103
104

HoI4Why don't nukes kill population too? (self.paradoxplaza)

DaedraNocturnal が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]AlmightyBVictorian Emperor 66ポイント67ポイント  (61子コメント)

Paradox don't simulate civilian deaths.

[–]sarmedalwanIron General 63ポイント64ポイント  (28子コメント)

What about the epidemics in Victoria 2, or the native extermination mechanic in EU4?

[–]BadGoyWithAGunVictorian Emperor 134ポイント135ポイント  (0子コメント)

Natives aren't people. /s

[–]kaspar42Iron General 24ポイント25ポイント  (26子コメント)

Those games do not take place during WWII, so they wont make people think of the Holocaust, which is a subject they (understandably) want to stay well clear of.

[–]sarmedalwanIron General 38ポイント39ポイント  (4子コメント)

Not all mass killing is the Holocaust, especially in the context of a massive global war. You'd have to be really weird and probably not at all well-learned on WW2 to associate all instances of mass death in WW2 with the Holocaust.

[–]kettesiVictorian Emperor 41ポイント42ポイント  (2子コメント)

Exactly. Shying away from Mass killing in a WORLD WAR 2 game is fucking stupid. I get that they don't want to make a Holocaust game, fine, whatever. Nuclear Bombs and terror bombings were major parts of WW2 and leaving them out because someone might get offended is like removing attrition or battle casualties for that same reason. Walk on as many eggshells as you like until it messes with gameplay. Then it's an issue.

[–]Quatsum 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is conjecture on my part, but I believe it's mainly due to the potential for bad PR, since the moment paradox started implementing that there would be a lot of neo-nazis and ultra-nationalists loudly talking about how much they enjoy playing the game to purge insert ethnicity/nationality here. Leaving such a mechanic mechanic out of the games sacrifices very very little while, adding it could potentially get it banned in numerous countries.

[–]Lordofdepression 49ポイント50ポイント  (20子コメント)

And yet I can make a nazi faction in Stellaris, rename an empire the international jewry and commit a Galactic holocaust.

Yes, they don't want to make a holocaust sim, we get it.

But terror bombing is legitimate strategy, pushing the civilians to demand their own government capitulation is one.

Germany almost did it. lord Halifax and the majority civilians of Britain wanted to capitulate because of the terror bombing if not for Churchill.

As of right now, atomic bombing and strategic bombing do absolutely nothing.

I have a game where I fucking bombed the entire Britain with strat bomb for 5 years and it did nothing.

I bombed them with atomic bomb for 4 times and it still did nothing.

It's ridiculous, if Germany won the battle of Britain and attained total air superiority and continue terror bombing it should force the British to capitulate. That's it.

[–]kaspar42Iron General 12ポイント13ポイント  (18子コメント)

And yet I can make a nazi faction in Stellaris, rename an empire the international jewry and commit a Galactic holocaust.

That's you doing it, not them. That's a world of difference.

But terror bombing is legitimate strategy, pushing the civilians to demand their own government capitulation is one.

One that never actually worked against any of the major players in WWII.

I bombed them with atomic bomb for 4 times and it still did nothing.

Yes, that is silly. Atomics bombs should have an immense shock and awe effect, and very quickly make a country surrender, if they don't have nukes themselves.

[–]Dungeons_and_dongers 26ポイント27ポイント  (3子コメント)

Just because it didn't work doesn't meant it should never work.

[–]SevsquadIron General 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

If killing hundreds of thousands of people with no way to fight back in night/week/month doesn't make people surrender I can't really see a reasonable scenario that Does cause a nation to capitulate outside Nuclear arms.

[–]PauloGuinaUnemployed Wizard 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well, Japan got extremely hurt with bombing and they didn't surrender until atomic bombs, plus being rolfstomped by Soviets in Manchuria.

Strategic Bombing never actually worked, not in Germany, not in Britain, not in Japan, not in Vietnam, not anywhere else. It should just damage infra/other constructions and damage NU a bit, but never enough to cause a nation to surrender, as, historically, that was the opposite of what happened.

[–]SevsquadIron General 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It does hurt infrastructure and damages factories though....

[–]Lordofdepression 19ポイント20ポイント  (7子コメント)

The thing is they're the one who facilitate it. I push a button, paradox say people die, same thing

It didn't work because Germany lost the air war, and if not for Churchill, the people demanded an armistice. In a a game claiming to be sandbox ww 2, that's huge.

And it doesn't matter if something works or not, many strategy didn't work and they put it in. Heck the Soviet infamous mass charges, kamikazes, and German Volksturm got in. They absolutely have no strategic value at all and they're arguably as bad as terror bombing in pr term.

