Things that Never Happen in HoI4 (But did so in history)
- Thread starter Cheesecakeczar
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
I would like to see the game go to say 1954, anything much past that would require some significant changes to the game.
The problem with this is how extremely binary factions are, and how factions as they are right now are basically purely military alliances centered around mutual defense and nothing more. The game has no actual system in place to simulate anything outside of that scope, which is also why the whole anti-communist pacts is a tad awkward and any other type of treaties or agreements are night impossible to model in the current game...and to be fair how the hell would you properly model trade agreements with the current tools at hand; at best it's a -x% consumer factory. Heck, there's not even a good system to embargo other nations; only a couple of NF allow/force you to embargo.
Possible through scripting, events and especially the new decisions; but I do agree that some type of vanilla support and especially some type of actual gameplay mechanics supporting more dynamic faction politics would be more than welcome.
Strangely enough, this keeps basically happening in my game all the time.
Using the new decisions system, I can see way to simulate partisans and foreign and exiled armies, the former through events, the latter by spawning armies and (forcing AI) allies to send your lend-lease. But some proper gameplay mechanics for exiled countries and resistance fighters is truly and desperately needed.
Volunteer Air Corps will be added with the coming DLC
At the scale of the game, it makes little to no sense modelling this. Lakes are too small of a terrain feature to be modelled at all in the game, and all rivers are crossable right now (since the game assumes that there's at least a bridge somewhere in the province). There could be special modifiers to river-crossing-combat during winter, but I couldn't think of any way to model that, that's not already implied through the weather and the attrition modifiers.
That all said, I do wish the AI would be much smarter and be able to occasionally actually do plan proper operations and/or that there'd be multi-national planning and operations (and/or you could actually request expedition forces from AI allies to take care of it yourself.)
What would be
If Paradox wants a stalemate in China, feel free to take my idea (and change it to fit HoI4 mechanics) for implementing a stalemate in Darkest Hour I never got around to.
The idea is to make it so that JAP would prefer to take cities rather than rural territory as rural territory hurts JAP. As CHI loses territory the penalty on JAP becomes larger to bring about the stalemate. This system models what happened in real life quite well as it was logistics that caused the initial stalemate until the Chinese got weapons parity once the allies started sending in better weapons. Emergency conscription happened which allowed the Chinese to hold the line. With regards to troops with no supplies (equipment) this also happened, they were told to pick up weapons from fallen troops. The partisan system also prepares things for the civil war and cold war era and sets up a proper civil war to model history by allowing CHC to gain strength as they did historically
Code:
1) Emergency Conscription & Lend Lease system
* If they have supplies (lend lease OR partisans): CHI gains unit at cost of manpower x1
* If they have no supplies: CHI gains unit at cost of manpower x4 - postwar dissent penalty (chinese cival war)
* Decision for USA/SOV to send supplies to CHI
* One-off decision to convert police/national guard to 'Army' status (emergency measure taken after fall of Nanjing)
* One-off decision for USA/ENG/CHI to train a KMT Army in India (prior to the atomic bomb this was the army that was planned to invade Japan)
2) Partisan system (CHI, CHC, and JAP) - Inspired by HoI3 dev diary
* CHI and CHC can invest supplies/manpower into partisans behind JAP lines.
* JAP can invest manpower to counter partisans (garrison troops) - daily penalty on manpower. Simulates troops dying as well.
* CHI and CHC can choose the following stances for their respective partisans:
a) Launch supply raids - gain supplies/strengthen partisan strength/drain JAP supplies
b) Consolidate control - strengthen CHI/CHC affiliated partisans at the expense of rival faction partisans, decreases trust with other faction (trust impacts postwar likelihood of chinese civil war, if trust is high then peace conference would succeed)
c) Gather Strength - go underground - greatly decreases effectiveness of JAP anti-partisan, slowly increases partisan strength, provides supplies for CHI/CHC
d) Military Intelligence - provide combat bonuses for official troops
e) Offensive Blitz - temporary combat bonus at cost of partisan strength. Increases trust with other faction.
f) Mass Uprising - Requires significant partisan strength, spawns militia across all JAP held rural territories, partisan strength takes significant hit
g) Mobilization - Postwar (requires JAP to be defeated) - adds infantry reinforcements to the reinforcement pool based on partisan strength. Adds offmap supply generation to help pay for the troops (they are farmer-soldiers) until civil war is over. Allows CHC to do what it did historically to defeat CHI in the civil war.
