|
http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=5cc3d48ae4b01977b196a518 I made a poll so people can vote on which nation my Imperator LP will be. You can chose as many nations as you want but can only vote once. e: Me pagesniping both threads was literally an accident I swear!
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
I think there's a rule against lping nearly released games
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:22
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:I think there's a rule against lping nearly released games They got rid of that rule a while ago iirc. It shouldn't really apply to non-narrative games like Paradox GSGs anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:23
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:I think there's a rule against lping nearly released games The bugs aren't that bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Posters who are uncomfortable with Germany in Hearts of Iron, what your ideal response from Paradox be (and I don't mean this in a hostile way): cripple Germany? Make it non-playable? Not make a game about WW2 in the first place? I would understand if it was. Personally, I'm not very comfortable with a lot of the atrocities involved, whether or not they're fully represented, a bit of a damned if you do and damned if you don't, but it's offset by how I just plain am not interested in the mechanics of the games attached to those time periods, so it's mostly academic to me. When I get into a big map-spanning war in CK2 it's exhausting enough for me, so of course I don't wanna get knee-deep in HoI's biggest war of all time. Colonization in Vicky and EU carries with it all sorts of implications, but it's also mechanically a whole lot of slowly poking around a landmass I already know blindfolded, which both takes you away from managing your home country and there's already better games about exploring terra incognita or sailing around the east coast of the Americas out there if you want. Now if you get down to it, technically CK2 has all the same problems. There's a whole mess of ways where being a tyrannical bloodthirsty monster is much more productive than playing it nice, but you can kinda squirm out of it by saying it was a lot longer ago, and technically most of the people you do horrible things to are wealthy aristocrats for whom the risk of having horrible things happen to them is the price for having all that aristocratic wealth. Not in like general "upcoming socialist uprising" terms, but in literal feudalism contract terms. Still kinda feels depressing when I consider doing an After the End run as a republic and paving the way to reforging America with endless JFKs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 05:43
|
|
|
Groogy posted:Also keep in mind s lot of our "historicity" has an element of what do the player expect? Like why the hell does Russia have the Soviet meme of manpower in EU4? Because otherwise people wouldn't identify it with being Russia. Not the soviet meme, its far older..
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:48
|
|
|
The oriental slavic hordes meme was at a minimum present in the minds of the German generals prior to WW1 because their strategy assumed they would be overwhelmed by Endless Russians undless they beat France quickly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:51
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Posters who are uncomfortable with Germany in Hearts of Iron, what your ideal response from Paradox be (and I don't mean this in a hostile way): cripple Germany? Make it non-playable? Not make a game about WW2 in the first place? I would understand if it was. Germany's military curve should be the opposite of the Allies (instead of starting weaker and then getting stronger as the war progresses, Germany should start strong and get weaker as the war progresses) in order to simulate the Nazi state basically running out of one of its primary sources of income: dispossessing its minorities. By 1942 that ship had largely sailed for Germany and its racial policies weren't bringing in the insane amounts of money that they were at the start of the war, and the situation would only get worse over time. Edit: and please change the Hitler portrait. Like every other portrait of the game is a colorized photo, and Hitler looks like it came straight from a propaganda painting (complete with blue eyes).
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 06:59
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:Posters who are uncomfortable with Germany in Hearts of Iron, what your ideal response from Paradox be (and I don't mean this in a hostile way): cripple Germany? Make it non-playable? Not make a game about WW2 in the first place? I would understand if it was. I think that putting a message on every loading screen saying something like "This is a videogame, not an educational tool. Please do not treat it as such." would be a bare minimum that no-one could really object to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 07:19
|
|
|
Drone posted:Germany's military curve should be the opposite of the Allies (instead of starting weaker and then getting stronger as the war progresses, Germany should start strong and get weaker as the war progresses) in order to simulate the Nazi state basically running out of one of its primary sources of income: dispossessing its minorities. By 1942 that ship had largely sailed for Germany and its racial policies weren't bringing in the insane amounts of money that they were at the start of the war, and the situation would only get worse over time. This is literally exactly how it is except it's production instead of force strength. In-game and IRL, Germany started arming itself for war well before any Allied power, so of course they start with a larger force strength in the early game. They have a large force and large industrial output because they were working at it for years while the allies sat on their asses, and Stalin was embroiled in internal issues. But they cannot hold a candle to the Allied war machine once it wakes up if they don't nip in the bud. Even if the Germans take France and, hell, most of Europe other than the UK, they cannot beat Allied production. Time is not on their side, and the tide will inevitably turn. They must leverage their initial advantage into dealing a knockout blow to either the UK or the USSR to have any chance in the long run. If they don't, they will eventually lose. The entire conflict is already exactly as you claim it should be (but think it isn't) if you just understand that it's sustained production, not total strength, that is the key fungible dynamic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 07:21
|
|
|
Honestly playing as the Axis should be hardmode. I don't see any reason other than appeasing nazi cosplay weirdos for Germany to be the easiest country in the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 07:23
|
|
|
You really don't need to touch the gameplay. Aesthetics are just as good if not usually better at evoking an emotion. This is a videogame, after all, not a tabletop or a board game. You could do something like when playing a fascist country have the colours drain a bit, and when you are zoomed in over your owned or occupied territories have subtle sound effects of people crying or screaming that cannot be muted (though that might break compliance, I don't know).
