Red Warrior

Revolution Under Siege

Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:18 am

There should be political and civil component to this game showing the mass character of the revolution. How workers in the factories and fields won the political struggle to build the Red Army and defeat the imperialist nations trying to reverse the first worker's revolution in the history of mankind. I believe there are a lot of positives to be learned from the historical experience of the Russian Revolution that we can apply to today's capitalist world and the struggle globally against wage slavery and fascism.

the_dovlets
Private
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:11 pm

Sun Jun 26, 2011 1:38 am

Lol :D

You reminded me about the history classes in my childhood during the communist regime

User avatar
TheDoctorKing
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:30 am

The "special operations" missions are part of this. As the Reds you have to balance the pain you inflict on your people through special taxation and recruitment missions with the political education, coercion, and limited social benefits you can deliver through your Cheka missions. As the Whites, you can promise political reforms to keep your people happy and again make them angry through conscription and taxation. If you maintain military control of a region and don't do anything to make the population angry I think they will slowly come to like you better. In the mini-mods mod the Whites can make political decisions that allow them more or less options to do political reforms and in the Fatal Years mod there is an option for the Reds to do a New Economic Policy reform that will allow them some political reform choices too. The key to the whole game is building population loyalty while gathering enough resources to allow you to fight effectively.
Stewart King

"There is no substitute for victory"

Depends on how you define victory.

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

User avatar
ERISS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:25 am
Location: France

Sun Jun 26, 2011 6:48 am

Red Warrior wrote:There should be political and civil component to this game showing the mass character of the revolution. How workers in the factories and fields won the political struggle to build the Red Army and defeat the imperialist nations trying to reverse the first worker's revolution in the history of mankind. I believe there are a lot of positives to be learned from the historical experience of the Russian Revolution that we can apply to today's capitalist world and the struggle globally against wage slavery and fascism.

You're some right, but that's not the point of an AGE game. Even the engine is adaptative, tailoring it for civil fights would be very heavy for this military simulator (That's why Ageod had to make AGE in 3.0 for PoN..).

About this 'revolution', I think there are far more negatives to be learned: how to not do a revolution:
You talk about "workers in the factories and fields" but it's some untrue: there were few workers in factories: they the Bolsheviks did put people in factories to work for them: Bolsheviks went the new capitalists.
But maybe you meant people compelled in factories tried to do revolution despite their new bolshevik masters, and then I would be ok with you.

User avatar
TheDoctorKing
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:43 pm

There were a respectable number of factory workers in Russia in 1914, and they were very likely to support the Bolsheviks, not by force but because the Bolsheviks told them they were the future of Russia, made much of them, protected them as much as possible from the disruptions of the war years, etc. Most Russians were still peasants, though, a point that the Mensheviks and S-Rs made in coming up with their more gradual plans to revolutionize Russian society. There was a connection between the factory worker and peasant communities, though. Most factory workers were first generation, and they often had close family members still living in the countryside. When things got tough in the cities, or when the individual worker got substantial resources in good times, they would often return to their villages, bringing with them urban attitudes towards work, property, and, of course, politics. Many of these became the capitalist farmers who were subsequently rubbed out in the collectivization after the end of the RCW.

No great transformational movement in any society is going to have success without the genuine loyalty of a significant segment of the population. It is a mistake to think of communism (or fascism) as mere criminal cliques that somehow managed to take control of their societies by force or fraud. The communists used plenty of force and fraud but they had a solid core of support among the urban working class and a goodly number of supporters (though not a majority) in the countryside as well.
Stewart King



"There is no substitute for victory"



Depends on how you define victory.



[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Athens
Brigadier General
Posts: 431
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 8:46 pm
Location: definitly elsewhere

Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:44 pm

FY has modified too reforms for White factions. maybe I will for them a sort of Tcheka equivalent, with somewaht different results and conditions.Things are maturing on this one ;)

And the AI will cope with, FY being intended for Single Play too, not only PBEM.
Fatal Years mod for RUS: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2875975

My blog: http://moddercorner.com/about/

[SIZE="2"]Players quotes about Fatal Years:[/size]

the more I play this the more I become convinced that RUS is one of the best strategy games I have ever played... and I have played many since the mid 80's. The AI in this mod is at level with Sid Meier's best efforts.

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Sun Jun 26, 2011 6:26 pm

I think few "revolutions"/and some independence wars were achieved with the genuine loyalty of a significant segment of the population even with the false promises. In the end it should all about military organization,success in the battlefield including in some extent French revolution.
I know/read some revolutions/wars that peasants,sometimes workers were very neutral through the end. Ex: Peasants in my country refused to take arms until the enemy burn their village. Before hand they were looking with suspicion to their own leaders that shaving everyday and for trying to manipulate them to fight for their own country. The reason it took so long for them to fight is ignorance/ opportunism of the peasants. As they dont have any ties to any class struggle or few state/society values. They have their own morality values.
I think in the beginning of the 20th century there was not very clear nationality/class consciousness amongs Russian peasantry. So why the peasants should listen to even workers among some relatives. I think Reds who gets top with military supremacy(with arming/convincing workers) threatened peasants for their own goals.
It is very interesting that even today small organized armed groups can manipulate and control whole unconscious population.
To my understanding Red were more succesfull to form organic ties with workers than the white factions did with peasants.

