• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Developer Diary | Norway Alt History!

Hej everyone, it’s me, Carlo! Katten has been staring at me from the other side of the office all morning, which can only mean one thing: it’s time for me to write another Dev Diary! Now, I’ve already talked about Historical Norway, the Joint Focus Tree, and modding stuff so there’s only one more thing I could write about, and that’s our favorite kamerat, LevTrotskij.

Known outside of Norway as Leon Trotsky, he was one of the most prominent members of the bolsheviks in the Soviet Union, renowned marxist theorist, known for his permanent revolution, and even more permanent exile. He was Lenin’s successor apparent, but Stanlin’s political maneuvering forced him out of the government and eventually out of the Soviet Union. After that, he was allowed to move to Norway, with the newspaper editor, Konrad Knudsen. So far so good.

01. Trotsky advisor.png

The important thing for us happens in an August much like this one, in 1936, when Quisling’s thugs ransacked Knudsen’s house, and would’ve gotten away with it if it wasn’t because Knudsen’s daughter drove them off. So much for the tolerant left, smh. This event will be represented in AAT’s Norway, regardless of the path you take, and it’s the start of trotskij’s event chain.

02. Trotsky’s place ransacked event.png

Historically, the pressure from fascists and stalinists was too much for the Nygaardsvold Cabinet, so he was put under house arrest in a farm in Hurum, which, by his own account, was one of the worst periods of his life. After that he was allowed into Mexico, and received by the artist Frida Kahlo and her husband Diego Rivera. And then they lived happily ever after. Though he was, indeed, kicked out when Diego Rivera found out he was having an affair with Frida Kahlo and then was killed with an ice pick by a Soviet Union agent. Other than that he had a good time in Mexico by all accounts.

03. Trotsky arrives to Mexico event.png

Of course, you don’t need to care about what happened historically. You can just imprison him, or send him to Mexico right away and use this altercation as a justification for increasing political repression, send him straight to Stalin, and even put him in government. Those last two are especially useful if you’re going the communist route by the way.

Communist Route?... Oh, right, that’s what I was supposed to write about, Alt History content for Norway! Since I already wrote about Trotskij’s fate, let me tell you about the options you have for
turning Norway even redder.

04. Norway Communist Branch.png

First step, the labor movement needs to regain its momentum, with the ‘A Resurgent Labor Movement’ focus. This will set Norway on to the path of Communism, but which one? You can compromise with the NKP to adopt their Stalinist stance or prosecute them and let the Labor Party embrace Trotskij’s teachings, and if you kept him in Norway you’ll also have him as an advisor and general.

05a. Compromise with the NKP.png

05b. Prosecute the NKP.png

Each path has advantages and disadvantages: you can be beholden to the Soviet Union and their support, or you can go your own path and bring the Permanent Revolution to the rest of the world.

Regardless of your communist goals, you will need to rouse the proletariat in states that are industrialized enough, and when you’re ready you can trigger the communist revolution and fight in a civil war against the old Norway! Now of course, riling up the workers has its cost, because they’ll do some heavy damage to your factories and infrastructure once they rise up for the revolution.

06. Rouse The Proletariat Decisions.png


Let’s take a better look at the ‘Rouse the Proletariat Decisions’. The first level will grant you the state once the civil war starts, but will leave your buildings in a pretty rough shape.

07. Rouse the Proletariat 1.png

You can reduce this damage by bringing it to Level 2 and you will also be granted 2 irregular divisions.

08. Rouse the Proletariat 2.png

Then if you’re really serious about that state you can fully rouse its working class, reducing the damage to the buildings and upgrading those troops to Militias.

09. Rouse the Proletariat 3.png

And before you think “But Carlo, what if I just rouse the whole country and I skip the civil war?”, I’ll tell you now, that won’t work. You will have to choose carefully how to approach these decisions, as you can’t go over 20 Total Support for the Revolution and no matter what, the other side will have Oslo.

Ok now, let’s go over the things you’ll be able to do once you’ve seized the means of production in Norway. If your senpai Stalin noticed you, there will be plenty of improvements to your industrial base, manpower and a close collaboration with the Soviet Union, and even help them invade Finland. Maybe the Arms Against Tyranny thing is just aspirational.

