Kaiserreich: Legacy of the Weltkrieg

So, according to the explanation made by @Sherman Von Bismark , "The world set free" is the name of the mod pack, but the second civil war mod is called "Home of the brave"

Well, here are the CSA paths, and I showed the totalists paths for the creator of the "REDS!" timeline and he liked it


First the federalists (socdems) and the nationalists (radsocs), a very interesting move since people tend to forget that you got left wing nationalism too
The only thing I miss is a hint of christian socialism, Norman Thomas was a christsoc and a member of my church (presbyterian)


Then we got the syndies, like on Huey Long tree, you got options to take to better configurate the nation as you want, this is awesome


Now to the cherry of the cake
Earl Browder was the leader of the USA communist party, but he didn't followed marxism leninsm, he had his own communist toughs and theories based on the american patriotism, he was a patriotic communist, to the point he was denounced as a traitor by the soviets and re-replaced with Foster (whom he had replaced in 1932)
Thus, Browder can have his Marxist Browderist dictatorship, while Foster goes Mar-lenin to the brink reviving the whole 1920s in the USSR


Their military tree





And the CSA foreign policy
 
So, according to the explanation made by @Sherman Von Bismark , "The world set free" is the name of the mod pack, but the second civil war mod is called "Home of the brave"

Well, here are the CSA paths, and I showed the totalists paths for the creator of the "REDS!" timeline and he liked it


First the federalists (socdems) and the nationalists (radsocs), a very interesting move since people tend to forget that you got left wing nationalism too
The only thing I miss is a hint of christian socialism, Norman Thomas was a christsoc and a member of my church (presbyterian)


Then we got the syndies, like on Huey Long tree, you got options to take to better configurate the nation as you want, this is awesome


Now to the cherry of the cake
Earl Browder was the leader of the USA communist party, but he didn't followed marxism leninsm, he had his own communist toughs and theories based on the american patriotism, he was a patriotic communist, to the point he was denounced as a traitor by the soviets and re-replaced with Foster (whom he had replaced in 1932)
Thus, Browder can have his Marxist Browderist dictatorship, while Foster goes Mar-lenin to the brink reviving the whole 1920s in the USSR


Their military tree





And the CSA foreign policy
So if I’m understanding this, if you go with Foster, your breaking with Syndicalism and going for Marxist-Leninism?
 
So, I don't quite know what to post so I'm posting some of the content of "the world set free" submod, I hope you like it

It gonna be under spoilers for convenience sake

The AUS has been moved to the center, and thus apart from the evangelical radicals, the other groups (I am looking at you George Moseley and Lindberg) are under a faction called "Constitutional American Republic", as such the AUS can now make a detente with the Internationale


The AUS army doctrines are under different officers, however I don't know any one of them


Assuming you go for the christian radicals, however, you can adopt Gerald K Smith who has no military insight whatsoever to make your army, and it is like what you would expect from a 2000s game showing the soviet army


Here the map

The black revolt only spawn if you go too harsh with the Constitutional american republic


Some leaders of the constitutional american republic, William "Alfalfa Bill" Murray, Charles Lindbergh, General George Patton and William Bell Riley

from what I can understand, the CAR is the new AUS, as the AUS is the "evil" faction on normal kaiserreich but got one less evil path being Huey, now the AUS is a "good" path with the CAR being the "evil" faction with one less cursed path, that path would be Lindberg


Now, you might be wondering "If this is the less cursed path, what is the most cursed one?"

Alfafa Murray is basically a integralist on the sense that he believes that "until point x of history everything was going all right, then from this point on everything collapsed", he wants to turn the entire USA into the pre civil war south with added antisemitism, the only thing he lacks is the slavery, but he probably comes close to that


The second most cursed path is the christian fundamentalist one, under someone called Armstrong , I really would like to paste his wikipedia here but I have no idea who he is


The third is the new KKK, you have a path with the old KKK also. The New KKK path is the closest you have to Pelley in normal Kaiserreich.