User avatar
Kev_uk
Colonel
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:43 pm
Location: South Wales, UK.

Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:23 pm

Red Warrior wrote:There should be political and civil component to this game showing the mass character of the revolution. How workers in the factories and fields won the political struggle to build the Red Army and defeat the imperialist nations trying to reverse the first worker's revolution in the history of mankind. I believe there are a lot of positives to be learned from the historical experience of the Russian Revolution that we can apply to today's capitalist world and the struggle globally against wage slavery and fascism.


That does sound like a political rant. However, yes, I actually agree, I would have liked more economics and some more civil portrayal, say with strikes against the regime, the repression against political opponents (they were all outlawed which lead to the Cheka etc), and a more possibly social aspect how requisitioning effected the population and so on.

This is however a mainly military game, as with all of Ageods game. I guess their game engine is not that suited very well with things like you suggest and which I also would find could possibly add a load more depth to the title.

Also, the Russian Revolution is a very contentious historical issue, no side can agree if it was a really essentially a coup d'etat, a genuine rising of people, or was a it caused basically from the poverty people were facing in the face of military defeats on the Eastern Front during WW1.

Whatever, it lead to dictatorship and repression against political opponents.

User avatar
ERISS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:25 am
Location: France

Sat Jul 09, 2011 7:29 pm

Kev_uk wrote:Whatever, it lead to dictatorship and repression against political opponents.

I think you must tell more if you want to be understood, as just saying that you mean the revolution changed nothing. :) (And I almost agree you)

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Sat Jul 09, 2011 8:31 pm

Maybe revolution did not changed much.Though I think there were always the danger of landlord democracy and fascism in the alternative success scenario for WH1 and WH3. But I think it changed something for not available in game sub-factions such as WH9,10.. that they didnt become another Afghanistan or Pakistan.

User avatar
Kev_uk
Colonel
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:43 pm
Location: South Wales, UK.

Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:01 pm

Baris wrote:Maybe revolution did not changed much.Though I think there were always the danger of landlord democracy and fascism in the alternative success scenario for WH1 and WH3. But I think it changed something for not available in game sub-factions such as WH9,10.. that they didnt become another Afghanistan or Pakistan.


I will say that it did massively industrialise Russia, with Stalins Five Year Plans really putting the economy on a forward footing; what would have happened if the Whites had won the civil war though is another matter. Maybe it would have become a very backward country with more civil unrest? Conjecture.

Stalin did extensively industrialise Russia at the expense of decimating his political opponents, such as Trotsky and his Left Opposition, with the purges etc. He made 'Socialism in one Country', against both Lenins and Trotksy wishes, but really, with the absence of any other worldwide revolution taking place, he had no choice other than relinquish power and let the Whites in.

User avatar
NY Rangers
Major
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:16 pm
Location: Finland

Sat Jul 09, 2011 11:56 pm

Kev_uk wrote:I will say that it did massively industrialise Russia, with Stalins Five Year Plans really putting the economy on a forward footing; what would have happened if the Whites had won the civil war though is another matter. Maybe it would have become a very backward country with more civil unrest? Conjecture.

Stalin did extensively industrialise Russia at the expense of decimating his political opponents, such as Trotsky and his Left Opposition, with the purges etc. He made 'Socialism in one Country', against both Lenins and Trotksy wishes, but really, with the absence of any other worldwide revolution taking place, he had no choice other than relinquish power and let the Whites in.


Do you think that only Stalin was capable of industrializing Russia?

User avatar
Kev_uk
Colonel
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:43 pm
Location: South Wales, UK.

Sun Jul 10, 2011 3:59 pm

NY Rangers wrote:Do you think that only Stalin was capable of industrializing Russia?


I dont know. I really dont. Do you think Kolchak et al would have done any better? As I said its conjecture of what would have happened if the Whites had won, and I read somewhere that even they would not have also restored the Monarchy?

I think, for what I know, it was caused (the revolution) because of WW1 and the defeats. Bolsheviks took advantage and Russia had a long long history of opposition.

