I wanted to talk about this topic since it wasn't talked about in the dev corners, at least not yet, since it is a bit more "complex/advanced" and factions seem to be still early in development. I didn't want to write it as a suggestion because I first wanted to see what the community thinks of the general concept and because I think that It would be better if developers saw general discussion around the topic, and then alone drew conclusions, I am only a player, I know good game design when someone offer's it to me on a silver plate, But I don't neceseraly know how to poof it out of nothing.
In a HoI4, there's a chance for the world to be divided into countless smaller factions, but there will always be two ideologically aligned factions. On a historical setting, it is the Axis and the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
Even tho Japan was technically part of the Axis powers, there wasn't much that they could do to support the war in Europe directly, but even tho cooperation between the two was limited, some efforts were made, in the form of technology sharing, and supporting a few units that could break through the Allied blockade.
On the other hand, we have Allies, which in most cases, outside of HoI4, includes the USSR and China. There is an in-game reason for why the Soviets and Chinese are not part of the Allies, backed with some historical precedent (that being ideological differences) which were ignored because of a common enemy but this does mean that some historical aspects of WWII get left out, like the land-lease to the USSR.
UK and US knew that losing the war in the east would prolong the war for an indefinite amount of time, even just the collapse of the organised army in the east would relieve a lot of resources that Germany needed, it was important to keep a supply of Military hardware and that had to be done whilst passing close to german territories in the north, meaning that UK and USSR had to run large escort taskforces in order to safely supply USSR, It was of such importance that Allies even gave ships to USSR.
Another part where the USSR cooperated with Allies (UK) was in the occupation of Iran; still main purpose was to keep German influence out of the country and to make supplying the USSR easier.
There is also the case of Allies flying sorties over Germany and lending in the USSR for resupply, but a better example would be the US flying sorties from China to hit Japan.
I wanted to point out that there is a place for Cross Faction Coordination/Cooperation in the game, in my opinion, based on two things;
a) Ideological alignment
b) Common enemy/Goal
Those are just some ideas I brainstormed but there is one I want to emphasize, and that is:
Support when not at war or not at war with the same enemy.
It's simple, if Two Factions have similar goals or Ideology, they would support each other through some means, like lowered costs of envoys, lowered requirements for landlease, lowered requirements, and increased number of volunteers. Maybe some other economic help.
Initiative/Agenda to support another faction via landlease, example: US would send equipment to USSR even if they are not part of their faction and the equipment sent should be more than 4 support /month and 120 infantry /month, only to be canceled second after that month ends.
Ability to ask permission to use their airfields, which would work like volunteers, where you get a cap on how many squadrons you can send to operate from x faction's territory, I as US send 8 squadrons of Strategic bombers and 2 squadrons of heavy fighters to "re landscape" Japan, but unlike volonteres they can operate from any airfield belonging to Chinese United front, but I can't sand 10 Squaadrons to China and 10 Squadrons to Communist China etc.
Ability to operate ships more efficiently from the territory of another faction, same way that if you have a task force in the base of your ally, you can have max 1 dockyard repairing them, compared to small passive repair one in ports of nations that only give you access. Coordinated factions would have 1 dockyard taking care of your ships in the territory belonging to another faction. For example, if As UK had had my carrier assaulted by land-based German aircraft, I decided to move it into Northern Russia where I could repair it.
Again, this is just on top of my mind and is meant to paint a picture, to try and at least vaguely give you the idea of what I am thinking about.
I also want to address the reason (more so to give some context of what I think Paradox was thinking) why those factions weren't part of the one super faction or why they are not part anymore, and some alt-history scenarios to show how those interactions could look, and how AI could interact with the concept.
In theoldest Ancient versions of the game USSR and Chinas joined allies, whilst Japan joined the Axis.
This meant that you had to cap Japan + Germany + Italy for Allied victory or cap France + UK + US + USSR + China for Axis Victory (not fun)
This was probably the largest reason why factions were split up, but there are historical justifications behind this.
As I mentioned, Axis and Japan couldn't really cooperate effectively.
The USSR also held some reservations towards the West, for example, they didn't usually allow allied pilots to operate from Soviet territory; they much preferred to be given aircraft to do it themselves. They were reluctant to share Intel and keept Allied envoys under tight supervision to ensure they weren't spies.
West also held animosity towards USSR.
