The mechanic for Germany where you have to decide if you want to give Himmler military command or not felt like an early attempt to create a balance of power dynamic, but it just didn't go far enough. This seems like the natural evolution of an idea they have been working on for a while now. It makes sense and should give more depth to gameplay.

@Senior--Pomidor

Жыл бұрын

Это обсуждение мода? или это реально механика, которую собираются добавить в игру Парадокс? (sry for non english lunguage :)

@AmericanCaesarian

Жыл бұрын

It does impact the SS balance mechanic so it is early balance of power

@Senior--Pomidor

Жыл бұрын

@@AmericanCaesarian Окей понял принял (ахаххахах у тебя охрененный никнейм, чувак))))

@itsKarlDesigns

Жыл бұрын

How stupid is it to ask a question in some obscure language and expect an answer lmao.. so you speak english, but choose to ask the question in non english, makes no sense

@AmericanCaesarian

Жыл бұрын

@@itsKarlDesigns i think he's using a translator

Sad that there is no official rework confirmed, I had high hopes when reading the headline... I really like how you collect all your ideas but if I get it right it's just an idea and nothing official so it is nice to talk about but for all players who are watching this don't be sad if nothing like this is coming

Yeah I've been feeling like Japan needs this update, desperately. I'm glad Ethiopia and Italy got updated, but this could be VERY EASILY adapted for Japan and also the US(Democrats/Republicans) Edit: I actually also like Feedback's idea of Isolationism vs. Interventionism

@pwn3r1

Жыл бұрын

Japan would have 2 balances of power, one army/navy, one tokohai/kodoha(till the February 26th incident)

@Jshaw6614

Жыл бұрын

With the US I think it would be more President-Senate or something like that.

@Ytuser485

Жыл бұрын

@@Jshaw6614 yea that would make more sense.

@joda7129

Жыл бұрын

@@Jshaw6614 executive-legislative

@TalonAshlar

Жыл бұрын

I like your idea but not for democracies since in practice all of the allied nations ran united war cabinets that were some degree of coalition between their major parties.

For the US maybe you can do The State vs. Capital. If you go all the way towards the state, Roosevelt nationalizes strategic industries and clamp down on Wall Street. If you go the other way, industrialists and finance kick out Roosevelt and puts an end to The New Deal-essentially The Business Plot.

@Cooom

Жыл бұрын

That works a lot better than the interventionists v isolationists, even the republicans vs democrats. As it can flow into fascists and communism much much easier

@01296501923654

Жыл бұрын

@@Cooom Yeah, I think it's good to have each side be quite flexible so that you're not forcing any specific ideology, faction, focus tree branch or play style on the player. Picking The State is compatible with all ideologies, and picking Capital/Big Business works with all but Communism (unless you get quite creative with the narrative 😄).

@dumatrising2421

Жыл бұрын

Yeah that's what I was thinking. The goal of the US is to get out of the isolation in time to help, so it's not really a good ballance of power since the entire point is that the US ends its isolation permanently after ww2. It also better represents the actual balance of power within American politics. Corporate interest vs consumer/labor protectionism

For the Soviet Union I think you could do a balance of Party versus Councils. That would admittedly have been more accurate under lenin but some level of centralization mechanic. Another option for the Soviet Union would be a balance between the Soviets and the NKVD which would fill out the paranoia system. If you push too far to NKVD you suffer stability hits, international relations hits, and purge events but gain additional spies. If you push too far to the Soviets you suffer reductions to military performance, production losses from sabotage, and potentially germany either gaining additional units or a counter revolution during the war. The events of the purge were a lot more complicated than just stalin was scared and killed people. There was, or at least believed was, a fifth column in the soviet union, and sabotage was a constant problem in the soviet union especially in the early years through industrialization. Also unfortunately many people do learn history or come to understand history to some amount through paradox games, and having a mechanic that more accurately reflects the situation in the soviet union would be good versus just saying stalin was overly paranoid and started killing everyone.

@itsabwomp

Жыл бұрын

True, when i first saw rework of USSR with this Stalin's paranoia bullshit I was sadly surprised. Behind the purges (and any historical events in general throughout the world at all times) lie much bigger and more serious and deep reasons than the madness falsely attributed to any person

@nevets2371

Жыл бұрын

I feel like the great purge was a consolidation of power to Stalin anyway, and so there wouldn't be much balance if you go historical. Maybe if you go left or right opposition.

