Why is MacArthur now the icon for HoI4?

[Reitschuster]

An arrogant, fanatical, delusional, quasi-fascist war-monger that droned on about using nukes on North Korea and China and making unsolicited political statements is now a face of the game made by a woke company? Haha, what an embarrassing farce for Paradox.

EDIT FOR DISCLAIMER:
This is not an anti-PDX post. The poster is disappointed with the direction PDX has gone in the last years, but has neither lost faith in PDX nor is an opponent of the company. He only wants PDX to become good again, and would hate any other outcome. That is all.

Автор сообщения: Reitschuster

Bias? Not sure what you mean, but I'm here with conviction. It's not a meme, it's not a joke, it's just how it is. Did I really laugh at Paradox' faux-pas? Yes. I don't like how the company is doing things, or treating people in particular. I've been silent for many years, but I'm tired of it. I'm not anti-PI, I want Paradox to do well, but I also want them to be good. I want them to make good content instead of what we have now, and I call out inconsistencies and bad behavior of others for the benefit of others, not to be correct. As far as my stance, I want Paradox to be more historically accurate in their depiction of games, even if that means being politically incorrect or unpleasant to modern sensitivities. But if they pursue woke policies and neuter games while doing stunts like this with MacArthur, it's just trying to have the cake and eat it too. I don't like it, and I'm here to bring attention to this.

EDIT 2:
Now that we've collected ideas, we're starting a poll among people to show who/what the public wants to be the new HoI4 icon, the submitted options are as following:
1. Iron Cross
2. Old Icon
3. Tiger
4. Sherman Firefly
5. German ww2 flag
6. Hitler
7. Stalin
8. skibidi toilet

Pick your number and type it into the thread with nothing else. The poll will end in a week.

[Big [REDACTED] Marty]

Автор сообщения: Reitschuster

Автор сообщения: rm48473

that's what i was referencing. there'd be a similar ceasefire to that and potentially a peace treaty later on, although admittedly im not sure if the UN would advance into manchuria, but i have doubts.

and ya thought about all that too and honestly, i don't think the radiation effects would last much longer than a few years to a decade. its kinda a misconception that nukes leave ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ of radiation for decades and leave the area a uninhabitable. maybe Hiroshima and Nagasaki are bad examples since it was only 2 bombs, but i still think people get nuclear detonations and nuclear reactor meltdowns confused.

what i'd be more concerned about is the massive amount of particles and dust yeeted into the atmosphere from such a large nuclear bombardment, and firestorms that would definitely cause some catastrophic damage.. not that that wasnt already happening from USAF bombing raids...

Nuclear bombings have lasting effects for centuries, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are only lucky in that regard because the bombs were small and were only two. Were MacArthur to nuke the hell out of China and North Korea with 1950s nukes, it would've been severe.

And if radiation isn't a concern then nukes would have likely been useless against China. They were only ever effective against Japan because it was an industrialized nation, vulnerable to attacks on its populace and industry. China was one of the least industrialized countries in the world, spread out, and tenacious. They'd just enter the war in full force, and then the result would've probably been the same or worse as modern day, unless North Korea were made completely uninhabitable by nukes. Otherwise you'd be going at it with the same assumptions MacArthur had that led him to fail his war.

the nukes were intended to cut off reinforcements, the chinese NEEDED to move by land, nuke the only major through-ways, no more china for quite some time, while we mopped up an unsupported korea, we weren't going to bomb china into submission, just enough to stop them from sending literal 100s of thousands of men into korea

[Reitschuster]

Автор сообщения: Big REDACTED Marty

Автор сообщения: Reitschuster

Nuclear bombings have lasting effects for centuries, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are only lucky in that regard because the bombs were small and were only two. Were MacArthur to nuke the hell out of China and North Korea with 1950s nukes, it would've been severe.

And if radiation isn't a concern then nukes would have likely been useless against China. They were only ever effective against Japan because it was an industrialized nation, vulnerable to attacks on its populace and industry. China was one of the least industrialized countries in the world, spread out, and tenacious. They'd just enter the war in full force, and then the result would've probably been the same or worse as modern day, unless North Korea were made completely uninhabitable by nukes. Otherwise you'd be going at it with the same assumptions MacArthur had that led him to fail his war.

the nukes were intended to cut off reinforcements, the chinese NEEDED to move by land, nuke the only major through-ways, no more china for quite some time, while we mopped up an unsupported korea, we weren't going to bomb china into submission, just enough to stop them from sending literal 100s of thousands of men into korea

And they would still move in still.
Like Russians moved in Chernobyl and took positions as irradiated as Red Forest during the Ukraine war, it just presumes they'd be scared. Stalingrad German army had the same assumption, burn the river and the Soviets will be cut off but they did come anyway, because they didn't care about people dying. An inadvertent side effect would also be that it would force UN Command to fight in irradiated environment, which would be harder for the UN than it would've been for NK, China and USSR.

