|
If you do a Haití Game, use the greater flavor mod. They have a way better starting position and can reclaim french América and eventually expel the anglos from the new world
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:57 |
|
|
An underreported part of US history is that until around the postwar period the US Federal Government was actually quite toothless, and in many respects still is down to this day. While it would make for a rather needlessly complicated game state you very well could model US states from the Victorian time period as being their own sovereign nations if you wanted to.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 01:46
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:An underreported part of US history is that until around the postwar period the US Federal Government was actually quite toothless, and in many respects still is down to this day. While it would make for a rather needlessly complicated game state you very well could model US states from the Victorian time period as being their own sovereign nations if you wanted to. This. I honestly have no idea how Tokugawa Shogunate Japan ranks in comparison—it may very well be much less centralized. I just think there are many ways to represent decentralization aside from having more colors on the map. Fragmenting everything might not make the most gameplay sense, and none of the stories about Japans decentralized feudalism are convincing me that there needs to be multiple playable countries there.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 01:53
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:An underreported part of US history is that until around the postwar period the US Federal Government was actually quite toothless, and in many respects still is down to this day. While it would make for a rather needlessly complicated game state you very well could model US states from the Victorian time period as being their own sovereign nations if you wanted to. which is part of my point, theres really nothing to be gained from a gameplay perspective by having either japan or the us broken up into substates, better to just keep them together and model these things as internal tensions with certain classes of pop violently resisting your efforts to modernize your country which I actually find more interesting because it hooks into the big ticket mechanic that the whole franchise is built on top of
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 01:53
|
|
|
And I repeat myself, having one Japan tag means you get a semi-proper Boshin War and not a FotS clusterfuck that takes ten years for the AI to resolve.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 02:13
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Losing a civil war rapidly is itself indicative of high centralization, though? How? I think you would need to actually explain your point; because the other feudal daimyo's being like "we're signing up to the winning side now, Mikaido Banzai!" doesn't mean the new government was able to utilize the previous levers of state to quickly bring the nation back into control. Likewise the Soviets had to slowly crush the various rebellions, secession movements, and renment armies even after the White armies were decisively defeated and the political will collapsed with the Tsar's execution; it still took time to incorporate everything back together and multiple rounds of talks and committees to hammer out new state constitutions. BBJoey posted:Making the case that Tsarist Russia was actually a decentralised state because it lost a civil war ????? Tsarist Russia isn't a feudal society by 1917, and as I note above would actually contradict Beamed's argument since after the Red's won they weren't able to at all quickly get things back under control. Japan in the 1850's however is absolutely a feudal society, I'm pretty sure I pointed that out when making this argument. Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:I don't understand this argument. Do you also support every US state being separate from the federal government in DC? Because clearly they had a lot of their own power. Honestly now that I think about it yes; to represent things like Kentucky being neutral during the war and Virginia having its own secession. Remember that a big reason for the power of the federal government is that Congress had control over the territories. Separate is also not the same thing as independent and this is honestly the time period where the give and take relationship between the central government and its "provinces" can be best represented for what it puts on the table and the internal and domestic issues these various nations had. For example in the 1880's Germany was still struggling to fully integrate the incorporated German states that Prussia unified with; plus the whole hassle between Austria and Hungary. Honestly to handle this in a consistent yet nuanced fashion across the board could provide incredible benefits to the gameplay and immersion factors; in addition to properly modeling why the "unrecognized" states could be ripped apart by European powers once the logistical means was available to exploit Africa. For something like Russia you'd have something like Stellaris's district system where states are assigned to an administrative zone and a governor (a CK like character entity with traits, etc) appointed to invoke your rule; who might get ideas about separating or might join one side or yours or stay out of a civil war altogether if cohesion and stability are low enough. This is why you as the player might try to value loyalty over competence; with having both being the outstanding exception. Gaius Marius posted:Yes actually but the argument reanir is making still doesn't hold up I'm not sure if people understand my argument, my argument is that Japan is a feudal society; much like say, Medieval France or the Holy Roman Empire. The Shogun had a great deal of power but this power was still at behest of the feudal contract between the Shogun (Liege Lord) and Daimyos (Subjects) and that just how powerful the Shogun is, just as how powerful the US Federal government is/was; changes with the times. With the Shogun's power crumbling towards the end of the Bakufu due to the Shogun being unable to keep the foreigners out. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure Daimyo's in addition to the fact they had their own armies/retinues, had a great deal of autonomy as to how to run their domains and there was a limit to how much the Shogun could in practice interfere before risking rebellion. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 02:28 on May 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 02:25
|
|
|