10. War in Finland Tooltip.png

If instead, you decided to go with uncle trotskij, as I said before, you’ll get an extra advisor and general, and that will put you behind the wheel of your very own communist faction, the Norintern with the focus ‘The Permanentest Revolution’. That’s what it’s actually called, and nobody has complained about it so I guess the name is final? Defend Finland, bring the war to Stalin, Sweden, Norway and even Hitler, bringing about a new, Trotskyist world order.

11.Permanentest Revolution Tooltip.png

To summarize, with Stalin you’ll get soldiers and industry. With Trotsky you’ll get easy wargoals and offensive bonuses. Your pick.

Now let’s move slightly to the right. To the allied democratic branch, which starts with a fictional Vote of No confidence that the Nygaardsvold government loses. This branch is what happens when militaristic industry tycoons take control of the government. It overlaps somewhat with the democratic branch, except you can skip the whole Broken Gun thing and go straight for rearmament, so you’ll have more time to get ready for what’s coming, but at the cost of a lot of civilian industry.

12. Alt Dem branch.png


This path leads to a more centralized government, so all the local preparations are pooled together, letting you start nation-wide initiatives, both during peacetime and war time.

13a. Military Preparedness Decisions.png

13b. Military Preparedness Decisions 2.png
13c. Military Preparedness Decisions 3.png


It also overlaps a little with the Trotskyist path, just not the commie parts, and you’ll be able to join the allies instead of forming your own faction.

14. Prepare for war and Join The Allies.png

Let’s keep going, I have actual work to do, so I’m gonna skip the historical path. A few things have changed, but not enough to care, and the dog is still there so onwards to the fascist path, which, of course there is one.

15 Fascist Path.png


It starts with The Stumbling Storting, in this reality the labor party fails to secure political stability for Norway, leaving the door open to fascists, and other undesirables.

16. Stumbling Storting event.png

Let’s go with Undesirable Elements #1, fascists. In this scenario Quisling is somewhat good at making people think he’s competent and that fascism is reasonable. The Nasjonal Samling will lurk in the shadows and build support for their agenda state by state, seeking support from the Fatherland League (A proto-fascist nationalist movement), industrialists, conservatives and even fascists abroad.

17. Lurk in the Shadows Decisions.png


Eventually, you’ll reach a familiar focus, ‘Quisling’s Coup’, except this time, you’re ready for it, you have built the support needed to make the takeover as easy as possible for you and the foreign fascist invaders, whom you invited! Yes, in this path you can invite the most suitable fascist regime to invade Norway so you can take over the government and help them on their fascist crusade. Don’t worry if they say no, that rejection will also allow you to start the coup without them, who needs Hitler anyway.

18. Nasjonal Samling Focus.png

The coup, as expected, will trigger a civil war in which, unlike the communist one, you’ll only control Oslofjord. That’s alright though, you prepared for this, which means that you can take over states where you built support in. If you only prepared base level support, you’ll get the state, not too shabby! But if you built more support, you will be rewarded for your efforts with a brand new Military Factory, and maybe even a couple of militias too if you fully prepared it.

19. Deploy Prep Decisions.png

This should put you on the right footing to start your fascist campaign, have fun making the world a worse place! Eventually, you’ll make it to your outlandish viking theme claims around the North Atlantic. Classic.

20. Old Vinland Tooltip.png

Now onto the last branch: The monarchist branch. For some reason a lot of people who want nordic focus trees also want a monarchist path, I can understand why, but I still think they’re wrong. I still made a monarchist path for Norway, whose king was reluctant to become their king, and even when he took over, by all accounts had no intention of becoming anything more than a figurehead.

21. Monarchist Branch.png


This reality starts much like the fascist one, with the Storting devolving into chaos, and the Royal Chamberlain, Anker Peder Wedel-Jarlsberg uses this opportunity to build support for a more involved monarchy, with his steady hand at the helm of course. Obviously, he is not part of the real Wedel-Jarlsberg noble family that lives in Norway, any similarities are purely coincidental, etc. He’s not Wedel-Jarlsberg with a ‘-’, his is a minus symbol. Just do me a favor and don’t tell the legal team, they don’t need to stress about it.

22. Anker Peder Wedel-Jarlsberg.png

Peder Anker will travel all around Norway proselytizing his monarchist cause, giving you bonuses for building defensive buildings, and adding more building slots, which will of course reduce the available manpower in the state, because, you know, they’re all busy being monarchists so they don’t have time to be soldiers.