@freezer20cm64

Жыл бұрын

​@lukasomasta2333 soviets are bad? What are you talking about? Mb soviet AI is bad, but when you as a player leed its just OP as f. Amount of bonuses to the industry and the airforce is just insane, you can destroy the luftwaffe even before the war throu sending air volontiers to the uk and France and so on. In 1941 you can have 4 to 5 full mecanised army groups with tanks and all the bling along side with 2-3k fighters and full doctrines. And all of this without droping a sweat.

@asdfasdfasdfadftew

Жыл бұрын

There were no councils in Soviet Union. Maximum Joseppe Stulin authority.

@anthonysmith6098

Жыл бұрын

This, but change it to NKVD vs the Bolshevik Party. As the Purge helped solidify Stalin’s regime and eliminated any power the Party had

he was JUST TALKING about a germany rework in the live stream. not only a germany rework but also other countrys

@nimrodvass7274

Жыл бұрын

But?

@nimrodvass7274

Жыл бұрын

@@ozzo1542 op didnt originally put anything behind the but

14:48 take a shot every time Dave says "isn't it?"

Germany could get more commanders with spirits like: Heer loyalist or SS leader (inspiration taken from TWR) also germany could get another SS leader: Reinhard Heidrich as a commander or political advisor. (Sorry for my terrible english)

@ronan2064

Жыл бұрын

You have normal English lol?

@mackosmirgl

Жыл бұрын

I am deeply disgusted by the grammatical and spelling errors you didn't make. Your level of English is good. You're apologizing for nothing bro, chill. 😃

@morisco56

Жыл бұрын

Hi (Sorry for bad english)

@dripmaestrolxix4228

Жыл бұрын

@@morisco56 i loving yo'ure profile picture (mine english very good i apologies)

@dripmaestrolxix4228

Жыл бұрын

@ORN227 love you too lad/lass

There is mod for the balance of power between SS and Wermacht

This balance of power system would work with two rival groups, not multiple like in Greece or Bulgaria though.

@Zack_Wester

Жыл бұрын

exactly. that said I dont see why there would one could not use both. like for Greace the current 4 in the faction manadger and a balance of power to represent something else. there is nothing stooping that.

Also the army - navy rivalry in japan decided that they will strike south not north and it could make a great pair with the tree like Switzerland

@heinzketchup6528

Жыл бұрын

Chalkin Gol decided the Japan gonna strike South, until the battle there was a real chance Japan going to attack Soviet Union as they tought Soviets to be an easy target since they already invaded and defeated Tsarist Russia before and later in Russian civil war they advanced well into Siberia along the Trans-Siberian railway..

I think that this mechanic could also work for the Oppose Hitler paths like in the Italian Focus Tree. For example the balance of power would be the Kaiser and the Parlament. If the Kaiser gets all the power then the goverment would be fully authoritarian / fascist way because Wilhem III (3) was also a nazi so we could have a fascist monarchy. If the Parlament gets full power then the goverment would stay/become a constitutional monarchy were the Kaiser is just a figurehead. Going the Kaiser way we would gain more war support and attack/defence boosts on core territory but loose stability, while going the Parlament way we would gain more stability, political power and less consumer goods but lose war support. I could also see this mechanic being used right after the civil war when we choose the focus Reinstate Free Elections there could be a balance of power betwen the Republicans and Monarchist, going either a Parlamentary Republic or a Constitutional Monarchy. Either way i think this would be a really cool adittion to the game.