My opinion is that multi-vassal Shogunate Japan looks sweet as hell e: I will admit that it was not an ideal setup with Victoria 2's mechanics, as Kyoto (and presumably also the vassals I didn't play), was permanently starving as they only produced Tea and was entirely reliant on the world market for food, except their individual ranking (and by extension their market priority) was so low that they could never afford enough food to prosper. ThaumPenguin fucked around with this message at 02:45 on May 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 02:37
|
|
|
Multi shogun Japan rules bc u can just day 1 puppet them and shatter the shogunate system, preventing a united Japan for the rest of the game
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 02:49
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:How? I think you would need to actually explain your point; because the other feudal daimyo's being like "we're signing up to the winning side now, Mikaido Banzai!" doesn't mean the new government was able to utilize the previous levers of state to quickly bring the nation back into control. I am not the person who originally made that post, but my assumption is that it's because the rest of the nation was eager and willing to rally around the winner, instead of immediately falling apart and needing to be re-united over a span of decades. In other words, the entire nation saw it as a question "who is ruling us, Japan" rather than "let's take down the weak ruler and declare independence". Which implies a very centralized government and national identity. Clarste fucked around with this message at 03:14 on May 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 03:09
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:
The Kaiserreich was pretty decentralized. It was basically a custom's union with a unified foreign policy. Bavaria, Wurttemberg and Saxony had their own armies. All the states had their own suffrage laws. Now, Prussia dominated because they controlled the Northern 2/3rds of the Empire, but that was not set in stone. In a realistic Greater Germany scenario where a Kingdom of Hungary and Croatia is given independence under a different Hapsburg, there would be a large Kingdom of Austria & Bohemia (Austria, Bohemia and Slovenia) within the German Empire that would dilute Prussian dominance a lot. Charlz Guybon fucked around with this message at 03:14 on May 26, 2021 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 03:11
|
|
|
Clarste posted:I am not the person who originally made that post, but my assumption is that it's because the rest of the nation was eager and willing to rally around the winner, instead of immediately falling apart and needing to be re-united over a span of decades. In other words, the entire nation saw it as a question "who is ruling us, Japan" rather than "let's take down the weak ruler and declare independence". Which implies a very centralized government and national identity. Yeah that doesn't make any sense to me but that could be my polisci education talking. It would make sense for a bunch of administrative units to be like, "You now have the mandate of heaven, we bow to your will" like in some periods of Chinese history because well, the previous Emperor is dead or captured, the bureaucracy that maintains the empire is now in the hands of the usurpers. They have the levers of the state and their command to compel obedience and they have no real base of power in the provinces they government and depend on the Imperial court for their authority. These lower level polities bending the knee to the new King because that's the way the winds are blowing indicates the opposite, a decentralized state that's not able to easily compel obedience through a variety of means; but instead is local rulers seeking to either gain rank and boons from the new rulers by rushing to bend the knee before their rivals do; and local rulers seeking to ingratiate themselves to the new rulers to also maintain their existing rank and privileges and to continue their obligations to the feudal conflict as is. See also the "Keys to Power". To put it this way, if you look at it from a Machiavellian perspective; Machiavelli in the Prince gives two examples of states; the highly centralized state ruled by "the Sultan" and the decentralized state ruled by the "King", the King is decentralized and easier to invade because the barons are easier to pry away from the King and use them as a toe hold. The Sultan has no such weaknesses; his lieutenants owe their position 100% to the Sultan and hold no inherent legitimacy or claim to those positions and can be removed and dispensed with at will. A civil war or rebellion is extremely difficult to pull off, and requires the Sultan to be extremely weak. I think how a civil war concludes doesn't have a whole lot to do with how decentralized it officially on paper is and there's better tools to analyze it; but its a saliant point to make that the Shoguns power weakened considerably, opening up the subjects to ally each other and rebel to restore the Emperor's powers because of that. The resulting quick reconsolidation under a new government isn't to do with how centralized or decentralized Japan was and these arguments are kinda bad when the simplest explanation is that surrendering quickly lets them keep their heads and some influence/say/leverage in the new social post-revolutionary order. Many got to leverage their previous station for positions in the government after the samurai class was abolished and so on. Charlz Guybon posted:The Kaiserreich was pretty decentralized. It was basically a custom's union with a unified foreign policy. Bavaria, Wurttemberg and Saxony had their own armies. All the states had their own suffrage laws. Now, Prussia dominated because they controlled the Northern 2/3rds of the Empire, but that was not set in stone. I think "decentralized" especially by 1914 isn't quite right, but there was definitely a period of time where the Kaiserreich is by modern standards yeah fairly "decentralized" but yeah that's my point; there's a lot of versatility to the idea of juicing up the Substate mechanic and the Stellaris district system to form a new nuanced and immersive gameplay to represent the path towards centralization of state power during the period.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 03:35
|
|
|
Ok, legit question this time: while the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom be playable?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 04:03
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Ok, legit question this time: while the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom be playable? They've said you can play as any rebellion so yeah.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 04:08
|
|
|
I hope Paradox fixes some of those borders in the middle east and morocco so they're not all straight and jaggedy. We want curves dammit!
