Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-10-2018, 05:48 PM   #3501
(E)
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: New Zealand.
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

A further twist on that reality, the flooding of the Qattara Depression is an option for expansion to the west for Egypt as well as a possible hydroelectric project.
__________________
Waiting for inspiration to strike......
And spending too much time thinking about farming for RPGs
Contributor to Citadel at Nordvörn
(E) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2018, 02:11 AM   #3502
Phil Masters
 
Phil Masters's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: U.K.
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreatWyrmGold View Post
Egypt had Red Sea ports, which would be a relatively sensible place to send trade to southern Chinese ports (closer to China's seat of power, and not dependent on two empires letting merchants through).
No, it’s just dependent on multiple successful crossings of the Indian Ocean, with any intervening Indian or Indonesian powers letting the merchant ships through.

You’re essentially accelerating the evolution of the Indian Ocean dhow trade, which might actually be possible given Roman grim determination exploiting Greek astronomy. There’s no absolute block to this; there were established Muslim Arab communities in the southern Chinese ports during the Middle Ages, and the minimum required technology (dhow rigs and working knowledge of the monsoon climate pattern) is pretty much TL1. But that always seems to have been considered an epic, once-in-a-lifetime trip by most traders — and if the Romans are trading with China that way, they’ll also be trading with the intervening powers, which has its own implications.
__________________
--
Phil Masters
My Home Page.
My Self-Publications: On Warehouse 23 and On DriveThruRPG.
Phil Masters is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2018, 05:49 AM   #3503
malloyd
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Masters View Post
You’re essentially accelerating the evolution of the Indian Ocean dhow trade, which might actually be possible given Roman grim determination exploiting Greek astronomy.
Ptolomaic (and then Roman) ships traded directly with India as early as the late 2nd century BC. Strabo recounts the story of the effort of the Roman governor of Egypt to destroy the south Arabian pirates interfering with that trade in 26 BC. This was failure, apparently due to disease and bad intelligence, but did burn the town of Aden. The maritime trade routes to south Arab incense and Indian spices were far more important to the classical world economy than the Silk Road ever was. And later too for that matter - it was after all those spices that motivated the Age of Exploration, not a desire for Chinese silk.
__________________
--
MA Lloyd
malloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2018, 08:33 AM   #3504
GreatWyrmGold
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

Quote:
Originally Posted by johndallman View Post
Affording that navy requires having lots of trade for it to protect. If Egypt can make a deal with the Caliphate to protect ships to the west coast of Arabia, and thus the Hajj traffic to Mecca and Medina, that's a significant source of income.
That would certainly help, but...well, in OTL, Europeans accidentally (re)discovered two continents while trying to find a better route to India. So there's going to be a lot of trade, as long as Europe doesn't cheese off Egypt.
Which brings up two further questions:
  1. When did this happen? I'm not sure exactly when expeditions to the New World stopped being "I'm pretty sure this is India" and started being "Okay, not-India is a pretty awesome place," but the first expedition around Africa wasn't long after Colombus's voyage to the West Indies. If the timeline of events lines up right, colonization of the Americas might be slowed a bit (though not stopped, and probably not seriously delayed). But even if that's not the case, you would want to have Egypt start catching up before European powers started colonizing willy-nilly; otherwise, they would have a much harder time catching up (what with European powers trying to colonize them and their trade partners).
  2. How much economic and political influence does this give Egypt? Just enough to keep them independent, or enough to make them a great power? Can they create colonies of their own in east Africa and the Indian Ocean, or can they only resist the colonization of others?
There probably aren't right or wrong answers to these questions, just interesting ones. And boring ones; Egypt as a colonial power sounds a lot cooler to me than Egypt as a profitable port between European colonies and Europe.
GreatWyrmGold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2018, 09:03 AM   #3505
AlexanderHowl
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

A canal from the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea actually occurred really early on in the form of the Canal of the Pharaohs (at least as early as the 3rd century BC), and the Romans used it to send ships from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea when they controlled Egypt (it was last used during the 8th century AD). The only reason why they built the Suez Canal instead of just reopening the Canal of the Pharaohs is that the old canal was too small for modern shipping.
AlexanderHowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2018, 11:05 AM   #3506
malloyd
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreatWyrmGold View Post
[*]I'm not sure exactly when expeditions to the New World stopped being "I'm pretty sure this is India" and started being "Okay, not-India is a pretty awesome place,"
"The Indies" were quite a vague place at the time. There were plenty of people who were pretty doubtful Columbus was off the coast of Asia starting from when he reported back. On the other hand there were still diplomatic disputes over where "India" ended up into the 1530s, though the 1529 Treaty of Zaragosa conceding the Spice Islands to Portugal marks a point it was pretty clear to everybody the "Indies" were now two separate places. Still the issue of whether or not America connected to Asia remained in doubt for quite a while after that. By 1560 or so it was starting to look unlikely, but it wasn't actually firmly disproved for another 4 centuries, with the mapping of the northern coast of Siberia in 1879.