Yugoslavia could definitely benefit from the balance of power. The main issue the kingdom of Yugoslavia had to deal with was Centralization vs Federalization. We already kind of have the two kingdom paths with one being sort of centralized (although it was more like brute force the ethnic issue or give out territories so the problems go away) and a complete federalization path which can lead even to a peaceful dissolution of Yugoslavia. Highly centralized Yugoslavia could get high political power and industry bonuses, but getting penalties to war support, stability or even army fighting capabilities. While highly federalized Yugoslavia would get great stability bonuses, great recruitable population factor, but would give you great penalties for political power and maybe even construction/industry. Not only that, but the Yugoslavian government in exile could have a special balance of power as well. Can't believe no one else thought of this before: Partisans vs Chetniks. Yugoslavia was already scuffed by not getting anything special in regards to the Yugoslav resistance in La Resistance DLC, so this new balance of power of power could really represent the struggle of the two resistance groups. Having Chetniks at max support would probably give you bonuses to attack and defense on core territory, but would tank your war support due to them being monarchists and predominantly Serbian. Having Partisans at max support would give you bonuses to recruitable population (maybe even a flat weekly increase in recruitable population), resistance growth in states occupied by the enemy, but would tank your stability and political power gain, ultimately even Yugoslavia being taken over by the communists, due to Chetniks being so sidelined and Partisans being the only supported resistance group growing too strong that they would establish their own socialist state and abolish the monarchy. You know, just like in real life what happened.

Make sure your taking note’s paradox. He’s basically doing the work for ya

I think the balance of power works well for some nations, but I don’t think paradox should use it universally. The main issue with hoi4, at least in single player, is that it’s so easy to develop a “one size fits all” build that works relatively well for most countries you play. I think that paradox is on the right track with the balance of power system, but I want to see a high quantity of different systems implemented in different countries to help diversify each nation and really help each country be enjoyable in its own right.

I think a more interesting system would be having the military balance of power (e.g. rivalry between the army and navy in Japan) tied to who you pick as advisors in the military high command and who you have as chiefs of staff. Each of the branch high command picks could have their trait plus some sort of positive modifier favouring their branch, and a small/slight negative modifier for the other branches. Additionally, the advisors experience as a specialist, expert or genius could also increase the effects of the modifiers. For the military high command advisors you could have the same thing, so if you stack your high command with all army people it would disadvantage the Air Force and navy in someway. I think this would be a really good tool to use especially in multiplayer for minor nations trying to get them to play to certain strengths over others, and could prove incredibly useful in single player for certain runs.

in Turkey case, you could just do triangle and a dot representing where the power is shifting, and now you have 3 powerm and basicaly you can do that with as many as you like

Hey man ! Just got into HOI4 .. Just wanted to say thanks for all these video's you do man ! Although i've had the game for a while, I just felt overwhelmed by the depth of this game on the surface. Anyways i got past all that and have a solid grasp of the game finally ! And your video's have been a big help in that !

@totskaart

Жыл бұрын

itll come easy mate just learn from ur mistakes and have fun always

9:27 Winston Churchill jumpscare

I think a more interesting balance of power for France, rather than commie vs democracy (which excludes the Napoleon/Bourbon LARP btw), would be in the miltary : old guard vs reformists. It would serve as the mechanic behind the total french doctrinal failure that was the Campaign of France. The old-guard side (Pétain, Weygand...) would grant you more political power (you keep the fascists in check by giving them an ear), stability (because of appeasement) and division defense. The reformists (De Gaulle, Juin, Lattre de Tassigny...) would grand you more innovation-related bonus : division organisation, research bonuses for land doctrines planes and tanks, etc...

Yooo, the Germany idea of the Wehrmacht vs the SS sounds so cool. It immediately reminded me of a movie "Valkyrie". I am a modder and I will try to implement this idea to my mod. Thank you Feedback

The ss had its own army formations and stuff, might be cool to have something with that balance of power system with that included.

For the Soviet Union you can do The Party vs. The Army. The focus tree can largely remain the same since it's mostly about deciding the ideology of the party/state.

@Malino8835

Жыл бұрын

I like this idea, maybe as the soviets you can choose to weaken the army at the cost of losing more generals/offivers and gaining debuffs for economic bonuses and paranoia reduction.

@01296501923654

Жыл бұрын

@@Malino8835 The power of the political commissars in the military can reflect the balance. With high Party control the commanders fear being seen as disloyal or cowardly by their commissar, so will stay in a battle for longer before retreating. But they will also avoid risky and unconventional tactics while on the offense as to not be seen as revisionist. As a result, you pick The Party for a more defensive and attrition-based play style, and The Army for a more aggressive and mobile play style.

@MaFo82

Жыл бұрын

NKVD vs Army would make more sense and could be kept for a Tsarist run by changing NKVD to the Ochrana.

