2014 Group Build discussion

[NARSES2]

Right as promised the subject is now open for debate, comment, criticism etc.

So let me know how you feel about the possibility of this for a 2014 Group Build ? We can then firm the whole thing up before the end of December, hopefully !

Chris

[Dizzyfugu]

Personally, I do not find it much appealing - but that's me, maybe a better outline would not be bad?

Africa would also be an option, IMHO?

[Dizzyfugu]

Ah, overlooked the parallel post with more details! 

Anyway, still not totally sold on it, as it either confines builds to the 191X era, or needs MANY parallel timelines to be developed/explained. I find it complicated. 

[Mossie]

I'd suggest a much looser build, with simply WWI as the guide, similar to the previous Australia and Asiarama builds.  Do what you want around that, with the proviso that there's a measure of respect to it.

[Captain Canada]

I'd be into a WWI build....give me an excuse to buy a certain Airfix bomber or two.....

[Rheged]

Back in 1973, my history tutor set a group of us the task "Discuss the newspaper headline from  1919--FRANZ FERDINAND FOUND ALIVE AND WELL IN GRANGE-OVER-SANDS: WAR FOUGHT BY MISTAKE"   Can I count this as my first written whiff?

More  seriously, where would the Anglo-German "Naval Race" end up?   or how quickly would the Schneider Trophy races improve high speed flight?  or  how would the development of AFVs be changed?

[PR19_Kit]

So long as it doesn't involve ruddy bi-planes and tying the model up with string it sounds OK to me......... 

[NARSES2]

Right lets be clear on one thing. The build is not restricted to WWI indeed given this scenario WWI as we know it probably wouldn't have happened.

You can build whatever you want as long as your back story contains a nod to the basic premise of the GB. It gives you a chance perhaps to play with the Worlds Edwardian Empires as if they'd continued into the 20/30/40's etc ?

As regards the British Empire it is entirely possible that India would have been given Dominion status without WWI. I won't go into the reasons why or why it didn't happen after WWI here as the material is available out there. India independent in the 20's creates an interesting scenario and it's doubtfull if there would have been partition if this had happened as well.

Another scenario was raised in a PM to me by Rickshaw. He postulated that the Austro-Hungarian Empire probably wouldn't have survived 10 years or so anyway and then postulated another assassination, that of George V. My reply was

Hi Brian

I totally agree with you regarding the Austro Hungarian Empire although in one or two accounts I've read Ferdinand had some interesting ideas about the possible "Federalisation" of the Empire, particularly with regards to the Czech lands. It's just that it's an obvious point of departure from our timeline and removes the "Causas Belli" for the war, although not the deep underlying causes.

An assansination of George V, or perhaps the Prince of Wales, whilst in India, especially if Russian involvement was suspected would have some very, very interesting consequences. An Anglo-Russian War with France supporting its ally Russia and Germany coming in on Britain's side ? You'd end up with what were in most peoples eyes far more natural alies ?

China is another area of world interaction. The Old World Powers saw it as ripe for plunder, the US had other views.

At the moment this is just a suggestion, not set in stone. However I really would like to hang the GB on what is such a significant historical milestone and if I'm honest I can't think of anything else.

The 2013 Asiarama threads will remain open throughout 2014 for those who want to continue with that.

[tc2324]

The History(2)? channel are doing an alternative WWI story line documentary on the 8th December I think?

Something about a martian invasion in 1913 so everyone was on the same side fighting them?

Anyways, probably not much help here but thought I`d mention it.

[rickshaw]

As an alternative to the obvious POD departure that the assassination or rather lack of it, of the Arch-Duke Ferdinand provides can I offer an alternative?

What if instead, 1914 had seen the assassination of George V.  Perhaps by a crazed, lone Indian Assassin. I could easily envisage such an event.  This lone Indian Assassin may well have been to Russia where he had come into contact with Revolutionaries, such as Lev Davidovich Bronshtein or Valdimir Ulanov or Ioseb Besarionis dze Jughashvili or any of the other multitudes of such people who were running around the countryside, inciting unrest.    After his return to India, his discontent with his peoples' predicament led him to hatch a plan to strike at the centre of British power, so he moves to the UK.