Before the War, France and the UK hoped that Germany would counterbalance the Soviets (one of the reasons why they were so passive) in the process of alienating USSR, Soviets and Germans found common ground (easy land grab), which is another cross-faction coordination.
And China was a mess with no coherent political strategy other than "I'm the real China" and "Kick out Japanese" the latter being more important than the former.
After the end of WW2 Europe and the world were torn into two blocs: West and East.
Ideological differences came back into the first plan right after the larger threat was eliminated. That is why I stated that faction cooperation should be based on two things:
Ideological alignment, which there wasn't any to begin with between the USSR and the Allies, and a Common Enemy/Goal, which didn't exist anymore.
And now on hypothetical alt history.
Let's say the Baltics formed a Democratic Faction in order to protect their sovereignty from the USSR and Germany.
Germany demands Memel, and Lithuania refuses. The faction is at war with Germany.
Germany demands Danzig, Poland refuses, Poland joins allies, Poland gets capped cuz AI. Both Allies and Baltic Faction are at war against Germany, and both are democratic.
Those two factions have incentives to cooperate, for example, sharing Intel, allowing the usage of airfields and ports, maybe some discounts on the weapons market, maybe giving some subsidies. However reason why they are not part of the same faction is a) Focus tree b) politics.
The purpose of the Baltic faction is to keep their independence from Germany and the USSR, but the Allies have no interest in going to war with the USSR, so when the Soviets declare, it's all up to them. Same school of thinking with the current balance of power.
Another alt history example could be the Pan Balkan Workers' Congress and the Comintern. Both are Communist, and both have the goal of "giving power to the workers." But Yugoslavia has its own plans, so unless the USSR and Yugoslavia have a fallout due to border disputes, they will support each other in times of war, for example:
Germany invades the Comintern.
Yugoslavia, as a faction leader, can steer the faction towards helping out the USSR through volunteers. Landlease if possible, and subsidies.
Italy then invades Albania, now both factions have a common enemy and the same ideology. even tho volunteers are returned, and most agendas for factions have changed, there still can be a shape for cooperation and coordination through the means I have mentioned a few times above.
However, if the USSR demands Bessarabia, Yugoslavia gets mad, because this is where their goals cross. Now, from what we have seen bout faction until now, this could endanger the potential agenda of the Pan Balkan Workers' Congress. We will say that Romania Accepted, which would result in some nerfs for the faction, because they are failing to protect the Balkan Nations from oppressors. Now, this should be enough to encourage players not to support the Soviets in case of a war.
The last of my alt history examples is the normal Hitler Germany, and Italy First, Italy.
Italy has the goal of reclaiming Mare Nostrum. They seek to control Sentinels and to be the dominant power in their sea, they have Ambitions in the Balkans, Spain, and Northern Africa.
Germany has the goal of becoming the dominant power of Europe once more; they have ambitions in Scandinavia, Central, Western, and Eastern Europe.
On paper, those two share ideology, have common enemies, and their general areas of interest don't cross.
Whilst those two powers would coordinate and cooperate during the war with the Allies, but Italy would not help out against the Soviets.
However, after the war against the common enemy ends, those two factions now become opposing. Both seek to be Dominant powers in the region.
As long as they have common enemy there would be an incetive to keep relations favorable.
Last point that I want to go over is how could AI interact with this concept. Very simply, by set of values that are determened by few factor.
Ideology, Agenda, Enemy, General opinion between leaders, and Largest of all "Historical ON".
It would be best to give some special agendas to the UK, US, USSR, Germany, Japan, and China, so that course of history could be set on tracks.
"If_ENG_at_war_with_GER
Is_Faction_Leader
Is_not_at_war_with_RUS
If_RUS_at_war_with_GER
Is_Faction_Leader
Is_not_at_war_with_RUS
Set_Faction_friendship: 1000"
This would mean that allies are going to be friendly with the USSR and China, so that they can support each other.
Whilst relations like the one between Axis and GEACPS would remain in the hands of players
But in general, AI would only give some smaller support based on ideology and enemy, like Allies sent 8 volonteres to China, and would prefere to be passive in order for the game not to become too diplomacy oriented.
I also think that there should be non-aggression pacts between factions. This would act as a non-aggression pact between all members of two factions. This is mostly done so when two factions have a common enemy but can't agree on ideology or have different plans, they don't kill each other until they have defeated the common enemy.