@MD.Akib_Al_Azad

Жыл бұрын

​@@MaFo82 so the secret police vs the army

@MD.Akib_Al_Azad

Жыл бұрын

@ORN227 almost every ww2 dictatorship has this divide between the paramilitary forces and the army

3:21 The reason to stay in the middle could be found by making it a requirement for certain focuses

@bundayeti

Жыл бұрын

They did that with Switzerland, and it kind of sucks.

These Ideas of balance of power could work with foreign spys messing with your balance of power. Britian could send spys to help the German army to get rid of the bad moustash man or to gain more support for the USA to join the war early.

For the soviets it's not that dumb, you can have stalin versus the Opposition, and depending on your choice in the tree the Opposition will change (like in italy, the balance of powers is not always the same depending on your choices)

The german system could also be used for the ahistorical path. The 'oppose Hitler' event mentions a wehrmacht coup and so you would either need a certain percantage of Wehrmacht support or the other way around

It's unbelievable how often he said "Isn't it?" in this video

@FeedbackIRL

Жыл бұрын

It makes sense if you saw it live. I was interacting with KZread chat

On France I think a right-left divide would be more fitting, not only becouse it qas there were it originated but also becouse it would also work for the right path. Could be the right givin factory output and less consumer goods, symbolozing its focus on the economy, and the left giving more stability and war support, symbolizing the welfare.

I feel like in full SS control, it would give you a random fully trained division every month or every two months based on how many countries you fully occupy, to symbolize that you don't need to interact with the army to have troops And this SS troops would have some crazy bonuses while debuffing your regular army maybe some of this SS troops might even work like volunteer troops that move and attack on their own While if you give control to your Army you'd have significantly lower bonuses and you wouldn't get any of the elite SS troops but you'd also be more stable, like the army will never attempt a coup unlike the SS who will try it if you don't cooperate with their demands while they have full control

Ah yes, Mexico, my favourite focus tree.

The US is fairly accurate historically, they were able to just produce so much and fight on two fronts. I’d say reduce how much recruitable pop they have while isolated so it takes longer to build an army when they go to war.

@rosscalverley

Жыл бұрын

Have a balance of power for Pacific and Europe?

Before changes I looked into - to garrisons for Germans. If you stack basically everything it's 60% or higher, 30% from adviser how ever I think another one gives even more, then 2 techs that give 15% each I think. I'd have to double check the numbers but you can have near 100%

For the soviet case the balance of power could be between three points with of course the left opposition, the right opposition and the center, Stalin, in the middle, trying hard to keep the party balanced, thus forcing the player to choose who to persecute, sacrifice or save as any of these options would throw the balance between one of the two oppositions

It they make SS bonuses for pet projects, they need an achievement or hidden path for finding the Ark of the Covenant and other Arkane items

I mainly hope that the Paradox will remake German civil war system. Since it's just about choosing "Oppose Hitler" and waiting for the focus to complete. Also you get huge bonuses and the whole civil war just is one big encirclement over Bavaria and offensive line. I was personally very excited by the idea of ​​something like the "Oster Conspiracy" Like playing the German main focus tree to anshluss between planning to depose hitler and trying to contact the west to help you. And if Germany made a demand for the Sudetenland, you would have the opportunity to convince the Czech Republic to refuse it and go to civil war. With the fact that the West would help you while Fascist Germany, Italy, and possibly the Soviets, as they would not be pleased that Germany cooperates with the West.

@wasmachichhier1514

Жыл бұрын

And there is already a mechanic for the Oster conspiracy so it would just have to be expanded

Wow, I really REALLY enjoyed this video and like this concept a lot.

Oh, so this is just Feedback speculating on how that awful mechanic could be inflicted on on other countries, not confirmation of anything. Anyway, I dread the day a rework is announced for any of the remaining countries with actual focus trees, since they will be saddled with another sprawling unfocus tree that requires an online guide to parse...

@Kirtrickify

Жыл бұрын

This ^

And if France bans the communists, you can have the same mechanic but with the leagues instead.

Was playing a mod that added the balance of power to japan, and it was the interservice rivalry and it was really well done

@madhat2569

Жыл бұрын

Name

Italy got the paramilitary guys, the same could be give to Germany having a limited number of SS units and they could be buffed while the regular troops are weakened when you are more pro-SS and the other could be applied when you are pro-OKW. And going to far into one direction could lead to a Civil War when having low war support or stability.

