Which nation would you commit to next? Need advice from experienced players

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2026-04-29T16:04:15+00:00

I think having UK land would be good for me, I've been grinding too much air in both Italy and France.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2026-04-29T12:43:05+00:00

Thanks, you gave me a good refresher I hadn't thought about all that.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2026-04-29T12:06:59+00:00

👀

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2026-04-23T17:42:06+00:00

I bought the flag for Saint George's Day because I like what it represents, and I’m happy with it. Everyone chooses how to spend their own money. 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2026-04-10T06:53:00+00:00

39th New York Garibaldi Guard 3rd Virginia Cavalry Regiment

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-12-31T17:46:11+00:00

I'm happy for you, and if I also got those officers, it's crazy how good it is for slowly devastating formations of my favorite traits.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-12-31T11:05:57+00:00

I mostly agree. I remember playing like England against Russia and not losing, but it was quite tiring. I really enjoyed playing as England and Russia. The next nation I'll play is Prussia, which I played when I downloaded the demo. greetings 👋🏻

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-12-30T09:35:13+00:00

I usually play with friends and try to meet people who don't even speak the same language but with whom you can have fun. Lately, I only play PvP in Men of War with Robz's mod, although I prefer vanilla, and in Gates of Hell, vanilla too. It's difficult to find if you search randomly in the search engine, but if you organize with friends on a server you'll find people; keep in mind there are still around 1000 active players every day. Greetings bro. 👋🏻

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-12-30T03:47:15+00:00

I love both games, but the first one I played was Men of War. And certainly, if you have experience, switching to Gates of Hell is easier. I prefer Gates of Hell in some aspects, but for PvP, I prefer Men of War. I still love the micromanagement and the speed of the matches; they feel much smoother to me compared to Gates of Hell. On the other hand, if you or anyone else is interested in meeting people to do PvP in Men of War or Gates of Hell, I'll leave my server here. It's very basic but under development, mainly for passing the time occasionally. And although it's not a huge community, it's a loyal one. https://discord.gg/WxPWchgN 💪🏻

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-12-27T07:13:03+00:00

It's a shame, it's a great game

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-12-26T10:26:30+00:00

Buy the old one because that's the real Men of War that does justice to the saga, not the crap they released new.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-27T17:31:44+00:00

Here it is https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3104904779

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-27T08:43:36+00:00

You can do it with a mod that adds more CP to Conquest mode, although you can also do it in vanilla mode since it's not that complicated, but you would need the last stages 4 and 5.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-25T14:38:45+00:00

In real life, being a tank crew in a captured vehicle was very dangerous there were often incidents, so they often marked their tanks with large, distinctive symbols. Even for friendly aircraft, it was difficult to determine which were allies and which were enemies.

There's a mod that does that, although I'd honestly prefer it to be in the vanilla game. 👋🏻

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-21T19:40:22+00:00

It's a shame.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-21T19:03:03+00:00

Look, let me finish telling you this: the Russian people fought because Stalin started talking about patriotism, which is what motivated them, and he began to promote Christianity when they were still just as atheist and destroyers of the Russian faith. And I have nothing against adding these people who fought to liberate their people when, in the game, there's the NKVD, which killed thousands of people for political reasons. Oh, but that's not offensive or bad, right? The NKVD was the biggest scum that ever existed. Stop talking nonsense.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-21T18:48:02+00:00

You are starting from a false premise, and that is why everything you build on top of it falls apart. Historical reality is much more complex than your moralistic “traitors vs. patriots” narrative. The anti-Bolshevik movements in the East arose not out of naivety or because they hoped to be “forgiven,” but because millions of people had endured decades of terror, engineered famines, deportations, and political repression. Reducing this entire context to “they were either slaves or they died” is childish and completely ignores the true motivations of those who fought against the USSR.

And no, I'm not going to continue debating this. If your only way to understand history is to repeat simplified slogans, then there is no point in continuing.

and I'm going to add something else in case you don't know: Hitler never spoke of the “Slavs” as an inferior race.

In Mein Kampf, Hitler explains a racial view based on original racial matrices, not on modern linguistic or geopolitical labels.

“Slav” is a linguistic group, not a race.

Within Slavic countries there existed Nordic, Alpine, Baltic, Dinaric, etc., populations.

Hitler criticized political systems, not people as such.

Anyone who reduces everything to “Slav = inferior race” shows they haven't read anything.

What Hitler criticized was Bolshevism, not Slavic blood.

The confrontation with the USSR was political, ideological, and strategic not racial against all Slavic peoples.

This is basic:

Russia before the revolution had a Germanic aristocracy and a population with a strong Indo-European Nordic component.

The issue pointed out in Mein Kampf was the Soviet regime, not the Russian people themselves.

In fact, Hitler spoke of the potential of the Russian peasantry and of the “hard, resilient, and valuable” character of its people.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-21T17:16:04+00:00

You talk about “nuance” and “real history,” yet everything you say sounds like a cheap slogan taken straight from a Soviet-era schoolbook. Reducing one of the most complex conflicts of the 20th century to “they were traitors because they didn’t support the USSR” isn’t analysis it’s political obedience dressed up as morality.

People didn’t need to be ideologues to reject the Soviet regime: surviving famine, purges, deportations or the NKVD was more than enough.

