Why can’t Germany sign a white peace with Britain?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Is there a way to do it I’m not seeing? If it isn’t possible at all, why? And when if ever will you implement it?
Same questions go for Germany and USSR after Germany takes everything west of the Urals.

[CEO of a one-person company]

Britain won't sign white peace because it wouldn't make any sense. Imagine how bad would it look on the pages of history, "Poland and France f*cked up and got enslaved by Nazis? K, im out.".

As for conquering SU situation yea, that's kinda stupid. They should capitulate after fall of Moscov, Stalingrad and Leningrad. If you have La Resistance DLC you can build collaborating goverment which will lower their capitulation limit by 30%, then they usually surrender after losing Moscov and 1 major city like Stalingrad.

[Natius]

In History, Churchill never deal with germany and only Neville Chamberlain who only want make peace deal with germany if London fall

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Guys, I understand that it didn't happen historically, and Churchill would never would have agrred to a white peace, but foreign secretary Viscount Halifax would. I'm far from a ww2 history buff, but I believe there was a small, if reasonable, chance Winston Churchill would lose a vote of no confidence after the British Expeditionary Force was completely captured in France. Look up the War Cabinet Crisis, May 1940 on Wikipedia to see the article on the situation. It was closer than it may appear.

[Včelí medvídek]

Originally posted by Gaius Julius Caesar:

Guys, I understand that it didn't happen historically, and Churchill would never would have agrred to a white peace, but foreign secretary Viscount Halifax would. I'm far from a ww2 history buff, but I believe there was a small, if reasonable, chance Winston Churchill would lose a vote of no confidence after the British Expeditionary Force was completely captured in France. Look up the War Cabinet Crisis, May 1940 on Wikipedia to see the article on the situation. It was closer than it may appear.

Truth, mission of Rudolf Hess was not random without reasonable background.

However it would do no good to game - push Brits out of Europe is something that comes automatic in ~100% games that dont go ahistorical way, so it would knock out Allies out of game in 1940, making Axis rulers of world even easier than they have it already.

And as for the Soviet - even if they have very high Stability they should capitulate if you coqnuer all of west of Ural as it is about 80% their VP.

[zz_tophat]

the real question is why won't the US sign a white peace. It should be focus, that if the UK falls, the US can be brought to the peace table. Maybe a couple of decisions that result in negotiated limited independence for the UK and france, they become german puppets, the US agrees to a white peace.

(maybe with a fun little "USA occupies canada" focus)

Realistically, the US had no real means of waging war across the atlantic without the UK as a base and so a peace accord with a victorious germany would have been very likely.

(By the same token, germany never really stood a chance of invading the mainland US.)

But as for a peace with the UK? Not nearly as likely.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

ZZ_tophat: Yeah! you are SO right! I think that is the most likely Axis victory, not Germany invading the lower 48. It would of course make sense for the US to simply not enter the war at all if Britain falls in 1940, but right now if they join you basically have to crush the US to win the war, which makes 0 sense.

Vceli Medvidek: I see your point: there are no good mechanics in hoi4 for "war enthusiasm" apart from territory lost or casualties. Having them give up always after France falls is silly. Having them automatically give up when the SU falls would make more sense, but is only a partial solution. In reality, Britain's enthusiasm to fight to determined by a combination of casualties, the speed of German conquest on the Continent, and the naval and aerial balance of power. It would be nice if the focus for peace would be like "beat France by summer 1940, inflict x casualites on Britain, have naval superiority in y regions (surrounding UK) sink z number of convoys, have aerial superiority in a regions, and drop b number of bombs on UK turf". With the current system, however, this way too complicated - a recipe for disaster. I have no doubt that someday though, hoi4 with add a proper "willingness for a white/negotiated peace" mechanic.

[dreking5203]

actually the real question is why the hell pepes like''they wouldn't do that'' in a game with a focus on alt history lol

[Metal Izanagi]

Originally posted by Gaius Julius Caesar:

Is there a way to do it I’m not seeing? If it isn’t possible at all, why? And when if ever will you implement it?
Same questions go for Germany and USSR after Germany takes everything west of the Urals.

It will never be implemented, because the game would be pretty boring if you didn't have to actually properly win the war as the Axis. If you could just control continental Europe and be done, it'd be easy mode.

[mk11]

A peace after the fall of Poland and before the attack on Netherlands would make for an interesting game and doesn't seem too far fetched.

[Bourgeois Conformist]

If I recall correctly, German planning for operation sealion was more than half-hearted, as even Hitler recognized the utter futility of attacking British mainland with the means Germany had in 1940.