Couldn't agree more. I have an idea for France, a balance between collaboration and resistance spirits!

‘Land planes’ the most scary of war vehicles

they should do one for usa involving europe first or pacific with buffs involving naval or army productions as well as stat bonuses for navy or army

Here's my ideas based on what you said: Germany - army v SS Army gives base stats boost like org, speed, core def/atk, but penalties to garrisons, stability and war support and could lead to a SS coup. SS gives war support, surrender limit, manpower, wundenwaffe and Garrison buffs but penalties to base army stats, pop losses accross the axis(Holocaust), and research penalties. And can lead to a military coup. Staying in the middle give boost to pp, stability and maybe some economy boost Uk - peace v war Peace gives economy and stability boosts but penalties to factory output, army stats and locking out focuses that prepare UK for war(higher levels mean morr lockouts) War gives boosts to output, army stats manpower but penalties to stability, economy and party support if low war support. In the middle gives no bonus/penalties Another thing for UK/France would be a penalty system if UK puts no troops in France. Both sides get an event where the French starts to get army, surrender limit, and compliance for the invader penalties if none or not enough(based on number of divisions UK has) troops in france. Ie "where are the British, why are we the only ones fighting" cuase right now there is no point for a UK player to do basically anying for the battle for France in 1939. And something like the island hoping mechanic(forget what mod that is from) but something similar to that and if it gets high enough it can force peace negotiations with the axis. Based on losing Africa/Europe for axis and if at war with Japan add in India and Pacific holdings. British commonwealth: Independence v crown Basically instead of a pick a branch in the focus tree, it's now a balance of power each dominion and the UK has to deal with and make partition a separate focus tree that can always be chosen. Add some flavor for each colony and allow various foreign govs able to influence the colonies. Ie US for Canada and Japan for Malaysia US - I feel you almost need 3. Party politics, isolation v intervention, and POTUS v congress Party politics I think is decently done via the Congress section but needs more flavor and add in a representation of # of seats each party has. More seats each party has gives different buffs/debuffs. Also extend this to the UK and France, feels weird only 1 democracy has democracy.... Isolation v intervention a lot like you said boosts to civ economy and stability v mil economy and war support. Middle gets research and resource bonuses. And then limits on volunteer, lend lease and faction joining. POTUS v congress: POTUS gives all round buffs/debuffs and harder time to pass certain focuses(congress support) and support for fascism and communism depending on stability level. Ie American start to think a strong man gov is better with high stability or fears it on low. Obviously us needs to start with much lower stability now. High congress makes it easier to pass focuses and higher buffs/debuffs for the partie. and congress would be opposite the president on intervention v isolation, ie FDR is interventionist, so high congress increases isolationism, and vice versa. Basically try to represent the growing/shrinking issues congress had with FDR over time especially the whole court packing fiasco and overpoweredness of the us at the start by having a complicated political field to deal with to get involved with the war, like FDR had to dela with. I'll had edits for other countries as I got time France, be kinda like Italy where 1 side changes based on party %. Starts democracy v communists. Very similar to what you provide, but add in chance for civil war based on party % versus how far left/right on the balance of power you are. Switch out each side if fascist or non aligned get higher in party % or focuses. Japan: army v navy Not to different from the decisions and this with what determines north v south doctrine via unlocking the focus for it, no longer tied to a particular government. Another could be Asian v japanese supremacy. Basically are they the "liberators of Asia from western colonialism" or a new colonial master. Asian give bonuses to compliance mainly and destabilize emwestern colonies(Vietnam, Malaysia Philippines, Indonesia) at cost of home islands stability/economy Japanese would give boosts to home island economy, stability, war support but penalties to garrisons/economy in those areas, maybe periodic rebellions against Japan. Soviet like you said there is the issue of making it more complicated with already having the paranoia in place. But if one was to be made it would be centralization v decentralization. Centralization gives reductions in paranoia growth, boosts leader stats, and pp at cost of economy and army stats. Decentralization increases paranoia growth , econ and army boosts. Center gives stability and construction boosts, but political focuses require a certain level of central/decentralization to unlock making the soviet's very unstable to keep it there.

I believe the ss could be used to core that are claimed

I may be in the minority, but I personally hate the balance of power stuff.

@FeedbackIRL

Жыл бұрын

You prefer the battle for the Bosporus spreadsheet system?