|
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 04:22
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Ok, legit question this time: while the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom be playable? The Taiping Tianguo is definitely an interesting alt-history proposition: could a more militant China better protect itself, or would it have simply led to China getting carved up even harder? it's probably the latter Of course, there's a lot of weirdness with the Taiping...
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 04:32
|
|
|
Modeling the taping rebellion to be remotely close to historical is gonna be a hell of a doing
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 05:11
|
|
|
Lance of Llanwyln posted:The Taiping Tianguo is definitely an interesting alt-history proposition: could a more militant China better protect itself, or would it have simply led to China getting carved up even harder? Depends on how the whole thing ended up. If they had won early on, before Hong Xiuquan implemented some of his more cult-y ideas, or if he was more of an orthodox Christian and got western backing, or if a capable reformer like Hong Rengan had ended up in charge, etc then the Taiping could have revitalized the country in ways that Manchu simply were unable to do so.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 05:27
|
|
|
Also like, the US is slowly starting to wake up as a power and the geopolitical european rivalries are heating up; a capable diplomat can keep the Europeans off of China with minor concessions.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 05:33
|
|
|
I wonder what new historical apologia this pdox game will foster HOI4 had an awesome narrative about the Great Purge being necessary.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 08:34
|
|
|
That narrative is insanely stupid as if your against it you should be against it ideologically not based on results. The only way to know if a purge is necessary or not is with hindsight. So if it turns out to be nothing your paranoid if it does turn out to be true your naive. History already loves its hindsight way to much as it is
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 09:30
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Why would Shogunate Japan not be united? It had basically been united and at peace (and prospering which is an important element of why and how Japanese modernization and industrialization was possible and so rapid) with a very strong central government in Edo (which I'm pretty sure was the largest city in the world until London overtook it as the industrial revolution got going) (edit!) for more than 200 years. Looks like this has been addressed in the thread, but I was ignorant (just going off NNM and FOTS) so I guess TIL v  v
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 09:41
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:That narrative is insanely stupid as if your against it you should be against it ideologically not based on results. The only way to know if a purge is necessary or not is with hindsight. So if it turns out to be nothing your paranoid if it does turn out to be true your naive. History already loves its hindsight way to much as it is are you seriously arguing that the great purge was necessary in the victoria 3 thread, lmao
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:02
|
|
|
maybe if stalin had purged gorbachev as a baby the soviet union would still be here makes you think
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:07
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:are you seriously arguing that the great purge was necessary in the victoria 3 thread, lmao I cannot parse it at all tbh. But this is an issue all pdox history games have. Acknowledge something and make it a mechanic, pretty disgusting. Don't acknowledge something = "clean wehrmarcht/colonialism" etc
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:07
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:are you seriously arguing that the great purge was necessary in the victoria 3 thread, lmao No I’m specifically arguing that if you want to make it a moral issue whether it would have been necessary or not isn’t important.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:22
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:I cannot parse it at all tbh. But this is an issue all pdox history games have. Acknowledge something and make it a mechanic, pretty disgusting. Don't acknowledge something = "clean wehrmarcht/colonialism" etc The Great Purge focuses are a bad mechanic in HOI4! That doesn't mean that the Great Purge focuses or an "Expel Jews" button along the lines of CK2 is the only way you can model historic atrocities. Assuming your goal isn't to make the player complicit (which is always going to be difficult and dicey), they can just be the result of people who are prone to atrocities being in power. To give an example from HOI4, you already have King Carol II of Romania, who isn't prone to atrocities but is a scandalous philanderer. That doesn't mean there's a "Waste the budget on your mistress" button; he just does that whether you the player want him to or not. That's just the consequence of having that person near the levers of power. I'm not sure how you'd apply that lesson to Victoria, though. They're going to have to deal with the fact that one of the main things you do in the game - the colonization of Africa - is a historic atrocity, but it's also something that's going to be under the player's control. And Vic2's and EU4's approaches both had problems.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:24
