Kaiserreich: Legacy of the Weltkrieg

This entire mod is a Ship of Theseus. I imagine that as the years go by new teams that emerge will have different attitudes, and the pendulum will swing back to meme-friendly again. I only wish that someone was keeping track of the history of the changes.
 
I agree wholeheartedly. Fun fact: IIRC, Blair’s role in the UoB, the concept of Totalism and the whole counter-Mosleyist arc were actually thought of by Meadow of AH.com fame :)
Wasn't totalism and some of the other ideologies introduced because the devs needed to match the 10 ideologies in vanilla darkest hour?
 
No, before Totalism the left-most ideology was simply called Bolshevism or Leninism. I forget which.
 
Last edited:
The weird thing about this debate is that memey-ness and plausibility are not mutually exclusive. Stuff like Pelly's America, the Dogmeat General, and Esoteric Leninist Tibet are pretty whacky, but are genuinely well researched and plausible. History itself is pretty crazy, and I would rather the devs build upon that reality rather than just making shit up.
 
No, before Totalism the left-most ideology was simply called Bolshevism or Leninism. I forget which.
It was "Bolshevik" (source: I remember when Totalism came out)

It's kind of weird to me seeing how people are defining "memey" things, since quite frankly I've viewed a lot of how HOI4 KR presents itself to be pretty memey. "Direct Rule From X", basically everything to do with Long, that sort of thing. In the game itself (now that I finally caved and bought HOI4 this month) it's less so, but it really looks to me like the current team loves to lean into memes. Stuff like La Plata, Fuhrer Wrangel, most of China, doesn't strike me as memey at all, more just legacy stuff from a way earlier internet that didn't have the research capacity we have today that people were unwilling to change because hey, it works and who wants to stomp all over someone's hard work. Hell, I did the same thing when I made Transcaucasia with all the espionage events. Looking back, all those events suck and should be axed in favor of actually fleshing out the socialist Caucasus, but I didn't want to feel like I was trampling all over the mod. Also it's a bit funny to mock La Plata when at the time of its conception it was one of the few exceptions to another AH trope of Nothing Ever Happens in South America. It wasn't super plausible or accurate but it was trying, which is more than you can say of some TLs on this site right up to this day!

So to be cutting Blair due to "plausibility" rings weird. Especially when KR devs have been totally fine with Totalism just being "what if Syndicalism but eeeevil"* since its inception. The whole point is to be a historical in-joke where George Orwell helps create Airstrip One! If you constantly invoke plausibility over a)interesting gameplay, b)interesting setups/outcomes and c)the occasional "see what we did there" (although it'd have been nice if they were more subtle than "this time the CSA is leftist and in the north!!") then eventually you're going to wind up at a place of OTL being the only of all possible worlds and at that point just, I dunno, go read a book or something. I'm not saying plausibility is unimportant, but eventually you're more concerned with pleasing nit-pickers than making an engaging game. KR has been almost continuously blown off by this very website for being implausible, and all the changes to the mod over the years really don't seem to have done anything for that. At some point, you have to wonder why even bother.

*If I ever get back into DH modding then I'm starting the "make a Bad End for a leftist country that doesn't invoke Stalin/Mao or 1984" challenge for KR
 

Deleted member 82792

How would scientific and technological research be done in a syndicalist nation? Would the scientists have to be in a union or something?
 
Honestly, I really don't get the point of removing Blair from the UoB. Man was a socialist irl, so it's not like he's going to support the Royalists. If I'm being less charitable, it feels like an attempt to demonize the UoB by removing the morally "good" characters, compounded by the fact that the Reworked UoB is going to be "authoritarian".
 
New patch is out an apparently some sort of rework will be coming China's way:

"Removed Chen Mingshu's ‘Left Kuomintang in Exile’ content. Several game breaking bugs have been found in the path and with an imminent rework of the content, we’ve decided to disable the path temporarily while we get it fixed and improved. Apologies to those who enjoyed that path but fear not, it’ll be back soon and better than ever"

So maybe the L-KMT and Federalists reconciliation is coming.
 
New patch is out an apparently some sort of rework will be coming China's way:

"Removed Chen Mingshu's ‘Left Kuomintang in Exile’ content. Several game breaking bugs have been found in the path and with an imminent rework of the content, we’ve decided to disable the path temporarily while we get it fixed and improved. Apologies to those who enjoyed that path but fear not, it’ll be back soon and better than ever"

So maybe the L-KMT and Federalists reconciliation is coming.
This would be AWESOME if it is true!
 
I know that the Chinese devs fought tooth and nail to try to get them(Sternburg and Qing) removed, obviously they failed but what we're seeing is a compromise.

Not at all. I actually insisted on keeping both, and personally wrote out a lot of the rationale behind the Qing restoration. My personal view is that these are among certain elements which are "core" to the experience, and some are pretty implausible (like the ACW). In those cases we just rationalize things as best we can. However, other parts are so minor and/or so implausible that we simply can't justify retaining them (like the Triad takeover of the Legation Cities), or we can design better content without them (like the AOG as a tag). In those cases we do what we can to adapt them, and where we can't, we remove them.

However, the mod is a group project, and different Devs have different ideas of where the boundaries lie.
 
Last edited:
Not at all. I actually insisted on keeping both, and personally wrote out a lot of the rationale behind the Qing restoration. My personal view is that these are among certain elements which are "core" to the experience, and some are pretty implausible (like the ACW). In those cases we just rationalize things as best we can. However, other parts are so minor and/or so implausible that we simply can't justify retaining them (like the Triad takeover of the Legation Cities), or we can design better content without them (like the AOG as a tag). In those cases we do what we can to adapt them, and where we can't, we remove them.