I suspect the average idiot on the street now is better informed about India or China than anybody in Europe when the Council of the Indies was established in 1521.
__________________
--
MA Lloyd
malloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2018, 05:59 PM   #3507
Astromancer
 
Astromancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Virginia
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl View Post
A canal from the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea actually occurred really early on in the form of the Canal of the Pharaohs (at least as early as the 3rd century BC), and the Romans used it to send ships from the Mediterranean to the Red Sea when they controlled Egypt (it was last used during the 8th century AD). The only reason why they built the Suez Canal instead of just reopening the Canal of the Pharaohs is that the old canal was too small for modern shipping.
I hadn't known that the canal lasted so long.
__________________
Per Ardua Per Astra!


Ancora Imparo
Astromancer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2018, 07:21 PM   #3508
GreatWyrmGold
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

The Swiss have maintained a policy of "Maybe we should stop getting involved in wars" since sometime around the Battle of Marignano, a conclusive Swiss loss which established a "perpetual peace" between Switzerland and France, which became official and internationally-recognized after the Congress of Vienna. This neutrality has been enforced by Switzerland maintaining a shockingly large military, keeping much of the civilian population armed, a series of elaborately paranoid facilities hidden in the mountains of the Alps, and being in the middle of said Alps. (Oh, and occasionally shooting down bombers in case they mistook Swiss cities for enemy ones.) Switzerland hence deserves a place in the list of powers which do crazy stuff in alternate histories.
Unfortunately, I'm not a guy who does crazy alternate histories. I'm a guy who gives great victories to neat historical leaders or nations at turning points, and then lets them get overextended, reducing their gains or even leaving them in worse shape than OTL. I dunno, I guess I find that more interesting than "Country X takes over the world". But that's not important right now. What's important is, how well does a more aggressive Swiss nation fare?

Let's start by looking at contemporary Swiss military actions. The aforementioned Battle of Marignano took place at the end of a series of transalpine campaigns. These campaigns seem to have taken the form of a series of victories followed by a defeat and a longer pause before the next winning streak; they lead to the successful annexation of territory along the Ticino River. Before that, individual communes had expanded their territory, often by force. The Swiss also fought the Burgundian Wars, where they and the Duchy of Lorraine defeated the duchies of Burgundy and Savoy. And, of course, the famed Swiss mercenaries had a reputation of invincibility.
What do we learn? Well, the Swiss seem to be more than capable of fighting duchies and crushing city-states, but they would need powerful allies to defeat proper kingdoms (and have struggled or fallen against even more powerful duchies, e.g. Milan). However, as an aside, Switzerland also grew diplomatically, by everything from convincing new communities to join their confederation or buying judicial rights from neighboring counts.

All things considered, continued Swiss expansionism doesn't seem likely to make them a great power. The Swiss alone would probably have trouble expanding outside the Holy Roman Empire; its other neighbors were France (the big blue blob) and Milan (which, as noted proved at least equal to the Swiss).
But what alliances could have been sought? Since the Swiss were eating chunks out of HRE members, the Hapsburgs would be a likely enemy of the Swiss. Skimming through the Wikipedia page for "History of Austria," the Austrians have a history of cheesing off the French and were allied with several of their enemies. France could therefore be a decent ally for the Swiss. The French would support the relatively limited manpower and resources of the Swiss army, and the Swiss would provide an elite infantry force that could easily turn otherwise-even battles.

