Plagued /r/TNOmod and the Reddit HOI4 modding community - When a subreddit for a video game mod turns to utter insanity

TWR Dev 819 said:
Who is this Matt dude? I feel like there could be some interesting stuff to be found about him....
Click to expand...
Not on topic but I had to ask out of curiosity. Are you a dev from the TWR mod discord? I thought that because of your username.
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: BSC
Oblique said:
Not on topic but I had to ask out of curiosity. Are you a dev from the TWR mod discord? I thought that because of your username.
Click to expand...
1612735263691.png


Perhaps...
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Lieutenant Rasczak, thhrang, Ged! and 27 others
Pointless Pedant said:
Most civil wars and coups are in poor, authoritarian countries. The TNO developers are much closer to a communist failed state than a liberal democracy, though.
Click to expand...
That is true.
However, dictatorships have the advantage of being able to silence any kind of opposition or criticism against them, so I find it pretty weird to see wealthy authoritarian regimes like Germany and Italy fall into that much instability, especially if you consider the cult personality that happened in fascist regimes and the fact that authoritarian leaders (or most leaders in general) would always fill their cabinets with absolute loyalists to avoid uprisings from within.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: ScatmansWorld
UltraCunt said:
Ex-Dev, he never really did much work and just liked being a miserable fucker and a backseat janny, as shown in that screencap.
Click to expand...
Oh shit, I think I kinda remember this guy. His name previously was Matt the Radar Technician, IIRC he was one of the few right leaning members of the mod that wasn't completely flushed out from the team, him and another guy called Heussman.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Kanuckski
Soy Chad said:
That is true.
However, dictatorships have the advantage of being able to silence any kind of opposition or criticism against them, so I find it pretty weird to see wealthy authoritarian regimes like Germany and Italy fall into that much instability, especially if you consider the cult personality that happened in fascist regimes and the fact that authoritarian leaders (or most leaders in general) would always fill their cabinets with absolute loyalists to avoid uprisings from within.
Click to expand...
Germany and Italy weren't rich countries back then compared to today, though. Even historically the king of Italy just sacked Mussolini once he started losing the war and arrested him. Only German intervention and occupation of Italy rescued him for a couple of years before partisans killed him. Germany was a lot more committed to supporting Hitler, but in the game's scenario fighting starts after Hitler's death, once his cult of personality is gone.

What is really unrealistic is that the civil war is so conventional. Rather than an (avoidable) crisis escalating into riots and sporadic battles across the country, the 4 power blocs just appear with fully formed front lines on the map as if it were a conventional war between states. That's not how the Spanish civil war happened, or Syria more recently.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: FunPosting101, Saturnalia-1918, ScatmansWorld and 10 others
Pointless Pedant said:
Rather than an (avoidable) crisis escalating into riots and sporadic battles across the country
Click to expand...
Might as well throw my hat into the autistic ring and say: A post-victory, post-Hitler Nazi Germany would have been even more stable than during Hitler's lifetime, since without the turn in the war, Hitler's definite successor would still have been Göring, a known moderate within the Nazi elite who was still respected within a large chunk of the conservative and nationalist resistance. Hell, fat old Hermann even tried to use his influence to exclude Jews he respected from antisemitic legislation, quote: "I decide who's a Jew and who isn't".
A victorious Third Reich under his leadership would only have fallen apart from a rekindling of resistance in the occupied and annexed territories (France, Britain, Eastern Europe etc) - which admittedly would be boring because it would just end in the same result as the late stages of WWII, pretty much.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: FunPosting101, Saturnalia-1918, not william stenchever and 5 others
Pointless Pedant said:
Germany and Italy weren't rich countries back then compared to today, though. Even historically the king of Italy just sacked Mussolini once he started losing the war and arrested him. Only German intervention and occupation of Italy rescued him for a couple of years before partisans killed him. Germany was a lot more committed to supporting Hitler, but in the game's scenario fighting starts after Hitler's death, once his cult of personality is gone.

What is really unrealistic is that the civil war is so conventional. Rather than an (avoidable) crisis escalating into riots and sporadic battles across the country, the 4 power blocs just appear with fully formed front lines on the map as if it were a conventional war between states. That's not how the Spanish civil war happened, or Syria more recently.
Click to expand...
I think the German Civil War would be more realistic if:
- Burgundy's assassination of Hitler succeeded and thus there would be no heir for the Fuhrership, making the civil war much more "reasonable"
- It would be a Two-Way Civil War between Heydrich's Germany (with a much more present Burgundian support) and the rest of the German factions, with Bormann and Goering fighting over who gets more influence in the Wehrmacht and with Speer possibly spliting from them, receiving support from the OFN but still being the weakest out of all of the factions.
- More post-civil war decisions to deal with the economy and remaining partisan activity
- Himmler is Heydrich's puppet and not the other way around, just like it was IRL
- Heydrich doesn't make Germany descend into uther anarchy if he wins because that is retard

Maybe I'm wrong, but hey, I'm just spitting ideas.

