The New Order: Last Days of Europe Thread II

Reader mode
SilverImperator

SilverImperator

chankljp said:
I think the question here is that with all the reworks and removal of existing plot lines, at what point does TNO stops being TNO, and instead being 'WI Axis won WW2 TL number 236'?

Perhaps Kaiserreich have it much easier in that regard, due to WW1 ATLs not being as common, meaning that as long as you keep a victorious German Empire around, even with the removal of iconic elements like the AOG controlled Southern China , La Plata, Genghis Khan II's new Mongol Empire, Lawrence of Britannia, President Curtis avoiding the Second US Civil War, President Kerensky's assassination throwing Russia into a political free-for-all, etc, the KR TL is still recognisably unique... Though I would argue that if syndicalism as the dominate far-left ideology or the continued existence of the Entente operating in exile gets removed, that WOULD be a bridge too far in making Kaiserreich no longer Kaiserreich.

For TNO, however.... Lets be honest, 'Nazis won WW2' ATLs are dime-a-dozen, to the point of being THE default alternate history TL in popular culture, right alongside 'If the Confederates won the American Civil War'. Meaning that in order for TNO to be recognisably unique, it NEEDS to maintain its own niche, to make it different from say... "The Anglo/American – Nazi War", "Fatherland", "The Man in the High Castle", "Wolfenstein", "Thousand Week Reich", etc.

I would argue that at its core, TNO's niche would be, 'If the Axis powers were able to inexplicably maintain the same lucky strike that in OTL, enabled them to defeat France in 6 weeks, make as much headway against the Soviets as they did during Operation Babarosa, and for Japan to overrun Singapore and the Philippines with relative ease... But for reality to ensue when said plot armor suddenly wear off the moment they won WW2, resulting in their regimes getting slowly crushed under the weight of their own inherent issues that prevented them from winning WW2 in OTL'.

Hence, it can be argued that even with Atlantropa and the German Civil War removed, as long as the victorious Axis powers still suffer from the weight of their own self-inflicted problems, TNO with all the 'unrealistic' elements removed will still be TNO... However, at the moment, I feel that a TNO without the German Civil War might as well be a Kaiserreich without syndicalism... Or even a Kaiserreich in which instead of falling to a leftist revolution, Britain became a fascist republic.... With it being so removed from the original material that you might as well create your own TL instead of reworking the existing one.

But I guess we will wait and see if this rework will actually be carried out, and if the devs can pull this off...
Click to expand...
La Plata is only an iconic thing because anglos don't know Latin American history, it was literally created because back in HOI2 you had a limited amount of tags so some minnor countries like Uruguay and Paraguay were recycled to other purposes. Also nobody in Uruguay would support joining Argentina, less one that is a dictatorship.

Atlantropa was not erased because "realism" it was erased because it brought problems to the Balkan and Turkey teams (because how in the hell do you determine the borders in things like islands) and because ultimately the mod didn't account for Alantropa. Like the Mediterranean countries didn't have a mechanic of "holy shit, we have lost all of our ports, we need to rebuild them, also our economy is being hurt", so if it doesn't impact the game at all, why have it?

Same thing with the US lore changes, TNO USA said that the New Deal didn't happen but it didn't want to account for how the American political system would have changed without it, so Mango decided to brought FDR back, if at the end of the day it didn't change anything.

In general I find that the "realism" complains have no merit, like people who complain about the Commune of France or Germany being reworked in KR, what devs are doing now is trying to study politics, movements and other things before deving. "Wikipedia deving" generates things like KR Uruguay which are horrible.

I think that TNO is characterized as the realistic Axis winning WW2 scenario, because it was a change from back the media was back in the day, but the three-sides cold war for me is more iconic that the German Civil War. If the Russian warlords were to be removed then I would agree with the "soul of TNO arguments", because TNO Russia is one of the elements which set TNO apart.

I am biased for saying this (Uruguayan and TNO dev), but for me now TNO is great because of its South America, is the best representation of the continent in any HOI4 mod. Its devs actively do the leg work to do research and check primary sources to see what interesting things they can add. Adhemar de Barros being elected in Brazil or Frondizi surviving in Argentina are unrealistic, but they are interesting scenarios and stories and the lore for those scenarios has been well-researched by its devs.
 

Nuka1

91h107fglv7a1.jpg
How do you think Frances population ends up divided in TNO 2022? No way post Burgundy Paris is as populated.
 

BritishSocDem

Nuka1 said:
How do you think Frances population ends up divided in TNO 2022? No way post Burgundy Paris is as populated.
Click to expand...
The south will be much more developed than the north and will have more people compared to the north. Post-burgundy France especially the north would also be quite unstable leading to maybe more people emigrating from the north to the south. France in general will be less populated than OTL
 
Impirius

Impirius

Just this.
Its not there yet,but the devs are going down a risky path and for the first time im not confident they will stay above my red lines.
1671909191133.png

Aside from this do you think if they really go down the path of cutting the civil will they then accept the need to adjust the 2WRW?
Or better said will the devs make the basic win impossible for most of the unifiers.
 