Athens
Brigadier General
Posts: 431
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 8:46 pm
Location: definitly elsewhere

Sun Jul 10, 2011 4:06 pm

The real point is maybe: would someone have industrialized Russia as fast? For what it's worth, NEP was beginning to stagger in 1928, and the Stolypin experience, successful in some ways, didn't give Russia the basis to sustain WW1. Whatever his cost, human drama,errors, weaknesses in agricultural and quality matters, and US help during the war, Stalinist Soviet Union was able to sustain modern war requirements during WW2. What would have given a less industrialized Russia face to Hitler? Not to say Stalinism is commendable or even could be forgiven, but history is full of irony sometimes.
Fatal Years mod for RUS: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2875975



My blog: http://moddercorner.com/about/



[SIZE="2"]Players quotes about Fatal Years:[/size]



the more I play this the more I become convinced that RUS is one of the best strategy games I have ever played... and I have played many since the mid 80's. The AI in this mod is at level with Sid Meier's best efforts.

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:05 pm

If counter-revolutionary whites against Reds were succesfull it wouldnt eliminate the possibly of dictatorship or repression against political opponents maybe. So I think it can be correct to say Revolution did bring another privileged class and maybe more autocracy and did change nothing in that regard from previous regime.
I think if less industrialized Russia had to face Hitler, It would be a less concern for peasants or proletariat and change their daily life. I gave the example above.
But in realistic perspective 5 years plan were cruel but mandatory as the Socialism was in danger, time was short and victims would be own people for the necessity of quick industrialism. But history all about irony indeed. ;)

User avatar
Kev_uk
Colonel
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:43 pm
Location: South Wales, UK.

Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:18 am

Baris wrote:If counter-revolutionary whites against Reds were succesfull it wouldnt eliminate the possibly of dictatorship or repression against political opponents maybe. So I think it can be correct to say Revolution did bring another privileged class and maybe more autocracy and did change nothing in that regard from previous regime.
I think if less industrialized Russia had to face Hitler, It would be a less concern for peasants or proletariat and change their daily life. I gave the example above.
But in realistic perspective 5 years plan were cruel but mandatory as the Socialism was in danger, time was short and victims would be own people for the necessity of quick industrialism. But history all about irony indeed. ;)


Well we are then in a lot of ways lucky that Russia did become Industrialised, but I guess that then raises the point would Germany still have wanted to conquer, and also raises a question what kind of relationship would the whites had with a fascist Germany? Also, we could go on, would the nazis have come to power in Germany *if* Russia had not ended up a Socialist State? A whole load of 'what-ifs'.

User avatar
NY Rangers
Major
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:16 pm
Location: Finland

Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:30 am

Stalin was a red Tsar, more brutal than Ivan the Terrible. In that sense, nothing changed. ;)

User avatar
ERISS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:25 am
Location: France

Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:56 am

Athens wrote:What would have given a less industrialized Russia face to Hitler?

See Afghanistan (in the role of few industrialized country vs invaders) ...

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Mon Jul 11, 2011 1:25 pm

Kev_uk wrote:Well we are then in a lot of ways lucky that Russia did become Industrialised, but I guess that then raises the point would Germany still have wanted to conquer, and also raises a question what kind of relationship would the whites had with a fascist Germany? Also, we could go on, would the nazis have come to power in Germany *if* Russia had not ended up a Socialist State? A whole load of 'what-ifs'.


Cossacks were somehow fascists as well, maybe they would form some kind of agreement or military alliance with Germany in 1935's?. But I think no other idea than communism would bring unity in Russia. Most probably there would be many rebellious states that would want an independence. As whites would never allow that there would be many uprisings and battles that would take place.
But from my readings minor nations inside Russia were also somehow convinced by Lenin's speeches that they thought the only chance to survive is communism.
More interesting thing is(as the fact Societies has always vague memories for the past) next generations after the revolution somehow does not look at the bolsheviks with hatred(?). Additionaly after Gorbacov Russia, newly independent nations (after 1990's) priority is to trade with Russia and not to break cultural ties.

deoved
Corporal
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:36 am

Mon Jul 11, 2011 1:58 pm

Baris wrote: Additionaly after Gorbacov Russia, newly independent nations (after 1990's) priority is to trade with Russia and not to break cultural ties.


They may be glad to break away. But Russia did not stop issuing imperialist policies on them.

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:50 pm

deoved wrote:They may be glad to break away. But Russia did not stop issuing imperialist policies on them.


Yes it should be correct. But there can be 2 opinions about that. Just after 1990's when Russia was trying to maintain her own balance, some nations that break away from Russia made some quick agreements with other nations in terms of construction of buildings and/or facilities. Some projects were fake and they were heavily upset of the outcome and the money they spent(as they have little experience about how free enterprise work) . So they should think that Russia is more valuable business partner but truth is after 10 years or so Russia indeed unofficialy declared them as main influence areas and respond harshly for any intervention to the market/society.