23. Build Support for Monarchism Decisions.png

Except… If you go all the way with your monarchism you get 2 free militia divisions, and once you get the power as the Regent of Norway you can edit to your heart’s content. They’ve been so converted that they are now soldiers for monarchism.

24. Royal Militias.png

Once the Absolutist Regency is the rule of the land you’ll recruit the crown prince, Olav to join either the Navy or Army staff, since he was indeed employed in both during the war. In this case you’ll probably want him dedicating all his efforts on one thing, so he can become either a General or an Admiral and will allow you to specialize your country further.

25a. Olav to Army Staff.png
25b. Olav to Navy Staff.png


And of course you can get an extra set of outlandish claims. Faroe Islands, Iceland, Greenland, part of Russia, and even part of Sweden. At the end you’ll be able to consolidate your kingdom to make it easier for Peder Anker to rule over his king’s land.

26. Claims on Faroe Islands.png

And well that’s it. Obviously there’s tons more to unearth if you ask the right questions ;) and many more things I’ll either keep as a secret for release or haven’t implemented yet, like the new Trotskij portrait and the [Redacted] of [Redacted]. Also, don’t forget to stay tuned for the Sweden alt history Dev Diary, where you’ll see how wildly different the world would be if Sweden had privately managed vacation instead of state managed ones.
 
  • 64
  • 35Like
  • 9
  • 7Love
  • 6
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
I went from not caring, to now my opinion is if there's not at least a decision to change rulers I'll genuinely be upset for dozens of minutes. This coming from an American who knows 11 less words than you. Unless Norway doesn't count, then stuck at none.
I think "Norway" is "Norge" in Norwegian.
 
Again, thank you for the DD and for being honest about your feelings towards developing these focus trees. That warants respect, and I hope my criticism does not come over as unfriendly or unkind, as that is not my intention at all.

As some might remember, I had a number of post in the "historical Norway" DD raising a number of concerns I had with much of the direction and approach to Norway that DD showed. Reading this DD, I can not say that I am any less concerned. When reading the Finnish and Swedish DDs, there seems to be an enthusiasm and effort to include elements of "coolnes" (for lack of a better word), like historically accurate units such as ski troops and rangers. Norway seems to have been approached from a more "LOLish" angle, with the "Meme-tank" that saw no operational use in reality and militia troops which really wasnt part of the army at the time, and a somewhat caricatured approach to the political difficulties at the time. This DD and responses ends up reinforcing that impression.

It also seems like there is so much double work being done, and great ideas and concepts not being implemented even though they are being developed for this DLC specifically. For instance, Sweden has a mechanic to move their government around if they loose territory. This is exactly what the Norwegian government at the time did, and implementing a similar mechanic for Norway seems like really low hanging fruit. The same can be said for unit types that were prevalent throughout the Nordic countries, but that Norway seems to lack though they are implemented for Sweden and Finland (rangers and ski troops respectively). Also, I do feel like the "push button to increase state stat" is less interesting than the other countries approach, where they try to model the hard balancing between welfare and warfare spending (or similar dilemmas), and from the looks of it this "minigame" will be a thing for most of the focus tree branches. Lastly, I think using "your army is really bad" modifiers to model an army lacking equipment and manpower is the wrong approach, in a game that models both equipment production and manpower availability, and there seems to be a certain fascination with militia divisions which seems a bit out of place.

I do understand that you wouldnt want four identical countries, but I do question the overall direction when much effort seems to be spent developing less good solutions to the same problems and not implementing good solutions that already exists. I would prefer "reuse" of good ideas, and the effort in stead being spent on improving and diversifying each of the nations. But then again, im no game developer.

Again, I hope I do not come over as overly negative and critical, that is not my intention, and I do realise there might be cool features I have missed or that havent been announced yet. Im just stuck with the feeling that the Norwegian content lacks much of what would make Norway a fun and interesting country to play, in stead being "different" and "funny".
 
  • 25
  • 5Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
My first read-through of the dev diary left me with a bit of a sour taste. First all the talk about Trotskij, who in the end is nothing more than an advisor. Then there's the fascist branch, which is described using terms like "Undesirable" (this one especially irks me) & "making the world a worse place". I mean, I feel that way whenever I play as a fascist in HoI4, but hammering home how much your content stinks neither sells copies nor keeps your coworkers motivated. And then finally there's the monarchist path, which doesn't even put a monarch in charge, yet still goes around making all sorts of insane claims.

