A massive oil producer, actually. But so is the United States, in-game, while in reality it was a net importer by the 1970s (albeit not especially dependent on Arabian oil--more Venezuelan, Mexican, and Canadian oil). I've mentioned before that the oil crisis doesn't make as much sense in TNO as it did IOTL because of the lower degree of interconnectedness of world markets. Without post-war U.S. dominance outside of the Soviet Union and harder boundaries between blocs--and especially with the fascist/Nazi penchant for autarky--I can't see a global oil market developing to the same extent that it did IOTL. The price of oil in Houston and the price in Abu Dhabi might just not have that much to do with each other.
The New Order: Last Days of Europe - An Axis Victory Cold War Mod for HoIIV
- Thread starter Lonely Knightess
- Start date
- Status
Well, we have been assured he is definitely not Alexei Romanov.Does anyone have any idea who this Alexei is? I randomly encountered this event during my Sablin playthrough.
brooklyn99
Banned
Doubtfully anyone of importance. Just one of the many POV characters in-game, whose perspectives you will get insight to, through flavour events.
Alexei is a very common Russian name, and a lot of POV characters in events are just made up by the greytides writing the events. I presume this Alexei is one of those made-up characters.
In times of emergency the monarch will lead the nation; after the economic crisis hits, Hirohito will temporarily lead until a new PM is appointed. Umberto II will do the same.
A clarification of Ultravisionary Socialism and Zhandov's characterization from Pacifica:
Just saw a post over on reddit that OFN mandate can successfully decolonize it self and create democratic African nations.
I wonder if point of interest like Congo Dam will still be garrison and operate by OFN due to it importance and potential of catastrophic failiure if not properly manage.
I wonder if point of interest like Congo Dam will still be garrison and operate by OFN due to it importance and potential of catastrophic failiure if not properly manage.
They can at the cost of fucking you over at home,so it's easier to do Glenn i guess.
Also they can still fail even then.
Apparently it give ruling government boost in popularity if it is done succesfully. And people on reddit said it is not that hard to do.
Everything is easy to do in the hands of the player,here you are relying on 3 ai to do there trees well.
Ultimately the mirror stops when Sablin turns out to be sincere, and Scorza not so much in the end.
Guys, this text someone posted on Reddit rocks
"A Reflection on Why Novosibirsk is so Bleak.
So after a recent game as Novosibirsk left me feeling bummed - more so than some games as the funni Russian warlords - I initially couldn't put my finger on why. Yes, we see in events that Novosibirsk is not a fun place to be, and I'm pretty sure if you don't feel a little guilt at the Tomsk annexation events, you have no soul. But what exactly makes Novosibirsk feel so damned bleak? After some reflection, I think I have an answer: region and realism.
Moreso than any other region, Central Siberia starts the game as one of the brightest spots in Russia. Unlike the other regions, there are no overt villains: no Vagner, no Black League, no Rodzaevsky. As such, the bar is set way higher, since you can't simply say "well at least they're not x." Fittingly, most of the Central Siberian unifiers have grand dreams of a Russia that could be. Tomsk, with their idealistic democracy and philosopher-presidents. Kemerovo, combining the best of Slavic tradition and Soviet progress for something uniquely Russian. The Black Army and their dream of uncompromising freedom. Even the PRC, declaring that the Union is not yet lost.
And then there's Novosibirsk. What is Novosibirsk? What does it stand for? The answer is nothing. It stands for nothing except the expansion of its power - and that of a narrow range of state-backed corporate entities - and its continued existence. There's no grand dream, no optimistic future. It is a state that stands for itself. There is some slight redemption for Novosibirsk if Shukshin emerges victorious, but even he is just a faint echo of what Central Siberia - and Russia - could have been.
This commitment to such suffocating mediocrity is seen in its annexation events. Brilliant scientists and inventors are reassigned to bland mass production projects and discouraged from innovating. Orators who once passionately argued for the rights of workers are left standing in line and begging for a job at one of Novosibirsk's megacorps. Novosibirsk doesn't kill the human, but it does kill their spirit, their optimism, their idealism, and their drive to succeed.
And that's why Novosibirsk feels so damned bleak: it is firmly grounded in realism. The more overtly villainous paths - like the AB or everyone's favorite funni clock man - feel so outlandish that it's easy to remember "there's no way this would actually happen." The AB would be crushed by everyone with a rifle and 5 minutes of time. Inevitably, someone would cap Tabby. Novosibirsk, however, isn't evil, just mediocre. Throw a dart at a world map, and you're likely to hit a state like Novosibirsk - a state with no values beyond its continued existence. In a region with as much potential to be bright as Central Siberia, that plodding, suffocating, strangling mediocrity bites all the harder.
Oh, and if you didn't know, Novosibirsk is the canonical unifier of Central Siberia. Sweet dreams."
"A Reflection on Why Novosibirsk is so Bleak.