However, the mod is a group project, and different Devs have different ideas of where the boundaries lie.
You worked on the new China? Congratulations, it is by far the best fan made content for any video game I've ever played. It makes EAW look slapped together.
 
You worked on the new China? Congratulations, it is by far the best fan made content for any video game I've ever played. It makes EAW look slapped together.

I was in charge of it, actually. Glad you like it!

Zim gave some more hints about the Union of Britain rework here. I'm pretty stoked for it personally.

I can't add any details about the rework, but I can say that, yeah, it's looking really cool. Honestly there's so much stuff we have in the pipeline that's similarly huge improvements over legacy content, but it all takes a long time to put together. That's why sometimes myself and other team members get frustrated when people criticize the appearance or function of legacy stuff. We want to change it, and we know how we want to change it, but we just haven't had time to do so yet.
 
The China rework is not just far better than the old version, it's just plain fun to play as any faction. My worry about the Britain rework is that I really like what's already there, and would rather have the main five characters be fleshed out more than have a full rework that changes the nature of the Union entirely.
 
The China rework is not just far better than the old version, it's just plain fun to play as any faction. My worry about the Britain rework is that I really like what's already there, and would rather have the main five characters be fleshed out more than have a full rework that changes the nature of the Union entirely.

If it allays your fears, the UoB rework is a very different beast to the China rework and I can guarantee that the current cast of characters will for the most part stay the same. The most egregious cases will get cut but otherwise its the same people with expanded motivations, depth and lore etc.

Btw if anyone else would like to ask any questions please feel free, I'd love to help clear some stuff up.
 
If it allays your fears, the UoB rework is a very different beast to the China rework and I can guarantee that the current cast of characters will for the most part stay the same. The most egregious cases will get cut but otherwise its the same people with expanded motivations, depth and lore etc.

Btw if anyone else would like to ask any questions please feel free, I'd love to help clear some stuff up.
Will Charter Totalism get a more detailed explanation and mechanical growth? I like the concept of it as a hyper-nationalist "red fascism" bordering on 1984 totalitarianism, but it sort of just...exists in game right now, when IMO it should sort of develop and surge in the early game as a reaction to the stresses of the mid 1930s crises and ongoing trade issues in the Internationale.

(I've mentioned upthread that if I were reworking the UoB, it would start with a good third of autdem and natpop support representing closet Royalists, that Mosley converts to his cause (thereby gaining Totalism popularity) over the first year of the game, gaining him a power base that he can then use for a takeover attempt)

Will the Autonomists be less of an obviously bad option?

I believe that I proposed something upthread with each main leader having a mechanical focus--Horner unlocks foci and decisions about prepping the Internationale for war and EXPORTING THE REVOLUTION, the Autonomists want to bring Ireland into the decentralized Union as a socialist republic, Mosley builds up the military and sidelines his political enemies to centralize power, Kenney tries to peacefully resolve conflicts and neutralize strategically significant capitalist states through peaceful negotiation, and Mann tries to keep the unstable governing coalition together--but that's a case where some leaders (Horner, Mosley, arguably Kenney) would be obviously superior to others (Mann, the autonomists). What sort of story/stories is the new setup trying to tell?
 
Will the ideological basis and tenants of Totalism be expanded upon or more thoroughly explained in the UOB rework.

Good question, though I'd say it only really comes to down to Mosley's totalism and I guess a look into that kind of national-syndicalist element of it. Though even then I'd argue he diverges from other ones quite a bit, especially in how he views himself.

Will Charter Totalism get a more detailed explanation and mechanical growth? I like the concept of it as a hyper-nationalist "red fascism" bordering on 1984 totalitarianism, but it sort of just...exists in game right now, when IMO it should sort of develop and surge in the early game as a reaction to the stresses of the mid 1930s crises and ongoing trade issues in the Internationale.

(I've mentioned upthread that if I were reworking the UoB, it would start with a good third of autdem and natpop support representing closet Royalists, that Mosley converts to his cause (thereby gaining Totalism popularity) over the first year of the game, gaining him a power base that he can then use for a takeover attempt)

Will the Autonomists be less of an obviously bad option?

I believe that I proposed something upthread with each main leader having a mechanical focus--Horner unlocks foci and decisions about prepping the Internationale for war and EXPORTING THE REVOLUTION, the Autonomists want to bring Ireland into the decentralized Union as a socialist republic, Mosley builds up the military and sidelines his political enemies to centralize power, Kenney tries to peacefully resolve conflicts and neutralize strategically significant capitalist states through peaceful negotiation, and Mann tries to keep the unstable governing coalition together--but that's a case where some leaders (Horner, Mosley, arguably Kenney) would be obviously superior to others (Mann, the autonomists). What sort of story/stories is the new setup trying to tell?

Regarding the first part, yeah I'm going to try and expand on Mosley's form of it though I only have jurisdiction over the UoB rather than anyone else. Though maybe other devs will link up with me, guess we'll have to see with other reworks.

Oh yeah the Autonomists are...kind of being radically changed but at the same time thematically very much the same. Though yeah they'll be an actually viable path mechanically wise now.

Really good question with the last one and I'd say it links back into the authoritarianism of the Union that I've mentioned elsewhere. It's quite a big element and plays into a lot of the paths. Basically everyone but Mosley (Maybe someone else too) see the growing authoritarianism as poisoning the socialist experiment of 1927 (When the constitution was finalised) and wish to move away from the current setup. Of course they have different ideas of what the new path should be or if they should be a new path and maybe the solution is to just reset the clock and go back to the 1927 setup. Of course for Mosley it's a lot different and for him and his followers, without spoiling too much of his path, the authoritarianism is a natural evolution of socialism and is necessary for the coming years, the inevitable war being one.
 
Last edited:
Top