Handmade World Map of the Kaiserreich Universe by Zveiner on DeviantArt
www.deviantart.com
Well, while I am an 'old KR' fan, the biggest problem that I have always had with the old UoB flag ever since the DH days was that it included the Union Jack, a royalist symbol, as part of its design. Like... Why would a syndicalist state keep that around?I haven’t been paying much attention to KR lately, but recently gave the subreddit a look.
Please don’t tell me that the current devs changed the flag of the Union of Britain...
Well, while I am an 'old KR' fan, the biggest problem that I have always had with the old UoB flag ever since the DH days was that it included the Union Jack, a royalist symbol, as part of its design. Like... Why would a syndicalist state keep that around?
That being said, I wish that the design of the new flag would have more red in its design. You know, to keep with the entire 'The people's flag is deepest red' thing that was in the UoB's national anthem.
Well, think of say...Can I admit that "Old Kaiserreich" purists that feel the good old days where Kaiserreich was unrealistic and "fun" was objectively superior and whine about Kaiserreich's embrace of hard alternate history over soft alternate history are annoying as hell? I feel they don't understand that alternate history standards have changed so much and what's acceptable then are seen with more scrutiny and cries of ASB now due to more research done into those eras that changed preconceived notions.
So, yeah, your thoughts on Kaiserredux on that note, considering much of their content consists of adding back old content?Something that the many reworks on the KR setting actually does with the older version of the lore. Hence the bitterness and resistance to the changes.
Not only that, but there doesn't even feel like there is a single artistic vision for the Kaiserreich setting, with the mod's setting having more reworks than Thailand have military coups. Seeming like every new dev wanting to add their own mark on the setting while undoing and invalidating the work of those that came before them, instead of at some point deciding that 'Ok. This is good enough', and push the setting forward.
Add in this tendency for a never ending ideological tug of war, with writer sneaking in or taking out things with the goal of make their own side look better while making the other side looks worst, and it overall just makes it really hard for me to keep staying passionate or invested in whatever newest version of KR world we are currently up to. Since it will just get reworked and changed by the new batch of devs and writers anyway.
I mean I would argue thats its not actually all that more realistic, gust different. Darkest hour was plenty realistic and there attempts to make it more so have caused at lest me to completely bounce from the game (not that it helps that hoi4 is still a pretty bad game compared the 3ed one).Can I admit that "Old Kaiserreich" purists that feel the good old days where Kaiserreich was unrealistic and "fun" was objectively superior and whine about Kaiserreich's embrace of hard alternate history over soft alternate history are annoying as hell? I feel they don't understand that alternate history standards have changed so much and what's acceptable then are seen with more scrutiny and cries of ASB now due to more research done into those eras that changed preconceived notions.
People bring up TNO as an example of a "fun, absurd" premise done well but to be honest, the premise had to be there to justify a scenario that most of the alternate history community had given up on as plasuible despite it being the bee's knees 20 years ago with more revelation of just how fucked up Nazism was. And premise aside, TNO's presentation in the 1962-1972 years do lean closer to hard alternate history than soft alternate history on it's own. All the le woke funni gamer paths are, on top of being horrifying, either economically and socially stagnant due to the far right and racial oppression or ticking time bombs on the verge of destruction(including one in Russia that actually goes off at the end date) while the more mundane, blessed, happy or the non gamer paths tend to be sustainable.
Hell Kaiserreich, as it's a different sort of mod(less narrative based), are more charitable towards the woke horrifying funni gamer paths. The Charter totalists, Pelley and Maurras and the saner paths are seen as both having benefits for the nation they happen in.
Also even TNO is genuinely aiming for realism outside the premise, just look at their plans for Burgundy and Kovner rewrite and the hint that DSR is going to be redone or cut. Also I think the CSS submod for TNO cut out one of the le funni woke horrifying gamer paths and I suspect that has to do with CSS maybe going ascended fanon in the future and the devs taking account into some of the rules of the TNO setting to better fit it into there.