However, upon rereading it all, and letting things sink in, I think a lot of the humor and irony flew over my head. In either case, it did grow on me, and had it been made clear to me before I would have liked to hear more about the narrative design of the tree.

Still, I'm not quite sure if alt-history Norway is my cup of tea. So many civil-wars in the country perhaps most prone to stalemates. Plus another preparations minigame, which I haven't yet wrapped my head around in any of the other instances in which it appears. That said, if it's possible to get Newfoundland (as ridiculous as that claim is) and Iceland without going to war with the Allies; Norway as an unassailable guardian of Allied shipping in the north Atlantic does sound like an attractive playthrough. It kinda puts the "Norway" back into Norway so to speak.

Now, as for the monarchy, based on what little I know of norwegian history I suppose it makes sense for Haakon not to take full charge. But with all those claims, surely you'd need a more passionate monarch backing things up, right? Alternatively, perhaps it could be a thing that Haakon steps in and stops his regent from dragging the Norwegian people to war with the UK?
 
  • 14
  • 2
Reactions:
> My post got removed

Guess we still need to control Marrakech to form Arabia despite holding the titular peninsula (sans the British colonies) for almost a decade already, eh? Despite being historically more plausible than Al-Andalus or Roman Empire, with the more recent talks about it was the McMahon-Husein correspondence in 1917, Arabia is still not a tiered formable.

Scandinavia and Nordic Union formables are still achieveable before going to war with a major despite they are not a tiered formable, at least.....
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Just stepping in here briefly to say that of course we do listen to feedback. The discussion took a bit of a turn to sound like we don’t. But of course we do. We get feedback all the time; from our colleagues, from beta testers and from the forum - and other places. We cannot act on everything, but we try to listen to as much as possible. And we do a lot of changes based on feedback.

Come to think of it - that might be a good idea for a dev diary: How designs change over the course of a project. I’ll see if I can sneak something about that in at some point in the not so distant future.
Reading this diary left me quite concerned. I'm not sure how specific I can be while still complining to forum rules (Steam comments might be a good hint, though), but at the very least I'd expect a person with an obvious political bias to abstain from creating contents for the opposite political spectrum, provided all his intents boil down to just mockery.
 
  • 23
  • 3
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
On the other hand, that's not consistent with how monarchs who chose to rule through the cabinet (Emperor Showa) or likely would have had to do so (Edward VII) are portrayed in-game currently.
Or Horthy for that matter. He wasn't a king but very much like a deep state authority figure, nothing count happen without his consent. So although he never took nominal power he's portrayed in game as country leader.

Apart from this i think King Haakon should not be non-aligned but rather democratic representing his political attitude as well as his ties to the British.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
> My post got removed

Guess we still need to control Marrakech to form Arabia despite holding the titular peninsula (sans the British colonies) for almost a decade already, eh? Despite being historically more plausible than Al-Andalus or Roman Empire, with the more recent talks about it was the McMahon-Husein correspondence in 1917, Arabia is still not a tiered formable.

Scandinavia and Nordic Union formables are still achieveable before going to war with a major despite they are not a tiered formable, at least.....
There should honestly be a Together for Victory 2 or something at some point to cover parts of the British and French empires that were skipped for some reason as well as bits of the Middle East and East Asia. A pan-Arabism route basically writes itself. There are also a bunch of small inconsistencies like how Ireland, in game terms, should technically either be a dominion or have some kind of loose treaty status with the UK at the start until 1937 and larger inconsistencies like the fact Egypt just outright doesn't exist.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
This one is not memetic and even promised IRL, but whatever.
Husein's Arab Territories.jpg
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions:
I don’t know if this is a good idea, but I want to be as transparent as I can be and hopefully reach some sort of mutual understanding.

First of all, I apologize for my flippant tone. I believe in knowing when you’re wrong and accepting it. At the time it felt like a fun tone and style and now I know it was clearly the wrong one, especially since it doesn’t always carry well in text. It ended up being a bit too unprofessional.

