08-10-2018, 05:48 PM | #3501 |
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: New Zealand.
|
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 |
08-11-2018, 02:11 AM | #3502 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: U.K.
|
Re: New Reality Seeds
Quote:
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. |
|
08-11-2018, 05:49 AM | #3503 |
Join Date: Jun 2006
|
Re: New Reality Seeds
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 |
08-11-2018, 08:33 AM | #3504 | |
Join Date: Oct 2011
|
Re: New Reality Seeds
Quote:
Which brings up two further questions:
|
|
08-11-2018, 09:03 AM | #3505 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
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.
|
08-11-2018, 11:05 AM | #3506 | |
Join Date: Jun 2006
|
Re: New Reality Seeds
Quote:
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 |
|
08-11-2018, 05:59 PM | #3507 | |
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Virginia
|
Re: New Reality Seeds
Quote:
__________________
Per Ardua Per Astra! Ancora Imparo |
|
08-11-2018, 07:21 PM | #3508 |
Join Date: Oct 2011
|
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?
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. |
08-12-2018, 11:57 AM | #3509 |
Join Date: Oct 2011
|
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. |
08-12-2018, 12:37 PM | #3510 |
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Virginia
|
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 |
Tags |
ideas to share, infinite worlds, infinity unlimited |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|