What's wrong with the Hearts of Iron version of history

[Porkman]

Going back to China, and improving it/modding it specifically as it relates to the map of China (since part of properly representing warlords in HOI will necessarily involve the right states and map to do it), I wouldn't mind some feedback

I created map of all of the states I right now would like to see included in the final map, including a bunch of small ones that it might not be practical to put in but I left them for now. (map 1) Are there a lot? yes. Is China huge by population and territory? yes, so its justified. Are there that many more states than Europe has in game? I don't think so.

Spoiler

I then created a map of Tibet and the pre-ww2 warlords on that state map (map 2)

Spoiler

I then created a hypothetical where, nothing happens except (a) Tibet conquers the tibetan plateau and (b) Shanxi (as a puppet or using some unknown mechanic) conquers all Jin-Chinese territory. (map 3) This hopefully illustrates the general rationale I used in the state borders I decided on.

Spoiler

I would appreciate feedback from people who know China better than me about reasonable outcomes like warlords declaring independence from China, or foreign powers conquer parts of china, that cannot properly be represented on this map as the borders stand now etc.

The borders are fine as far as I can tell. The only real issue with it is that you are filling in a modern PRC map whereas in 1936 the province boundaries were different.
(ignore mongolia, that was just legal posturing, it was independent)

This page has a link to a 1936 map of China as well as the one in 1946 and the current one.

Main differences between 1936 and now.

In 1936, there was a province called "Xikang" between Tibet and Sichuan.

There was no Inner Mongolia. Instead, there was Ningxia, Rehe, Jehol, and Cha har.

Ignore the extra provinces in Manchuria in 1946. In 1936, there was only Fengtien, Heilongjiang, Jehol and Kirin.

 

[Secret Master]

That raises an interesting question. After Nov 27, 1942, Case Anton, Vichy had no navy and no army and was occupied by German forces. It also sent half it's revenue, hundreds of thousands of ex-soldiers as forced labor, and other resources to Germany. The government also had administrative authority over much of non-Vichy France. So in HOI3 or HOI4 does that make it an:

1. Independent country?
2. Puppet?
3. Conquered territory/collaborationist?

She's occupied under the HOI3 rubric. Probably under collaboration government, although after Overlord fires, it's probably closer to military government with a ton of URs rising up and partisans doing their thing.

 

[Caesar15]

In the most recent WWW China was united..excluding the PRC.

 

[CrasherZZ]

In the most recent WWW China was united..excluding the PRC.

Yes!

 

[Caesar15]

Yes!

Now I'm not sure if this is because they changed how China works or it's a mechanic for when Japan declares war.

 

[Anichent]

The borders are fine as far as I can tell. The only real issue with it is that you are filling in a modern PRC map whereas in 1936 the province boundaries were different.
(ignore mongolia, that was just legal posturing, it was independent)

This page has a link to a 1936 map of China as well as the one in 1946 and the current one.

So by taking the provinces on that map you showed, and putting it on my state map, everything works fine except 5 "states" would need to be split in half to make it work:

Spoiler

Then once those 5 states are split, the administrative divisions you showed on your map are perfectly represented everywhere else (in fact most of them are the same as today....):

Spoiler

The only question is...why do they matter for the purposes of HOI4? They are administrative divisions, not country borders. States are needed to show country borders, real or potential, not administrative divisions.

 

[Porkman]

The only question is...why do they matter for the purposes of HOI4? They are administrative divisions, not country borders. States are needed to show country borders, real or potential, not administrative divisions.

Well, remember what I said before. The split of China into Warlords and "cliques" was based on these administrative divisions.

To take an obvious example, Zhang Xueliang was part of what had been the "Fengtian Clique" which only makes sense if that province exists. Or to take the example of the Tibetans, the Sicuan warlords controlled Xikang. Tibet under the Republic was smaller than it would be under the PRC.

The new version of the map looks good, the only thing missing is that modern Ningxia was put with Gansu province while it was actually part of the old Ningxia province.

I definitely want a more dense state map for China and your map looks perfect.

 

[FOARP]

In the most recent WWW China was united..excluding the PRC.

That would be a positive outcome as far as I'm concerned: it shows that they've thought about this and want to try something different.

 

[CrasherZZ]

Now I'm not sure if this is because they changed how China works or it's a mechanic for when Japan declares war.

I'll take it either way. In HOI3 when Japan attacks China the Nationalists have no transit rights into the warlord territory, and can't grant transit rights either. That's a serious problem because Nat China cannot counter attack into Shanxi until its conquered by Japan. Shanxi won't grant transit rights even while it is being overrun, and won't accept transit rights either. Very absurd. By the time Nat China can move into Shanxi, it has already been outflanked.

So no matter how it happens, by event or by default, it still makes a lot more sense than in HOI3.

The situation with the Communists can be very interesting too. They were more than willing to help the Nationalist fight against the JA but CKS didn't want it for political reasons. He regarded the CC as a bigger threat to him than Japan. Turns out he was right. Makes for some interesting political possibilities in the game. CC isn't technically a country. They are more of powerful faction in a civil war.

 

[Porkman]

The situation with the Communists can be very interesting too. They were more than willing to help the Nationalist fight against the JA but CKS didn't want it for political reasons. He regarded the CC as a bigger threat to him than Japan. Turns out he was right. Makes for some interesting political possibilities in the game. CC isn't technically a country. They are more of powerful faction in a civil war.

No, they weren't.

The Communists had 2 major battles in the war. Pingxingguan which was pretty small and the hundred regiments offensive. The hundred regiments offensive happened in 1940. For the next 5 years, despite being located behind Japanese lines, the Communists adopted a live and let live policy towards the Japanese and focused on building up the base areas. Since the Japanese only cared about the cities and the railroads and they lacked the logistics for prolonged operations in the countryside, the Communists were allowed to grow pretty much unmolested.

 

[Caesar15]

@FOARP @CrasherZZ

At the end of the video it shows a faction: "Chinese United Front", I am going to assume that when the Japanse attacked there were some event chain than allowed China to form up. Perhaps the PRC had a chance to join in as well but denied it? Who knows. It does look better than past hearts of irons though.

 

[agus92]

Someone in the WWW thread thought that they're using the faction system to model China. I don't recall it's justification though.

 

[Caesar15]

Someone in the WWW thread thought that they're using the faction system to model China. I don't recall it's justification though.

China went from being disunited to United (sans communists) and in the very end at the endgame screen it says China is in the faction: "United Chinese front" or something similar.

 

[agus92]

China went from being disunited to United (sans communists) and in the very end at the endgame screen it says China is in the faction: "United Chinese front" or something similar.

Thanks.

If they manage to improve China organically with the faction system, that would be good news.

 

[CrasherZZ]

the Communists adopted a live and let live policy towards the Japanese and focused on building up the base areas

Does that imply that CC had some kind of arrangement with the JA not to attack each other? More accurately, CC base areas were not worth going after for the IJA so there was less fighting there. The CC did conduct a persistent guerilla warfare throughout the war. Cooperation with KMT was not possible after a major battle with KMT forces in January of 1941, in which the CC Army suffered heavy losses after being ambushed. They retreated and reorganized around Yan'an, and conducted intensive guerilla warfare against the IJA for the remainder of the war.

The 100 Regiments offensive of 1940 could not be continued because the CC suspected that the KMT was about to attack them. So it was really the KMT that put a stop to the operations of CC conventional army regulars.

 

[Sagrido]

This thread is great, many nice suggestions. I just hope that this time around I can play as communist China in a better and more interesting way than before. I was really annoying with the RNG based events in HoI2 (didnt play much hoi3) to be able to break out and do something, otherwise you were pretty much doomed.
Im always for making the game with as many countries and provinces as possible

 

[Anichent]

China went from being disunited to United (sans communists) and in the very end at the endgame screen it says China is in the faction: "United Chinese front" or something similar.

My question would be who is in this faction (if it includes warlords, which ones are represented) and how does China look when they are not at war.

So this is what China looked like when divided in WWW: spoiler 1
comments?

I am a bit confused because this is not what divided China looks like to me based on the information people have shared here :s

Specifically I wonder if more
1) regions should be out of Nationalist China's direct control during peacetime (by adding 8 more warlord controlled 'regions')
2) if Guangxi Clique should be split into 2 different regions
3) if the borders of Yunnan should be changed.
4) If the China-Japan border is correct, because Japan seems to have slightly more territory in Hebei then it should.
Essentially my impression based on these discussions is that Paradox might have got the mechanics right, but the map may be off. I'll also include a map of the impression I have of what China should look like in 1936 (second spoiler)

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[Sir Garnet]

To put it in familiar HOI3 terms, it sounds like the regions of China should be somewhat autonomous and control their own armed forces, but with the KMT abel to give them objectives like current allied objectives (which they would tend to follow, at some point) with an option in the case of more cooperative provinces the use of these forces as expeditionary forces.

There is no need for a CK-like system of dynastic interrelationships. The regions matter, who runs each region is secondary. Whomever that person is, the key variable is debre of collaboration with the KMT command.

 

[FOARP]

To put it in familiar HOI3 terms, it sounds like the regions of China should be somewhat autonomous and control their own armed forces, but with the KMT abel to give them objectives like current allied objectives (which they would tend to follow, at some point) with an option in the case of more cooperative provinces the use of these forces as expeditionary forces.

Except this does not really model the relationship between Chiang and the warlords. Men like Long Yun and Liu Xiang were most definitely subordinates of Chiang's - no-one openly questioned this. They followed his orders. Their territory was at the disposal of the KMT. They were not autonomous or able to control their armed forces in the sense that even an allied nation would. When Chiang wanted to remove them from their positions, he did so via either assassination or a coup, not through invasion.

 

[Secret Master]

They were not autonomous or able to control their armed forces in the sense that even an allied nation would. When Chiang wanted to remove them from their positions, he did so via either assassination or a coup, not through invasion.

Of course, that's not how the United States, Germany, France, or the UK generally removed subordinates, either.

Can you imagine Truman having to assassinate MacArthur to remove him during Korea? Or FDR having to coup Fredendall out of command in North Africa?

Again, there's a lack of granularity here that doesn't help model the issues in question.