Dickxon said:
Might as well throw my hat into the autistic ring and say: A post-victory, post-Hitler Nazi Germany would have been even more stable than during Hitler's lifetime, since without the turn in the war, Hitler's definite successor would still have been Göring, a known moderate within the Nazi elite who was still respected within a large chunk of the conservative and nationalist resistance.
A victorious Third Reich under his leadership would only have fallen apart from a rekindling of resistance in the occupied and annexed territories (France, Britain, Eastern Europe etc) - which admittedly would be boring because it would just end in the same result as the late stages of WWII, pretty much.
Click to expand...
Nazi Germany would fall from stagnation and isolationism, similar to the Roman Empire, in my opinion. Not from a civil war or a foreign intervention.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Saturnalia-1918, YellowTanker, Neo-Holstien and 1 other person
Soy Chad said:
That is true.
However, dictatorships have the advantage of being able to silence any kind of opposition or criticism against them, so I find it pretty weird to see wealthy authoritarian regimes like Germany and Italy fall into that much instability, especially if you consider the cult personality that happened in fascist regimes and the fact that authoritarian leaders (or most leaders in general) would always fill their cabinets with absolute loyalists to avoid uprisings from within.
Click to expand...
The way Hitler organised the state apparatus a civil war was very much possible after his death. It was more of a feudal state with everyone running their department with large autonomy, the left arm doesn't know what the right one is doing and Hitler loved to pit one group against another. Whoever Hitler would pick someone wouldn't be happy and would take action. They were all power hungry autocrats in the top levels of the Nazi party.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Randall Fragg, KiwiJoe and Pointless Pedant
Dickxon said:
Might as well throw my hat into the autistic ring and say: A post-victory, post-Hitler Nazi Germany would have been even more stable than during Hitler's lifetime, since without the turn in the war, Hitler's definite successor would still have been Göring, a known moderate within the Nazi elite who was still respected within a large chunk of the conservative and nationalist resistance.
A victorious Third Reich under his leadership would only have fallen apart from a rekindling of resistance in the occupied and annexed territories (France, Britain, Eastern Europe etc) - which admittedly would be boring because it would just end in the same result as the late stages of WWII, pretty much.
Click to expand...
There's also the issue of the Reich moving towards central planning during the war which would probably have led to a similar sort of stagnation under national socialism that the Soviets experienced in the 1970s, combined with military overextension trying to control the east. This ridiculous mod wouldn't show a realistic slow decline of empire, though.
Jaromar said:
The way Hitler organised the state apparatus a civil war was very much possible after his death. It was more of a feudal state with everyone running their department with large autonomy, the left arm doesn't know what the right one is doing and Hitler loved to pit one group against another. Whoever Hitler would pick someone wouldn't be happy and would take action. They were all power hungry autocrats in the top levels of the Nazi party.
Click to expand...
A civil war is definitely possible (the USSR almost had one in the months long succession crisis after Stalin died, after all), but it should be possible to avoid it diplomatically like they did. Either work with the other Nazis or it all falls apart and violence breaks out - but it's in the form of more irregular warfare rather than a bunch of conventional front lines appearing, since the army would be divided and mixed in with citizens' militia units. Also units would defect mid-combat depending on their loyalties. Civil wars are incredibly messy. During the American one, West Virginia split off Virginia and made its own state to stay in the Union.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Saturnalia-1918, Kanuckski, Brigada and 2 others
Übertroon said:
Click to expand...
I see that someone else knows about M.D.P.
Pointless Pedant said:
Germany and Italy weren't rich countries back then compared to today, though. Even historically the king of Italy just sacked Mussolini once he started losing the war and arrested him. Only German intervention and occupation of Italy rescued him for a couple of years before partisans killed him. Germany was a lot more committed to supporting Hitler, but in the game's scenario fighting starts after Hitler's death, once his cult of personality is gone.

What is really unrealistic is that the civil war is so conventional. Rather than an (avoidable) crisis escalating into riots and sporadic battles across the country, the 4 power blocs just appear with fully formed front lines on the map as if it were a conventional war between states. That's not how the Spanish civil war happened, or Syria more recently.
Click to expand...
granted do you think that HOI4 can handle something like realistic civil war territories? the only interesting thing TNO does in the civil war is that it splits Heydrichs germany in 2 but youre better of abandoning the 2nd part entirely anyways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bat'Ko the Radek
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back