US National Unity; why is it so low?

[Magnificent Genius]

I knew that one of the election events messed with unity. Couldn't remember which one.

I've spent too much time electing Landon just to get Standard Oil.

Is Standard Oil that good?

 

[Secret Master]

Is Standard Oil that good?

Discount to researching industrial techs? For a country that won't be entering the war until later? For zero PP? Yeah, it's worth it.

 

[thedarkendstar]

Discount to researching industrial techs? For a country that won't be entering the war until later? For zero PP? Yeah, it's worth it.

So I have a question on industrial tech is it separated from the tech that gives 10 percent construction speed?

 

[celethiel]

Because the United States is suffering still through a depression, and has a complete bann on Alchehol... Rampant Crime... with Mafia style working, the extreme poor, joblessness... look at our Unity now... then magnify it at LEAST by 10... because it was that much worse back in the 30's.... i mean look at what happened to Germany during to the same time period, and it didn't even have that Bann and Obvious Mafia workings.... what is surprising is that there isn't higher of the Other percentages of the other Factions besides Democratic..

 

[adam_grif]

Because the United States is suffering still through a depression, and has a complete bann on Alchehol... Rampant Crime... with Mafia style working, the extreme poor, joblessness... look at our Unity now... then magnify it at LEAST by 10... because it was that much worse back in the 30's.... i mean look at what happened to Germany during to the same time period, and it didn't even have that Bann and Obvious Mafia workings.... what is surprising is that there isn't higher of the Other percentages of the other Factions besides Democratic..

Prohibition ended in 1933, the economic situation had improved by 1936, and for some reason Roosevelt winning in 1940 makes national unity plummet further for no clearly explainable reason. The US national unity situation is just confusing overall.

 

[celethiel]

Prohibition ended in 1933, the economic situation had improved by 1936, and for some reason Roosevelt winning in 1940 makes national unity plummet further for no clearly explainable reason. The US national unity situation is just confusing overall.

didn't the economy start sliding again...?... i remember my history teachers saying that the United States only came out of the Depression because we entered world war 2 and ramped up production and employed more people Than even the New Deal's projects. if they weren't comming back as well as people would like or wish or feel.... Then like how Obama's administration went, the national unity wouldn't be that good.... could be worse, could be France...

 

[adam_grif]

didn't the economy start sliding again...?... i remember my history teachers saying that the United States only came out of the Depression because we entered world war 2 and ramped up production and employed more people Than even the New Deal's projects. if they weren't comming back as well as people would like or wish or feel.... Then like how Obama's administration went, the national unity wouldn't be that good.... could be worse, could be France...

It was up and down until 1940, but the peak of hardship was behind them and things were definitely improving prior to entry into the war - the outbreak of the war in Europe generally started firing up the war economy through foreign purchases of American material, and the United States also began increasing defense spending and reintroduced conscription before December '41.

 

[thedarkendstar]

The interesting thing that many people say government intervention hurts the economy but when they wanna get a war going it seems it can also have the opposite effect

I do wish Nationa Unity affected more than just you surrendering tho.With that, it was also a more dynamic value so you could affect the bonuses.

 

[Secret Master]

So I have a question on industrial tech is it separated from the tech that gives 10 percent construction speed?

Unless I am mistaken, it affects all techs on that page.

 

[thedarkendstar]

Unless I am mistaken, it affects all techs on that page.

Really because I will get the 50 percent bonus from the German NF tree and it only affects the resource techs and the construction techs.

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

Really because I will get the 50 percent bonus from the German NF tree and it only affects the resource techs and the construction techs.

The one from generic focus affects everything, at least.

 

[Secret Master]

Really because I will get the 50 percent bonus from the German NF tree and it only affects the resource techs and the construction techs.

I just checked. The discount from an industrial design company (Standard Oil and others with the same bonus) affects all techs on the industry page.

I'm not using the beta patch that came out yesterday, but I don't imagine it has changed.