This should give players a lot of freedom to do funky alt history scenarios with some funky factions without having to go to war against everyone because Italy wants Albania.
This took two days to write because I fell asleep whilst writing it. So my original idea might have died out sorry if there are any contradictions.
In a HoI4, there's a chance for the world to be divided into countless smaller factions, but there will always be two ideologically aligned factions. On a historical setting, it is the Axis and the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
Even tho Japan was technically part of the Axis powers, there wasn't much that they could do to support the war in Europe directly, but even tho cooperation between the two was limited, some efforts were made, in the form of technology sharing, and supporting a few units that could break through the Allied blockade.
On the other hand, we have Allies, which in most cases, outside of HoI4, includes the USSR and China. There is an in-game reason for why the Soviets and Chinese are not part of the Allies, backed with some historical precedent (that being ideological differences) which were ignored because of a common enemy but this does mean that some historical aspects of WWII get left out, like the land-lease to the USSR.
UK and US knew that losing the war in the east would prolong the war for an indefinite amount of time, even just the collapse of the organised army in the east would relieve a lot of resources that Germany needed, it was important to keep a supply of Military hardware and that had to be done whilst passing close to german territories in the north, meaning that UK and USSR had to run large escort taskforces in order to safely supply USSR, It was of such importance that Allies even gave ships to USSR.
Another part where the USSR cooperated with Allies (UK) was in the occupation of Iran; still main purpose was to keep German influence out of the country and to make supplying the USSR easier.
There is also the case of Allies flying sorties over Germany and lending in the USSR for resupply, but a better example would be the US flying sorties from China to hit Japan.
I wanted to point out that there is a place for Cross Faction Coordination/Cooperation in the game, in my opinion, based on two things;
a) Ideological alignment
b) Common enemy/Goal
Those are just some ideas I brainstormed but there is one I want to emphasize, and that is:
Support when not at war or not at war with the same enemy.
It's simple, if Two Factions have similar goals or Ideology, they would support each other through some means, like lowered costs of envoys, lowered requirements for landlease, lowered requirements, and increased number of volunteers. Maybe some other economic help.
Initiative/Agenda to support another faction via landlease, example: US would send equipment to USSR even if they are not part of their faction and the equipment sent should be more than 4 support /month and 120 infantry /month, only to be canceled second after that month ends.
Ability to ask permission to use their airfields, which would work like volunteers, where you get a cap on how many squadrons you can send to operate from x faction's territory, I as US send 8 squadrons of Strategic bombers and 2 squadrons of heavy fighters to "re landscape" Japan, but unlike volonteres they can operate from any airfield belonging to Chinese United front, but I can't sand 10 Squaadrons to China and 10 Squadrons to Communist China etc.
Ability to operate ships more efficiently from the territory of another faction, same way that if you have a task force in the base of your ally, you can have max 1 dockyard repairing them, compared to small passive repair one in ports of nations that only give you access. Coordinated factions would have 1 dockyard taking care of your ships in the territory belonging to another faction. For example, if As UK had had my carrier assaulted by land-based German aircraft, I decided to move it into Northern Russia where I could repair it.
Again, this is just on top of my mind and is meant to paint a picture, to try and at least vaguely give you the idea of what I am thinking about.
I also want to address the reason (more so to give some context of what I think Paradox was thinking) why those factions weren't part of the one super faction or why they are not part anymore, and some alt-history scenarios to show how those interactions could look, and how AI could interact with the concept.
In the
This meant that you had to cap Japan + Germany + Italy for Allied victory or cap France + UK + US + USSR + China for Axis Victory (not fun)
This was probably the largest reason why factions were split up, but there are historical justifications behind this.
As I mentioned, Axis and Japan couldn't really cooperate effectively.
The USSR also held some reservations towards the West, for example, they didn't usually allow allied pilots to operate from Soviet territory; they much preferred to be given aircraft to do it themselves. They were reluctant to share Intel and keept Allied envoys under tight supervision to ensure they weren't spies.
West also held animosity towards USSR.
Before the War, France and the UK hoped that Germany would counterbalance the Soviets (one of the reasons why they were so passive) in the process of alienating USSR, Soviets and Germans found common ground (easy land grab), which is another cross-faction coordination.
And China was a mess with no coherent political strategy other than "I'm the real China" and "Kick out Japanese" the latter being more important than the former.