Once there, working in a succession of menial positions he manages to purchase a rifle and find out the itinerary of the monarch.  Ensconced in a hidey hole, overlooking the route George V is to travel, he shoots and kills him.  This causes a flurry of oppression of Indians, in the UK and back on the sub-continent, destroying the largely romantic view that many Englishmen held of the Indians as a subject peoples (having forgotten the horrors of the Mutiny two generations before).  If the increased oppression in India had resulted in a sort of "mini-Mutiny", then Britain might find itself hard pressed to suppress that and fight in Europe at the same time.

While such an event wouldn't have destroyed the British Empire it would have changed matters rather dramatically.

British suspicion would have fallen on possible Russian involvement - shades of the Great Game which both sides thought had ended at the turn of the Century. This would have meant less willingness to support the Russians and could well have resulted in the Russian Empire collapsing faster, perhaps in 1916, rather than 1917.  This would have repercussions on the Western Front, with more German troops freed for use their, faster and more resources becoming available from the Ukraine earlier, thereby staving off starvation and hunger in the Central Powers which caused the collapse of their morale in 1918.

Edward VIII would have ascended the throne as a 20 year old.  He would have been more impressionable and naive.  George V's influence was largely responsible for preventing Haig from being sacked in 1917.   Without that and the monarch much more under the thumb of the Prime-Minister, Haig would have been replaced.  David Lloyd-George would have had his way, the emphasis of Allied strategy against the Central Powers would have changed from the Western Front to his favoured "knocking the supporting props out" from under Germany.  This would have meant just as the Germans were increasing their troop numbers on the Western Front, the Allies were decreasing theirs.   In our timeline, this resulted in the German Offensives of 1918 which were barely held by the existing Allied forces.  If that was to occur in 1917 instead, then the Germans may well have achieved a breakthrough, with catastrophic results.

While this might not have resulted in defeat for the Allies, it would have been a major setback and thereby prolonged the war.  As this was achieved without resorting to unrestricted submarine warfare, the Americans would have continued to be reluctant to intervene and the Allies would have been fighting with their backs to the corner for longer.

While an Allied victory would have come, it would have taken considerably longer and may have been the result of negotiation, rather than efforts on the battlefield.  Longer term, it would be possible to see a Europe even more scarred by the experience (if that was possible).   A stalemate would see matters more unresolved than they had been in real life.  Perhaps a military dictatorship in Germany which would mean that Hitler would have remained a failed house-painter?   Edward VIII would have matured into a real king and not come under Wallis Simpson's influence.   The British Empire's hold on India would have tightened with the elimination of a generation of rebels, meaning that nation's independence would have been delayed by some time.

[rickshaw]

So, where does this leave us?

Narses has said he largely wants Europe post-WWI to resemble the map of Europe, pre-WWI.  With this scenario, the Germans are able to negotiate their way out of war.  This results in the Central Powers still as going concerns.  Germany remains united and Poland never gets recreated, East Prussia remains connected to the rest of the nation.  Austro-Hungary staggers on.  Even before WWI it was on shaky ground with nationalism tearing the Empire apart.  The Hungarians, the Czechs, both wanted to lead and control the Empire but only one could really be in the cockpit.  So, after a succession of minor and distant Royals, the Empire dissolves in say about 1930, perhaps under the pressure of the Great Depression.   This time though, without the guiding hand of Wilson, et al at Versailles to draw their lines on the map, the resulting nations are much more ethnically cohesive and their countries aren't determined by Nationalistic claims in quite the same way.