* JAP can choose the following anti-partisan strategies:
a) Three-All: increases manpower and supply drain, greatly increases effectiveness of garrison troops, on the other hand, greatly increases effectiveness of CHI/CHC investing in partisan growth (more people willing to fight)
b) Puppet Regime: decreases manpower and supply drain of the garrison force, costs money every day and decreases army effectiveness (spies), increases effectiveness of Launch supply raids
c) Co-Prosperity (actually vs lip service): increases money and supply drain, decreases effectiveness of CHI/CHC investing in partisan growth (less people willing to fight)
* The more territory JAP controls the larger the impacts of the system becomes.The idea is to make it so that JAP would prefer to take cities rather than rural territory as rural territory hurts JAP. As CHI loses territory the penalty on JAP becomes larger to bring about the stalemate. This system models what happened in real life quite well as it was logistics that caused the initial stalemate until the Chinese got weapons parity once the allies started sending in better weapons. Emergency conscription happened which allowed the Chinese to hold the line. With regards to troops with no supplies (equipment) this also happened, they were told to pick up weapons from fallen troops. The partisan system also prepares things for the civil war and cold war era and sets up a proper civil war to model history by allowing CHC to gain strength as they did historically
Concerning The Finnish Winter War I see a few things that could be done to make it tougher for AI USSR and atleast more expensive for a human USSR.
- One very important factor for the early failures of the Red Army was that they underestimated the finnish defenders. Since Japan supposedly will be given negative modifiers against chinese troops it should be easy to give the USSR simillar negative modifiers against finnish troops to represent this.
- If frozen lakes/rivers become a thing a mild 1939 winter will help the Finns (this was actually another big and often overlooked factor that aided the poorly equipped finnish defenders while at the same time denied the Red Army the advantage their better winter clothing would otherwise have provided). It should be noted that the weather changed quickly and in early 1940 the temperature plummetted which meant that the Soviets could advance over frozen lakes and rivers even with armored columns and bypass finnish defensive strongpoints. What this would mean in game is that Finland in 1939 get's natural obstacles that limits the area where the Red Army can advance and in 1940 they are gradually removed.
- On Soviet leadership it should be noted that Kliment Voroshilov, a close friend of Stalin who initially commanded the forces, where an awful strategist who lacked knowledge of modern warfare and this undoubtly helped the Finns too. After he was replaced by the capable if unimaginative Semyon Timoshenko the Red Army performed much better even though the casualties where still horrendous. This could be represented by giving a negative combat modifier that slowly goes away the longer the conflict drags on.
- Finland really should be given their own National Focus Tree. Even if they where a minor nation they played a big part in the War and like Stalin himself admitted after the ceasefire the Finns could have spelt doom for Leningrad if they hadn´t refused to advance towards the city during the continuation war. In that tree one obvious focus would be to construct the 'Mannerheim Line' and much like the German Westwall or Soviet Stalin Line focuses it should add Fort levels in certain areas to make the defences there harder to crack.
- One very important factor for the early failures of the Red Army was that they underestimated the finnish defenders. Since Japan supposedly will be given negative modifiers against chinese troops it should be easy to give the USSR simillar negative modifiers against finnish troops to represent this.
- If frozen lakes/rivers become a thing a mild 1939 winter will help the Finns (this was actually another big and often overlooked factor that aided the poorly equipped finnish defenders while at the same time denied the Red Army the advantage their better winter clothing would otherwise have provided). It should be noted that the weather changed quickly and in early 1940 the temperature plummetted which meant that the Soviets could advance over frozen lakes and rivers even with armored columns and bypass finnish defensive strongpoints. What this would mean in game is that Finland in 1939 get's natural obstacles that limits the area where the Red Army can advance and in 1940 they are gradually removed.
- On Soviet leadership it should be noted that Kliment Voroshilov, a close friend of Stalin who initially commanded the forces, where an awful strategist who lacked knowledge of modern warfare and this undoubtly helped the Finns too. After he was replaced by the capable if unimaginative Semyon Timoshenko the Red Army performed much better even though the casualties where still horrendous. This could be represented by giving a negative combat modifier that slowly goes away the longer the conflict drags on.
- Finland really should be given their own National Focus Tree. Even if they where a minor nation they played a big part in the War and like Stalin himself admitted after the ceasefire the Finns could have spelt doom for Leningrad if they hadn´t refused to advance towards the city during the continuation war. In that tree one obvious focus would be to construct the 'Mannerheim Line' and much like the German Westwall or Soviet Stalin Line focuses it should add Fort levels in certain areas to make the defences there harder to crack.
Adding to the list is the Japan-Soviet Battles of Khalkhin-Gol which was part of Japan's Hokushin-ron (Northern Road) strategy favored by the Imperial Army versus Nanshin-ron (Southern Road) favored by the Imperial Navy.
Anyone hear if PDS is adding this as part of the next DLC given focus on China/Japan?
Anyone hear if PDS is adding this as part of the next DLC given focus on China/Japan?
Currently, the confrontation at Khalkin Gol is an event the Japanese and Soviets get if the Japanese decide to confront the Soviets at the Manchurian border.
Either the Soviets push back and win, they lose or they withdraw to everyone's relief.
With the new border war mechanics in WOT, this might come into play a bit more.
Actual battles of Midway, D-Day, Crete, are difficult to recreate in a game of this magnitude. Outcomes should be close to an expected end product though the various battles should not necessarily be represented.
Pearl Harbor should be a secret Japanese focus event the US can discover if it researches decryption ahead of the Japanese encryption. There should be a 25% chance the PH commanders will correctly understand what the cryptologists are warning them about. Pearl Harbor will not happen in this game until PDX provides Nagumo as an Admiral.
Pearl Harbor should be a secret Japanese focus event the US can discover if it researches decryption ahead of the Japanese encryption. There should be a 25% chance the PH commanders will correctly understand what the cryptologists are warning them about. Pearl Harbor will not happen in this game until PDX provides Nagumo as an Admiral.
- Konigsberg becoming Kaliningrad.
Yeah, there's some less than tasteful history behind it, but the fact is that Russians love their warmwater ports and them not having a National Focus that gives them a core on Konigsberg is kinda ridiculous. Even after the collapse of the USSR, that was the one territory in the Eastern Bloc that Russia held onto, and for a pretty Russia-specific reason.
Oh, and while we're on the subject:
- Northern ports suffering from ice-blockages during the winter.
That'd add some complexity to the situation, and maybe make players hungry for warm water ports too!
Yeah, there's some less than tasteful history behind it, but the fact is that Russians love their warmwater ports and them not having a National Focus that gives them a core on Konigsberg is kinda ridiculous. Even after the collapse of the USSR, that was the one territory in the Eastern Bloc that Russia held onto, and for a pretty Russia-specific reason.
Oh, and while we're on the subject:
- Northern ports suffering from ice-blockages during the winter.
That'd add some complexity to the situation, and maybe make players hungry for warm water ports too!
> Make a NF that is available when in a faction and at war, which launches a Civil War with strength "1" and switches the country tag over to the coup-ists
> AI instantly joins faction which the faction the country was originally in was at war with, while the latter joins the conflict against the coup
> Coup beats the other side, country has effectively switched sides
> SHAMELESS SELF-ADVERTISMENT FOR MY MOD THAT DOES JUST THAT
> ???
> Profit!
The problem here is actually that Tukhachevskiy never seems to get purged in 1937 as he was historically (even though the Purge events do have the option to remove him, which I guess the computer rarely picks), and the computer will simply put most European troops under his command for all eternity. Otherwise, SOV would probably fall back on Voroshilov, Kulik or Budyonniy for the Winter War, all of whom start as field marshals with Old Guard and at skill level 1. (Kulik should probably start at skill level -1, tbh.) An event could promote Timoshenko (who starts at skill 3 iirc) to field marshal if SOV remains at war with FIN and fails to control Viipuri / Vyborg by some date.
