u/TheHaplessBard

I feel that allocating certain factories to produce certain niche equipment - and consequently running out of said equipment extremely fast - is ultimately my biggest Achilles heel in this game. I've watched many videos on Youtube from various seasoned HOI4 players and can never understand how these players manage to turn somewhat underdeveloped powers like Greece or Finland into industrial juggernauts that almost single-handedly gobble up half of Europe lol. Especially when they mass produce tank divisions that have like 30 combat width using hundreds of medium tanks that they miraculously have in surplus by 1940 lol.

Currently, I mostly use the 25 combat width - 11 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 support artillery, and 1 engineering company - for most nations (both big and small) and just try to frantically mass produce them as soon as possible before 1940, while simultaneously building military factories. I also try to allocate two factories to trucks (for supply related purposes) and a minimum of two factories each to CAS and Fighters (total of 4), though obviously gradually add more depending on how many factories I have available. Despite my efforts and even buying extra infantry equipment from other nations in the process, though, I almost always get demolished.

If anyone has any tips on how to better organize my military factories and what to prioritize in terms of production, regardless of the industrial size of one's nation, please let me know. Please be kind since I'm horrible at this game lol.

Like for real. I remember a time when Canada and National France (aka "Sand France") were once fairly competent on the default game settings and often won crucial victories in North America and India, which automatically made them a force to be reckoned with. Nowadays, it's a miracle if they even win against Panama. Seriously, in the majority of my recent games, Canada loses to Panama and almost always gets demolished by the WCA before 1940, even if the WCA are still fighting the Not Pacific States (aka the "ACC") and the American People's Government. And National France hardly ever does anything at all anymore - uncharacteristically, in my opinion, given their fanatical anti-socialist views - and often just keels over with barely a fight once the Internationale invade North Africa.

I remember when the Entente could actually successfully naval invade the fuck out of most nations, which, among other things like naval strength and a decent air force, gave them a unique advantage that justified their existence as an alliance. Now, it's just pathetic.

Kind of want to see what you guys think, since there are always interesting answers to questions in this subreddit.

In the event that a socialist revolution successfully happened and took over America in the Kaiserreich universe, I'm curious at how the American Founding Fathers would be perceived. Since the WCA claims to be at the forefront of a "Second American Revolution," I would imagine some of the founding fathers would still be venerated but others would likely be discarded and denounced as "reactionaries" or even "slavers."

For example, ironically, I think Thomas Jefferson would still be highly respected in a socialist/syndicalist America due to his staunchly anti-clerical views (being a Deist) and his vehement opposition to banks and wealthy businessmen (slavery and Sally Hemmings, be damned). Thomas Paine would likely also be part of the political pantheon due to his uniquely proto-socialist and similarly anti-religious views. John Adams and Alexander Hamilton would probably largely be forgotten or possibly even vilified for their proto-capitalist and elitist views, in addition to most of the Southern aristocrats (e.g. James Madison and James Monroe).

I feel that it's inevitable that the socialists have to keep George Washington around for the sake of legitimizing their regime. However, I think Washington probably gets perceived in a similar way as heroic generals from Russian history like Alexander Nevsky and Pyotr Bagration, in the sense that his military achievements become more prominent and talked about in socialist propaganda than his actual background/political inclinations.

Adding to that, I think John Brown and certainly Abraham Lincoln officially get elevated to the rank of new founding fathers, due to those two 19th century individuals being much more representative of the radicalism and egalitarian views of the 20th century socialist movement. That's what I think though and I would love to hear more of what you guys think.

Like it says on the tin. Trying to get some pointers for a Belgium/Flanders-Wallonia run, template and strategy-wise. Or is Belgium just destined to get flattened by the Internationale lol?

Appreciate the suggestions.

Morbidly curious about what you guys think about the Democratic candidates the most relevant to Missoula this election cycle, Senate candidate Alani Bankhead and House candidate Sam Forstag. I have my own thoughts but I wanted to see what you guys think before I chime in. For full disclosure, I'm not affiliated whatsoever with either individual's campaign so freely share with you really feel.

I know that there's a Spain remake allegedly in the works but I feel that in future patches, the loyal monarchists should have an option to choose another dynasty should they win the Spanish Civil War. Currently, if you win as the Spanish monarchists, you have the choice of making Jaime - the eldest surviving son of Alfonso XIII - king or simply proclaiming a republic, which seems silly and counterintuitive for a country that literally bled to death to maintain a monarchical form of government.