With Germany having negotiated it's way out of the war, there is no "stab-in-the-back" claims, nor do reparations cause quite the problems they did post-Versailles.  Kaiser Wilhelm II however is still going to more than likely have been deposed.  The Army were fed up with him and while they had taken an Oath of Loyality to him, most of the rank and file returning from the war were restless for a change.   I could foresee a military coup, with Ludendorf perhaps becoming Head of State with von Lettow-Vorbeck as the power behind the throne.  Both were very active in politics post WWI in real life.  Both would want to revenge the stalemate, so I could see a rearmed Germany being ready to go by about 1935, perhaps provoked by something like the Munich Crisis where Germany attempts to expand SE into the warring Mittel-Europe and Balkans?

The UK, occupied by events in India, as already alluded to, has remained largely aloof from European squabbles.  France, of course has been trying to lick it's wounds from the War.  Neither has prepared necessarily well for the eventual European conflict.  Both has largely forgotten the tactical lessons of the war, rather as they had in real life.   France, has as in real life, created the Maginot Line and retreated into a siege mentality.  The UK has built up it's navy and as in real life, reduced it's army to an Imperial Constabulary.

In the East, Russia has succumbed to Bolshivism.  It has taken longer and more than likely doesn't occur until about 1921.  It is racked by civil war for most of the interwar period.

In the West, the United States coming later to the war and perhaps without Wilsonian idealism driving its involvement, has retreated after the war into isolationism as it largely did in real life.

In the Far East, Japan is as in real life, largely running rampant in China, which is riven by civil war.

[Mossie]

I have some ideas for WWI, but they wouldn't fit with the alternate time line.  One is something around Plan 1919, the other is an alternative tank design. 

I might be able to fit the tank in as it was designed pre-war, but as far as I can gather, Plan 1919 wouldn't be elliglble for the GB as it assumes WWI carried on as per our time line?

[NARSES2]

I am taking your thoughts on board and will think about them during the next few days or so. Must admit part of me is thinking of pulling the idea but as said before I don't know where else to go. If we don't go down the GB route then maybe it's a Theme Build idea ?

I have some ideas for WWI, but they wouldn't fit with the alternate time line.  One is something around Plan 1919, the other is an alternative tank design. 

I might be able to fit the tank in as it was designed pre-war, but as far as I can gather, Plan 1919 wouldn't be elliglble for the GB as it assumes WWI carried on as per our time line?

Mossie. Plan 1919 is still viable if that's the route you wish to go down. WWI could still occur just not with the starting point of Sarejevo. It might have started latter, indeed it's almost inevitable. Germany was extremely concerned that Russia's industrialisation would mean that by 1916 it might be on a par with Germany military wise and would move into the lead after that. Must admit I'm not at all sure that was true but it was a real fear for the Germans and fears and perceptions drove politics at the time. Now given that war is a huge driver for progress (there's an oxymoron for you) any war starting in 1916 would still kick off in a 1914 style.So  Plan 1921 ?

Must admit my builds would be 1930/1940's Austro Hungary and Imperial Russia during the Third Balkan War

[royabulgaf]

Once there, working in a succession of menial positions he manages to purchase a rifle and find out the itinerary of the monarch.  Ensconced in a hidey hole, overlooking the route George V is to travel, he shoots and kills him.


The London School Book Depository?

I am not sure much would change.  Ferdinand's assasination was not so much the cause of WWI as the excuse for it.  Something else would have happened.

[Old Wombat]

There is, also, the point that Germany & Britain were knocking heads more frequently over colonial matters in the late-19th & early-20th centuries (esp. in Africa & the Asia/Pacific region) which may have led to a different start-point &, maybe, a different main theatre of operations, with the war being much further removed from Europe (at least initially).

Direct points of contact were to be found between Neu Guinea/Papua, the Gold Coast/Togoland, Nigeria/Kamerun, German East Africa/British East Africa/Uganda/Northern Rhodesia, German South West Africa/North & South Rhodesia/Bechuanaland/South Africa & South Africa, with its ex-Dutch, pro-German Afrikaaner majority, was a powder keg waiting to explode in the face of Britain. Then there were all the island groups in the Pacific.

So, what if WW1 began as a sort of large scale inter-colonial war that got out of hand?



Guy