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 07:36
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:This is literally exactly how it is except it's production instead of force strength. In-game and IRL, Germany started arming itself for war well before any Allied power, so of course they start with a larger force strength in the early game. They have a large force and large industrial output because they were working at it for years while the allies sat on their asses, and Stalin was embroiled in internal issues. But they cannot hold a candle to the Allied war machine once it wakes up if they don't nip in the bud. Even if the Germans take France and, hell, most of Europe other than the UK, they cannot beat Allied production. Time is not on their side, and the tide will inevitably turn. They must leverage their initial advantage into dealing a knockout blow to either the UK or the USSR to have any chance in the long run. If they don't, they will eventually lose. Yes. I agree. And I'm saying that they should have an even -harder- time of it late war, because the systems you are describing (and the way it currently works in the game) are a result of Germany just not being able to sustain factory production or manpower due to the inherent limits of being, y'know, a single country. They have nothing to do with the country reaping the consequences of its heinous racial policies. I'm not saying that Germany doesn't already have no hope of matching Allied production. I'm saying that German production should hit a peak at some point around 1942, and then become harder and hard to maintain, or even to actively slide backward.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 08:05
|
|
|
Drone posted:Germany's military curve should be the opposite of the Allies (instead of starting weaker and then getting stronger as the war progresses, Germany should start strong and get weaker as the war progresses) in order to simulate the Nazi state basically running out of one of its primary sources of income: dispossessing its minorities. By 1942 that ship had largely sailed for Germany and its racial policies weren't bringing in the insane amounts of money that they were at the start of the war, and the situation would only get worse over time. You do know that their overall production reached its peak by late 1944. They were producing more equipment tanks and munitions, even subs towards the end of the war than at the beginning. Even in 45, they were outproducing 39-42. Like in 1944 alone they produced more Panzer 4s than they had in all the years from like 1936 to 1943. German production only started to drop off once their factories actually got occupied. Your understanding of their production is almost the exact opposite of reality, because their main problem was that they didn't switch into a war economy until late 42/early 43. Just to make this extra clear, more than 50% of all of Germany's wartime production during ww2 was in 1944 alone. They were literally dragging their feet from 39-42 and only started producing stuff at a real pace in 43 and they doubled that across the board by 44. Dramicus fucked around with this message at 09:11 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 09:03
|
|
|
Yeah guess what other "production" really ramped up at the same time in Germany?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 09:29
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:Yeah guess what other "production" really ramped up at the same time in Germany? Sure, doesn't change the fact that German military production was relatively stagnant from 39-42, then started to spike exponentially in 43-44. So for the game to be accurate, Germany's pre-war build-up should be toned down and their mid war potential buffed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 09:36
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:ES2 recently got ruined by its latest DLC adding an atrociously implemented "hacking" system. I played ES2 recently and didn't notice it, I assume the issue is easily avoided by not buying the DLC (which I definitely won't)
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 11:35
|
|
|
I feel that the easiest way to solve the "Nazis in my WW2 game and not enough terrible poo poo" is to put in some sort of educational disclaimer that pop up when you choose a country. Like how ck2 sometimes links to wiki? Then they would acknowledge it, put the information in front of the players and not mess around with game mechanics based on what offends people. I mean does playing the UK inform you about all the fuckin terrible poo poo they did in africa, or apartheid? Other than that more community moderation would be good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 12:47
|
|
|
LordMune posted:On the flip side of the coin, then we'd have Nazis furiously masturbating over the game (more than they already are). aardvaard posted:Honestly playing as the Axis should be hardmode. I don't see any reason other than appeasing nazi cosplay weirdos for Germany to be the easiest country in the game. Zombiepop posted:I mean does playing the UK inform you about all the fuckin terrible poo poo they did in africa, or apartheid?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 12:57
|
|
|
Yeah but in a way that don't affect gameplay and makes it a choice for the players. Since it's a game, supposed to be fun and for relaxation etc. Not a war-crime-sim. So some sort of document and statement maybe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 13:02
|
|
|
what’s the game where you have to decide as a Wehrmacht general how much to help the SS with it determining if you got hung at Nuremberg at the end? Because you should just have that launch when the player selects Germany
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 14:32
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:what’s the game where you have to decide as a Wehrmacht general how much to help the SS with it determining if you got hung at Nuremberg at the end? Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 14:38
|
|
|
How does that work, you lose no matter how well you play? ...makes sense given historical context, actually.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