Athens
Brigadier General
Posts: 431
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 8:46 pm
Location: definitly elsewhere

Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:02 pm

Baris wrote:Cossacks were somehow fascists as well, maybe they would form some kind of agreement or military alliance with Germany in 1935's?


I don't think fascist to be appropriate and I can't imagine a powerful fascist movement in a Nation whose larger part of the population is made of peasants. A reactionary one certainly.

Alliance between a reactionary regime and Hitler's Germany isn't impossible and Nazism had such type of alliance but the Drang Nach Osten dream was with the antisemitism one of the very basic aims of Nazism, so I fear any yemporary alliance would have been eventually denounced. After all, Reactionary clique leading Poland in the 30 searched for alliance with Hitler. We may imagine a sort of pact like the real One between Stalin and Hitler, violated later...like in our history :D
Fatal Years mod for RUS: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2875975



My blog: http://moddercorner.com/about/



[SIZE="2"]Players quotes about Fatal Years:[/size]



the more I play this the more I become convinced that RUS is one of the best strategy games I have ever played... and I have played many since the mid 80's. The AI in this mod is at level with Sid Meier's best efforts.

tagwyn
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:09 pm

Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:27 pm

You are full of IT!! t

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:34 pm

Athens wrote:I don't think fascist to be appropriate and I can't imagine a powerful fascist movement in a Nation whose larger part of the population is made of peasants. A reactionary one certainly.


Alright, the cossacks in Volga and Don, lets say a bit conservative then ;) but not to get confused with Hitler's fascism as most probably they had marriages across the black sea. But the land they had to protect and the battles they had to fight against the same enemy for centuries make them conservative lets say. :) in western norms. But Im very much interested in history of Cossacks.

Fascism is indeed needs well organized state and sufficient proletariat ratio.

Athens wrote:Alliance between a reactionary regime and Hitler's Germany isn't impossible and Nazism had such type of alliance but the Drang Nach Osten dream was with the antisemitism one of the very basic aims of Nazism, so I fear any yemporary alliance would have been eventually denounced. After all, Reactionary clique leading Poland in the 30 searched for alliance with Hitler. We may imagine a sort of pact like the real One between Stalin and Hitler, violated later...like in our history :D


Most probably would be like the alliance with OE in WW1. Not the alliance of equals.

User avatar
Hohenlohe
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:24 pm
Location: Munich

Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:17 am

History was always the history of some certain personalities either men or women and more often we got only some historical records related to those deeds and not very much about whole culture...

greetings

Hohenlohe...*smile*

edit: I became a very great fan of the cossacks as I has encountered some old ones here in Munich during my work as postman and from an old Ukrainian Exile Edition I even got an very good book about Ukrainian and Cossack history and was very fond of it after reading it twice...
R.I.P. Henry D.

In Remembrance of my Granduncle Hans Weber, a Hungaro-German Soldier,served in Austro-Hungarian Forces during WWI,war prisoner, missed in Sibiria 1918...

deoved
Corporal
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:36 am

Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:31 am

Hohenlohe wrote:History was always the history of some certain personalities either men or women and more often we got only some historical records related to those deeds and not very much about whole culture...


History was always the history of economic proceses, that spawn certain personalities and whole culture, i think.

User avatar
NY Rangers
Major
Posts: 218
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:16 pm
Location: Finland

Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:39 am

deoved wrote:History was always the history of economic proceses, that spawn certain personalities and whole culture, i think.


I fully agree.

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Tue Jul 12, 2011 5:02 pm

In order for a border tribe to survive economic,political and in militaristic way whole community should be very eager to fight for existance with the guidance of the Ataman in the case of Cossacks. And most probably next Ataman that would be selected should have represent commune lifestyle and ideology. It is not what we think but how they were thinking. :)

But I have also read communities inspired from Cossacks that have similar lifesyle. But the thing is similar communites were indeed very aggressive when taking the land from others.

User avatar
Kev_uk
Colonel
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:43 pm
Location: South Wales, UK.

Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:56 pm

Baris wrote:In order for a border tribe to survive economic,political and in militaristic way whole community should be very eager to fight for existance with the guidance of the Ataman in the case of Cossacks. And most probably next Ataman that would be selected should have represent commune lifestyle and ideology. It is not what we think but how they were thinking. :)

But I have also read communities inspired from Cossacks that have similar lifesyle. But the thing is similar communites were indeed very aggressive when taking the land from others.


Cossacks always have been brutal and ruthless - just take Napoleons Grande Armee and his Russian adventure...I read Zamoyskis 1812 a while ago, and the Cossacks used to wait out of musket shot when the army was retreating, on the side, picking up and butchering stragglers, waiting till dark..and well..leave the rest for your imaginations.

And yet, in some ways today the Cossacks are a cultural identity of Russia and in some instances actually romanticised. But their past leaves a lot to be liked.

Return to “Revolution Under Siege”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests