 party factional struggles but a faction Lenin opposed also called the Workers' Opposition) was similar to what in Kaiserreich is called syndicalism. Shliapnikov and his supporters proposed a system in which the political life of the country would still be monopolized by the communist party, but in which trade unions would essentially form the structure and control economic and social life.

I only float this half-jokingly to demonstrate this point: you really don't need some fantasty Russian monarchy path to have a fully fleshed out and fun Soviet rework. Even sticking with socialism, there's still a huge amount of possibilities, more than enough for a complete rework.

Of course, if Paradox really wants to go above and beyond, what they'll do is do all of this AND somehow a renewed White Guard civil war with a resurrected Russian Empire. That would require the biggest focus tree the game has ever seen, something that dwarf even Spain's. This would basically require the Soviet Rework to contain the equivalent of two full blown focus trees within it. Since this is what would make everyone happy, then, ideally, this is what they should do. Failing that, they should focus entirely on socialist/communist options for the Soviet rework's political choices.

Another issue is that the White Guard 'movement' at this point was completely moribund. Most of its surviving members were extremely old. People like ROVS leader Yevgeny Miller and others like Mikhail Diterikhs would die of old age within 18 months of the game's start. Almost all of the historical figures who could be involved in a new White Guard Civil War are geriatrics who would die of old age before the civil war even finished. This is a bit of a problem in my opinion, putting it mildly. A few like Anton Denikin lived a few more years, but still, these were already very OLD people who were well past retirement age.

Edited Addendum: All the Soviet civil war stuff is also a compelling reason as to why a Poland rework should accompany the Soviet one: no country in the game is better poised to exploit/intervene in a Soviet civil war than Poland. It would also make playing them a more viable and appealing option.

I agree that there are many socialist paths which are way better than my suggestions. I think it's really cool how informed you are about the topic. My point of view came from what I know of Paradox. Usually they don't stick to one ideology, even if it would make the most sense (I mean look at Japan).

I do think it would be quite cool, if you go with the white uprising, that, depending on your later ideology you can pick Allies and have to make concessions to them. For example you could try to get help from the UK and France if you guarantee Balkan nations and form non agression pacts. Heck, you could even get support from Poland, the Baltic States and the Balkans for that. Or you need to make your government more democratic for US support. This would at least make the balancing more realistic. Also the coup shouldn't be started by veterans from the 1st civil war, but maybe by disgruntled military officers and politicians as a broad front. Of course there doesn't need to be a Tsardom at the end, but maybe a military junta as non-aligned...

 

[squid_hills]

If we absolutely have to have a monarchist branch, I'd like to see the civil war started by Russian expatriates and their children. Maybe put a focus into the tree that is the opposite of Germany's "Expel the Communists" focus, where you "Reconcile the Expats" or something, which causes a slow uptick in monarchist support...?

 

[Iskulya]

If we absolutely have to have a monarchist branch, I'd like to see the civil war started by Russian expatriates and their children. Maybe put a focus into the tree that is the opposite of Germany's "Expel the Communists" focus, where you "Reconcile the Expats" or something, which causes a slow uptick in monarchist support...?

The reason it's hard for this to work is that the Soviets had already thoroughly infiltrated expatriate circles. So successfully, in fact, that the dominant opinion even among expat Russians who favored a monarchy was a kind of Lasallean style "People's Monarchy", i.e. a cursed combination of communism and monarchism.

I don't think the doddering old whites can really feasibly, even in the most fantastic scenario, really have much to do with anything.

If there is going to be a monarchist option, the only way I can really see it working is by having a civil war result if Stalin stays in charge and doesn't do the purge, and then having the rebelling officers choosing to invite Trotsky or to invite the tattered remnants of ROVS and their supporters in. There is no way that any kind of civil war could be instigated from the outside. Political change in the Soviet Union was only ever going to come from within, or by being conquered by a foreign power.

Also, a military junta really wouldn't be a viable thing as anything other than a transitional government. Any junta would have to give way to some new form of government, either in the form of reforming a new communist government or in a total destruction of the soviet system, either of which go far beyond the purview of a clique of generals. They would necessarily have to give way and allow something else.

This is also one of the reasons that a military revolt against Stalin was also impossible in the first place: they would either just have to keep the system intact and replace Stalin with someone else who would keep the stalinist system intact, or they would have to destroy the entire structure of Soviet society, throwing the country into political and economic chaos, making the country easy prey for eagerly awaiting and envious neighbors.

You have to remember that the Russian Civil War had hardly been over a decade by our game's start date. The Bolsheviks were invaded by a multitude of countries including Britain, France, the US, Japan, Greece, and more... there were points in the civil war where it looked like areas occupied by foreign powers like Japan in the Far East, Britain in the Caucasus, and France in Ukraine were set to divide up and parcel out the country. Any Soviet general would have this history well in mind and be wary of it repeating itself..

In addition, do you think the Soviet bureaucrats also hadn't considered this scenario? Which is exactly why the NKVD kept extremely close surveillance on military officers and of some of the highest ranking ones kept their families in a state that amounted to de facto hostages. They got the message loud and clear: keep in line, or who knows what could happen to your family. The Soviet state already had plenty of contingencies to prevent the situation we're talking about from ever happening.

If there really is going to be an option for transitional military junta to restore the Empire or something like that, it should be super hardcore. As in, during the Civil War, Japan occupies the far east, Turkey gobbles up Azerbaijan and puppets or annexes Georgia, Ukraine breaks free, Poland invades and takes Belarus, Finland invades and takes Greater Finland+Leningrad, all the central asian republics break free, etc. It should be a free lunch to all the neighbors and rivals of the Soviet Union and it should be an uphill struggle even to regain what the Soviet Union starts with in 1936. That's the only way I can see it offering gameplay that is different from the other paths and fun. Most players would not be able to survive a German invasion in 1941 in this scenario, but perhaps if OUN takes over Ukraine and it joins the Axis they won't feel the need to bother with invading a Russian rump state.

If a monarchist path is just gonna be "Soviet Union, but green" then that's not really enough to justify itself imo.

 

[brissyger]

If there really is going to be an option for transitional military junta to restore the Empire or something like that, it should be super hardcore. As in, during the Civil War, Japan occupies the far east, Turkey gobbles up Azerbaijan and puppets or annexes Georgia, Ukraine breaks free, Poland invades and takes Belarus, Finland invades and takes Greater Finland+Leningrad, all the central asian republics break free, etc. It should be a free lunch to all the neighbors and rivals of the Soviet Union and it should be an uphill struggle even to regain what the Soviet Union starts with in 1936. That's the only way I can see it offering gameplay that is different from the other paths and fun. Most players would not be able to survive a German invasion in 1941 in this scenario, but perhaps if OUN takes over Ukraine and it joins the Axis they won't feel the need to bother with invading a Russian rump state.

I think that is the most likely compromise. While the only realistic possibility for the Soviets at this time was some form of socialism and the majority of the tree should reflect that, the community has somewhat of a monarchist fetish so I can't see them not including some path. The danger as you have said is you then just fall into the trap of just making the monarchist path the same as an aggressive Soviet path ie defeat the west. After the civil war in the Russian Empire its disparate parts rose up for independence and with a second civil war the same would happen again. The focus of a monarchist path should be to recover these lost states and then thwart the fascists with a new Triple Entente.