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:No I’m specifically arguing that if you want to make it a moral issue whether it would have been necessary or not isn’t important. I still don't get it. If you say that the Trotskyist conspiracy is real, as the game does, that means that the victims were at least partially traitors. Reminder this is a thing that actually happened and not a paragon/renegade choice in mass effect.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:32
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:I cannot parse it at all tbh. But this is an issue all pdox history games have. Acknowledge something and make it a mechanic, pretty disgusting. Don't acknowledge something = "clean wehrmarcht/colonialism" etc You can make mechanics that don't actively justify the thing in question though, at least.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:36
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:I cannot parse it at all tbh. But this is an issue all pdox history games have. Acknowledge something and make it a mechanic, pretty disgusting. Don't acknowledge something = "clean wehrmarcht/colonialism" etc Stalin's purges in HoI4 are more poorly-handled than that. They acknowledge that they happened, give the player a button to push to make them happen, and most damningly states that the Great Purge was a necessary and good thing because if the player doesn't push the purge button the USSR is plunged into a historically baseless, bloody and crippling civil war just before WW2 begins. The obvious approach would be a simple, "Stalin purges the USSR" event. Acknowledges that the purges happened, puts the blame where it belongs (Stalin), and doesn't encourage the player to push an atrocity button.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:42
|
|
|
Well, the thread has convinced me, I'm in favour of breaking up the US. Mostly because it sounds hilarious.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:43
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:I still don't get it. If you say that the Trotskyist conspiracy is real, as the game does, that means that the victims were at least partially traitors. Reminder this is a thing that actually happened and not a paragon/renegade choice in mass effect. Because ones a counter factual you can’t prove one way or another, but saying purging someone with no evidence to back it up is bad is more consistent position. People focus on the wrong part. The fact he did something without any proof is the bad thing. Even if in the end he was right it would be luck based. Which still makes it a bad thing to do
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:44
|
|
|
I think a lot of people seem to be conflating what is most beneficial to their position and what is morally good.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:46
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:People focus on the wrong part. The fact he did something without any proof is the bad thing. Even if in the end he was right it would be luck based. Which still makes it a bad thing to do the bad thing is that they loving executed tens of thousands
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:49
|
|
|
Vasukhani posted:the bad thing is that they loving executed tens of thousands Sounds like you agree that whether it is successful or not is irrelevant to whether it is morally good to do, which is what OP was suggesting.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:52
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:Sounds like you agree that whether it is successful or not is irrelevant to whether it is morally good to do, which is what OP was suggesting. the main issue is suggesting it is necessary implies that victims were traitors.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:54
|
|
|
Does them being traitors make executing tens of thousands a morally good decision? I think that says more about the person making the decision to do it, rather than the game.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:55
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:Does them being traitors make executing tens of thousands a morally good decision? In my mind, of course not. In the minds of many, though, maybe not moral, but at least "understandable"
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 10:58
|
|
|
Fellblade posted:Does them being traitors make executing tens of thousands a morally good decision? There's a big difference between, "Do you want to murder thousands Y/N" and "Do you want to murder thousands, by the way if you answer no thousands will die in a civil war and half your military will be destroyed immediately prior to a Nazi invasion Y/N"
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 11:18
|
|
|
There should be an independent kingdom of Hawaii at game start, right? That sounds like a cool start after learning the mechanics a bit.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 11:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 21:57 |
|
|
Hidden probabilities might help with morally ambiguous situations if you want to model a paranoid fear of traitors. If the player decides to purge, never let them know if they were right, only that they severely hurt themselves, just in case.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2021 11:27
|
|