[[☽] L33M0N [☾]]

I've been subscribed to this discussion for the past day or two now and it's just been getting worse and worse

[Hetzrr]

Автор сообщения: uncleflagzz

Автор сообщения: Reitschuster

ll these seething suckers trying so hard to misconstrue my question or make me out to be communist. If only their hero had a twitter account when he lived, he wouldn't have made even a half of his career for people to defend him for his asinine, treacherous actions against his own country.

you dug your own grave by presenting this hot take to a game that is literally played by hardcore racist ultra far right conquer the world type of gamers

You just sold this game to me with that summary.

[Frosty]

Автор сообщения: Reitschuster

Автор сообщения: rm48473

that's what i was referencing. there'd be a similar ceasefire to that and potentially a peace treaty later on, although admittedly im not sure if the UN would advance into manchuria, but i have doubts.

and ya thought about all that too and honestly, i don't think the radiation effects would last much longer than a few years to a decade. its kinda a misconception that nukes leave ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ of radiation for decades and leave the area a uninhabitable. maybe Hiroshima and Nagasaki are bad examples since it was only 2 bombs, but i still think people get nuclear detonations and nuclear reactor meltdowns confused.

what i'd be more concerned about is the massive amount of particles and dust yeeted into the atmosphere from such a large nuclear bombardment, and firestorms that would definitely cause some catastrophic damage.. not that that wasnt already happening from USAF bombing raids...

Nuclear bombings have lasting effects for centuries, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are only lucky in that regard because the bombs were small and were only two. Were MacArthur to nuke the hell out of China and North Korea with 1950s nukes, it would've been severe.

And if radiation isn't a concern then nukes would have likely been useless against China. They were only ever effective against Japan because it was an industrialized nation, vulnerable to attacks on its populace and industry. China was one of the least industrialized countries in the world, spread out, and tenacious. They'd just enter the war in full force, and then the result would've probably been the same or worse as modern day, unless North Korea were made completely uninhabitable by nukes. Otherwise you'd be going at it with the same assumptions MacArthur had that led him to fail his war.

well we tested over a thousand nukes over a few decades and they never left any lasting *deadly* radiation. obviously H-bombs didnt release radiation, but there were still lots of A-bomb tests prior.

also im pretty sure they were planning to simply tactically nuke the chinese positions to 'soften' them up and target military infastructure and all that. so literally using nukes as big bombs for strategic and "tactical" purposes

[Reitschuster]

Автор сообщения: rm48473

Автор сообщения: Reitschuster

Nuclear bombings have lasting effects for centuries, Hiroshima and Nagasaki are only lucky in that regard because the bombs were small and were only two. Were MacArthur to nuke the hell out of China and North Korea with 1950s nukes, it would've been severe.

And if radiation isn't a concern then nukes would have likely been useless against China. They were only ever effective against Japan because it was an industrialized nation, vulnerable to attacks on its populace and industry. China was one of the least industrialized countries in the world, spread out, and tenacious. They'd just enter the war in full force, and then the result would've probably been the same or worse as modern day, unless North Korea were made completely uninhabitable by nukes. Otherwise you'd be going at it with the same assumptions MacArthur had that led him to fail his war.

well we tested over a thousand nukes over a few decades and they never left any lasting *deadly* radiation. obviously H-bombs didnt release radiation, but there were still lots of A-bomb tests prior.

also im pretty sure they were planning to simply tactically nuke the chinese positions to 'soften' them up and target military infastructure and all that. so literally using nukes as big bombs for strategic and "tactical" purposes

Bikini Atoll is still irradiated, because it used heavier bombs than Hiroshima & Nagasaki.

MacArthur wanted to create a radioactive belt between Korea and China to make it impassable, but that wouldn't work for reasons mentioned before. Also, they could still go through the USSR, which was a participant in the war.

Strategic nuclear bombing of China would've been ineffective since it was barely industrialized and territorially huge.

It wouldn't have changed much, but it would have definitely involved the USSR and China at minimum. It might have ended up worse, after MacArthur's UN offensive into the Yalu failed, people were already discussing evacuation of the UN forces from the Island. If the USSR and China were to enter, it's likely they could have even gone for this.

[Sobieski]

Автор сообщения: HuX - Nuggi Fisting

Автор сообщения: Sobieski

Rings rather hollow when there are already nearly 100 replies to this, one of which is yours. If you don't care, you should do a better job at showing it by not responding.

same goes for you.

I do care, so watch your own mouth, since you keep caring.

[Reitschuster]

[HuX - Nuggi Fisting]

nasty. sad there is no puke emoji.

[Reitschuster]

Автор сообщения: HuX - Nuggi Fisting

nasty. sad there is no puke emoji.

Simple solution is to stop caring

[Útost Alronbem]

He have the cob. The cob is in his mouth. That's why.
HoI IV gone woke...

[Fighteraviator120]

Автор сообщения: Pneumothorax

you're right, the icon should be hitler

based, the real representation of the hoi4 gamer

[Bovril Brigadier]

Because they needed a dumb ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and he fit the profile exactly.

[why]

free weekend and its consequences

[Reitschuster]

Hearts of Iron IV player since 2017
1275 hours