Different from the AUS, the CAR is way more belligerant and can take more foreign policy paths, from going full "AMERICA FREEDUM!" to a pro british policy, or a pro german, or just close like the AUS usually do
As Home of the Brave's release comes closer and I need a way to express my hype and inspired by Gukpard's post above, I decided to take a deeper look at each of the different factions with some of my own opinions on them, starting with the AUS. Spoiler tag to prevent spamming, feel free to ignore if you're not interested.

The AUS in general, in my opinion, is a weak point of base Kaiserreich realism wise. It has Huey "every time this administration has gone to the left I've voted for it" Long allying with large corporations and every type of racist imaginable regardless of it making much sense. HotB's AUS, while it has a notable issue I'll get to, is miles ahead of base KR IMO.


First, you have Huey's tree. Depending on which mutually exclusive focuses are taken, he can end up being SocDem, SocLib, SocCon, AutDem, or PatAut. I'm especially fond of the right side of it, which fully explores Share Our Wealth and what a Long presidency would look like policy-wise. As for the left side, I doubt Huey would go full "Reconcile the Right" (I am admittedly biased here, see my signature) instead of "AFP alone" or "Reconcile the Left". Still looks to be an amazing tree, and Huey is gonna be my first playthrough.

r/krtheworldsetfree - AUS National Progressive Party (Social Liberal)

Next is the National Progressive Party. It's SocLib but has been described as a mix between SocLib and SocDem by the dev, and looking at the tree it seems more SocDem tbh. It essentially represents the progressive elements that cooperate with Huey in the civil war but make their own party following it. They're led by Robert La Follete Jr, son of famed Wisconsin progressive Robert La Follete Sr, and is overall typical SocLib-SocDem stuff.

r/krtheworldsetfree - Pelley's Christian Party path's Christian Party path

Then we have Pelley's tree, where Pelley can be elected following the Civil War. This is one of the few aspects of HoTB that I'm unsure about. Pelley is SocCon, and a remarkable departure compared to his base game tree. While I do think Pelley's base-game tree is mostly a generic "evil Christian theocracy" that just smacks a guy known for his fascist sympathies on top of it, and IMO Pelley was less of a full on nazi and more of a weird christian-cultural nationalist, he was still a nut and HoTB's version may be going too far the other way. At the same time, HoTB is remarkably well researched so I heavily doubt it's an instance of trying to be different/edgy for the sake of being different/edgy. They also had advice from someone who had researched Pelley previously. The explanation for his different portrayal is: "Pelley was basically a 1930's Radical Boomer Christian Democrat with (at worst) some Strasserist and Esoteric characteristics, he was a bigot who likely had some mental issues but he was not on the Klan or Ford's level". The devs have confirmed that that in-universe Pelley is still bigoted, there will be events dealing with Pelley's esoteric/bigoted views, and that his party has AutDem/PatAut factions he can pander to, and the devs straight up seem to be invested in making a great submod, so I have hope that it's an overall well-made path.

Post image
r/krtheworldsetfree - AUS Foreign Policy Tree

Then there's the military and diplomatic trees, but Gukpard already commented on them.

The devs have also said that a Coughlin/Smith PatAut path and an "Alfred Bingham" (no idea who that is TBH) RadSoc path will be added post-release.

I had fun making this, I'll probably make a BBR overview next.
Forgive me for my ignorance, but can someone explain to me what Home of the Brave and The World Set Free are? I assume they're submods for Kaiserreich? If so, how does one go about getting them? Thanks fellas.
 
Forgive me for my ignorance, but can someone explain to me what Home of the Brave and The World Set Free are? I assume they're submods for Kaiserreich? If so, how does one go about getting them? Thanks fellas.
I had this same question yesterday! Home of the Brave is a pending (2ACW focused) update of the World Set Free, which folds together a variety of KR submods into a cohesive whole. It has a subreddit.
 