Now there are a few things I genuinely feel Kaiserreich is wrong to remove like Orwell, and their India setup had problems on it's own, but this idea that gen 1 kaiserreich was better because "fun" is rather really absurd. Their China update was genuinely agreed to be good FOR it's realism rather than in spite of it despite the people that whine about Mongolia for one. And I think their South Africa content update wasn't derided as awful and a lot of people are genuinely looking forward to their CoF update.
Also, don't forget about a landlocked Pakistan.To my understanding, Azad Hind is more a fusion of the Bharatiya Commune and the Princely Federation in the Indian rework. Azad Hind doesn't start as with a Syndicalist regime and it has a wide variety of political routes it can go. The only common point everything has in Azad Hind was that they needed to get rid of British yoke.
The smaller semi-independent statelets you see in the Indian rework are more there to give a bit more depth and believability to the Raj. The Raj proper that you play is essentially what's left directly in control of the British administration in India after the Revolution, while the smaller statelets that are allied to it are basically princely states that remained loyal to the Raj but have a certain autonomy. It's been done to reflect how Britain administrated India: some parts were directly administrated by the Brits themselves while in others they relied on prince that were judged loyal to the crown (though probably still kept on a close watch).
In-terms of how the game evolves if you play the Raj, you essentially have to take into account the internal politics of the smaller princely states while you're trying to rebuld the Raj. If you crack down on them too much or if you let them too much autonomy, you can lose control of them and be forced in a war to stabilize the situation. Not to mention the dealing these princely states have with Azad Hind. Essentially, they've made the Raj into a more believable position: a colonial administration that still has a powerbase but has been significantly weakened and must play its cards right if it wants to survive.
I mean I would argue thats its not actually all that more realistic, gust different. Darkest hour was plenty realistic and there attempts to make it more so have caused at lest me to completely bounce from the game (not that it helps that hoi4 is still a pretty bad game compared the 3ed one).
Hello guys. Has anyone noticed about a change in lore for Kaiserreich? I refer to the Treaty of Versailles of 1919, which the UK signs, and the Tsingtao Accord of 1922 with Japan.
I was there, nine years ago, it was real...Don't want to be rude, but did you see China in Darkest Hour?
HoI4 simulates WW2 somewhat well. It however fails at simulating the late 30s/early 40s as a whole.The other thing worth mentioning is that Hearts of Iron 4 is a bad simulator of the period. To be clear, it is also a very fun game. While I do recognise that Kaiserriech has installed features to make it better/more plausible, fundimental there is a juxta-postion between say Brazil and Portugal have a soild lore and political macanics and it being possible for one to naval invade the other across with 7 Days of prepation (I am sure there are plenty of over examples).
I disagree, Hoi4 lacks simulation of many things, such a Corps, Railways, Joint Allied Command, or any kind of reaction to event in terms of Politics and public oppinion. For Example, OTL when Japan entered the war Austriallia recalled its division from the middle east for home defense. There is no mechanic for that in game.HoI4 simulates WW2 somewhat well. It however fails at simulating the late 30s/early 40s as a whole.
Small army with only a few divisions in it. Granted, this doesn't represent corps as parts of armies, but I'm not sure what doing so actually adds in a gameplay sense. I don't think that the HoI3 OOB mechanic really benefited from including corps, for instance.I disagree, Hoi4 lacks simulation of many things, such a Corps
Infrastructure. You can actually quite clearly see this in Russia, where the route of the trans-Siberian has a noticeably higher infrastructure than surrounding areas., Railways,
Expeditionary forces.Joint Allied Command,
I'll give you that, but it's not like attempts at that in other versions of the game ever worked particularly well.or any kind of reaction to event in terms of Politics and public oppinion.
But that ignores the way the importance of hubs and the like, for example Luxembourg is an important railhub for Western Europe, but the state by state approach to infastruture does not repsent this.Infrastructure. You can actually quite clearly see this in Russia, where the route of the trans-Siberian has a noticeably higher infrastructure than surrounding areas.
These perhapse allow you to repsent say the South Africans, Indians and Australlians in the 8th Army, but the limits on general transfers means that you will struggle to to simulate the structure of Allied Forces in the Normandy campagin for instance.Expeditionary forces.