After the end of WW2 Europe and the world were torn into two blocs: West and East.
Ideological differences came back into the first plan right after the larger threat was eliminated. That is why I stated that faction cooperation should be based on two things:
Ideological alignment, which there wasn't any to begin with between the USSR and the Allies, and a Common Enemy/Goal, which didn't exist anymore.
And now on hypothetical alt history.
Let's say the Baltics formed a Democratic Faction in order to protect their sovereignty from the USSR and Germany.
Germany demands Memel, and Lithuania refuses. The faction is at war with Germany.
Germany demands Danzig, Poland refuses, Poland joins allies, Poland gets capped cuz AI. Both Allies and Baltic Faction are at war against Germany, and both are democratic.
Those two factions have incentives to cooperate, for example, sharing Intel, allowing the usage of airfields and ports, maybe some discounts on the weapons market, maybe giving some subsidies. However reason why they are not part of the same faction is a) Focus tree b) politics.
The purpose of the Baltic faction is to keep their independence from Germany and the USSR, but the Allies have no interest in going to war with the USSR, so when the Soviets declare, it's all up to them. Same school of thinking with the current balance of power.
Another alt history example could be the Pan Balkan Workers' Congress and the Comintern. Both are Communist, and both have the goal of "giving power to the workers." But Yugoslavia has its own plans, so unless the USSR and Yugoslavia have a fallout due to border disputes, they will support each other in times of war, for example:
Germany invades the Comintern.
Yugoslavia, as a faction leader, can steer the faction towards helping out the USSR through volunteers. Landlease if possible, and subsidies.
Italy then invades Albania, now both factions have a common enemy and the same ideology. even tho volunteers are returned, and most agendas for factions have changed, there still can be a shape for cooperation and coordination through the means I have mentioned a few times above.
However, if the USSR demands Bessarabia, Yugoslavia gets mad, because this is where their goals cross. Now, from what we have seen bout faction until now, this could endanger the potential agenda of the Pan Balkan Workers' Congress. We will say that Romania Accepted, which would result in some nerfs for the faction, because they are failing to protect the Balkan Nations from oppressors. Now, this should be enough to encourage players not to support the Soviets in case of a war.
The last of my alt history examples is the normal Hitler Germany, and Italy First, Italy.
Italy has the goal of reclaiming Mare Nostrum. They seek to control Sentinels and to be the dominant power in their sea, they have Ambitions in the Balkans, Spain, and Northern Africa.
Germany has the goal of becoming the dominant power of Europe once more; they have ambitions in Scandinavia, Central, Western, and Eastern Europe.
On paper, those two share ideology, have common enemies, and their general areas of interest don't cross.
Whilst those two powers would coordinate and cooperate during the war with the Allies, but Italy would not help out against the Soviets.
However, after the war against the common enemy ends, those two factions now become opposing. Both seek to be Dominant powers in the region.
As long as they have common enemy there would be an incetive to keep relations favorable.
Last point that I want to go over is how could AI interact with this concept. Very simply, by set of values that are determened by few factor.
Ideology, Agenda, Enemy, General opinion between leaders, and Largest of all "Historical ON".
It would be best to give some special agendas to the UK, US, USSR, Germany, Japan, and China, so that course of history could be set on tracks.
"If_ENG_at_war_with_GER
Is_Faction_Leader
Is_not_at_war_with_RUS
If_RUS_at_war_with_GER
Is_Faction_Leader
Is_not_at_war_with_RUS
Set_Faction_friendship: 1000"
This would mean that allies are going to be friendly with the USSR and China, so that they can support each other.
Whilst relations like the one between Axis and GEACPS would remain in the hands of players
But in general, AI would only give some smaller support based on ideology and enemy, like Allies sent 8 volonteres to China, and would prefere to be passive in order for the game not to become too diplomacy oriented.
I also think that there should be non-aggression pacts between factions. This would act as a non-aggression pact between all members of two factions. This is mostly done so when two factions have a common enemy but can't agree on ideology or have different plans, they don't kill each other until they have defeated the common enemy.
This should give players a lot of freedom to do funky alt history scenarios with some funky factions without having to go to war against everyone because Italy wants Albania.
This took two days to write because I fell asleep whilst writing it. So my original idea might have died out sorry if there are any contradictions.
- 2
- 1