 

[josefrees]

I really don't see all of America surrendering even if all the important bits are taken. It would break into smaller republics imo

Also the ideology party popularity should play into national unity. When you invade a country it should capitulate easier if your ideology is extremely popular in the target nation

 

[hkrommel]

I really don't see all of America surrendering even if all the important bits are taken. It would break into smaller republics imo

Also the ideology party popularity should play into national unity. When you invade a country it should capitulate easier if your ideology is extremely popular in the target nation

Also this. The game doesn't properly model US federalism (and frankly I don't see the need for devs to use their time developing a mechanic to do so until there's a US-specific DLC), which makes the US far more vulnerable than it was historically. Each state could function as its own independent nation if need be (and still can today, though the power creep of the federal government had reduced that capability).

 

[Dracolithfiend]

The US doesn't like offensive wars, defensive wars or wars on their own territory have rallied the populace. Claiming the us shirked at the relatively low losses in the Vietnam war is one thing however much like France/USSR in WWII if someone landed on their shore they could expect the same except better armed.

 

[sterrius]

the problem we are not talking about troops landing on NY and taking +1 or 2 states.

We are talking about taking the whole capacity to wage a modern war. The whole East coast where the industry and most resources are located or 70% of the country if coming from the west coast.

This to me is what NU represents more than will to fight.

If we start to use guerrila warfare after capitulation france, poland etc did not stopped fighting even with the whole country occupied.
Japan would have fought to almost extinction before capitulation and was a very special case.

You can´t ask USA to be like a big japan. It was not even close. (And if we put USA to 80% it would become just like japan).

USA would not have risked its own existence for europe and maybe the pacific islands. Not with enemys already taking half the country and advancing without stop. (And HOi4 already have the partisan system).

Maybe 1 day hoi4 adds a mechanic for partisans even after a country capitulate. Then we can discuss how USA would have resisted under occupation.
but i know a lot of countries that would have resisted until the occupation ends no matter what the federal government says.

Just saying you guys are not the only ones that love your country/people/etc and willing to die to remove a foreign force from its territory even when the Normal war is over.

But continental countrys would likely get buffs here due to their size helping the formation, hiding and strikes of guerrila troops. (The top 10 countries in size likely as it becomes impossible to be everywhere no matter how many troops you put there).

 

[RELee]

It was, but I didn't think anyone else would get it!

Ack! You think so poorly of us! Ashamed you should be!

 

[Dracolithfiend]

Japan would have fought to almost extinction before capitulation and was a very special case.

You can´t ask USA to be like a big japan. It was not even close. (And if we put USA to 80% it would become just like japan).

I never understood the logic of Japan being special. Even in your own post you say Poland never stopped fighting. Neither did many nations such as France and Yugoslavia. The biggest difference between theoretical resistance in the US and Japan is what? I always hear the same point - The Emperor was basically a god and 100% of their population would either banzai charge with pikes or suicide bomb or jump off a cliff. I just don't buy that conclusion and if that gets me a bunch of disagrees so be it.

According to this https://www.google.com/amp/extranosalley.com/gun-ownership-in-the-1940s/amp/ amongst other sites guns and ammunition were readily available in vast quantities. The US population would surely not roll over and accept Japanese occupation. With the fake quote "a rifle behind every blade of grass" actually being plausible I can only picture higher losses then in an occupation of Japan.

 

[Secret Master]

Japan would have fought to almost extinction before capitulation and was a very special case.

Ehh, I don't know about that.

It would depend on who ended up in charge after some defeats at home during any landing on the home islands.

On the one hand, some officers tried to overthrow the government when the Emperor tried to surrender.

On the other hand, there are a number of contra-indicators to "resistance to extinction" from both government figures and the populace. By February of 1945, government officials had already warned that famine was inevitable by 1946 unless the blockade ended. There were musings that a Communist revolution might topple the regime before the Americans did.

But the Strategic Bombing Survey is most revealing to how the people of Japan were looking at things by the time 1945 rolled around:

Sixty-four percent of the population stated that they had reached a point prior to surrender where they felt personally unable to go on with the war. Of these, less than one-tenth attributed the cause to military defeats, one-quarter attributed the cause to shortages of food and civilian supplies, the largest part to air attack.