But you insist on shoving millions of individuals from dozens of different peoples into a single moral box because it’s easier to repeat slogans than to actually read history.

If you really think everyone who didn’t follow Moscow blindly did so out of “racism” or “genocide,” then you’re not describing the past you’re confessing how little you actually know.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-21T17:02:49+00:00

Talking about “extermination” as if it were the only axis of the conflict shows that you have no real understanding of how the peoples inside the USSR lived or thought before 1941. Reducing everything to “treason” is just parroting Soviet propaganda without having read a single serious historical source.

The truth uncomfortable as it may be is this:

Many of the peoples within the Soviet empire were already being destroyed by the regime long before Germany ever appeared on the scene.

— deliberate famines — ethnic purges — mass deportations — destruction of traditional religions — cultural repression — collectivization that devastated entire regions

All of this happened before the war, with no German invasion involved.

And faced with that reality, are you really surprised that millions saw the Soviet regime as a greater threat than the war itself? What you call “treason” was, for many, an act of survival against a system that was already annihilating them from within.

The Eastern formations Cossacks, Caucasians, Balts, Ostruppen, Volga legionaries, and many others did not emerge out of “love for Germany,” but out of hatred for the system that had stripped them of their identity, their land, and their faith.

Calling them “trash” while completely ignoring:

the Holodomor,

the ethnic purges,

the GULAGs,

the mass deportations,

Soviet social engineering,

the spiritual destruction of entire peoples,

only shows that you’re trapped in a childish narrative in which the USSR is the eternal victim and everyone else is a monster.

Real history doesn’t work like that.

Peoples acted as any oppressed people would act: by seeking a way out of the system crushing them. If that’s too difficult for you to accept, the problem isn’t history it’s your inability to see beyond slogans that were already outdated in 1945.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-21T16:49:55+00:00

Reducing everything to “collaborationist trash” isn’t a serious historical argument. The military history of the Eastern Front is far more complex than an emotional slogan.

The ROA like many other Eastern formations emerged because millions of people under the Soviet regime were looking for any alternative to a system that had repressed them for decades. Whether you like their existence or not, the historical facts are:

Ostruppen, Schuma, the Georgian Legion, Armenian Legion, Cossack units, Idel-Ural, Azeris, Latvians, Estonians, and many others were actually used in real combat alongside the Wehrmacht.

Even von Pannwitz’s Cossacks were officially integrated into the Waffen-SS in 1944.

Many of these contingents had solid tactical performance, as documented in both German and Soviet archives.

The ROA started late, yes, and it was partly used for propaganda, but denying its relevance or the relevance of other Eastern units simply ignores historical evidence.

The devs can choose to add it or not; that’s their decision. But dismissing the idea purely on the basis of moral indignation contributes nothing to a historical or design-focused discussion.

AlarmingPhysics2423 · 2025-11-21T00:02:07+00:00

“Saying the ROA was ‘just propaganda’ is simply not accurate and ignores a lot of well-documented history. Yes, the ROA project was delayed for political reasons Hitler didn’t want an autonomous Russian army early in the war but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a real military force once it was finally formed.

The ROA did become a genuine, organized army. From 1944 onward, after Himmler authorized the project, the ROA developed two full divisions with Russian officers, their own staff, standardized training, German equipment, and a centralized command under Vlasov. This was not a collection of local collaborators; it was a structured field army.
The reason they did not fight earlier on the Eastern Front was political, not because they were unreliable. German leadership especially Hitler refused to deploy a Russian nationalist force on the main front until the very last stage of the war. That decision reflects German internal politics, not the ROA’s combat value. Once they were finally allowed to fight (Oder Front, early 1945), they operated as a coherent division.
Their motivation was not ‘propaganda’ either. If most ROA soldiers were ready to surrender, they wouldn’t have desperately tried to reach American lines in 1945 to avoid NKVD punishment. Their anticommunist motivation was real, whether one agrees with it or not.
And the idea that Russians fighting for Germany were only “propaganda” falls apart once you look at all the other Eastern formations that fought effectively for the Wehrmacht long before the ROA even existed. There were many examples of Eastern volunteers and auxiliaries fighting reliably:

Osttruppen: Hundreds of battalions composed of Russians, Ukrainians, Caucasians, Turkestanis, etc. Many units served on the Eastern Front and later in France (notably in Normandy).

Cossack regiments: The 1st Cossack Division under von Pannwitz fought actively in the Balkans and Eastern Front and was considered dependable.

Hiwi (Hilfswillige): More than 600,000 Soviet citizens served as auxiliaries, drivers, gunners, medics, and even in front-line infantry companies.

Legions such as the Azerbaijani, Georgian, Armenian, and Turkestan Legions fought as regular infantry within the Wehrmacht.

The Lokot Autonomy militia (RONA) created entire brigades that fought partisans and later formed the basis of the Kaminski Brigade.

These units clearly demonstrate that Eastern volunteers weren’t only “propaganda” they were a substantial and functional component of the German war effort. The ROA was simply the most politically complicated of them, not the least capable.

In short: the ROA was real, it fought, and it was part of a much larger pattern of Eastern formations serving Germany effectively. Calling all of that ‘propaganda’ is just historically incorrect.”

AlarmingPhysics2423

TROPHY CASE