Kaiserreich: Legacy of the Weltkrieg

One thing on the Iran rework: If Iran can align with Russia and invade the Ottomans, does this mean this dominoes into the Ottomans getting involved in the Second Weltkrieg much more often once Germany and Russia start duking it out?
 
So, I decided to play as Norway for the first time in a while, and this made me wonder something, Quisling is shown as a PatAut, shouldn't he be Natpop instead? Or the lack of a nazi Germany turned him into a normal denazified dictator?
 
One thing on the Iran rework: If Iran can align with Russia and invade the Ottomans, does this mean this dominoes into the Ottomans getting involved in the Second Weltkrieg much more often once Germany and Russia start duking it out?
Not sure but that might be a consequence.
So, I decided to play as Norway for the first time in a while, and this made me wonder something, Quisling is shown as a PatAut, shouldn't he be Natpop instead? Or the lack of a nazi Germany turned him into a normal denazified dictator?
Afaik the old Norway dev wrote up a pretty big summary about how Quisling would be more of a "moderate" far right figure with no Nazi influence, but there's been mixed opinions about this on the dev team (and how relevant Quisling should be anyhow)
 
Not sure but that might be a consequence.

Afaik the old Norway dev wrote up a pretty big summary about how Quisling would be more of a "moderate" far right figure with no Nazi influence, but there's been mixed opinions about this on the dev team (and how relevant Quisling should be anyhow)
Where can I read the summary?
 
A comment that that makes sense is that he builds a regime that seems very fascist, instead of a conservative authoritarian republic, to quote that user

"What I'm wondering then, if Quisling isn't a natpop in this time line, why do all the national focuses make him seem to be one? Like, literally every one of them seem like a variation of a focus you could very easily make for Nazi Germany or fascist Italy.

NSFO (German Labour Front), reorganizing the economy into a corporatist one, Statspolitiet (Gestapo), NS Arbeidstjeneste (Reich Labour Service), the "Rikshird" and "førergarde" (SS anyone?), as well as an agressively irridentist "national rebirth" foreign policy where they literally harken back to territory their country lost hundreds of years ago and end up demanding it. This is pretty much as Italy/Nazi-esque fascist as you can get to be honest. And if this isn't "a radical new society", I don't know what is."

I mean, yeah, it looks natpop, not pat aut
 
The Lore is 4 year old, and as I said, it has been subject to some discussion of whether it should change. Remains to be seen that will happen!
 
"What I'm wondering then, if Quisling isn't a natpop in this time line, why do all the national focuses make him seem to be one? Like, literally every one of them seem like a variation of a focus you could very easily make for Nazi Germany or fascist Italy.

NSFO (German Labour Front), reorganizing the economy into a corporatist one, Statspolitiet (Gestapo), NS Arbeidstjeneste (Reich Labour Service), the "Rikshird" and "førergarde" (SS anyone?), as well as an agressively irridentist "national rebirth" foreign policy where they literally harken back to territory their country lost hundreds of years ago and end up demanding it. This is pretty much as Italy/Nazi-esque fascist as you can get to be honest. And if this isn't "a radical new society", I don't know what is."

I mean, yeah, it looks natpop, not pat aut
The main question for me would be whether Norway already has a NatPop and if so by whom its led. Hard to envision someone worse than Quisling but I haven't really checked Norway and don't now its political history enough so that could be possible...

If there are none, then yeah Quisling should definitely be moved to National Populist because what I see about him seems more coherent for a NatPop than a PatAut.

Otherwise, we have to remember that Paternal Autocrat is technically a kind of "catch-all" term for all authoritarian regimes that have little to no trace of democracy but also don't cross the border into being fully totalitarian. That's extremly large in terms of possibilities: it can simply be a traditionnal monarchy or a dictatorship where one person simply holds way too much power, but it can also cover regimes that are close to Totalitarianism but lack certain key features. It's possible to make an argument that Quisling belongs to the latter... But, as stated, that only works if there is a definitely worse option. And given it's Quisling we're talking about... that option has to be a lot worse.
 
The main question for me would be whether Norway already has a NatPop and if so by whom its led. Hard to envision someone worse than Quisling but I haven't really checked Norway and don't now its political history enough so that could be possible...

If there are none, then yeah Quisling should definitely be moved to National Populist because what I see about him seems more coherent for a NatPop than a PatAut.

Otherwise, we have to remember that Paternal Autocrat is technically a kind of "catch-all" term for all authoritarian regimes that have little to no trace of democracy but also don't cross the border into being fully totalitarian. That's extremly large in terms of possibilities: it can simply be a traditionnal monarchy or a dictatorship where one person simply holds way too much power, but it can also cover regimes that are close to Totalitarianism but lack certain key features. It's possible to make an argument that Quisling belongs to the latter... But, as stated, that only works if there is a definitely worse option. And given it's Quisling we're talking about... that option has to be a lot worse.
Or his policies could be mitigated and be based in a "prussianist" dictatorship instead
 

This makes complete sense

A comment that that makes sense is that he builds a regime that seems very fascist, instead of a conservative authoritarian republic, to quote that user

"What I'm wondering then, if Quisling isn't a natpop in this time line, why do all the national focuses make him seem to be one? Like, literally every one of them seem like a variation of a focus you could very easily make for Nazi Germany or fascist Italy.

NSFO (German Labour Front), reorganizing the economy into a corporatist one, Statspolitiet (Gestapo), NS Arbeidstjeneste (Reich Labour Service), the "Rikshird" and "førergarde" (SS anyone?), as well as an agressively irridentist "national rebirth" foreign policy where they literally harken back to territory their country lost hundreds of years ago and end up demanding it. This is pretty much as Italy/Nazi-esque fascist as you can get to be honest. And if this isn't "a radical new society", I don't know what is."

I mean, yeah, it looks natpop, not pat aut

But this is why they either need to change the focus tree to reflect his KR politics, or change his backstory and classification, or replace him with a different, NatPop leader for this focus tree.
 
I wonder what peoples here preferred leader of the right KMT do you prefer Li Zongren or Zhu Peide because I'm fine with either It's all It's all counting on the situation
 
I wonder what peoples here preferred leader of the right KMT do you prefer Li Zongren or Zhu Peide because I'm fine with either It's all It's all counting on the situation
Unfortunately, Li Zongren is the only one with a post-unification focus tree of the two, so Imma have to go with Li.
 
So, Luis Carlos Prestes in KR uses a red tie on his suit, so this made me wonder something. It is my impression or hearts of iron 4 Devs tends to paint the ties of left wing leaders in red?
 
Top