World War 2 Games?

[Phony Moderate]

Does anyone know any World War 2 games where you can play as Churchill, FDR, Stalin, Hitler or any of the other leaders?

[afleitch]

Best WW2 straegy is Hearts of Iron

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Best WW2 straegy is Hearts of Iron

Yea I have that and Hearts of Iron II Doomsday. My problem is I am an absolute failure at coordinating a two front war like when you play as the US whereas I seem to be able to play Nationalist China with relative ease.

[12th Doctor]

Paradox also get major win in my book for not Kowtowing to the PRC just so they can sell games there.

[k-onmmunist]

Paradox also get major win in my book for not Kowtowing to the PRC just so they can sell games there.

They gave in to Germany instead and gave them the old Kaiserreich flag.

PS: Counters are best.

[Bacon King]

Paradox also get major win in my book for not Kowtowing to the PRC just so they can sell games there.

They gave in to Germany instead and gave them the old Kaiserreich flag.

There are laws against the display of swastikas in lots of countries (including, I believe, Sweden where Paradox is based) and its a superficial difference that doesn't affect gameplay in any way. Besides, for anyone who finds it a big deal it's not like it's hard to mod Paradox games anyway!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Agreed! While I always prefer counters in HOI2 the little soldier graphics are especially annoying.

[12th Doctor]

Paradox also get major win in my book for not Kowtowing to the PRC just so they can sell games there.

They gave in to Germany instead and gave them the old Kaiserreich flag.

There are laws against the display of swastikas in lots of countries (including, I believe, Sweden where Paradox is based) and its a superficial difference that doesn't affect gameplay in any way. Besides, for anyone who finds it a big deal it's not like it's hard to mod Paradox games anyway!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Agreed! While I always prefer counters in HOI2 the little soldier graphics are especially annoying.

Indeed, because if we just make it illegal to talk about Nazism in non-highly controlled academic settings, or forbid people from drawing their own conclusions about it, then maybe, just maybe people won't become interested in it, and then that will change history and human nature.

[12th Doctor]

And, of course, while we are at it, we are going to pretend that we can live in a liberal democracy while forbidding people from reading Mien Kampf no matter their reasons.  We can't trust anyone to see that this material is crack pot.  Besides, this ban will probably work, right?

[12th Doctor]

P.S.  I found this particularly interesting in discussion about Civilization 4 and why they don't put Hitler in the game.

"Hitler was a terrible, evil, genocidal maniac."

But Stalin, Mao, Genghis Khan, etc. were also and they are all in the game.

"Yeah, but Hitler brought his country to ruin, not like the other leaders in the game."

Napoleon didn't bring France to ruin?

"Shut up you fucktards.  They won't put him in because then they couldn't sell the game in countries where his image is illegal."

Don't you think it is odd how we illegalize and demonize Hitler, but still glorify and celebrate people who were just as brutal by putting them in this game.

"Shut up.  I'm shutting this thread down."

So now you are going to limit the speech of people who want to talk about this issue.  Way to cave in there, oh glorious defender of liberty.

[Bacon King]

Soulty, first off, if you have multiple things to say like that please edit them all in to the same post. Nothing personal or anything but I've always found it annoying when I see three posts in a row by the same person like that.

I wasn't agreeing with the ban on swastika displays/whatever, just pointing out that not having a swastika in a video game isn't really something to complain about compared to having huge elements of everything in a history game to be changed to match the PRC's warped view of the world.

While I do think bans on swastikas, Hitler's book, and stuff like that is a bit excessive, I don't really think it's the horrible knife in the throat of democracy that you seem to want to make it out to be. I can understand, at least, when a country that has just spent over a decade under a brutal and manipulative dictatorship might want to ban the elements of propaganda that this dictatorship used, especially considering that there were still plenty of fanatical devotees to the regime still hanging around. So yeah, it's at least understandable.

And come on now, soulty. Putting Hitler as a playable leader in a Civ game would never be anything but a horrible idea. I don't really see what argument you're trying to make.

[12th Doctor]

Soulty, first off, if you have multiple things to say like that please edit them all in to the same post. Nothing personal or anything but I've always found it annoying when I see three posts in a row by the same person like that.

I wasn't agreeing with the ban on swastika displays/whatever, just pointing out that not having a swastika in a video game isn't really something to complain about compared to having huge elements of everything in a history game to be changed to match the PRC's warped view of the world.

While I do think bans on swastikas, Hitler's book, and stuff like that is a bit excessive, I don't really think it's the horrible knife in the throat of democracy that you seem to want to make it out to be. I can understand, at least, when a country that has just spent over a decade under a brutal and manipulative dictatorship might want to ban the elements of propaganda that this dictatorship used, especially considering that there were still plenty of fanatical devotees to the regime still hanging around. So yeah, it's at least understandable.

And come on now, soulty. Putting Hitler as a playable leader in a Civ game would never be anything but a horrible idea. I don't really see what argument you're trying to make.

Well, first off, and take no offense, but I will post whatever way I want to post.  I'm tired of easily annoyed people getting up in my face about multiple postings when the reason I do it is because when I do go back and try to modify the previous post, half the time someone is already responding to what I said, and thus I have to go back and explain myself in a fresh post anyway.  I would rather post more than once the first time to make sure that people are alerted to the fact that I have added to or clarified what I have said.

Second, if what we are going to say is that Hitler's government tried to force people into a circle of thought, and that was wrong, but we are going to, in turn, enact a complete ban on certain images, ideas, and not allow you to make up your own minds on them, then we are kinda defeating the whole purpose of liberal democracy.