I dont know why but no mater what I do America never joins Allies Japan never attacks Pearl Harbor, and D-day never happens.
This is part of a bigger issue HoI4 doesn't represent that well - even in democracies with a firmly established principle of military subordination to civilian leadership (e.g. the USA and UK) there were Generals and Admirals who just couldn't be shifted from senior positions without expending significant (sometimes massive) political capital. How to implement this in game, I don't know, but no leader, not even one with the general respect of his military and public, could simply pick and choose among the optimal General for any short-term task the way a Hoi4 player can.
- Joint Anglo/Soviet invasion of Iran never happens
- Mexico and Brazil never join the allies (yes Mexico joined and sent token air force units)
- Peruvian/Ecuadorian war does not occur
- A lot of countries are missing tank techs they should have in '36 (Bolivia/Ethiopia/Paraguay)
- Syria and Lebanon do not declare independence
- Partisans might as well not exist
- No option to liberate Ethiopia
- Pro-nazi coup in Iraq and following UK intervention does not occur
- Franco always joins the Axis
- Turkey joins the Axis most of the time
- No Icelandic independence
- China dies way too quickly
- King Michael's Coup occurs way to early, if it ever does
- AI minor research priority is... off.
Having anything like the historical invasion of the Soviet Union, with the Germans driving into the Soviet Union quite deep only to be stopped due to the brutal weather, and then a couple of years of back and forth fighting before it was settled, just isn't possible with the current game. Once one side is defeated at the front, they remain in retreat until surrender. There are exceptions where one AI side advances only to get stopped, and then it gets reversed by the other AI, but in general especially if in single player, they never get stopped or held up.
I was thinking about this a few months ago and there are some things that aren't in the game or aren't in the game strong enough to make the German Soviet war realistic.
1) Org and maintenance. One thing that I haven't noticed ever being mentioned in these forums (EVER) is the fact that three weeks after Operation Barbarossa, once Smolensk was taken, the Germans had to stop their panzer forces in mid July to perform maintenance. This lasted several weeks, three if I remember correctly. Its been said that it was also needed so that the infantry could fully catch up, but the point I am trying to make by pointing this fact out is that armored forces in the game can go on from Brest to Vladivostok and see combat the entire way and never once need to stop for maintenance. Maybe it should be a matter of diminishing organization until the armored unit is fully stopped to regain organization over a certain period. Going for hundreds of kilometers straight would realistically be quite taxing on armored vehicles, especially in combat.
2) The gauge difference in German/Soviet rail slowed the German advance. "Logistics was another hugely important factor in the German defeat. No matter how fast or far the fighting formations advanced, they were dependent on timely supplies of fuel and ammunition. This became an ever greater problem as the army progressed deeper into Soviet territory and further away from its own railheads. Not only were the distances much greater than they had been during the French campaign, but the Soviet transport infrastructure was much poorer. German engineers struggled to convert the Russian railway gauge to one which their own locomotives and rolling stock could use. Meanwhile the multitude of lorries and horse-drawn wagons in which the supplies were transported were forced to negotiate Russian dirt roads, which became virtually impassable after prolonged rain."
http://www.iwm.org.uk/history/operation-barbarossa-and-germanys-failure-in-the-soviet-union
The fact that the Germans and then later the Soviets had to change the gauge of the railway tracks so their trains could use them is also something I have not seen being discussed before by the developers. In the Gary Grisby game, "War in Russia", the railway advance was limited per turn so the further off you left the point the gauge was upgraded to, the less supply your forces had. I think in HOI, that what they could do is simply double the time it takes to fully repair infrastructure in captured Soviet territory, and vice versa when the Soviets advance towards the west. This would really help to slow down just how fast the Germans can penetrate into the Soviet Union, and also work to prevent the Soviets in Berlin by the end of 1941.