I feel that instead of the republican option, which is unrealistic, the Spanish loyalists should have the option of offering the throne to one of Europe's still surviving royal families should they not want to maintain the unstable Bourbon dynasty. Given the real life history of Spain, I propose three options:

1. The House of Savoy due to having previously ruled Spain from 1870 to 1873 under King Amadeo I
2. The Habsburgs due to having famously ruled Spain from the early 1500s until the Spanish branch's extinction in 1700
3. The House of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen due to being a Catholic cadet branch of the Hohenzollern dynasty ruling Germany and nearly inheriting the throne of Spain in 1870

I feel that in a world where the Central Powers won and monarchy is still, for the most part, the dominant form of government in the world, a German or Austrian candidate particularly would be extremely popular in Spain due to the potential for closer economic and political ties. Also, no disrespect, but realistically speaking, Jaime would have likely been bypassed by monarchists due to extremely prejudicial views against deaf people at the time.

Although Nazi Germany never emerged in this timeline, the Kaiserreich world almost certainly still practices eugenics and disabled individuals are still widely discriminated against. And since Infante Juan - the father of the real-life Spanish King Juan Carlos - dies during the war as mentioned in an event, it seems a tad bit unlikely that the Bourbon dynasty would survive given these circumstances. Just my thoughts and seeing what you guys think though.

In light of the plethora of complaints about Missoula's severely difficult job market, I thought I might shoot my shot and ask if anyone had any job database websites they might recommend for the Missoula area, besides the one for the university (as found here: https://www.schooljobs.com/careers/ummissoula) and Indeed.

I've been told that the employment center might have something reminiscent of what I'm asking for but I'm unfortunately out of town at the moment. Thanks in advance.

I get that Bolshevism - and implicitly Marxism - kind of loses its global relevance due to losing the Russian Civil War and syndicalism becoming the main form of revolutionary socialism. That being said, I feel that regardless of whatever socialist faction takes control of Russia or Ukraine, there would still be a huge push for a nominally decentralized model of government similar in theory to OTL's Soviet Union. Like even if said socialist factions don't believe in soviet democracy or even the concept of soviets, for that matter, they would probably inevitably have to rename their country into something more inclusive, like the Eurasian People's Republics or something (just spitballing here), instead of just Russia (lol).

Given that there's an option for literal Old Bolsheviks like Kamenev and Zinoviev to re-emerge as leaders of Russia, I feel that Latvia (of all nations) being the only one to really have the option to form the Soviet Union is kind of pointless and not particularly accurate. But what do you guys think?

I feel that making the UK an outright fascist state (albeit under a very aristocratic and British version of fascism) took away a lot of fun and potentially interesting paths you could do under the previous English collaborationist government in the old patch. One of which was having Harold MacMillan emerge as the dominant figure in a post-Civil War England (should the collaborationists win the war) and turn England into an authoritarian, dominant party democracy that opens up its economy to the West and generates significant economic growth (a la Singapore).

Kind of a minor nitpit but I feel that should Greece or democratic Bulgaria capture and annex Constantinople from the Ottomans, then there should be more events relating to that capture, like adding more factories or infrastructure.

I noticed there's a few for the autocratic Bulgaria focus tree but I feel that even if a democratic Bulgaria with a purely constitutional monarchy captured Constantinople, there would still be significant excitement and investment from the majority Orthodox population. As for Greece, I know they have the Megali Idea events and can even make Constantinople their new capital but that's the limit as to the city itself.

Edit: Also, I literally just forgot and wanted to point out the fact that as democratic Bulgaria, you don't even have the option of formally annexing and assimilating Constantinople into your territory (at least in my playthroughs). Realistically, even if Bulgaria was officially syndicalist and state atheistic, Constantinople would have officially been annexed and the devs need to change this to reflect realism.

I'm just speculating here but is the main difference that in a syndicalist state, the trade unions directly own the means of production whereas soviets don't and mainly exist for electoral/representative purposes?

I could see most Missoulians support either Russ Cleveland or Sam Forstag, just based on the sheer number of yard signs/posters I've noticed around this town and the fact that both candidates seem to give off somewhat anti-establishment vibes in terms of their respective backgrounds/platforms (which is a hallmark of Missoula's idiosyncratic political and cultural identity). Sam Forstag is, in my opinion, probably the weaker candidate between the two in terms of the general election given his relative youth (only 32) and the somewhat one-note nature of his campaign but I could be wrong.

I still think that Ryan Busse is probably the best possible candidate overall given his already well-established electoral credentials (i.e. familiarity to voters) and potential appeal to independents/Republicans across MT-01, not just those located in Missoula. I'm curious to see what you guys think though.