This would not be good for enemies of the French. With the (likely expanded) Swiss Alps a firm bulwark along France's southeastern border, invasions from central Europe (Austria, Germany, etc) would be forced into a narrower front, not to mention the defensive lines which they would need to set up to keep the Swiss from cutting off supply lines or wreaking havoc in their homelands. The Iberian Habsburgs would have no more barriers to France than in OTL, but that's still a narrow, mountainous front, and they would be on their way out by the Battle of Marignano.
France could expand east into the Holy Roman Empire and the Low Countries, weakening the Empire further (not to mention future nemesis Germany, if Prussia or an appropriate replacement takes the same path as in OTL). They might also help Switzerland expand, perhaps letting them take historic rival Milan to make them a more complete shield for France's southeast. By the time France started rival-ing England more than Austria, they would have an undeniable dominance over the Continent.
There are two ways this could go. One is to focus more on the Continent, continuing to eat into increasingly Germanic lands in the western HRE (and possibly Spanish lands to the south) while England and Spain take all the best colonies, likely giving them an advantage in later centuries. The other is the obvious route: France leverages the additional resources and manpower offered by their conquests and alliance with Switzerland to be even betterer at colonization, letting them dominate the New World, too. In the latter case, they hold onto Louisiana and Quebec and reduce the British colonies to small coastal settlements. The Swiss would likely have a notable presence in any French colonies that existed.

Beyond this, what happens?
  • If France's rivals start to rebel from their colonial overlords, as in OTL, France would likely support them. (I feel that's part and parcel of the whole "rival" thing.) If they wanted, they could probably keep said colonies in a state somewhere between ally and subject by stationing a helpful garrison in important colonial areas. This could allow France to effectively create a cosmopolitan colonial empire without having to send a single explorer. It's probably not that plausible (few rebels would want a new colonial overlord, even more distant and foreign than the old one), but it sure is amusing!
  • If France doesn't colonize, it could end up in an economic position similar to Germany in OTL--virtually unrivaled industry and manpower, but without the incredible resources offered by kicking out or conquering billions of people to claim their precious natural resources. Spain would probably play the France role of the colonial power who fights a bunch of wars with the continental powerhouse, losing the wars which other people remember best despite having a decent military record overall.
  • The French Revolution was ultimately caused by a series of economic factors, which may or may not come to pass in this timeline. But if they do, and a republican government comes to govern France, what happens then? Probably much the same, though Switzerland might be pressured to abandon any remnants of feudalism it retained up til that point.
  • ...Wasn't this originally about Switzerland? Well, the scenario doesn't provide any inherent reason for the Swiss to stop being loyal (but smaller and weaker) allies to the French, so they might stay that way until the story's "present day". But how many friendships have you had that lasted several centuries? Besides, allies like this breaking up makes for a cool setting.
Maybe the French keep belittling the Swiss, treating them as a guard dog more than an equal, and that drives a wedge between the two. Maybe the French start to fear the growing power and ambition of the Swiss. Maybe they just end up on opposite sides of one of those religious wars that were so popular in ye olden days. Whatever the reason, what might the outcome be?
It depends. France's sheer size could allow it to drive the Swiss deep into the mountains, especially if the Swiss weren't prepared. On the other hand, Swiss discipline and well-honed skill might let them drive deep into the soft French underbelly which they once guarded, especially if the French weren't prepared. It depends on a lot of factors, with one of the most important being who saw it coming first. If both sides were prepared...well, that could certainly lead to a lengthy war, with the Swiss trying to force themselves into French territory and the French driving them back into the Alps.
Any French/Swiss colonies would be promptly captured by whoever controlled or could recruit more of the garrison. If the garrisons were mostly spare French soldiers, France would control most of their colonies; if they were mostly Swiss recruits cutting their teeth on natives (or semi-retired veterans training said recruits), Switzerland would do so. This would obviously tip the balance firmly in their favor. Narratively, it might make sense to give more colonial garrisons whichever side doesn't have the element of surprise, to keep things relatively even.
What of foreign powers? Allies of the French/Swiss alliance would probably support the senior partner in the alliance, France, while their enemies would probably support Switzerland. France seems to have historically had more big enemies than big friends, so this probably tips the balance in favor of Switzerland. Neutral nations might get dragged into the conflict by their allies (France's enemies would want to pull strings; this is a chance to bring down one of the biggest powers in Europe), or join to spite their enemies (this is a chance to have one of the biggest powers in Europe on your side). This could potentially lead to a proto-world-war, like the Seven Years' War and other such 18th/19th-century conflicts.
All things considered, this could be a neat wartime scenario. Perhaps, for maximum allohistorical irony, it could take place in the time of Napoleon...who leads the Corsican army against the French.
GreatWyrmGold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2018, 11:57 AM   #3509
GreatWyrmGold
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

The D-Day landings were only as successful as they were thanks to a wide variety of things going right. One of the most important was that British counterintelligence had successfully convinced the Germans that the Normandy Beach attack was just a diversionary attack, with a larger force being sent to attack Calais.
Another helpful mistake on the Germans' behalf came in a command conflict. Erwin Rommel wanted to keep the panzers close to the sea, ready to sweep any Allied troops right off the beaches; Gerd von Rundstedt wanted to keep them in reserve near Paris, ready to respond in overwhelming force wherever they landed. The conflict was resolved by Hitler, who gave Rommel command of three divisions and kept the rest in reserve, only to be moved on his order.