It's only Barbarossa so if I recall the start of the game Hitler declares one major city the ultimate objective that will totally collapse the Russians if taken (I think the options are Moscow, Stalingrad, and maybe Leningrad?), and you win if you take that city before time runs out. Naturally the game assumes that no, even losing Moscow wouldn't have instantly lost the war for the Allies so after you if you win the game basically says "Well good job but the Nazis still lost the war so here's what happens to you personally". Throughout the game Himmler is constantly asking you to help him with war crimes either directly or indirectly. You have the option to go along with it, which gets you favor with him and can net bonuses, look the other way, or lodge an official protest which pisses him and Hitler off and costs you resources for your offensives (the game is half managing bickering Nazis, half wargame). However at the end if you actively helped Himmler in anyway, you lose anyway because you get hung at Nuremberg. I think looking the other way gets you sentenced to prison, while constantly lodging protests allows you to avoid Nuremberg.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 14:59
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:How does that work, you lose no matter how well you play? ...makes sense given historical context, actually. theres a way to win but its basically a hidden ending and requires you to play ridiculously well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:How does that work, you lose no matter how well you play? ...makes sense given historical context, actually. Supporting nazi schemes gets you lots of military support and prestige and so on. Opposing them means you have to make do with less. When it ends, the game tells you whether you were awful or not. And It only covers until February 1942 so you can “win” as the Germans and still lose, as it were. E: even that game still leans into war fetishization and Clean Wehrmacht at least on the player’s part. I don’t think there’s a completely satisfactory way to make a WW2 game. The issue is the mass of fans who take it as a learning tool. This happens with, for example, colonisation in Eu and Vicky, too. It’s not going to turn someone into an rear end in a top hat but if you’re already alt-right and racist, it can reinforce it. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 15:07 on Apr 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 15:03
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:It's only Barbarossa so if I recall the start of the game Hitler declares one major city the ultimate objective that will totally collapse the Russians if taken (I think the options are Moscow, Stalingrad, and maybe Leningrad?), and you win if you take that city before time runs out. lol I like that. A game where the easy mode is "defeat the enemy" and the hard mode is "don't get executed for it".
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 16:19
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:E: even that game still leans into war fetishization and Clean Wehrmacht at least on the player’s part. I don’t think there’s a completely satisfactory way to make a WW2 game. The issue is the mass of fans who take it as a learning tool. This happens with, for example, colonisation in Eu and Vicky, too. It’s not going to turn someone into an rear end in a top hat but if you’re already alt-right and racist, it can reinforce it. Why do you say that? The game makes doing the right thing difficult and rewards you for being evil/not doing anything about evil, and then hangs you for it. It straight up covers how parts of the Wehrmacht were collaborating and were certainly not clean. It's pretty much the only ww2 game I can think of that even mentions war crimes and even goes over them in detail, but it's still fetishizing Nazis? What more could be done, honestly? I don't ask that in a sarcastic or snarky way, I mean really, what else could they have done to better handle the situation?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:11
|
|
|
I suppose the objection is that you can run the wermacht cleanly? I don't know, I pretty much agree with you that it's as good as it gets short of banning games about WW2, which I don't think is a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:13
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:I suppose the objection is that you can run the wermacht cleanly? I don't know, I pretty much agree with you that it's as good as it gets short of banning games about WW2, which I don't think is a good idea. Well you can, but it's way harder. They make it clear how lovely and petty the Nazis are when you refuse to support them. They would rather suffer a significant defeat against the Russians rather than not have their way. That or they have absolutely no conception of how precarious their position is and that they somehow foolishly believe they can get you sacked after some poor performance and replace you with someone more pliable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:26
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:Well you can, but it's way harder. They make it clear how lovely and petty the Nazis are when you refuse to support them. They would rather suffer a significant defeat against the Russians rather than not have their way. That or they have absolutely no conception of how precarious their position is and that they somehow foolishly believe they can get you sacked after some poor performance and replace you with someone more pliable. Yeah the whole premise of the game system is to demonstrate to you, the player, how it was impossible to be someone serving the Nazi regime and come out with clean hands. The only way you can avoid compromising yourself is to win every single battle and be so incredibly good that you have the political capital to ignore the Nazis and not get sacked. It demonstrates why there's no such thing as a clean Wehrmacht.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:45
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:It wasn't paranoia, it was political infighting between different power bases in the government (Stalin's core vs the provincial peripheries) with the general populace caught in the crossfire This was a good read, thank you for posting it. Only USSR could set off a mass repression by having a new constitution that gives people more rights + planning for an election.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