Forgive me for my ignorance, but can someone explain to me what Home of the Brave and The World Set Free are? I assume they're submods for Kaiserreich? If so, how does one go about getting them? Thanks fellas.
It's an upcoming submod reworking the American Civil War and is in the final stages of development and will release soon. I and I suspect others are making these as an outlet for our hype. Subreddit link: https://www.reddit.com/r/krtheworldsetfree/

PSA HOTB Overview
The PSA starts out as looking to restore the USA, but if the war goes on to long or the PSA becomes AutDem, PatAut, or NatPop they can declare independence like pre-0.8 KR.


The PSA's SocCon, MarLib, and SocLib paths. The Dem-Reps are a unity ticket between Liberal Republicans and Democrats. Walt Disney is a candidate from the SocCons.

SocDem tree. Of note, Rescue the Kingfish fully aligns the PSA with the AUS, and if the AUS collapses Huey can flee to the PSA and eventually claw his way back to power as leader of the PSA Progressives. (He shares their tree in that scenario though)

RadSoc Tree. It's EPIC and led by Upton Sinclair. Sinclair can unite with RadSoc/SocDem CSA, and will be peaceful with other CSA's but won't unite with them,

The AuthDem "National Democrat" Tree, led by newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst. He is conservative and especially paranoid about Japanese influence. While starting AuthDem, if he has his way it will end in a PatAut dictatorship with Hearst at the helm, possibly reigning over all of the USA...

Hearst's PatAut tree. Only available if he reconquers the rest of the USA.

The NatPop tree. If Hearst's government collapses, there's a chance a new unlikely political coalition will gain control of the PSA. The right side is led by Edward Longstreet Bodin, and is essentially if west-coast cults, unhinged rich celebrities, and other conspiracy theorists gained control of the government. However, they require Japan's backing to come to power and if Japan finds them too much of a burden they can stage their own coup and go full Man-In-The-High-Castle mode and the PSA will go down the left tree, and be led by Max Thronburg.

Military Tree. If the Marshall-Arnold plan is taken but Hearst gains control of the government, the former can try to stage a coup against him, which can end in either snap-PSA elections or the generals just barely managing to escape to Canada.

Only one I think that isn't covered is New England and the USA's foreign policy trees.
 
Last edited:
I'm somewhat weary of writing this, as I don't want to come off as too dismissive of the (in many ways very interesting and refreshing) work done by the current team and, secondly, don't want to sound like too much of a pedantic old fart :)

That being said, since Rylock asked for feedback, I feel comfortable enough in doing so. However, it is also very difficult for me to address the underlying issues I see with the new India work with so much of its backstory still under the covers.

To begin with, I agree with those who argue that the name Pakistan feels off (on a related note, I feel the same way about Azad Hind - it seems as a ill-conceived nod to Bose's tragicomic puppet government). The biggest issue is the fact that it appears as an anachronistic adaption of OTL events to the Kaiserreich world. While I'm all for convergence in certain places, having Choudhry Rahmat Ali (who lived most of his life in England btw) come up with the Pakistan-name in KRTL just seems inappropriate when both the circumstances and alternate historical trajectory experienced by him are so vastly different from what happened in OTL. Still, at heart, this is a superficial issue (even cosmetic) and not one of very great importance. It does, however, directly and indirectly relate to a major gripe of mine: The very existence of Pakistan in KR (or at least in the way it is currently portrayed). Again, it's difficult for me to comment satisfactorily on, because so much of the backstory remains unavailable, but my thoughts are structured along the following lines:

It is true that the two-nation theory predated the emergence of the Pakistan movement. However, support for said movement only truly emerged in OTL in 1937, owing to some 20 years worth of events that did not transpire in KR (the Wilsonian Moment and the Khalifat movement being but the most prominent). Still, intercommunal violence was absolutely not unknown. After all, the fuse that set off our times' explosion of sectarian violence around the time of Partition was not lit in 1947. Nevertheless, Pakistan as a concept was conceived as a national home for Muslims. If the North-Western Indian state is framed as a state devoted to preserving Muslim and Sikh interests (which, in the latter's case, in and of itself is dubious, given the minuscule prevalence of Sikh separatism at this point of time. Indeed, not even Partition made the Sikhs seek a separate homeland - that only came later) then that nation is simply not Pakistan. The articulation and effectuation of the two-nation theory simply does not allow for it. The Punjab, for example, was highly contested between these two specific religious groupings (not to mention the large amounts of Hindus also living there).