4:29 OKW stands for Ober Kommand Wehrmacht, so basically army high command

hi bro, that is exciting news, indeed. Do you have any plan on doing guide for Poland?

That was not just for amusement. That were really good ideas

Himmler could also possibly increase defence on core Territory, or maybe Defense while a certain about to surrender.

There is also another balance of power in germany which is the fight against the british for neutral ports in the netherlands. They could give more bonuses the more your nation controls it.

I always thought that Germany would have it between Hitler and the Army and it could be a mechanic for the civil war for the Kaiser or Democracy.

For France, it's would be more interesting to see a balance of power for the military, the offensive doctrine vs the defensive doctrine

I feel Czechoslovakia could be either struggle between centralisation of power in Prague vs decentralisation and essentialy splitting with Slovakia +/- Zakarpatia; or war efford (building fortifications in Sudetenland etc.) or trying to find a compromise that involves Germans in Czechoslovakia so they do not support Hitler (essentialy blockiing German path of expansion without outright war right after Anschluss)...

''give me a strasser path and ill be happy''' - grimz

I think the UK one could instead be power of the monarch Vs power of the government. Could be an alternate way of going down the king’s party path. I think monarch side would probably give planning speed/other types of speed bonuses (like justification time) and war support while losing stability. Meanwhile the government is slower to do things but gives more stability and stuff

Finland's role in operation Barbarossa. Germany pressured Finland to support its attack and use its land to move military forces to norway before war.

They really should just have you on either the dev team or on some kind of think tank

yep i wonder about the same now its here ZZ and Weemarch

Balance of power could work for USSR if it's older Cavalry Clique Generals (Voroshilov, Kulik, Budyonny etc.) against the modernisers (Tuchachevsky, Rokossowksy, Zhukov, etc.). This could then influence the purges and paranoia, as well as bonuses to particular doctrines. Balance would limit purges, modernisers would get army XP and research bonuses but give away intelligence to enemies and cause more paranoia, cavalry clique would give crappy bonuses but limit paranoia? I don't know. If an Oppose Stalin path were taken, it'd be balancing Right against Left Opposition. Balance allows for more political power, right wing for civilian economy and foreign relations, Trotskyist left for army experience and war goals.

@mapoch9000

Жыл бұрын

Why the f Budyonny is in the cavalry clique? He wasn't against tanks or submachine guns (unlike Voroshilov). They were arguing with Tukhachevsky about light versus heavy tanks.

@bluntpencil2001

Жыл бұрын

@@mapoch9000 He wasn't against tanks per se, but was considered a member of the old school Cavalry Clique, particularly due to his history with the cavalry, and his defence thereof. It was, of course, occasionally as much political as it was doctrinal.

@bluntpencil2001

Жыл бұрын

@@mapoch9000 Also, in addition to bring politically aligned with Voroshilov, Kulik, and others, he did argue against mechanised doctrine for the Red Army - not in principle, but for reasons which he argued were practical. He argued that cavalry were better than mechanised formations as the Soviet infrastructure was, *at that point*, better suited to cavalry than trucks, and because they lacked the industrial capability to back it up. He might have had good reason to support cavalry initially (and the amount of cavalry used in the successful defence of Moscow was very high), but he was very vocally a defender of the cavalry, and was seen to be a member of the general staff that was very much in support of it.

Balance of power seems to usually be designed so either side is viable for long term, so US probably wouldn't be isolationism vs interventionism. I'd expect it to be conservatism or libertarianism vs progressivism in Congress. 1936 was the middle of the New Deal, with significant political changes alongside - for example, 1937 would include the "switch in time that saved nine," as far as I know the first time the Democratic party threatened to pack the Supreme Court in order to get the court to rule in their favor. 1938 like most Congressional elections ended with the party opposite the President gaining a lot of seats, presumably as pushback to Roosevelt. One could imagine a more significant pushback ending with a supermajority that tries to impeach Roosevelt, or an Alf Landon win in 1936 ending with conservative policies causing pushback in the other direction forcing through progressive bills with a supermajority. I'm not sure exactly the best way to implement this, since obviously balance of power is supposed to change over time, not suddenly shift every 2 years during elections. With Kaiserreich's political system you could represent government support as the political pie chart support, and Congressional makeup as the Balance of Power, but that doesn't really work in Vanilla. And ultimately having mechanics that take away control from the player for political stuff isn't that fun since it's not the point of HOI4.

