Kaiserreich: Legacy of the Weltkrieg
- Thread starter RiverDelta
- Start date
I don't have the skill to make icons, but heres my take on some Radical Socialist sub-ideologies:
Radical Socialism: The general term for less radical syndicalist ideologies. These governments have some charicteristics of a liberal democracy, and may even hold on to some capitalist elements in the economy.
Anarchism: A belief in the (gradual or sudden) abolishment of the state. Anarchist governments will heavily militarize, with very large militaries, and will heavily decentralize the government in preparation for the eventual abolishment of the state.
Three Principles: The left wing of Sun Yat-Sen's ideology. Believe in his Three Principles of Democracy, Nationalism, and Welfare, though with a syndicalist tint.
Bolshevism: A libertarian evolution of Leninism. Shares many beliefs with Vanguardism, but believe the People must be their own vanguard.
Radical Socialism: The general term for less radical syndicalist ideologies. These governments have some charicteristics of a liberal democracy, and may even hold on to some capitalist elements in the economy.
Anarchism: A belief in the (gradual or sudden) abolishment of the state. Anarchist governments will heavily militarize, with very large militaries, and will heavily decentralize the government in preparation for the eventual abolishment of the state.
Three Principles: The left wing of Sun Yat-Sen's ideology. Believe in his Three Principles of Democracy, Nationalism, and Welfare, though with a syndicalist tint.
Bolshevism: A libertarian evolution of Leninism. Shares many beliefs with Vanguardism, but believe the People must be their own vanguard.
What about Social Democratic sub-ideologies? I may suggest Democratic Socialism as the sub-ideology replacing Syndicalist-aligned Social Democrats.
Authoritarian Democrat Subideologies:
Authoritarian Populism - Authoritarian Populist regimes combine populist ideals (which generally consist of mixed-capitalist economics, the reformation of long-standing social and political orders for the 20th century, and patriotism) with a strong executive that is able to enact this program relatively unhampered.
Been thinking again about the National France rework and the role they gave De Gaulle in it.
My main issue with this remains the same I said earlier: De Gaulle can only be roleplayed as anti-Republican in Kaiserreich. The Devs do make a good point by saying it's likely the loss of WW1 and the exile could have radicalized De Gaulle into what they've made him in the mod. The issue is that in the past, they've seem more keen to leave how historical characters would evolve open to interpretation in the mod. The best example would be Edward VIII who has three options to how he would act in the mod:
Another issue I've been having after analyzing it comes from the way the chain of events that lead to the Action Française taking over happens. De Gaulle in Kaissereich essentially belongs to a Young Guard that owe everything to Pétain. There is absolutely no problem with that: De Gaulle started his career as a protégé of Pétain so it makes sense he would be in that position in Kaiserreich. But... The issue is that the path where Pétain names De Gaulle as the successor to Franchet d'Espèray, De Gaulle will end up betraying Pétain down the line: that's what it feels like at least since Pétain is stated to retire as a broken old man in the Dev Diary... This is a bit problematic for me because it assumes De Gaulle would feel absoluely no loyalty to Pétain in the Kaiserreich scenario... When by all accounts they should probably be on very close terms, especially if Pétain is doting on De Gaulle so much he's willing to name him as his successor. It's not impossible for De Gaulle to betray Pétain at all, especially given how they drifted apart OTL, but the possibility of the two having a "Master and Apprentice" relationship should be there...
Because of all of this, I've been trying to think of a way to change the new National France lore that would actually offer more possibilities and variations to play as De Gaulle while still keeping the original ideas behind what the KR team has gone for.
The basic idea at the start is that Pétain is in power and has basically been handing power to his protégés in the governement, which leads to some worry from other officers. And it's stated that the army is essentially divided between Pétain loyalist around the Young Guard De Gaulle is part of and a Reformist faction that is led by Mordacq. My idea would be to add a third faction to that group in a form of Hard-line officers who think Pétain's leadership is too soft and thus want more aggressive actions to be undertaken. That third faction would obviously be receiving support for the Action Française and many officers belonging to it would be its supporters. Leading this faction would be Weygand, who did have very close ties to the Action Française OTL and didn't hide it. Another thing going for adding Weygand to the mix is that he was a very close subordinate to Foch, whom Pétain is supposed to have replace during the Weltkrieg according to the lore: this thus could give Weygand a good reason to resent Pétain. Weygand also had the advantage of being roughly the same age as Mordacq, which makes them polar opposites.
The key moment that kickstarts everything in National France is the resignation of Franchet d'Espèray that leads Pétain with the question of who to name as a successor. I wouldn't change the three options that Pétain has in his nomination: Mordacq, De Gaulle or neither. In my mind, there isn't necessarilly to consider Weygand as a potential successor: he's just seen as hard-liner and lacks the political weight of the other two. The same way, I wouldn't really change what happens in case Pétain names Mordacq or Pétain refuse to replace Franchet d'Espèray because I feel what happens in both scenarios is coherent.