Last edited:

Tolkiene

The post is mistaken when they say that Hitler first brought up the matter of succession in 1939. It was his first public statement, but prior to that he'd signed decrees appointing Göring as his heir. The first time was in December 1934, though only a few cabinet members were informed. Then again in 1938.

Also Hitler wanting to eventually retire is...very dubious. He talked about it occasionally in Hitler's Tabletalk, but considering his belief in being sent by providence to rule Germany, it's doubtful. What could happen is that Hitler, who's getting on in years, not that healthy anymore and doesn't want to be burdened with day-to-day issues, appoints a minion he considers 'loyal' enough as Reich chancellor. He'd still retain the commanding heights and have final say on anything, but someone else would get to deal with the minutiae...which isn't that different from how things were run most of the time, as Head of Reich Chancellery Lammers often chaired cabinet meetings and acted as a conduit between Hitler and the ministers.

Of course, in classical Hitler fashion, the actual powers of said chancellor would be very ill-defined. After Hitler dies there's a senate election, which is basically an influence game where you have to outmanoeuvre your rivals and get enough of the power brokers on your side. Basically there'd be various blocs, such as Gauleiters, who have X amount of influence in the senate, and you must get them on your side or if they're totally hostile to you diminish their power. You could also pull shenanigans to stack the senate with your supporters...but that runs the risk of it being viewed as illegitimate, since it's a new, untested institution. Worth noting that the composition of the senate was a matter of debate. Lammers and Frick pushed for a more corporatist body that would represent the whole German elite and include people like Reichsleiters, Reich ministers and even field marshals. They feared that a body dominated by the Gauleiters would just encourage centrifugal tendencies by electing weak Führers not interested in or able to maintain a strong Reich authority. Hence why Frick wanted a large body with like 300 - 500 senators. Whereas Bormann would want a small, compact group dominated by Party people to push partification. Someone like Speer or Göring would favour a more 'corporatist' body because they lacked a strong hold on the Party. This applies to Speer in particular, whereas Göring at least has his 'old fighter' credentials. @Tanaka did nothing wrong made a good post about how this could work and how things could potentially blow up if an election is viewed as lacking legitimacy.

Also in regards to Göring, I'd just say he had some kind of health scare during the '50s as a result of his unhealthy life style. He recovers, but Hitler loses faith in him and rescinds the decree apointing Göring as his heir. This can serve as a shot in the arm for Göring, much like the Nuremberg trials did, so that by the time the game starts he's fit enough to be a claimant again. But since Hitler hasn't appointed a new heir, the senate is convened after his death.
 
Last edited:
Tiger

Tiger

Impirius said:
Just this.
Its not there yet,but the devs are going down a risky path and for the first time im not confident they will stay above my red lines.
View attachment 797930

Aside from this do you think if they really go down the path of cutting the civil will they then accept the need to adjust the 2WRW?
Or better said will the devs make the basic win impossible for most of the unifiers.
Click to expand...
Another day, another rework one of the main countries (with full content). What's wrong with devs?
 

brooklyn99

Banned
Impirius said:
Just this.
Its not there yet,but the devs are going down a risky path and for the first time im not confident they will stay above my red lines.
View attachment 797930

Aside from this do you think if they really go down the path of cutting the civil will they then accept the need to adjust the 2WRW?
Or better said will the devs make the basic win impossible for most of the unifiers.
Click to expand...
The cringeworthy replies on the subreddit makes me mollified to the changes tbh. There is the whole yelping about competancywashing the Nazis which is framed in a way that sounds like they believe it will open a Pandora's Box IRL by showcasing how Fascism can be successful. Yet humorous enough, this discontent regarding the changing portrayal of Fascism seems to be mostly raised insofar as concerning Nazi Germany. There wasn't much furor of that wrt to Scorza, Japan or back when the devs revealed the Quadrumvirate and it became known that all four paths for Fascist Italy can be successful.

As for WRW2, I know that much that a lead dev for Europas Narben has emphasised that any united Russia would in all cases be fighting a pretty uphill war to take back territory. I think when they eventually get around to TNO2, the plan would be that a victorious AI Russia will gain Moskowien at most whereas a player Russia can get the full satisfaction of taking everything up to Poland, as it was planned in Panzer's day.
 
Gukpard

Gukpard

I must say that I completely support the new approach towards the Nazis in the mod. Most of all the old approach of "hahha they gonna collapse anyway bruv, the system cannot work, right, right?" Reminds me of people tend to take an approach towards certain regimes (including of the Nazi regime when it showed up) saying that it would inevitably implode and then there will be a liberal democracy established after a while.
 
Last edited:
Impirius

Impirius

bill clinton01 said:
correct me if i'm wrong, but is speers reformed national socialist path doomed to fail?
Click to expand...
All Speer paths are successful reforms if done well.
The announcement is mainly about Bormann because he is pretty fundamentally a conservative even if they play him more in the party state way he otl wanted.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top