3) Weather affecting the battlefield and unprepared units enough. This is apparently going to get adjusted in the next DLC/patch but as it is right now, I don't believe that aircraft should operate at all during a blizzard, yet they can but with reduced efficiency according to the wiki chart. Regardless, non acclimatized forces should be facing severe penalties when in a blizzard and attacking. Also mud was pretty much a real drag on the German advance in October of 1941. Mud giving 50% less movement and 70% attrition and -50% attack is pretty good, so I cannot argue with it too much. But a blizzard is the perfect time to pretty much stop the entire German advance in 1941 and to give the Soviets a chance of a counter attack, however they should get much less terrain penalties when attacking if they are acclimated which I believe and hope gets implemented properly
4) Historical Soviet military inefficiencies. I believe that a good German army that is ready for Operation Barbarossa should be able to make advances into the Soviet union. What we find instead is that with single player or just AI vrs AI, that there is a way too slow start to advancing into the USSR because their front line is the toughest thing you will face. Once it is broken it's just one long advancement into the USSR or the opposite, the Soviets into German territory until a surrender. The Soviet army faced a lot of issues in 1941 that hindered it until it was more or less corrected around the time of the battle of Kursk. First off, yes the great purge did get rid of a lot of good leadership and that penalty is already in the game, but it also depends on when it is implemented. I see the AI starting the great purge in 1936 or 1937 with either historical or non-historical selected. This pretty much gets rid of all the penalties around the time of 1940 though, and by 1941, the Soviet army is basically back to normal. I think that the problems shouldn't even be able to be fixed completely until a couple of years of war under their belt.
It would be nice if only half of the recovery was done pre-war, and the last half taken off with Germany/Japan war. It can be reduced every so often as time is spent fighting in the war. There were other issues the soviets faced such as lack of soldier recognition and accomplishments up till 1943 which I speak with little knowledge on the subject, but I believe that honoring their soldiers led to greater individual success. There is a focus for that in the game, however I think it should only open up after 2 years of warfare - Positive Heroism.
There is also the fact that the Soviets relied on wire communication suspended on poles when Operation Barbarossa began, which was extremely unreliable under war conditions. They had few radios and the radio code system they did have was almost unworkable. So I think Germany should get some serious bonuses against Soviet organization for around 2 months until the Soviets get their communications under a workable state. I'm sure we've all read about Soviet generals ordering divisions into battle that no longer existed but they were unaware of the fact because their communications were so poor.
Now obviously the last point would really hurt the Soviet Union if there aren't things to slow the Germans down, and number 1, 2, and 3 are what I propose to really help do so. But at the least, I don't believe that the Germans couldn't have advanced into the Soviet Union at all, like what I see with a good number of AI vrs AI matches where the front barely moves for a few months until one side is ground down enough. Operation Barbarossa was a war of mobile warfare that the Soviets weren't prepared for, and I do believe that if it wasn't for the first three points I've made then they wouldn't have survived the war. Partisans also helped to tie down German units and to slow their supplies down, and that could be made into another point as well.
I was thinking about this a few months ago and there are some things that aren't in the game or aren't in the game strong enough to make the German Soviet war realistic.
1) Org and maintenance. One thing that I haven't noticed ever being mentioned in these forums (EVER) is the fact that three weeks after Operation Barbarossa, once Smolensk was taken, the Germans had to stop their panzer forces in mid July to perform maintenance. This lasted several weeks, three if I remember correctly. Its been said that it was also needed so that the infantry could fully catch up, but the point I am trying to make by pointing this fact out is that armored forces in the game can go on from Brest to Vladivostok and see combat the entire way and never once need to stop for maintenance. Maybe it should be a matter of diminishing organization until the armored unit is fully stopped to regain organization over a certain period. Going for hundreds of kilometers straight would realistically be quite taxing on armored vehicles, especially in combat.