So after a recent game as Novosibirsk left me feeling bummed - more so than some games as the funni Russian warlords - I initially couldn't put my finger on why. Yes, we see in events that Novosibirsk is not a fun place to be, and I'm pretty sure if you don't feel a little guilt at the Tomsk annexation events, you have no soul. But what exactly makes Novosibirsk feel so damned bleak? After some reflection, I think I have an answer: region and realism.
Moreso than any other region, Central Siberia starts the game as one of the brightest spots in Russia. Unlike the other regions, there are no overt villains: no Vagner, no Black League, no Rodzaevsky. As such, the bar is set way higher, since you can't simply say "well at least they're not x." Fittingly, most of the Central Siberian unifiers have grand dreams of a Russia that could be. Tomsk, with their idealistic democracy and philosopher-presidents. Kemerovo, combining the best of Slavic tradition and Soviet progress for something uniquely Russian. The Black Army and their dream of uncompromising freedom. Even the PRC, declaring that the Union is not yet lost.
And then there's Novosibirsk. What is Novosibirsk? What does it stand for? The answer is nothing. It stands for nothing except the expansion of its power - and that of a narrow range of state-backed corporate entities - and its continued existence. There's no grand dream, no optimistic future. It is a state that stands for itself. There is some slight redemption for Novosibirsk if Shukshin emerges victorious, but even he is just a faint echo of what Central Siberia - and Russia - could have been.
This commitment to such suffocating mediocrity is seen in its annexation events. Brilliant scientists and inventors are reassigned to bland mass production projects and discouraged from innovating. Orators who once passionately argued for the rights of workers are left standing in line and begging for a job at one of Novosibirsk's megacorps. Novosibirsk doesn't kill the human, but it does kill their spirit, their optimism, their idealism, and their drive to succeed.
And that's why Novosibirsk feels so damned bleak: it is firmly grounded in realism. The more overtly villainous paths - like the AB or everyone's favorite funni clock man - feel so outlandish that it's easy to remember "there's no way this would actually happen." The AB would be crushed by everyone with a rifle and 5 minutes of time. Inevitably, someone would cap Tabby. Novosibirsk, however, isn't evil, just mediocre. Throw a dart at a world map, and you're likely to hit a state like Novosibirsk - a state with no values beyond its continued existence. In a region with as much potential to be bright as Central Siberia, that plodding, suffocating, strangling mediocrity bites all the harder.
Oh, and if you didn't know, Novosibirsk is the canonical unifier of Central Siberia. Sweet dreams."
I had quite the response to this:
The way I see it, canon is basically the triumph of mediocrity in a word that needs radical action to allow it to get to it's feet, and the costs + consequences. With the exception of Batov and Yeltsin, all of the canon unifiers-Authsoc!Zhukov, Magadan(likely Fascist) and Novosibirsk represent the trimpuh of the most short-sighted or the most mediocre opportunists rather than the most far-seeing visionaries, with the last of these(Batov or Yeltsin) visionaries being crushed by the boot of mediocrity. And added to the likelihood of a Bennet+McNamara US, and a collab victory in the UK as canon under the woman in the ding dong song(through that specifically thing may be pleblore from what the devs told me) and we see a world that, rather than actually moving towards a positive direction(even if the resulting world can't be "as good" as OTL), picks the most middle of the road options in a world that can't tolerate it just because it's the "easier" way forward, leading to stagnation and no problem actually being solved.
Rodzaevsky(he becomes more subtle and enduring in his evil if allowed to exist for a long time but his early behavior realistically would see him dead in a ditch), Omsk, Tabby, Gumilov's gang in general, and the AB on the right, as well as Zhadanov, Tukh and Kaganovich on the left, are the tyrants whose flames of oppression burn the brightest but also whos flames burn out the fastest and whom can be easily snuffed out by saner heads because of how bright these flames burn in their oppression. But the painful, slow pain in the body created and gradually worsened by the canon "victors": Akhromeyev or Pokryshkin, are harder to dislodge, a virus that slowly but steadily eats away at whatever potential or possibility exists in the setting for something greater.
I quite disagree with this. Canon is just slow return to OTL - NPP breaking up (giving the same effect as it never existed in the first place), Thatcher UK, USSR rebuilding under Zhukov. It doesn't actually show us the premise of "world universally corrupted by Fascism" as Panzer promised us. The plausible outcome showing this premise would be - Serov united-Russia (as it'd mean that although Nazis ultimately fell, they "corrupted" Marxism which under Serov became really form of "red fascism"), Chesterton on Birch ran UK - (Nazis ultimately caused UK to abandon democracy), FR-NPP USA (because of Nazis winning, segregation was never abolished). Also it's not true than Rodzaevsky or Tabby would be killed. Tabby would be seen as eccentric, as before his takeover he doesn't actually appear insane despite his belief than Alexei lives, Rodzaevsky is just fascist Stalin - did someone remove Stalin from power?
- Status