So let's imagine a reality where things don't quite go according to plan. British counterintelligence is good, but not quite good enough; they miss a few German agents or fail to turn them into double-agents, meaning that the Germans get conflicting reports about the Allies' focus. von Rundstedt is firmly convinced that the Allies intend to attack Calais; it's the obvious choice, why wouldn't they?
Then, a German agent reports something surprising: The American forces of the 1st US Army Group in Kent, lead by General Patton, were a bunch of inflatable tanks and wooden aircraft. The generals who were so certain that these reports about Normandy being more than a diversion were just disinformation were thoroughly embarrassed, and for some (including von Rundstedt), this embarrassment was compounded by a series of further errors and faux pas which didn't happen (or didn't matter) in OTL. When the day came for Hitler to decide how to divvy up the panzer reserves, von Rundstedt's proposal is tarnished by all of this; more divisions are given to Rommel, and some of the reserves are moved to Alencon.

The weather is unchanged by the failures of British counterintelligence and the political failures of von Rundstedt. It's still terrible invading weather just before the landings, so the German officers are still relaxed, with many taking leave just before the Allies arrive. But they are able to throw together a response more rapidly. Teddy Roosevelt, Jr, dies before he can organize the Utah Beach landing into something more than an utter disaster; the heavy casualties on Omaha Beach turn into a rout. The British and other allies do better, but much worse than in OTL.
The Germans don't win the war, and don't even manage to completely stop the Allies from establishing a beachhead. But this beachhead is smaller, with far fewer American troops; the results of D-Day fell far short of their plans. This delays Germany's surrender; with fewer troops diverted from the Eastern Front, the Soviets don't reach Berlin until after the Manhattan Project is complete. Leipzig is nuked along with Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
This doesn't change the result of the war, but it absolutely changes the aftermath. The Soviets frame themselves as the liberators of Europe, with the other Allies being a nice diversion. The failure of American beachheads (which consumed many of the troops sent to France in the initial invasion) makes the "America saves the day" narrative more implausible; the dominant narrative (especially overseas) is something closer to "They make good weapons and bombs, but they would have been better off just giving them to Brits and Russians". The Manhattan Project is seen less as a war-winner and more as a way to reduce the losses taken by the Allies.
This obviously tips the balance of power for the Cold War. Stalin is able to get more out of the peace deal, and Truman gets less. Western Europe is less opposed to communism, particularly France (which, if Hearts of Iron is to be believed, was more Commie-leaning than most of the Allies). When the Cold War starts, America has less support from the nations who were its allies in OTL, while the USSR has more allies and more resources. Thus, not only do the Soviets have a less terrible economy, the Americans are forced to work harder to make up for lost prestige, which could lead to poor economic and budgetary decisions down the line. (You know, like OTL's USSR did.)
Is this enough to tip the Cold War in the Soviets' favor? Maybe, maybe not. But it's a decent way to raise stakes in any Cold War scenario.
GreatWyrmGold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2018, 12:37 PM   #3510
Astromancer
 
Astromancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Virginia
Default Re: New Reality Seeds

In Homeline history the Tanaka Memorial was a fraud which coincidentally resembled reality so closely that it was mistaken for real for decades. However, in this Q6 world, Japanese language and culture are different, and there is an identical Tanaka Memorial which is proved to be real!!!

What's really strange and spooky is that a Cabal informant recently murdered in a strange manner has said that the Tanaka Memorial of this world was the source of the Homeline Tanaka Memorial. And that the Imperial Japanese government, fearful of losing WWII is planning to time travel to the past to blindside the USA. The catch is they've botched the travel and somehow they're landing in Homeline's past.

Now, send your agents to spy on Imperial Japan and stop a hyper-secret government project.
__________________
Per Ardua Per Astra!


Ancora Imparo
Astromancer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ideas to share, infinite worlds, infinity unlimited

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.