I like your idea but I don't think Greece should implement it. 4 factions can't possibly be mapped out on a 1D plane. As for paranoia, I don't think it needs to be dumbed down even more. The ticking clock already represents what it should: managing Stalin until it is too late.

I like the left right slider but I think it's an oversimplification of a feature that deserves more complexity.

Here is a concept: multiple balances of power in a single country.

The SS would give bonuses to resistance suppression, increase WS, and allow for more non-core manpower. Perhaps certain units recruited by SS decisions would pull from a certain nations population pool. SS would also allow for more defense and org the closer to defeat Germany is. The OKW would give more bonuses to the army both in performance, attack, breakthrough, and better equipment production but come at the cost of lower stability and WS the closer to defeat Germany is. The idea is that the OKW is good when Germany is on the offensive and represents to more analytical and thoughtful nature of early war Germany while the SS represents the more ideological and fanatical resistance that Germany showed towards the end of the war.

I m still waiting for a focus tree for the skandinavian countrys especially for Finnland i think this would be very interresting

A way that a BOP mechanic could work in the Soviet union is that the mechanic gets implemented after you solve the paranoia issue maybe between Stalin and the NKDV or something like that

I could see this in the future for japan like at the left side of the balance is the parliament and on the other side its hirohito

This could also work well for the Netherlands in the trade mechanic

Personally I think a hypothetical Balance of Power for France would be more interesting if you had a choice between trade unions on the left, the fascists and monarchists on the right, or trying to tough it out in the center. If you choose to stay democratic in the center, then the focuses you take can slowly reduce the penalties in the center and then eventually replace them with bonuses. If PDX were feeling extra clever then they might allow a player to access certain things more easily by carefully swinging the balance this way and that, balanced against the risk of losing political control if you swing too far.

the American one does not fit IMO, because as soon as they were attacked they were all about war and still are, and if you say just have the max out intervention after pearl harbor, then the mechanic is just useless and then its just another senate system

Would also work well for a austrian focus tree. Balance of power between Vaterländische Front (Austrian Faschists/Unaligned) and DNAPÖ (Nazis). You'll have to keep the german influence in check or turn into a puppet or get annexed.

Imagine a triangular power struggle visualized

I like the state by state mechanic of the kemalists vs traditionalists of turkey. if pdx could figure out a way to visualize that better by perhaps showing a balance of power on each state that would be better

For France you maybe should have the far right versus the far left and démocratie in the centre because at that time there also was a significant non-aligned/far right group ( L'action Française)

They already have this in haguke and road to enhancement

So for the greece example there is that issue of more than 2 parties in a balance of power. Its sorta limited

I wonder what would be the next DLC

Everything feels so convoluted now. I guess I was too used to the overtly arcadey gameplay.

The simpler solution for isolationism vs. Interventionalism is this: Isolationism would give massive stability bonuses (15-20%) and bonuses for producing civilian infrastructure in core territory (civilian factories, railroads, refineries, etc), but would reduce military factory output by 25% at the highest level and increase the production cost of building new military factories by 25%. By contrast, interventionalism would give massive bonuses to military factory construction and output (25% increase respectively), but at the cost of stability (15-20% cost) and civilian infrastructure construction in core territory (I.e. increasing the cost of civilian factories, railroads, infrastructure, and refineries). If you keep a solid balance between the two, you’re incentivized by having increased political power gain, increased stability (10%), and a reduction in the PP cost of adding both civilian and military advisors. Navy would be unaffected as it, in the interwar years, was not impacted that much by the Isolationism vs. Interventionalism debate. It is also governed by the Washington Naval Treaty, meaning that it is already hampered partially through that.

Wouldnt for Japan make more sense if the BOP was for the tojo government Vs Hirohito, which could add flavour to the young officers coup and etc whilst giving you different options for maybe ending the monarchy entirely if you significantly bring it to the side of the tojo government

anything that would make armored cars is worth the effort

Events and Decision tab is seriously one of the best features in game. So useful compared to Navy lol

Here is how appeasment could work no one can join your faction and can't garuntee nations but more right you go you can allow people in factions and garuntee nations so its either be neutrel and keep the empire or not and lose the empire.

