The New Order: Last Days of Europe is an ambitious mod for Hearts of Iron IV presenting a unique alternate history Cold War between Germany, Japan and the USA, starting in 1962. Will you save the world or help destroy it?
Lore Discussion
Hi everyone,
Just to share that thought after played toukhatchevsky. Indeed, he seems to have the same goal and quite the same means while being some kind of more pragmatic. For instance, Toukhatchevsky can adopt the Yazov way of training (without feeling very sad for the one who failed). He can adapt limited democracy or full control. He doesn't feel very culprit to develop gaz weapon. Interestingly enough, I felt that when Yazov choose a cruel choice, he emphasize on the necessary cruelty, when Toukhatchevsky choose a brutal choice, it is swift and consider as quite normal. We can even say that the pragmatic dimension can be find in the aestethic of Toukhatchevsky. There is no ritual, no superfluous design, no innovative concept. The goal is to win war to "free" the oppressed. And by being so much pragmatic, I believe Toukhatchevsky is the best contender to oppose Germany. Not really the one to make the best Russia, but he is both a military genius and totally focus on the defeat of Germany. He is swift, efficient and without pity. Anyway thank you very much for reading and thanks to developers who make again a character so "realistic" and coherent with his ideology (in the game)
Archived post. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
The man: Talking about how Tukhachevsky is the better Yazov
Everyone: Ha ha baguette transliteration
Anyway, I agree on Tukh being a strong contender for the 2WRW, but please refrain from calling him Yazov. Their goals are not related
Thanks you! You are right technically! I mean Tukhatchevsky want a world wide revolution when Yazov seems to desire a Germany without population. But as idealistic is the goal of both, the way tukhatchevsky deal with population make me think it would probably the same.
Its not a huge deal but I think your English romanization of Tukhachevsky is a little off. Appears that you’re using the French one I think? Same with for Zhukov in the other post. Doesn’t matter really but just to let you know.
Yep it is the the french one :). For Joukov the french pronunciation is closer to the english one as in Rusian it start with ж. For Toukhatchevsky, both languages make a mistake for the pronunciation of the "х" so I won't defend my french pronunciation
Oh god Zhukov's even worse
Worse?
It’s pronounced practically the same but looks wrong to anglophones
Which mistake?
In french for instance it would be more like Tourhatchevsky if you would pronouciate it better. Ot is not a real mistake more a lack of letter that corresponds to "х" in Russian. But maybe a Russian could help wich letter in English would be better for this transliteration
Using "kh" is the closest you'll get to "х" in english.
It's true that there's no letter in the English alphabet for that sound, but the "kh" digraph (a sound represented by two letters that work as one) represents it in English, so the transliteration is correct: the sound does have a "letter". Almost nobody I've met knows that.
That sound is the same, or at least very similar, to the Spanish "j", that's why his name in Spanish is Mijaíl Tujachevski.
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mija%C3%ADl_Tujachevski
Smh. Frenchies.
So I propose to close the debate to say tujatchevsky et joukov as it it is the best Latin transliteration I know and forget the poverty of the english language
What is TT? :)