2) The gauge difference in German/Soviet rail slowed the German advance. "Logistics was another hugely important factor in the German defeat. No matter how fast or far the fighting formations advanced, they were dependent on timely supplies of fuel and ammunition. This became an ever greater problem as the army progressed deeper into Soviet territory and further away from its own railheads. Not only were the distances much greater than they had been during the French campaign, but the Soviet transport infrastructure was much poorer. German engineers struggled to convert the Russian railway gauge to one which their own locomotives and rolling stock could use. Meanwhile the multitude of lorries and horse-drawn wagons in which the supplies were transported were forced to negotiate Russian dirt roads, which became virtually impassable after prolonged rain."
http://www.iwm.org.uk/history/operation-barbarossa-and-germanys-failure-in-the-soviet-union
The fact that the Germans and then later the Soviets had to change the gauge of the railway tracks so their trains could use them is also something I have not seen being discussed before by the developers. In the Gary Grisby game, "War in Russia", the railway advance was limited per turn so the further off you left the point the gauge was upgraded to, the less supply your forces had. I think in HOI, that what they could do is simply double the time it takes to fully repair infrastructure in captured Soviet territory, and vice versa when the Soviets advance towards the west. This would really help to slow down just how fast the Germans can penetrate into the Soviet Union, and also work to prevent the Soviets in Berlin by the end of 1941.
3) Weather affecting the battlefield and unprepared units enough. This is apparently going to get adjusted in the next DLC/patch but as it is right now, I don't believe that aircraft should operate at all during a blizzard, yet they can but with reduced efficiency according to the wiki chart. Regardless, non acclimatized forces should be facing severe penalties when in a blizzard and attacking. Also mud was pretty much a real drag on the German advance in October of 1941. Mud giving 50% less movement and 70% attrition and -50% attack is pretty good, so I cannot argue with it too much. But a blizzard is the perfect time to pretty much stop the entire German advance in 1941 and to give the Soviets a chance of a counter attack, however they should get much less terrain penalties when attacking if they are acclimated which I believe and hope gets implemented properly
4) Historical Soviet military inefficiencies. I believe that a good German army that is ready for Operation Barbarossa should be able to make advances into the Soviet union. What we find instead is that with single player or just AI vrs AI, that there is a way too slow start to advancing into the USSR because their front line is the toughest thing you will face. Once it is broken it's just one long advancement into the USSR or the opposite, the Soviets into German territory until a surrender. The Soviet army faced a lot of issues in 1941 that hindered it until it was more or less corrected around the time of the battle of Kursk. First off, yes the great purge did get rid of a lot of good leadership and that penalty is already in the game, but it also depends on when it is implemented. I see the AI starting the great purge in 1936 or 1937 with either historical or non-historical selected. This pretty much gets rid of all the penalties around the time of 1940 though, and by 1941, the Soviet army is basically back to normal. I think that the problems shouldn't even be able to be fixed completely until a couple of years of war under their belt.
It would be nice if only half of the recovery was done pre-war, and the last half taken off with Germany/Japan war. It can be reduced every so often as time is spent fighting in the war. There were other issues the soviets faced such as lack of soldier recognition and accomplishments up till 1943 which I speak with little knowledge on the subject, but I believe that honoring their soldiers led to greater individual success. There is a focus for that in the game, however I think it should only open up after 2 years of warfare - Positive Heroism.
There is also the fact that the Soviets relied on wire communication suspended on poles when Operation Barbarossa began, which was extremely unreliable under war conditions. They had few radios and the radio code system they did have was almost unworkable. So I think Germany should get some serious bonuses against Soviet organization for around 2 months until the Soviets get their communications under a workable state. I'm sure we've all read about Soviet generals ordering divisions into battle that no longer existed but they were unaware of the fact because their communications were so poor.
Now obviously the last point would really hurt the Soviet Union if there aren't things to slow the Germans down, and number 1, 2, and 3 are what I propose to really help do so. But at the least, I don't believe that the Germans couldn't have advanced into the Soviet Union at all, like what I see with a good number of AI vrs AI matches where the front barely moves for a few months until one side is ground down enough. Operation Barbarossa was a war of mobile warfare that the Soviets weren't prepared for, and I do believe that if it wasn't for the first three points I've made then they wouldn't have survived the war. Partisans also helped to tie down German units and to slow their supplies down, and that could be made into another point as well.