A striking aspect of the air attack was the pervasiveness with which its impact on morale blanketed Japan. Roughly one-quarter of all people in cities fled or were evacuated, and these evacuees, who themselves were of singularly low morale, helped spread discouragement and disaffection for the war throughout the islands. This mass migration from the cities included an estimated 8,500,000 persons. Throughout the Japanese islands, whose people had always thought themselves remote from attack, United States planes crisscrossed the skies with no effective Japanese air or antiaircraft opposition. That this was an indication of impending defeat became as obvious to the rural as to the urban population.

Progressively lowered morale was characterized by loss of faith in both military and civilian leaders, loss of confidence in Japan's military might and increasing distrust of government news releases and propaganda. People became short-tempered and more outspoken in their criticism of the government, the war and affairs in general. Until the end, however, national traditions of obedience and conformity, reinforced by the police organization, remained effective in controlling the behavior of the population. The Emperor largely escaped the criticism which was directed at other leaders, and retained the people's faith in him. It is probable that most Japanese would have passively faced death in a continuation of the hopeless struggle, had the Emperor so ordered. When the Emperor announced the unconditional surrender the first reaction of the people was one of regret and surprise, followed shortly by relief.

The interrelation of military, economic and morale factors was complex. To a certain extent each reacted on the other. In the final analysis the Japanese military machine had lost its purpose when it could no longer protect the Japanese people from destruction by air attack. General Takashima, when asked by the Survey as to his reaction to the Imperial Rescript, stated that surrender had become unavoidable; the Army, even should it repel invasion, could no longer protect the Japanese people from extermination.

You can find the above here.

The "probably" part of facing death for the emperor has always bugged me. Despite popular culture depictions of Japan as full of mindless zealots ready to sacrifice themselves to die in suicide attacks against the Allies, the reality is a bit more complex. If you read more from that document, you'll find discussions of caloric intake and health effects from the blockade as well. One wonders how much resistance would have been offered by the civilian population if Downfall and Olympic launched in November as planned, versus a delay of a few more months. One also wonders whether an invasion would have resulted in a slow collapse of political authority in Japan (parts still controlled by the Japanese government), resulting in something closer to anarchy rather than mindless defense of the islands.

And if the Emperor had been taken into custody after his attempt at surrender (via a successful coup), would the population have fought on without clear guidance from the Emperor?

 

[ltccone]

the problem we are not talking about troops landing on NY and taking +1 or 2 states.

We are talking about taking the whole capacity to wage a modern war. The whole East coast where the industry and most resources are located or 70% of the country if coming from the west coast.

This to me is what NU represents more than will to fight.

If we start to use guerrila warfare after capitulation france, poland etc did not stopped fighting even with the whole country occupied.
Japan would have fought to almost extinction before capitulation and was a very special case.

You can´t ask USA to be like a big japan. It was not even close. (And if we put USA to 80% it would become just like japan).

USA would not have risked its own existence for europe and maybe the pacific islands. Not with enemys already taking half the country and advancing without stop. (And HOi4 already have the partisan system).

Maybe 1 day hoi4 adds a mechanic for partisans even after a country capitulate. Then we can discuss how USA would have resisted under occupation.
but i know a lot of countries that would have resisted until the occupation ends no matter what the federal government says.

Just saying you guys are not the only ones that love your country/people/etc and willing to die to remove a foreign force from its territory even when the Normal war is over.

But continental countrys would likely get buffs here due to their size helping the formation, hiding and strikes of guerrila troops. (The top 10 countries in size likely as it becomes impossible to be everywhere no matter how many troops you put there).

In HOI4 the Soviets can get a 90% or 75 % NU. With a 75% NU you have to push to the Urals. With a 90%, it is to Mongolia. According to your position, the Soviets should surrender if the AA line is reached, which will not happen.

And in my Japan game the US surrendered when I captured Detroit. I didn't even touch the Atlantic coast or New England, which contain plenty of factories.