- The Kriegsmarine had already taken some losses, which they could not easily replace unlike the Royal Navy. Challenging the allies for naval superiority around the United Kingdom would inevitably have meant the end of the Kriegsmarine.

- Germany had two available landing craft in 1940, completely lacking the means to pull of a naval invasion of the required number of troops to make any kind of progress, never mind tanks and heavy equipment.

- The Luftwaffe was equipped to support troops on the ground, but not very capable of conducting operations on it's own. Terror bombings on London and other British cities were meant to erode war support, and force a white peace.


One of the issues I have with the AI is it's inability to detect and cut supply lines. This is particularly relevant when rushing the UK as Germany. Once you capture some ports (either via paratroopers or limited naval invasions) you can simply reinforce them by setting a front line with an army, and within a couple of days you have an overwhelming force there, even though the Royal Navy could easily dominate the waters around Britain.

But the AI does not, so Germany can strengthen it's position and freely send supplies. Britain goes down in as long as it takes a Panzer III to drive from Dover to Glasgow.

In games where the UK is not cheesed, it's an arms race between Britain and Germany for dominance in the Channel. One, which Britain will inevitably lose if Germany and it's allies succeed in beating the Soviet Union.

[Mr_Faorry]

The USSR basically always capitulates before you reach the Urals, I honestly don't think I've ever seen the hang on all the way there.

As for Britain I'm somewhat conflicted on a whitepeace since on one hand it's annoying to have to invade them, but on the other it's not too hard to do and making a white peace option could easily lead to Germany becoming stupid OP since they only have to fight on one front at a time. Though there should definitely be a whitepeace option for the US as Germany because if the US makes it into the war and you've taken out the rest of the Allies the two of you just kind of sit there and do nothing and it's a real pain to invade them.

[S2]

Originally posted by Chef:

...

There is the historical question why Hitler stopped his tank divisions from crushing the British expedition army that was trapped at Dunkirk in 1940:

-some say it was to save tanks, some say it was to reprimand his overaggressive Generals, some say it was to give some of the fame to the airforce (Göring)

-another theory is that he didnt want to destroy the British army as he wanted them (as a (partly) nordic/germanic people) and hoped to alliance them against the Soviets


--> Churchill might have been forced to sign a peace treaty with his army destroyed/captured in Dunkirk, but thats highly hypothetical.

[zz_tophat]

Originally posted by S2:

Originally posted by Chef:

...

--> Churchill might have been forced to sign a peace treaty with his army destroyed/captured in Dunkirk, but thats highly hypothetical.

It was destroyed as an effective fighting force, because of all the equipment left behind most of the men arrived back home with just the cloths on their backs. It took months to re-equip the evacuated divisions properly.

[Bourgeois Conformist]

Originally posted by S2:

Originally posted by Chef:

...

There is the historical question why Hitler stopped his tank divisions from crushing the British expedition army that was trapped at Dunkirk in 1940:

-some say it was to save tanks, some say it was to reprimand his overaggressive Generals, some say it was to give some of the fame to the airforce (Göring)

-another theory is that he didnt want to destroy the British army as he wanted them (as a (partly) nordic/germanic people) and hoped to alliance them against the Soviets


--> Churchill might have been forced to sign a peace treaty with his army destroyed/captured in Dunkirk, but thats highly hypothetical.

One good explanation I saw for his reasoning was that the Wehrmacht was still fighting the French army, and France had not capitulated. So the primary objective was still taking Paris while one had the initiative, and getting bogged down around Dunkirk would have carried with it the risk of losing that momentum.
It is also believed, Göring persuaded Hitler, that his Luftwaffe could destroy the encircled enemy.

[PuttBlug]

Originally posted by płk. Hans Landa ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥:

Britain won't sign white peace because it wouldn't make any sense. Imagine how bad would it look on the pages of history, "Poland and France f*cked up and got enslaved by Nazis? K, im out.".

As for conquering SU situation yea, that's kinda stupid. They should capitulate after fall of Moscov, Stalingrad and Leningrad. If you have La Resistance DLC you can build collaborating goverment which will lower their capitulation limit by 30%, then they usually surrender after losing Moscov and 1 major city like Stalingrad.

Yeah Britain is a 21st century millenial/ zoomer who foams at the mouth the moment someone suggests they would be willing to negotiate with the 3rd Reich. Dude, do you have any idea how close Britain was at signing a peace deal with them?

If not for Churchill who had massive debts to the Rothschild banks and therefore had a personal interest in keeping G.B. into the war, it's very possible that they would have. And if the men left at Dunkirk were killed or captured I'm almost certain they would have done so.

So why not make it possible? I for one don't get why it's always total war with HOI4.