Last edited:
I think locking the Great Purge recovery behind a large scale war is an excellent idea for the Sovs.
I think a solution to this would be if the game used strategic reserves. Now you put all your units on the front and if the line breaks, all you can hope is that whatever garrisons you have spread across your territory gets there in time and is enough to plug the hole. Sure, you CAN put units behind the lines, but they won't dig in or get planning bonus because the game doesn't recognize what you are doing.
Maybe in the future with some additions to the CoC, you can mark one of the armies in your army-group as reserves and draw a line where they will dig in behind the front. They will get dig-in bonus but no planning bonus, with the logic that you cannot predict where the enemy will break through your lines. When one army is weakened or needs to recover, you can swap which army is in reserve to get fresh men to the front.
There is a lack of historicity concerning the French government because already Daladier was not President of the Council on January 1, 1936 it was Pierre Laval, infamous for its role under the Vichy regime. In 1939, it is indeed Daladier though (his portrait in his game dates back to 1923. By the end of the 30s he had baldness and no mustache ^ ^). Afterwards you can simplify by putting Albert Lebrun as leader (president from 1932 until the debacle of 1940) and by putting the different Presidents of the Council in national spirit like Great Britain with the kings. For good luck with the list I put ^^. And one thing about never happen is Provisional Government and the birth of 4th Republic for France. In Great Britain, you not have the victory of Labour in 1945 with Clement Attlee.
Attachments
Last edited:
On the Great Purge the current 'Lessons of War' focus should begin the recovery. Before the USSR had been humiliated by the finnish defenders no one dared to question the validity of the Purges and when the leadership including Stalin finally did so it was a slow process to fix it. The full scope on just how devastating it had been did not show until Operation Barbarossa and only after having suffered catastrophic defeats during the summer and early autumn of 1941 Stalin began ordering the NKVD to reinstate some of the officers (Rokossovsky is probably the most famous example) that had been detained on false charges.
I think one idea could be to tie the 'recovery rate' from the Purge to military losses/loss of land. The logic behind this is that if the USSR had managed to halt the Germans early on there wouldn´t have been such need for army reforms and Stalin and his cronies would have insisted on keeping some of the inefficient systems in place for longer. If things play out like they did historically they won´t have any choice other then letting the competent people like Zhukov make the reforms they think is needed.
On the Soviet-German war in general the biggest issue have always been that the Soviet echelon system have never been represented. The closest thing I have seen is the Operation Barbarossa scenario from HoI2 where the Soviets get free armies 'activated' the further the Germans get into their country, this would obviously not be a good thing for multiplayer but for AI USSR it could certainly help recreating the historical situation where the initial '1941 Red Army' was all but destroyed and still the Soviets had more Divisions in 1942 then they did when the conflict began.
I think one idea could be to tie the 'recovery rate' from the Purge to military losses/loss of land. The logic behind this is that if the USSR had managed to halt the Germans early on there wouldn´t have been such need for army reforms and Stalin and his cronies would have insisted on keeping some of the inefficient systems in place for longer. If things play out like they did historically they won´t have any choice other then letting the competent people like Zhukov make the reforms they think is needed.
On the Soviet-German war in general the biggest issue have always been that the Soviet echelon system have never been represented. The closest thing I have seen is the Operation Barbarossa scenario from HoI2 where the Soviets get free armies 'activated' the further the Germans get into their country, this would obviously not be a good thing for multiplayer but for AI USSR it could certainly help recreating the historical situation where the initial '1941 Red Army' was all but destroyed and still the Soviets had more Divisions in 1942 then they did when the conflict began.
I wanted to add also that there is not the war of Indochina which starts in 1946 opposing mainly the Viet Minh to France. It lacks the flight of the French government from Paris to Tours and finally from Tours to Bordeaux in 1940 as well as the scuttling of the French fleet. There is also the resignation of Hertzog in South Africa in 1940, which opposed entry into the war was outvoted and so Smuts becomes prime minister and brings the country to war. He also misses the repeated political opposition of the Americans to De Gaulle by preferring Darlan who dies assassinated which makes that the Americans suspect the British of having sponsored it.
- Status