At least terror bombing almost managed to make Britain capitulate

We agree on atomic bombs. That is nice

[–]Thinking_waffle 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Now the true question: where can we mod it before beginning another campaign. I was very diappointed when I nuked London, it just bored me, all of those efforts to gain a weapon to finally put an end to british imperialism...and almost nothing. And I don't even count the tons of shipping sent on the bottom of the Atlantic. (PS: I played Belgium)

[–]SevsquadIron General -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

It didn't work because Germany lost the air war, and if not for Churchill, the people demanded an armistice. In a a game claiming to be sandbox ww 2, that's huge.

Except they didn't and despite losing the airwar and being subjected to day and night terror bombing for 4 years neither Germany nor Japan capitulated. That's pretty damming evidence that it doesn't work to me.

[–]bluend 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

is not that it worked or not, but it had it's consequences. Less people to work/fight, more people frightened. Yes, it didn't caused them to capitulate, but if it had been more constant or let's say, more dramatic (nukes) it would have the same 1-year effect over the course of a week, that will make both government and civilians to rethink the whole war effort.

[–]SevsquadIron General 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You mean like destroying factories or rendering them useless? Because HOI IV has that already.

[–]ShadrolVictorian Emperor 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's pretty damming evidence that it doesn't work to me.

Only evidence that it doesn't work for nations with a strong ideological reason. Nazism supported an all or nothing approach to the war and Japanese culture at the time didn't allow surrender. If Britain had suffered the same as Germany or Japan I would say that they would've surrendered.
In WWI both sides didn't want to surrender a war that was a stalemate for the longest part, especially because of the cost of lives. Germany surrendered, because of revolution and the fact that the war was unwinable became evident. When they had a proper reason to, they surrendered.
In WW2 Germany had reason to surrender far earlier than May 45. Hell, they had reason to surrender in '43, but kept fighting because of the ideology.

[–]Unsub_LeftyMap Staring Expert -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think terror bombing/strategic bombing should only really work on democracies, as we saw historically, the British retaliated with their own strategic bombing campaign, yet it only hardened the resolve of the German populace. Now only as a NU hit I mean, all nations should lose factories/infrastructure as that's concrete. The indoctrination of both communists and fascist nations in this period prevented it from having the psychological and political effects that it did in Britain, as well as some other factors.

[–]themediocrebritain 14ポイント15ポイント  (5子コメント)

Not meaning to sound rude, but the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki effectively drove the Japanese to capitulation, whether from a movement by their citizens or through fear directly in the regime. Why do you not consider these bombings to be terror bombings?

[–]Vykoso 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

The Japanese weren't that phased by nukes at the beginning. They thought it was just another natural disaster. The sheer death and destruction while significant was lesser than with conventional firebombings. The other effects of nukes were not known.

What truly broke the spirit of Japanese military was the utter defeat in Manchuria. Those troops were supposed to be elite of the Empire, they were tasked with securing resources for war effort and were given significant materiel for that.

The realization that their elite troops folded like domino in crucial region, and that now 2 of the most powerful countries in the world are against them is what finally made them understand that it's over. Edit:English

[–]gosling11 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Plus they're also afraid of what a mainland invasion of the Soviets could've done (most likely Soviet occupation, abolition of monarchy and introduction of communist government), so they decided to surrender to the US instead. This resulted Soviets to have little/no influence over the occupation of Japan.

[–]afoxian 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

They are also terror bombings, but he's differentiating between conventional and atomic bombing, and saying that atomic terror bombing should (rightfully) have a much greater effect than conventional terror bombing.

Conventional terror bombing did not have much effect in actually driving any of the major players all the way to surrender on its own. Atomic terror bombing did, and thus should be represented this way.

[–]AHedgeKnightRainbow Warrior -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Two different things

[–]Artyomic -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

but the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki effectively drove the Japanese to capitulation

This isn't entirely accurate. Historians claim that the wildly successful Soviet invasion of Manchuria had far more to do with the Japanese decision to capitulate. This is not to say that atomic bombing would not drive a nation to surrender.

[–]idris_kaldor 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

[L]ord Halifax and the majority civilians of Britain wanted to capitulate because of the terror bombing if not for Churchill

Could you give a source on that? I was always given the impression that strategic bombing in Europe didn't suceed in breaking the spirit of either the United Kingdom or Nazi Germany. Your general point still holds, regardless, though

[–]darth_MarshmallowIron General 18ポイント19ポイント  (3子コメント)

What about the hunt natives option in Eu4 in which you can clearly see the reduction of native population?

[–]Novel-Tea-Account 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Don't worry, the natives all just moved to a farm in the country

[–]goddamnlidsUnemployed Wizard 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

But they aren't people /s

[–]MechaAaronBurr 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

"Convert" culture.

[–]DaedraNocturnal[S] 130ポイント131ポイント  (20子コメント)

You can't simulate a WW2 game without civilian deaths.

[–]AlmightyBVictorian Emperor 53ポイント54ポイント  (7子コメント)

I agree, I don't know why they don't include them.

[–]IoubduaTE 21ポイント22ポイント  (6子コメント)

It's no Holocaust denial if you deny all civilian deaths. At least I think that's what it is. On a certain level it still makes Nazi Germany seem more pleasant than it has any right to, but letting players revel in their simulated ability to kill all the Jews in murder factories would probably make for worse PR.