Third, ask some Ukrainians about Stalin, who is in the game, and then we will talk.  More over, Khan killed more people, in terms of total populations, than any modern dictator, but we celebrate him.  Double standard, perhaps?  Do your acts some how become more acceptable because the people you killed were from a time that exists outside living memory?

The whole "Hitler/Nazi" thing is a massive double standard.  Always has been.  How difficult is it to access a copy of the Communist Manifesto in Germany?  Not that hard.  And yet communists, as a collective, were responsible for far more deaths than fascists.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Soulty, first off, if you have multiple things to say like that please edit them all in to the same post. Nothing personal or anything but I've always found it annoying when I see three posts in a row by the same person like that.

I wasn't agreeing with the ban on swastika displays/whatever, just pointing out that not having a swastika in a video game isn't really something to complain about compared to having huge elements of everything in a history game to be changed to match the PRC's warped view of the world.

While I do think bans on swastikas, Hitler's book, and stuff like that is a bit excessive, I don't really think it's the horrible knife in the throat of democracy that you seem to want to make it out to be. I can understand, at least, when a country that has just spent over a decade under a brutal and manipulative dictatorship might want to ban the elements of propaganda that this dictatorship used, especially considering that there were still plenty of fanatical devotees to the regime still hanging around. So yeah, it's at least understandable.

And come on now, soulty. Putting Hitler as a playable leader in a Civ game would never be anything but a horrible idea. I don't really see what argument you're trying to make.

Well, first off, and take no offense, but I will post whatever way I want to post.  I'm tired of easily annoyed people getting up in my face about multiple postings when the reason I do it is because when I do go back and try to modify the previous post, half the time someone is already responding to what I said, and thus I have to go back and explain myself in a fresh post anyway.  I would rather post more than once the first time to make sure that people are alerted to the fact that I have added to or clarified what I have said.

Second, if what we are going to say is that Hitler's government tried to force people into a circle of thought, and that was wrong, but we are going to, in turn, enact a complete ban on certain images, ideas, and not allow you to make up your own minds on them, then we are kinda defeating the whole purpose of liberal democracy.

Third, ask some Ukrainians about Stalin, who is in the game, and then we will talk.  More over, Khan killed more people, in terms of total populations, than any modern dictator, but we celebrate him.  Double standard, perhaps?  Do your acts some how become more acceptable because the people you killed were from a time that exists outside living memory?

The whole "Hitler/Nazi" thing is a massive double standard.  Always has been.  How difficult is it to access a copy of the Communist Manifesto in Germany?  Not that hard.  And yet communists, as a collective, were responsible for far more deaths than fascists.

There is a double standard and I think it is dangerous cause the more we supress the stuff the greater the liklihood of it reoccuring.


When did STalin get put in Civ IV? I have the game and the only Russian Leaders I have are Peter the Great and Catherine the Great. Don't tell me they released some 40 MB update that I will have to spend hours downloading on my dial-up?

[12th Doctor]

Soulty, first off, if you have multiple things to say like that please edit them all in to the same post. Nothing personal or anything but I've always found it annoying when I see three posts in a row by the same person like that.

I wasn't agreeing with the ban on swastika displays/whatever, just pointing out that not having a swastika in a video game isn't really something to complain about compared to having huge elements of everything in a history game to be changed to match the PRC's warped view of the world.

While I do think bans on swastikas, Hitler's book, and stuff like that is a bit excessive, I don't really think it's the horrible knife in the throat of democracy that you seem to want to make it out to be. I can understand, at least, when a country that has just spent over a decade under a brutal and manipulative dictatorship might want to ban the elements of propaganda that this dictatorship used, especially considering that there were still plenty of fanatical devotees to the regime still hanging around. So yeah, it's at least understandable.

And come on now, soulty. Putting Hitler as a playable leader in a Civ game would never be anything but a horrible idea. I don't really see what argument you're trying to make.

Well, first off, and take no offense, but I will post whatever way I want to post.  I'm tired of easily annoyed people getting up in my face about multiple postings when the reason I do it is because when I do go back and try to modify the previous post, half the time someone is already responding to what I said, and thus I have to go back and explain myself in a fresh post anyway.  I would rather post more than once the first time to make sure that people are alerted to the fact that I have added to or clarified what I have said.

Second, if what we are going to say is that Hitler's government tried to force people into a circle of thought, and that was wrong, but we are going to, in turn, enact a complete ban on certain images, ideas, and not allow you to make up your own minds on them, then we are kinda defeating the whole purpose of liberal democracy.

Third, ask some Ukrainians about Stalin, who is in the game, and then we will talk.  More over, Khan killed more people, in terms of total populations, than any modern dictator, but we celebrate him.  Double standard, perhaps?  Do your acts some how become more acceptable because the people you killed were from a time that exists outside living memory?

The whole "Hitler/Nazi" thing is a massive double standard.  Always has been.  How difficult is it to access a copy of the Communist Manifesto in Germany?  Not that hard.  And yet communists, as a collective, were responsible for far more deaths than fascists.

There is a double standard and I think it is dangerous cause the more we supress the stuff the greater the liklihood of it reoccuring.


When did STalin get put in Civ IV? I have the game and the only Russian Leaders I have are Peter the Great and Catherine the Great. Don't tell me they released some 40 MB update that I will have to spend hours downloading on my dial-up?

Expansion packs, brother.

But, yes, one thing I beat around the bush at but did not say directly is that suppression of ideas tends to lead to only more suppression of ideas, which, in the end will result in the proliferation of the ideas you are trying to suppress, or you becoming the thing you hate.

Neo-Nazism has not diminished in popularity because of what European governments are doing.  And what kind of example are they setting by banning these ideas in the first place?