Assuming she is crowned, well, she will be a new Catharine the great (who also didn't had the right to the throne)
What I should have said is "She doesn't have the right to the throne", instead of "She couldn't be crowned"
The New Order: Last Days of Europe - An Axis Victory Cold War Mod for HoIIV
- Thread starter Lonely Knightess
- Start date
- Status
What I should have said is "She doesn't have the right to the throne", instead of "She couldn't be crowned"
I mean, considering Tabby's ideology and actions, I can see the Germans facing attacks from warlords who think that Tabby's regime was part of a German plot to destroy Russia and as such have an attitude of "we'll make you pay for unleashing Tabby on us and destroying our country, Germany, even if it is the last thing we'll do".
They would definitely be attacked by warlords,the problem is that they would be crushed by German tank threads,doubly so if they try chemical weapons.
Sablin meets WerBell:
The joke on the Discord was "Sablin is a terrible houseguest", but YMMV.
The joke on the Discord was "Sablin is a terrible houseguest", but YMMV.
Might be an unpopular opinion, but this event kind of unnerves/sickens me more than the other Sablin death events. I'm not really sure why, whether it's the completely casual way it's set up or the fact that Werbell is sane enough to understand and admire Sablin, but he still decides to destroy everything he worked towards.
But it fits with Sablins teem the best.
As a million idealists before him his destiny is after all to be admired whyle all his achievements are crushed under the booth of history by more ruthless people.
Last edited:
I love these things, but man does this shit remind me of this comic aside from the other shoutouts.
And yet there still are people that dont put him with the other evil USSR.
The bar is rather low admittedly. At the very least, Zhandov's no Serov, Kaganovich or Yagoda. Hell he's actually better than Lysenko since, unlike Lysenko's super soldier experiments that'll never work, some of Zhandov's experiments can actually have positive outcomes.
Last edited:
Now i can give it that he can be succeeded by Kardashev who diles down the crazy,but he still is bad.
Last edited:
Context does matter in these instances, and I like to imagine Zhandov isn't doing this because of shits and giggles. He's aware that the old systems have failed and need to look towards new ones to make things better. In this case, he wants to use SCIENCE! To ensure a better future for Russia.
Now, is this the right direction? Well, there is a reason that the longest-running themes in science fiction are the "Has science gone too far?!" and Zhandov is most certainly one of those types that could go down the very dark and dangerous path.
But on the other hand, a focus on education, science, and the hope such things bring with it is entirely possible.
I would agree,which is why i'm a big fan of Modernist Tomsk and not the dogmatist prone Science USSR.
Tho i have to give him the cool credit he deserves for the Science Maus.
Science is great only when done with wonder and purpose in my opinion.
Last edited:
I went ahead and did a Decembrist Tomsk game today, so that I've actually played through every Tomsk route (except for the hybrid routes, because screw that). I found it more satisfying than the Bastillard route, probably because even though the Decembrists aren't really my ideal they at least offer a few things I like (reformed prisons and environmental protections).
Out of curiosity, I also played the game past the standard end date, to try to work on preparing for the Second West Russian War. This time, instead of taking until the 1980s to get ready, I only took until about 1976 for basic readiness and 1978 for full readiness. As usual, the war itself was absurdly easy (I used nocb to trigger it)--I ended up making casualties of about 12 million Pakt soldiers (about 10 million Germans, 2 million RK troops, and a few hundred thousand from Iran and Ireland) for losses of about 20 000 on my side, in addition to destroying the Germany navy (they had about as many ships left after a few ill-starred efforts to support naval landings in the White Sea as Ireland. Nothing larger than a destroyer). Somehow the Germans still had any manpower at all left over after that, but even so they would pretty much be finished as a superpower. I can't see anyone taking them seriously for anything they're not ready to threaten nukes for after they pretty much killed their entire youth.
I probably could have been ready a little earlier if I had optimized a little better: no armored divisions, no dedicated interceptor forces (they mostly just blocked harmless Pakt strategic bombing), using mechanized divisions instead of airborne divisions to guard the White Sea ports. One thing I might do in the future is trade focusing on fighters versus interceptors, instead of using both as I have been doing. That does create a clean separation between defense and offense, but I suspect that it's better to just have one or the other (probably interceptors, due to their high air attack and air defense). Something that did work well was building a fighter and CAS group dedicated to dominating the Barents Sea, which, as I said, devastated the German navy and seems to have prevented the naval invasion spam that affected me the last time I did this.