The big change would be what happens when De Gaulle is nominated to replace Franchet d'Espèray. In the current lore, when Pétain does this, it is seen as though he is nominating a successor to his regime and it's seen as a bad omen by the liberals of the regime. Pétain then worsens the situation by moving agaisnt Mordacq and trying to remove him and his supporters, which backfires. At that point, Pétain either lets De Gaulle mediate with the Action Française for their support or refuse, which then leads us essentially back to what happens in the situation where Pétain named no successor.
What I'd change would be that instead for De Gaulle going to the AF right way, I would have Weygand offer its support to the Pétain in exchange for getting influence in the government. This will lead essentially to what happens on the current AF path, except that Weygand will work his way to gradually remove Pétain's men in favor of his own, until he forces Pétain to retire. Weygand will then restore the Monarchy.
If Pétain refuses, he will be more isolated than ever as is the case in the usual scenario. That is when De Gaulle comes in with a choice. As the second of the regime, he knows how weak Pétain's position is and how dangerous it is for the nation. As such, he knows he has to convince the Marshall to leave office and tries to do so. Pétain can either submit to De Gaulle, which leaves De Gaulle in charge of the Régime, or he refuses and sacks De Gaulle because he feels betrayed. Should the second option happen, we're essentially back to what happens normally in the rework.
If De Gaulle takes over, he finds himself in the position of a man who is lacking support of any sorts as he is essentially Pétain's heir and Pétain's late action have left anyone associated with him under suspicion. At that point, he knows he has to take action to consolidate his position. He's thus left with three options: go for a reconciliation with Mordacq, which opens the path for a Republican restoration, go to Weygand and invite the Action Française in, which opens the path to Monarchical restoration, or essentially follow the same path as Pétain if he'd been alone.
From my point of view, this keeps the spirit of the rework while still adding a more flexible way to play as De Gaulle in the game.
Thoughts?
My main issue with this remains the same I said earlier: De Gaulle can only be roleplayed as anti-Republican in Kaiserreich. The Devs do make a good point by saying it's likely the loss of WW1 and the exile could have radicalized De Gaulle into what they've made him in the mod. The issue is that in the past, they've seem more keen to leave how historical characters would evolve open to interpretation in the mod. The best example would be Edward VIII who has three options to how he would act in the mod:
- He can actually care about being King and do his best to conform to the role that is expected of him. Something that could happen if you assume the British Revolution and the subsequent exile to Canada would have made him more responsible.
- He can act pretty much like OTL and end up abdicating the throne.
- Or he can actually revoke Parliament and essentially become a Fascist King. Just like you believe he would have been given his Nazi sympathies. And you could argue also that he might actually be more willing to go that road thanks to the British Revolution.
Another issue I've been having after analyzing it comes from the way the chain of events that lead to the Action Française taking over happens. De Gaulle in Kaissereich essentially belongs to a Young Guard that owe everything to Pétain. There is absolutely no problem with that: De Gaulle started his career as a protégé of Pétain so it makes sense he would be in that position in Kaiserreich. But... The issue is that the path where Pétain names De Gaulle as the successor to Franchet d'Espèray, De Gaulle will end up betraying Pétain down the line: that's what it feels like at least since Pétain is stated to retire as a broken old man in the Dev Diary... This is a bit problematic for me because it assumes De Gaulle would feel absoluely no loyalty to Pétain in the Kaiserreich scenario... When by all accounts they should probably be on very close terms, especially if Pétain is doting on De Gaulle so much he's willing to name him as his successor. It's not impossible for De Gaulle to betray Pétain at all, especially given how they drifted apart OTL, but the possibility of the two having a "Master and Apprentice" relationship should be there...
Because of all of this, I've been trying to think of a way to change the new National France lore that would actually offer more possibilities and variations to play as De Gaulle while still keeping the original ideas behind what the KR team has gone for.
The basic idea at the start is that Pétain is in power and has basically been handing power to his protégés in the governement, which leads to some worry from other officers. And it's stated that the army is essentially divided between Pétain loyalist around the Young Guard De Gaulle is part of and a Reformist faction that is led by Mordacq. My idea would be to add a third faction to that group in a form of Hard-line officers who think Pétain's leadership is too soft and thus want more aggressive actions to be undertaken. That third faction would obviously be receiving support for the Action Française and many officers belonging to it would be its supporters. Leading this faction would be Weygand, who did have very close ties to the Action Française OTL and didn't hide it. Another thing going for adding Weygand to the mix is that he was a very close subordinate to Foch, whom Pétain is supposed to have replace during the Weltkrieg according to the lore: this thus could give Weygand a good reason to resent Pétain. Weygand also had the advantage of being roughly the same age as Mordacq, which makes them polar opposites.
The key moment that kickstarts everything in National France is the resignation of Franchet d'Espèray that leads Pétain with the question of who to name as a successor. I wouldn't change the three options that Pétain has in his nomination: Mordacq, De Gaulle or neither. In my mind, there isn't necessarilly to consider Weygand as a potential successor: he's just seen as hard-liner and lacks the political weight of the other two. The same way, I wouldn't really change what happens in case Pétain names Mordacq or Pétain refuse to replace Franchet d'Espèray because I feel what happens in both scenarios is coherent.
The big change would be what happens when De Gaulle is nominated to replace Franchet d'Espèray. In the current lore, when Pétain does this, it is seen as though he is nominating a successor to his regime and it's seen as a bad omen by the liberals of the regime. Pétain then worsens the situation by moving agaisnt Mordacq and trying to remove him and his supporters, which backfires. At that point, Pétain either lets De Gaulle mediate with the Action Française for their support or refuse, which then leads us essentially back to what happens in the situation where Pétain named no successor.
What I'd change would be that instead for De Gaulle going to the AF right way, I would have Weygand offer its support to the Pétain in exchange for getting influence in the government. This will lead essentially to what happens on the current AF path, except that Weygand will work his way to gradually remove Pétain's men in favor of his own, until he forces Pétain to retire. Weygand will then restore the Monarchy.
If Pétain refuses, he will be more isolated than ever as is the case in the usual scenario. That is when De Gaulle comes in with a choice. As the second of the regime, he knows how weak Pétain's position is and how dangerous it is for the nation. As such, he knows he has to convince the Marshall to leave office and tries to do so. Pétain can either submit to De Gaulle, which leaves De Gaulle in charge of the Régime, or he refuses and sacks De Gaulle because he feels betrayed. Should the second option happen, we're essentially back to what happens normally in the rework.
If De Gaulle takes over, he finds himself in the position of a man who is lacking support of any sorts as he is essentially Pétain's heir and Pétain's late action have left anyone associated with him under suspicion. At that point, he knows he has to take action to consolidate his position. He's thus left with three options: go for a reconciliation with Mordacq, which opens the path for a Republican restoration, go to Weygand and invite the Action Française in, which opens the path to Monarchical restoration, or essentially follow the same path as Pétain if he'd been alone.
From my point of view, this keeps the spirit of the rework while still adding a more flexible way to play as De Gaulle in the game.
Thoughts?
A very bad place to be a Greek or Armenian or Kurd. As in, genocidally bad.
Probably rickety. The ethnic cleansing pre-WK and during the WK basically destroyed the Empire's credibility with most minority groups, and given the scum who were in charge won the war in KRTL, basically every minority is likely about ready to rebel. It'll take a lot to save it.
Super corrupt and technologically backward, with natural resources getting exploited to hell and back by German companies.
There is one positive thing, tough
The empire has elections after Ataturk dies, and so you can choose what to do with the survivors, sadly I don't have time to find the event, but there is one about discussing the problem of the displaced armenians in cilicia, and your options is to give reparations, don't give reparations, and the third option is "Armenians? What armenians?" so the historical one
Glad to see the old Commonwealth of America flag is still getting some use.
I like how there's one guy in the comments named UnironicPelleyite or something who just posts "Based" in all lower case.
Guess the saying of "we only have to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down", if uttered ITTL by Farouk to his generals, would probably be fairly accurate considering Egypt and the Ottomans go to war with Egypt and Iran being more likely to win than they do right now.
I really enjoy Kaiserreich as a setting despite some stretches of disbelief, but Germany being powerful enough to massively project power into Asia and the Italian situation bother me immensely. I'm not sure how to manage China (maybe reduce the number of splinters/warlords and put them under a weak Qing empire backed by Germany, who also has some legation cities?), but I feel Indochina should be independent. For Italy, the current form is a bit better than what it used to be, but it has too many splinters. An idea I had was that it made peace with the CP before the collapse of France, which kept it united, but incredibly weakened (no more colonies or influence in the Balkans, navy and army limited by treaty) and constantly rife with fights between the syndicalists and the integralists/pseudo fascists, like the Biennio Rosso going on but far longer. The monarchy (if it hasn't been replaced by a republic) and democratic government are nearly completely discredited and unable to keep the extremist factions in check but the country limps along. Then, something happens shortly after the game starts and a civil war likely starts, dividing the country in various possible ways (SRI in the north, Kingdom/republic in the South, Integralists reviving the Papal states, relatively smooth futurist/fascist/syndicalist takeover...)
Last edited:
I feel like while on the surface Germany seems super powerful in Asia, they're extremely fragile in the region. The collapse of the League breaks their grip over China in most games with Qing either ditching them or Germany losing power in the south anyways. They have a coin flip over holding Indochina against rebellion or maintaining a hold over the Legation cities. Plus if GEA gets into a war with Japan they're pretty much guaranteed to lose most of their colonial holdings. German influence in Asia is pretty clearly a weak facade and much of the flavor in the region that deals with the Germans attempts to hammer home this point.
German control in Asia basically depends on collaboration from the worst kleptocrats in China and Japan staying out. As such it basically evaporates within 3 years of game start, and the League is so unstable it implodes in less than a month due to a few minor protests that get way out of hand.