[–]Malzair 16ポイント17ポイント  (5子コメント)

Well, that's the problem of WW2 strategy games, isn't it.

Include the Holocaust and you have a game where you can systematically, industrially exterminate millions upon millions and have to organise the logistics of it, rewarding you for good planning with more dead Jews, Slavs, Roma and homosexuals. That's shit.

Don't include the Holocaust and suddenly you are effectively making clean Wehrmacht history, the Nazis never commited Crimes against Humanity, the foundation of the ideology isn't racial supremacy, the war in the East doesn't have death squads massacring entire villages. The Nazis aren't any worse than the Soviets, French or Americans. That's shit.

Both quite turns me off from the entire series.

[–]Finnish_NationalistBannerlard 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

Couldn't you include Holocaust without making it a mechanic? Just give it a mention in an event or something.

[–]Unsub_LeftyMap Staring Expert 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Perhaps as Germany, when you fully capture a foreign state, a certain amount of its pop is removed and x building slots corresponding? Make this a national spirit or something, but not something a player would notice unless they paid attention. That way, you'd include the horrible mechanic but you aren't making the player revel in genocide.

[–]IoubduaTE 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think mods will solve most of this eventually. There was this mod Black ICE for HOI3 that one can admire in this YouTube series for example. It does include events to show the Holocaust, IIRC it even cost resources to go through with it. It also had lots of flavor events based on history and tedious attention paid to unit types and uniform details, because some people really love their WW2 history.

I am not entirely sure on the Paradox rules about mods, they might ban some content. If they do, some mods will probably be hosted on another site. It might even come down to Steam rules for this game because their workshop is so easy to use for mods.

[–]IoubduaTE -3ポイント-2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I just wanted to add that I am not so sure it makes sense to describe something like war as a conflict between people of various levels of goodness. There is a way more basic logic to war and that is that you really want to win. How ever horrible the price was of winning WW2 on the Eastern Front, it wasn't as bad as losing it.

There are all sorts of ways of thinking that value actions in various ways. On first sight something like the bombing campaign in Japan was horrible, with the murderous poisoning atom bombs as a cherry on top. At the same if we are to put any credence in general LeMay's words, they saved lives by bringing the war to a close. In the methodical mind of LeMay the million of American soldiers projected to die in the invasion of Japan, combined with the destruction that would follow the fighting would have killed more people than he did, with the bombing campaign he lead. This man fought both in the West and in the East in world war two, was involved in the Korean conflict and the one in Vietnam, he lived war. He helped set up and organize the forces that were going to drop the atomic bombs on the USSR as the US deterrent. Who are we to say he was wrong about the workings of war.

Countries were at war in WW2, they did lots of things, but the most important one was completely simple, winning the war. If that is our guide for goodness of action, then true modern warriors are like Machiavellians. Not in the commonly used sense that they scheme and intrigue a lot, though they might. More the good is what advances the goal and bad is what hurts that pursuit. With the same logic that Machiavelli uses to show that kindness is a bad quality in a ruler, fighters in a modern war can show that the unwillingness to risk turning the world into a nuclear wasteland is a failure in a world leader, as deterrence needs credibility.

I would say that from that standpoint Hitlers biggest flaw wasn't his antisemitism, not his authoritarianism, but his willingness to risk starting a war he didn't win.

[–]Malzair 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sorry, the industrialised slaughter of millions because they were born as something different than you with the aim of exterminating an entire people is independent from any outcome of the conflict a horrible, barbaric, unbelievable, crime.

Winning the war does not excuse you of that.

[–]Joltie 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

I thought HoI 1, 2, 3, DH, AoD did that pretty well without simulating civilian deaths, and most likely, so does the Paradox Development Team.

There's little need to court major controversy and PR blowback for no gain.

[–]sunset__boulevard 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

They're not trying to. This is a highly arcade game.

Faster you accept it, the better. It doesn't get any better.

[–]trotskyinternational 40ポイント41ポイント  (1子コメント)

Then they shouldn't simulate civilians and nuclear weapons.

[–]Nikis32Map Staring Expert 37ポイント38ポイント  (0子コメント)

Or soldiers, i mean they are at some point civilians. Just replace it with man-mana and civ-mana

[–]ElagabalusRex 19ポイント20ポイント  (1子コメント)

Paradox don't simulate white civilian deaths.

[–]Snorri_the_seal 8ポイント9ポイント  (1子コメント)

Aside from, you know, purging in Stellaris. But who cares about Xenos filth anyway?

[–]MurdochAVDrunk City Planner 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

I guess wiping out earthling ethnic groups is somehow seen as more controversial than wiping out the Beetle-men of Xantar VI

[–]Beckneard 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

They make a game where you can literally play as Hitler but somehow making a counter tick down and change some certain modifiers would be completely abhorrent?