For Russia it would be beaten but not defeated and then the Monarchist/fasict vs the church if you go all the way left you get some bonus etc but if you go right and fully support the church you can take the third rome and related focus. Also maybe if you go monachist centre you would get some kind of democracy event. And with fascist maybe some political bonus if centre or if full right you unlock focus to ally with germany and stuff but with down sides

It would work in nationalist Spain in various ways…. For franco path it could be the requetes and Falange or the Falangist path with Ceda vs Falange or Falange vs the National Syndicalist JONS of Ramiro Ledesma Ramos, or the monarchist path based on the bourbon and alfonsists

yes, the balance of power would be very cool on germany, but think about this: a new player is ABSOLUTELY overwhelmed by just anything in hoi4. What is the usual starting nation in a WW2 strategy game? Exactly, Germany. Now imagine a new player starting the game, going into germany, struggling to even invade poland and then getting for example a SS civil war. Guess what? Exactly, refund

And this is the point where you have to add the Big H to the game. I don't think Paradox would go to this direction. But they should. Just as Stalin got a shiny new gulag- and paranoia system. The rivalry between the Army and the SS would add an interesting mechanics.

I think it's an interesting mechanic, but for some nations just don't go far enough. For example in France, The left and the right are both extremes that could lead to commie/fascist playthrough or civil war if mismanaged, so you'd want to stay in the center. For Germany, you'd prolly want to favour the army as the default, but favouring SS would give some powerful bonuses with risk of civil war or coup if it gets too extreme. What I wonder is, for nations where there's more than 2 options, wouldn't it make more sense to expand the mechanic into a triangle, HOI3 Ideology triangle style.

The SS and Wehrmacht mechanic is the RTE mod

Saying the SS would provide a bonus to resistance suppression and reduced damage to garrisons is almost too close to representing the holocaust. And I don't know how much paradox wants to do that.

I'd rather have propaganda campaigns for every country instead of just soviets. Should be a generic set with some specific unique ones for countries when a good idea exists.

All I can say is giving a passive Act to go one way. Because I think Italy is made to eventually kick Duce out

in regards to the soviet union what if you start off with the balance of power locked until after you remove the political paranoia mechanic and depending on which path you take will define which factions you have to balance such as Stalin vs NKVD or Monarchist vs Orthodox Church

They should add a propaganda section for Germany so that you could get: construction speed 15% for 120 days, attack bonus 10% for 60 days etc

The German balance of power could be a fun one but is has little sense if you dont organize the SS in first place even Himmler should have no power to organize any coup in first place. Probably should be first Army vs Hitler if you have bad supply for a long time or to many casualties/lost terrain, a good amount of victories rise the support for both and give some bonuses but in the other side you get some penalties, an excess amount of damaged factories/garrisons lower or bombardment lower Hittler support (for bad management) and loose battles/bad air control/sunked transports reduce Army support and that could lead to a coup or a purge (URSS style) To introduce Himmler you need to activate a big recruitment for the SS, for starters you will have a high resistance unless you have used spies to give a high compilance before the conquest or assign harsh ocupation laws (so 0 compilance) or you could make the SS bigger to gain some more compilance and keep the resistance in check in trade for more equipment and some political power via descisions. and here you get the game of HIttler vs Army & SS.

I almost exclusively use Road to enhancement when I want to play Germany, because the balance of power is so much fun, I can get the SS with a branching path towards heydrich or hinmler, and the Wehrmacht with göring. Both give so much flavor to Germany, and with RTE giving a much more interesting and challenging civil war and a new communist focus treem it’s just… so good!

I would think that if the Soviet Union were to have a Balance of Power it would be between the military and the commissars or NKVD/battle priests so after the purge/civil war is over it's to reflect Stalin giving power away to the military that was done historically after Operation Barbarossa. For Japans interservice rivalry could be expanded to include the doctrines to get resources so leaning with the army will go get China and if more power will go for Siberia from the Soviets, meanwhile leaning with the navy will go for the European colonies and the USA territories in the Pacific.

This would be much bigger update than I was expecting for these small fixes to we were expecting... More like DLC stuff... ... Well now Paradox has stuff to new DLCs for 10 years at minimum :) I also expect mods to use this feature in the future!