Anyway, this kind of utterly lopsided result is why I just can't take pronouncements on the difficulty of the war (or any war that allows sufficient time to build up and free use of the player's forces) seriously. Even a moderately competent player who knows how to design divisions and use airpower will absolutely destroy the AI with zero effort. They use absolutely terrible division templates (the most common division in the Germany army before my attack was a two IFV, two motorized infantry division...needless to say, this had absolutely no standing power whatsoever against one of my 15 APC/5 MBT divisions) and don't seem to know to build jet aircraft instead of propeller planes (honestly, props should probably just be deleted from the game, they only seem to work to mess up the AI). The AI's suicidally insane aggressiveness while at war doesn't "help," either, especially when they're trying to attack very hard units with massive firepower, high defense, and both field hospitals and transport helicopters with regular foot infantry.
I also feel the same way about the Great Asian War, although both China and Japan at least have serious limits to their industrial and/or military capacity that could prevent them from making things so easy.
Out of curiosity, I also played the game past the standard end date, to try to work on preparing for the Second West Russian War. This time, instead of taking until the 1980s to get ready, I only took until about 1976 for basic readiness and 1978 for full readiness. As usual, the war itself was absurdly easy (I used nocb to trigger it)--I ended up making casualties of about 12 million Pakt soldiers (about 10 million Germans, 2 million RK troops, and a few hundred thousand from Iran and Ireland) for losses of about 20 000 on my side, in addition to destroying the Germany navy (they had about as many ships left after a few ill-starred efforts to support naval landings in the White Sea as Ireland. Nothing larger than a destroyer). Somehow the Germans still had any manpower at all left over after that, but even so they would pretty much be finished as a superpower. I can't see anyone taking them seriously for anything they're not ready to threaten nukes for after they pretty much killed their entire youth.
I probably could have been ready a little earlier if I had optimized a little better: no armored divisions, no dedicated interceptor forces (they mostly just blocked harmless Pakt strategic bombing), using mechanized divisions instead of airborne divisions to guard the White Sea ports. One thing I might do in the future is trade focusing on fighters versus interceptors, instead of using both as I have been doing. That does create a clean separation between defense and offense, but I suspect that it's better to just have one or the other (probably interceptors, due to their high air attack and air defense). Something that did work well was building a fighter and CAS group dedicated to dominating the Barents Sea, which, as I said, devastated the German navy and seems to have prevented the naval invasion spam that affected me the last time I did this.
Anyway, this kind of utterly lopsided result is why I just can't take pronouncements on the difficulty of the war (or any war that allows sufficient time to build up and free use of the player's forces) seriously. Even a moderately competent player who knows how to design divisions and use airpower will absolutely destroy the AI with zero effort. They use absolutely terrible division templates (the most common division in the Germany army before my attack was a two IFV, two motorized infantry division...needless to say, this had absolutely no standing power whatsoever against one of my 15 APC/5 MBT divisions) and don't seem to know to build jet aircraft instead of propeller planes (honestly, props should probably just be deleted from the game, they only seem to work to mess up the AI). The AI's suicidally insane aggressiveness while at war doesn't "help," either, especially when they're trying to attack very hard units with massive firepower, high defense, and both field hospitals and transport helicopters with regular foot infantry.
I also feel the same way about the Great Asian War, although both China and Japan at least have serious limits to their industrial and/or military capacity that could prevent them from making things so easy.
Last edited:
True, but the point remains many Russians will be blaming Germany for the Holy Russian Empire's rise and its actions, believing that it was all a German scheme to destroy Russia.
As far as I'm concerned you can do a lot worse than Zhandov if you count the rest of the potential unifiers especially, plus it's as clerk said it's not like he's trying to apply for a job at Vault-Tec. With all the other shitbags in the Passionariyy alone trying to unite Russia, Zhandov's at least a "middle of the road" option in the event that the Komi Democrats and the rest of the Communist Party are not an option for whatever reason.
I still consider his "Science" a big enough minus to disagree.
Zhdanov,because he continues the Soviet science bulshit on top of being as opresive as Suslov.
Suslov,Kruschev and Bessonov are about the same in my eyes,the basic USSR of otl with a bit better social and economic policy.
Last edited:
- Status