The Muslim/Sikh issue leads me to the wider question of communal violence and the religious cleavages on the sub-continent (which I feel the current team has opted to over-exploit so to speak). In my honest opinion it is maybe a stop or two from outright shoehorning a historical narrative that is - essentially - Partition on steroids into Kaiserreich's setting. I personally dislike this approach, because it removes agency (and alt-hist maneuverability) from the historical actors of the day by forcing them into a straitjacket shaped by modern, Western conceptions of the Raj as a powder keg of religious intolerance and a kind of hindsight determinism shaped by the India/Pakistan dichotomy of contemporary politics (which, truth be told, it entirely understandable). Political cooperation did happen and co-existence was the norm, not the exception. Even the Hindu Mahasabha worked with the AIML in OTL (which was also rather non-existent in the first decades of the 20th century). In other words, I'm wondering what traumatic catastrophe could credibly create a situation in India that fast-tracked "Pakistan" into existence some 15 years before its OTL emergence, pivoted Sikh separatism to pass its 1970 heights (in 1936!) and - most importantly - elevated the HM and RSS to such prominence that they constitute a serious contender to the INC for political dominance within the "Azad Hind"? I don't know and, unfortunately, I don't think the current information available does a very good job at convincing me. It might seem as I'm underestimating the importance of religion on purpose, but that is not the case. Communal violence and rivalry was important, it did happen and it was far too often horrific and deeply tragic affairs. However, the cause and effect relationship between escalating it to such heights as in the current KR setup doesn't appear validated to me.

Having a large "Free India" state on the Indo-Gangetic Plain wrecked by internal division is an interesting idea from a gameplay point of view, but the importance played by Hindu chauvinists appears to me as being far too determining on the general set-up of the region. The reason I spent so much time articulating the above points is because I can't make any recommendations without addressing my underlining concerns with the way the sub-continent is portrayed.

In other words, "Pakistan" has religious and political connotations tied specifically to the AIML of OTL which are irreconcilably opposed to communal equality. If you insist on keeping this convergence, then it is the concept of KR Pakistan that has to change, since changing the name to one of the many (more or less silly) alternatives Choudhry Rahmat Ali came up with doesn't solve the underlying issues. What is the North-Western State then? Is it a Muslim separatist entity? A non-Hindu-homeland? It can't be called the Punjab for the same reasons that the Bharatiya Commune is no longer called the Bengal. It limits its scope and legitimacy in the post-Raj context.

If you want to keep a balancing force in the North West, I suggest scrapping "Pakistan" as an idea and reinvent it as a "Unionist" stronghold centred on the Punjab. Since Calcutta is apparently steaming with Socialists and Hindu chaunivists (... eh?) and the princes in the South are portrayed as British lap-dogs, why not make the North West an opposite to those two factions, while maintaining the possibility of Islamic "radicals" turning it into the Muslim state that we all know and love from OTL? Make Jinnah an ally of Hayat Khan and their main political trajectory one of Indian "pluralism" - a confederation of faiths and ethnicities (playing on some of the early concepts of the AIML). This would give the North-Western state (the Confederacy of Indian States would be a nice nod to Star Wars ;) "General Bose, you are a bold one!") a claim on uniting the entire sub-continent while still maintaining the possibility of the rework's focus on communal-religious cleavages reaching a bloody crescendo. Seriously though, Confederalist/Federalist India could serve as a balancing force towards both the Raj Remnants and the Free Indians while opening pats of cooperation with both, co-dependent on gameplay events in the respective tags. Hindu "nationalists" take over in Calcutta? That could galvanise a Muslim OR pluralist response. Ganga Singh comes to power in Bombay? Maybe he's the type of man Jinnah/Hayat Khan can work with.



Seeing as you are intent on keeping the tripartite split of the previous versions, I think this would be the best solution.

