Modern game?

[TheDungen]

the resurrection of the holy roman empire has been put on hold

We'll probably never be able to call it that oficially, but there's some truth to that statement.

 

[kviiri]

The European Union was never European, nor a Union.

No wait.

 

[TheDungen]

The European Union was never European, nor a Union.

No wait.

Voltaire didn't say never he said that it "Isn't holy roman or an empire".

 

[Bobemor]

Actually we don't know that the full fallout of the financial crisis may yet be to be seen. And we must also consider the changes it prevented, like the futher centralisation of the EU.

In many ways my point, we can't look at history objectivly with a good understand of all the information.

Though that said I think a major extensio of HOI4 into the Cold War (or perhaps a new game, though i tend towards dlc now but let me try HOI4 before giving me jip), would be possible. Though I guess for many they consider that a very modern game...

It's fun to think of one but I don't think it would actually work. Here are a few problems.

America is unquestionably the strongest military nation in the world. Other countries often have to get Americas nod of approval before going to war and certain parts of the map are off limits (North and South America.)

Nukes are overpowered. The two which were dropped in WWII are very~ weak compared to modern versions. During the Cold War, America developed nuclear warheads which also divide multiple times after launch. This means that you don't need a nuke per province. You shoot those and they divide to hit the major cities.

This leads to the third point. Nuclear nations are fighting with kid gloves now. Nations don't want to unleash their full power. The recent American conflicts have very little to do with a true full on war. The larger nuclear powers don't want to fight either. Russia knows that America has a stronger military but they are counting on war weariness and the nuclear deterrent to prevent a conflict as they are annexing nearby states. It's kinda like this... Imagine you want to kill a deer near your house (I am not a hunter and am just using the deer as an example). One person has a rifle, the next person has a rocket launcher, the next a bomb, then a nuclear bomb equivalent of Hiroshima, then a modern nuclear bomb. Is the modern nuclear bomb substantially stronger than the historical nuclear bomb or a regular bomb? Definitely! Does it matter? Not really, either way the deer is going to die. so would it be fun to play a game in kid gloves all the time?

Last point and I'll stop so it doesn't get too long. Countries no longer expand just because they can. Expanding can actually hurt your country far more than it helps. America could conquer Mexico if it wanted. It would actually make America weaker to do so. That would be odd to have in a game.

The game would be very much about economic dominance, much more akin to Victoria, perhaps Victoria 3 should improve its war mechanics and just swamp over HOI and beyond. I understand the weaknesses of this and the dampening of WW2 time, but who knows what Victoria 3 could be like theoretically if its modeling economies well enough it could model any situation.