Here are some of my thoughts, in no particular order:

  • To whoever thinks I don’t care about the monarchist path and that’s why I’m not having Haakon as the king. That’s not it. I knew you (the fans) would expect a monarchist path for Norway and that I had to deliver something good, so I wanted to do something a little off the beaten path. If I truly didn’t care I would’ve just done the “the king takes power”, “the king gives you buffs for taking direct control” and “the king demands these territories because his cousins used to own them!” thing we already have used in the past. To be honest there’s still some of that in the tree but I wanted to have a different narrative. As I said earlier the Monarchist path in Norway is my second favorite path and my favorite in terms of narrative, and I can’t wait for you to play it and judge it on how it plays and not on how I wrote the DD. I played around with different narratives, including one where he abdicated in favor of prince Olav when Queen Maude died. In the end, none of those options felt right, in large part because both Haakon and Olav were extremely popular kings that always deferred their power to the people and by all accounts extremely nice dudes. I genuinely don’t think anyone is born “better” than other people, or with an intrinsic right to rule over a country, so I don’t like monarchies, but even I have to admit that if I were to have a king, Haakon and Olav are probably the best ones to have, and if I made them despotic rulers, I felt I would be betraying their legacy.
  • Next up, feedback. I love DDs because it lets us get different views and info we would never get otherwise and I do take it seriously. I could just easily say “Nice, thanks for the feedback, I’ll consider it” and just not done anything about it and my week would’ve been SO MUCH DUCKING BETTER :p. But I would much prefer explaining my reasoning for not using the feedback so you can understand our process and design intentions better.
  • Related to that, statistically, I can never make content that will please everyone, so I made an educated guess that more people would appreciate the offbeat monarchist path rather than a normal one, and if I did the normal one there would be people complaining that Haakon would never do that anyway, so I went with Peder Anker’s Regency. I still think I’m right about this one btw, I love this narrative and I had a ton of fun writing it.
  • I will reiterate, I think fascism is extremely evil, and I will not tolerate someone being actually fascist, and anyone who wants an absolutist monarchy, though not as evil, yields, in my opinion, a similar result and it’s an outdated and oppressive mode of government. That doesn’t mean I think any of you are wrong for wanting to roleplay them in a computer game. I thought there was an understanding of that and I was wrong, my tone probably didn’t help. On that same note, both Stalin and Trotsky were assholes at best, and me making content about them doesn’t mean I agree with them.

Ok before I digress and rant further. I will still stand by my design and narrative, after all, I deeply care about the content I’m making and though I truly appreciate your feedback, this is the path I want to make and the one I think will be the most fun. If I didn’t make content I was invested in I don’t think I could do this job, and the same goes for all my colleagues at Paradox. We are people with our own beliefs, interests, design style, personalities and preferences but we are united in that we are extremely passionate about the things we make, and have our own reasons for making them how we make them. Believe me, we don’t do this for the money, the work-life balance or the location.

Thanks for reading,regardless of this extra long post, you are an amazing community, and I’ve appreciated your unbelievably smart insights, and every positive message you’ve posted here, so don’t lose that and I hope this can be a way to understand each other better.


P.S: The expansion is not done yet, you never know what you might find when it’s out.
 
  • 35Like
  • 10Love
  • 10
  • 4
Reactions:
I don’t know if this is a good idea, but I want to be as transparent as I can be and hopefully reach some sort of mutual understanding.

First of all, I apologize for my flippant tone. I believe in knowing when you’re wrong and accepting it. At the time it felt like a fun tone and style and now I know it was clearly the wrong one, especially since it doesn’t always carry well in text. It ended up being a bit too unprofessional.

Here are some of my thoughts, in no particular order:

  • To whoever thinks I don’t care about the monarchist path and that’s why I’m not having Haakon as the king. That’s not it. I knew you (the fans) would expect a monarchist path for Norway and that I had to deliver something good, so I wanted to do something a little off the beaten path. If I truly didn’t care I would’ve just done the “the king takes power”, “the king gives you buffs for taking direct control” and “the king demands these territories because his cousins used to own them!” thing we already have used in the past. To be honest there’s still some of that in the tree but I wanted to have a different narrative. As I said earlier the Monarchist path in Norway is my second favorite path and my favorite in terms of narrative, and I can’t wait for you to play it and judge it on how it plays and not on how I wrote the DD. I played around with different narratives, including one where he abdicated in favor of prince Olav when Queen Maude died. In the end, none of those options felt right, in large part because both Haakon and Olav were extremely popular kings that always deferred their power to the people and by all accounts extremely nice dudes. I genuinely don’t think anyone is born “better” than other people, or with an intrinsic right to rule over a country, so I don’t like monarchies, but even I have to admit that if I were to have a king, Haakon and Olav are probably the best ones to have, and if I made them despotic rulers, I felt I would be betraying their legacy.
  • Next up, feedback. I love DDs because it lets us get different views and info we would never get otherwise and I do take it seriously. I could just easily say “Nice, thanks for the feedback, I’ll consider it” and just not done anything about it and my week would’ve been SO MUCH DUCKING BETTER :p. But I would much prefer explaining my reasoning for not using the feedback so you can understand our process and design intentions better.
  • Related to that, statistically, I can never make content that will please everyone, so I made an educated guess that more people would appreciate the offbeat monarchist path rather than a normal one, and if I did the normal one there would be people complaining that Haakon would never do that anyway, so I went with Peder Anker’s Regency. I still think I’m right about this one btw, I love this narrative and I had a ton of fun writing it.
  • I will reiterate, I think fascism is extremely evil, and I will not tolerate someone being actually fascist, and anyone who wants an absolutist monarchy, though not as evil, yields, in my opinion, a similar result and it’s an outdated and oppressive mode of government. That doesn’t mean I think any of you are wrong for wanting to roleplay them in a computer game. I thought there was an understanding of that and I was wrong, my tone probably didn’t help. On that same note, both Stalin and Trotsky were assholes at best, and me making content about them doesn’t mean I agree with them.