EDIT: posted this on reddit as well :)
Here’s my own suggestion.
The OTL Pakistan movement emerged, as Milites said, in the late 30s.
Punjab, meanwhile, at least the Hindu and Sikh-majority areas, was in many ways a hotbed for revolution. Not as industrialised or gentrified as Bengal, and with a large amount of farms and rural areas, socialists and other radicals and reformists within the Congress thrived in its villages.
Around this time both Sikh revivalism and revolutionary socialism began to sprout. While the Sikh nationalists committed acts of token resistamce against Britain such as Satyagraha and Gandhian-inspired strikes, the leftists were loud- protesting, burning, shooting, and bombing.
Lala Lajpat Rai, who leads the Bharatiya Commune in previous versions of KR, was one of Punjab’s many revolutionary and socialistic leaders. While opposed to communism IOTL (he claimed it would lead to class war, and announced that he had no intentions to become ‘another Lenin’), his views- especially his writings on poverty in India- influenced this young generation.
Then there was the Ghadar party.
Due to poverty in Punjab, many farmers (Hindus, Sikhs, and Muslims alike) moved to California. There, they continued their nationalist activities while keeping safe from Britain, and conspired with fellow revolutionaries and republicans back home. One, Lala Har Dayal, involved himself in the IWW, and later, with Buddhist inspiration, built a shrine to Marx, Kropotkin, and Bakunin!
Since the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, which triggers KR’s Indian troubles, happens ITTL, I’d think that Azad Hind would probably have a stronger foothold in Punjab.
What about West Punjab?
The majority of West Punjab was ruled by the Nawab of Bahawalpur. The Nawab, a well-liked monarch, ruled over a domain larger than Belgium. The Nawab was heavily involved in “democratising” his state, implementing education reform, expanding the role of civil servants, creating a State Bank, and a western-style cabinet. He was also sympathetic to the Muslim League, which at the time didn’t so strongly advocate the Two-Nation Theory. In my personal opinion, he would probably use this as an opportunity to expand into Lahore, while keeping the old administrators in place.
Said prince was also a military genius and commanded forces in both world wars.
Meanwhile, Balochistan and Rajputana were interesting cases.
The Rajputana Agency, which covered all of modern Rajasthan, was a loose federation of several local ,mostly Hindu, princes. Rajputana had few republicans and revolutionaries, even when compared to other princely states such as Hyderabad and Travancore (both of which suffered communist rebellions in the 1940s), and the local armies were fairly large as well. They mostly were autonomous except for one British agent.
The state of Mewar was the most powerful of these states, and we could see something similar to the Princely Federation in the old KR lpre.
Balochistan was a similar case, only with a larger Muslim population. The Balochs were also fierce nationalists. We could perhaps see them asking for Persian help, though i doubt that. As for Kashmir, if Pakistan still exists they’d want it obviously. If not, the Princely State would stay as an autonomous kingdom, with a frail and lackluster ”democracy”, British loyalties, and a massive fear of the nationalists.
Sindh would probably go with the Brits or Azad Hind, while the Northwest region would likely be up for grabs by the Afghans.
 
My "Khalistan instead of Pakistan" proposal is too wacky, right?
Considering the fact that Sikh separatism only emerged decades after Partition (to which the main Sikh associations were deeply opposed), I would say yes.

Here’s my own suggestion.
AFAIK, the Ghadar Movement was effectively infiltrated by the British and destroyed within India in 1917/18.

I think that my main issue with the current approach is the fact that so much of the rework is grounded in unpublished material. If the China rework was anything to go by this would not be a problem for me, but seeing the prominence Pakistan and Hindu chauvinists are apparently playing (referring to both Progress Report and feedback thread), I'm actually becoming a bit concerned. Hopefully the feedback thread will turn some things around :)
 
Considering the fact that Sikh separatism only emerged decades after Partition (to which the main Sikh associations were deeply opposed), I would say yes.
Oh, I just meant calling that state Khalistan instead of Pakistan, because they literally both mean "land of the pure", just in different languages. However, Khalsa also has Sikh-specific connotations, which makes this an unfeasible proposal.
 
Top