Drone posted:Germany's military curve should be the opposite of the Allies (instead of starting weaker and then getting stronger as the war progresses, Germany should start strong and get weaker as the war progresses) in order to simulate the Nazi state basically running out of one of its primary sources of income: dispossessing its minorities. By 1942 that ship had largely sailed for Germany and its racial policies weren't bringing in the insane amounts of money that they were at the start of the war, and the situation would only get worse over time. Replace Adolf Hitler with Adenoid Hynkel, imho.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
stavka-okh also directly addresses the same thing: http://www.rodvik.com/rodgames/STAVKA-OKH.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:Why do you say that? The game makes doing the right thing difficult and rewards you for being evil/not doing anything about evil, and then hangs you for it. It straight up covers how parts of the Wehrmacht were collaborating and were certainly not clean. It's pretty much the only ww2 game I can think of that even mentions war crimes and even goes over them in detail, but it's still fetishizing Nazis? What more could be done, honestly? I don't ask that in a sarcastic or snarky way, I mean really, what else could they have done to better handle the situation? I don’t think there is a good solution, and I don’t think WW2 games should be banned, so ultimately idfk. But the game essentially does portray the clean Wehrmacht myth with the idea that you, YES YOU!, can be One Of The Good Generals. It buys into “well yes Hitler was bad, but that Rommel fellow was a true gentleman and offensive wars of conquest are sometimes good.” The reality is that even if you play as humanitarian as possible, you’re a Wehrmacht general invading a place on Hitler’s orders. Every village you take is going to be genocided no matter how hard you politely protest. The “good” generals wouldn’t be in a Barbarossa game at all. They either resigned by ‘38 and are in some kind of resource management game where you try to make sure all of your fellow camp inmates survive, or they’re in an rpg or something feeding info to the allies as an Abwehr officer. There is no “I did Barbarossa but I am a good guy.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 18:58
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I don’t think there is a good solution, and I don’t think WW2 games should be banned, so ultimately idfk. But the game more or less does what you want. If you try to go the Rommel route, you will probably end up getting shot by the Nazis because you have no political protection and if you do anything except win perfect victories forever, they use it as an excuse to get rid of you. If you get some political protection by helping the Nazis, you contribute to warcrimes and get shot by the allies for being a monster. Being perfectly "clean" isn't really a viable way to play the game, as it's supposed to be a futile endeavor. Of course, by virtue of it being a game, you can save-scum your way to a perfect victory but that's just part of it being a game. Like in Order of battle, you aren't supposed to actually be able to take Moscow in 41, the game makes you believe you can, but it's designed that you will get close and be thrown back by the winter counter attack. However, because it's a game I was able to break it and actually take moscow and the game just kind of shrugged and said "you got thrown back anyway." It just seems like nothing short of getting an immediate game over screen after clicking start would appease you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
I just started Decisive Campaigns, and what a surprise. It specifically tells you that this poo poo isn't history and also lets you turn off war crimes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
I mean, to my mind there’s a relatively straightforward way to make a game which is set in WWII that doesn’t have to dip into the clean Wehrmacht theory: have the player not play as the Wehrmacht. Not that every (or even many) game where you play as the allies does anything at all to dispel the clean Wehrmacht myth, but it’s a lot easier to accurately portray just how bad the Nazis and Wehrmacht actually we’re when they’re the enemies in your game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 21:03
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:I mean, to my mind there’s a relatively straightforward way to make a game which is set in WWII that doesn’t have to dip into the clean Wehrmacht theory: have the player not play as the Wehrmacht. Sure, but then you lose 3/4s of your customers if HoI is anything to go by.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
Dramicus posted:But the game more or less does what you want. If you try to go the Rommel route, you will probably end up getting shot by the Nazis because you have no political protection and if you do anything except win perfect victories forever, they use it as an excuse to get rid of you. If you get some political protection by helping the Nazis, you contribute to warcrimes and get shot by the allies for being a monster. Being perfectly "clean" isn't really a viable way to play the game, as it's supposed to be a futile endeavor. Of course, by virtue of it being a game, you can save-scum your way to a perfect victory but that's just part of it being a game. Like in Order of battle, you aren't supposed to actually be able to take Moscow in 41, the game makes you believe you can, but it's designed that you will get close and be thrown back by the winter counter attack. However, because it's a game I was able to break it and actually take moscow and the game just kind of shrugged and said "you got thrown back anyway." I’m not sure that I need to be appeased? I’m fine with WW2 games and playing as the germans doesn’t make anyone a nazi. As I said I don’t think there is a good solution. That doesn’t mean I don’t notice when video games reinforce the narrative that the nazis and allies were equally bad, or the narrative of noble Wehrmacht officers fighting for nazis because genocide is less dishonourable than telling the Leader of the Nation to gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2019 21:09
|
|