Ok before I digress and rant further. I will still stand by my design and narrative, after all, I deeply care about the content I’m making and though I truly appreciate your feedback, this is the path I want to make and the one I think will be the most fun. If I didn’t make content I was invested in I don’t think I could do this job, and the same goes for all my colleagues at Paradox. We are people with our own beliefs, interests, design style, personalities and preferences but we are united in that we are extremely passionate about the things we make, and have our own reasons for making them how we make them. Believe me, we don’t do this for the money, the work-life balance or the location.

Thanks for reading,regardless of this extra long post, you are an amazing community, and I’ve appreciated your unbelievably smart insights, and every positive message you’ve posted here, so don’t lose that and I hope this can be a way to understand each other better.


P.S: The expansion is not done yet, you never know what you might find when it’s out.
Thank you for this reply. I know that being a game developer is not easy work and I would never trash your content. I personally like everything in the tree, outside of no ability to add Haakon. Of course if you don't want to add him, don't. Like I said I like the monarchist and the whole tree as a whole. You did a great job. Like ive said, I think at the end there should be a option maybe even only available in case of emergency for Haakon to take control for the good of the nation. Do you have to add this? Of course not, it's your tree. Do I feel like the community would appreciate it. I do.

Like I've said, I'm not a absolute monarchist in real life. Facists, communists, are of course. Both evil.

To wrap this all up. Do I hope for Haakon to be added in some way as the country leader? Yes. Do I want you to make content you don't want to? Of course not. Like I've said I respect your opinion.

Overall, great tree.
 
Last edited:
  • 9Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Well, well, since i have no stake on the Monarchist debate anyway (besides my beef about a certain formable from 2020 reignited), i appreciated your post and shared your your strong stance to keep your intended contents for your country, in this case Norway.

In my East Indies Reworked mod, i've had frequently defended my stance when my fellow Indonesian viewers complained that there are no Indonesian fascist movements despite there is an Indonesian Communist path, Indonesian Nationalist, and Dutch Fascists path for the Ahistorical branches. Buggy contents aside (as for Friday), fascism in the East Indies were largely restricted to the Indo and European population, with the Indonesian ones were quickly snuffed by the largely anti-fascist (albeit shared a bit pan-Asiatic sentiment with Japan) Indonesian Nationalists who were angered by the European Fascists' antics.

Also the Dutch Fascist path is still there and you can play it fully to expand the Dutch Empire to its greatest extent outside of Europe, despite my inclination as an anti-fascist.

A minor nitpick, though:
Peder Anker’s Regency.
Peder Anker's Ministry fits better since the king is still there.
 
Last edited:
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:
At the time it felt like a fun tone and style and now I know it was clearly the wrong one, especially since it doesn’t always carry well in text. It ended up being a bit too unprofessional.
Nah, I like the combative, flippant tone whether I agree with whatever point you're making or not. Not caring about generating HR faux pas is part of what made Johan a legend after all.
 
  • 9
Reactions:
Now that we have so many trostkyist trees, could you maybe add a kind of modifier, which allows them to organise in a faction? For example Canada has a trotskyist path but at the same time it isolates itself with it, wouldn't it make more sense, if it could at least team up with trotskyist Norway and so on?
 
Last edited:
  • 5
  • 1Like
  • 1Love
Reactions: