-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The comparison to Justinian isn't just on the talent around him but also the very specific timing of their rules. The First British Empire had just fallen and a reorentation towards domination and conquest of India was ongoing. This I consider to be the equivalent of the reconquest of North Africa and Italy. France and Persia are both the perennial enemy who they are able to keep at bay, and the Germans and various Caliphates do make for the interesting and upcoming fundamental threat. But yes, Justinian was unbelievably lucky to find a first grade wife in a whore. The one in our story who I'm willing to say is going to have that going on is Von Ouster by marrying a Radcliffe ironically enough.
- 1
Perhaps. Lincoln was long dead by the time Atherleigh came to office, his first president probably being Hayes unless the vote was less of a deadlock or someone else won out in the dealing after the fact. In fact the aftermath seems a mess for a while in terms of presidents considering several close runs, assassination attempts and successes. Only starts to get certain again with Grover Cleveland, who looking at his record probably wins one or two terms (wherher concurrently or not). I'll say two. Then mckinnley for his two, Teddy for his two, and then Taft nearing the end of his first term in 1916.
Mm. Anne Spencer is of course from the Spencer family, not Radcliffe. She's recently been bumped up the noble hierarchy by the untimely death of her first cousin Charles, and her father will now take the earldom when his older half brother dies (also coming soonish, later than OTL when he died in 1910). She'll then be Lady Spencer as a courtesy title and her younger brother will be Earl one day.
OTL Albert Spencer (Diana's grandad) is TTL born 2 years early and called Harold James. He's married to the youngest Radcliffe daughter, Lady Jane.
So Rodger Radcliffe (the Admiral) is his brother in law, as is Ouster (through Anne). So Ouster and Radcliffe are connected by marrige, by intermediary. This will become relevant in the peace to come.
- 1
I do like the graphics and presentation style. Should I win the lottery I will hire him to do the visuals for future naval battles.
- 1
Like various flash games from the 00s. Very pleasing style, especially the shooting animations.
Even got a 'lessons learnt' section at the end, and pointing out they got it wrong. Very TBE.
- 1
Don't know if I posted anything of this series before but it's a rather good look at the Middle East. With Britiain willing to tell France to "sod off" concerning claims from Palestine to Damascus and Mosul, they could more easily reach a understanding with the Arabs about smaller scail claims in Lebanon and what was to become Northwestern Syria. And with further British backing of Greece against Turkey I could see Britain giving the green light to France and by extension Italy to transform their declared zones of interest into actual colonies, all the while Britain supports Turkish, Turkic and Islamic forces in the Caucasus against the Russians. Turkey and Azerbaijan would have a very Russia-Belarus Union State type of bigger/smaller brother relationship where Azerbaijan is able to punch above its weight because of the Baku oil. And, again the ugly issue, with the Ottomans controlling the whole of the Caucasus during WWI, the Armenians are getting a really tough deal, so that Armenian Republic in Cilicia under a French protectorate/mandate is really looking quite attractive by this point.
- 2
Well, by the end of the war, the middle east will be controlled entirely by the british army, plus the Arab Revolt. A revolt which was well funded and organised because Atherleigh decided to empire build with his own resources.
So whilst Versailles and other peace talks will be covered in what now seems inevitably to be excruciating detail by both me and the commentariate, the reality on the ground is the British, and the British backed Arabs, are going to get most of what they want.
The bigger issue from the british perspective is making sure the Arabs play nice in their new state, plus deciding which if any of the regions they've already carved put into client kingdoms and colonies/protectorates join this new unified arabia. There are strategic reasons why they'd want to personally rule at the mouth of the Persian gulf and red sea etc.
But they do also have to give France something, and balance local interests for long term stability and british advantage.
Probably will get around to Long 19th Centurying this, but in essence, Greece has been a pet project of certain elements of the british upper classes and parties for a long time. The Greeks are generally anglophiles for this reason, and they've done well thus far in balkan and ottoman wars.
Post war, France and Italy both will be trying to poach Greece from the UK by offering more and more stuff to them at Turkish expense, given they're rebuffed for the most part from the levant and arabia.
Depends on how the conferences go, and whether League of Nation starts, and the idea of enlightened self rule/progress and protectorate hits off without Wilson or similar there pressuring for that. If its a conference full of colonial powers, real politik will rule rather than much in the way of ideology.
This they probably will do. No matter what stage of civil war / revolution Russia is in. However, the optics of that look awful both for ally backstabbing and because of what the turks did there, so further on...
Probably.
...this will get more support. If the turks get the caucuses, they have to lose part of Asia minor to the minorities they...damaged. So far as HOI4 is concerned, Armenia and Kurdistan are the same thing but its very possible to have one in Cicilia and even stretching into northern Iraq, depending on how succesful various groups lobbying for the cause are.
Given post war and conferences, Turkey and Greece and maybe some other balkan nations have a few wars to determine what actually ends up happening, all the above may end up the same, reduced or advanced depending on who wins those conflicts.
- 1
- 1
That's not all too different from IRL, just that the Arabs are better armed and organized. France did little in the theater up untill a minor expeditionary force untill very late and they still ended up with modern Syria, Lebanon and Alexandretta. Because the Brits and Arabs pulled the general Ottoman theatre even harder because they were more successfull, them keeping the French out more just has them seek their expansion outlet in the general area elsewhere, and Cilicia is next door where they just as much already had a presence IRL...
Which is honestly why I think that lesser composite Arab state is still the best option. The Arabs are going to be doing plenty of infighting and unifying such a vast area up untill recently under foreign rule is going to be hard. The sharif's sons no doubt are also doing to do plenty of infighting, maybe one ends up as the King of Aleppo under French protection if he falls out hard enough. And in such a enviroment the Hashemites may still lose Hedjaz to the Saudi's. Signing away minor area's at the borders of the former Ottoman lands to allies and taking certain contentious or valuable area's for itself seems very fitting for Britain.
The long arm of Lord Byron...
Yeah, the Middle East is quite fascinating as the Great Game is fully open and the British-Russian rapproachment for the Entente TTL is even more difficult because of the escalated Russo-Japanese War. France has long vested interests in Lebanon and Syria and Italy has also proven to be a power very much interested in Turkish lands. With Russia and Germany gone there is no need for Britain to prop up the Turkish corps against those powers and to build a longer lasting solution which will prove to be friendly to her interests. With France and Italy trying to poach Greece, it is within British interests to keep them happy and give them a piece of the loot in Anatolia, but they have to prop up the Turks against Russia, strange times. I also seem to recall that the Kurds, whilst ofcourse targeted by Turks, also partook in masacres agains the Assyrians, so they may end up on the wrong side of the "prize pool" as well, especially if the Assyrians gain the ear of the triumphant powers, which I don't consider unlikely. They were the backbone of the Iraqi army iirc, and France did the same in Syria with its minorities. It's why Assad, a Druze, rules Syria today. Also the fact they are Christians, that French general famously went to Salladin's grave and no doubt that Ottoman success is in part due to Islamic resentment against western powers and collaboration with the Caliph.
Also, afair, Armenia and Kurdistan are two seperate things in game, or you must mean the states, which overlap. Because ofcourse they do, they're ethnic claims in the Middle East, it's almost as bad as the Balkans. Almost? Most certainly as bad as the Balkans.
Also, if Italy is able to get its Anatolian colony in between Greece and French Armenian Cilicia, that will 100% cause a 2nd Greco-Turkish War over who gets to take over. No doubt that Armenia would be allied to Greece and seeking that land connection to its most loyal ally
Persia is going to get something I think. They took a hit keeping the ottomans out and held long enough for the Indian and afghan armies to show up. Afghanistan might get something too if Russia completely falls to bits.
All depends on the peace conferences, which will have no end of reader discussion and input, clearly.
Wasn't aware Armenia was a thing HOI4 does. That could male things even more interesting...
An interesting at the time map showing both the suggested imperial federation members and their scale in reference to each other.
Not sure whether any of these actually will come together TTL but would be interested to see people's thought of the chances of each listed here joining, both TTL and OTL.
List contains:
The entire British Isles including Ireland
Newfoundland
Canada
Falkland Islands
British Guiana
British Honduras
The Bahamas
The West Indies
Mauritius
Aden
Hong Kong
British South Africa
Straits Settlements (aka Singapore)
Fiji islands
British Borneo
Australia
New Zealand
Notable absences (can also discuss):
Gibraltar
Malta
Suez
Cyprus
Various Atlantic and Pacific islands
Not sure whether any of these actually will come together TTL but would be interested to see people's thought of the chances of each listed here joining, both TTL and OTL.
List contains:
The entire British Isles including Ireland
Newfoundland
Canada
Falkland Islands
British Guiana
British Honduras
The Bahamas
The West Indies
Mauritius
Aden
Hong Kong
British South Africa
Straits Settlements (aka Singapore)
Fiji islands
British Borneo
Australia
New Zealand
Notable absences (can also discuss):
Gibraltar
Malta
Suez
Cyprus
Various Atlantic and Pacific islands
Attachments
- 1
Starting with the big ones, getting Australia, Canada, South Africa and New Zealand joining probably needs a Victorian-era change. 1865 Colonial Laws Validity Act not happening, or in a different way, that sort of thing. Maybe a very different Boer War would also do it, no Jameson Raid (or a successful one) and a quicker win has enough jingoism and Imperial bits sloshing about that it might be forced through, particularly if the Rhodes faction is in the ascendant and not in disgrace.
All the bits and pieces could easily join in some sort of Federation if there was political will in the UK. Indeed certain bits could end up part of the UK (ala France and the Overseas Departments) and many nearly did, but again it needs London to want it. Hong Kong obviously is the tricky one with the lease, so depends on Anglo-Chinese relations.
The absent bits cover the range well;
Probably not big enough (or interested in) standing on it's own, happy to live under whatever the buzzword of the week is for 'place that internally self governs, while London does defence/foreign policy/economics.'
OTL wanted to join the UK, so is at the extreme end of Federation.
Like many of the choke points on that list requires a strong (military and economically) UK that is happy to exercise that power. Never going to be in Federation as it's not really a viable independent entity.
Falls between the two above, so a candidate for Federation.
Would fall under one of the members of the Imperial Federation rather than being full members I think. I'm imagining several layers to this to cover all the permutations. Say Jamaica is in the British West Indies Federation, that group sits under Britain, which then is the Imp Fed member. All of which gets shuffled around regularly as the subsidiary federations form and dissolve.
The other obvious missing area is Rhodesia, which absolutely would have gone for Imperial Federation (as at any plausible time Rhodes himself would still be influential) and would be the cause of at least 40% of the arguments about who was eligible for what.
- 1
All comes back to Canada and, had they been a bit more forward thinking, would have set up all the future settler colonies that get large enough to start amalgamating into joining either the UK or a joint sovereign state. Although in the 1860s and 70s, the former would have been far more possible than the latter.
Malta and Gibralter probably counties of the UK, or very special oversea territories. Cyprus more its own thing.
The random islands probably get federated or attached to the nearest big member unless they are strategic in some way, then UK overseas.
There's two different deals going on as well. Making it so the latter one is fully annexed or extended forever essentially makes Hong Kong viable as a city state long term, similar to Singapore.
TTL, there's a few different things going on and a few other places that might want to join. Most of Polynesia is in the Empire, and Hawaii is a protectorate - so that could be an interesting inclusion.
Singapore is a bit bigger. Australia is still coming into being and it hasn't been determined who else is going to be in it (tasmania, new Zealand and the surrounding islands all have that decision/pressure to make).
The Cape is smaller whilst rhodesia is larger, and the Boer war didn't happen or was very minor.
Canada is (potentially) going to be quite a lot larger if Newfoundland and the entirety of British Colombia eventually join, but they do have that angry Southern neighbour.
Suez and the greater Alexandria area are permanently leased in a similar deal to Hong Kong...which might not be as secure as the British think.
And the British carribbean is as OTL I suppose...not really thought about there much...might become more relevant if they do end up building a canal though.
- 1
Different in what way? Since South Africa started diverging really since the Dutch started taking interest in the Congo, so that's already the 1850'ies/1860'ies. There's going to be a Boer War with the most radical ones who aren't willing to leave for the Congo making a stand (Bittereinders as a name for them still fits) but this is going to require much less dominion manpower involvement, especially Ireland is highly populated and a integral part of the UK.
Something to consider for Cyrpus. As Greece is a British ally, population exchanges in the region have been confirmed and Greece is eying the island, they may demand that the Turkish population may be expelled from the island even if they don't recieve ownership of it in the immediate post war period. It would solidify the Greek claim to the island, and they would be very willing to host British military bases there, because it helps them secure ownership just as much.
If Rhodesia includes Transvaal, you may end up with Translimpopo and Cislimpopo as names of subunits of this enourmous Rhodesia.
Because of the hostile relationship with the US, even if the UK doesn't build the Nicaragua Canal, the British Carribean is still more important, as it provides basises for the Royal Navy to cut off the short route between the US east and west coast.
Speaking of the Carribean, how's the island of Hispaniola doing exactly. Spain holds a claim to the eastern half ofcourse, yet the whole lot is under France as of 1914. Would be interesting to see some tidbits of its history popping up in chapters detailing US history for example.
- 1
It won't be a versaille deal, it'll happen long after the fact when the 20s have calmed down and there's a better idea of what rhe Eastern med will look like. Britain has a few things going for it: saved the island from the turks, investing a ton of money into making more than one port viable, and the best great power to own it compared to all the other Mediterranean ones. However, it also did lose the island to the ottomans to begin with (big black eye for them), and Greece being expansionist is going to make things antsy, esepcially if population movement is mooted.
Some sort of deal is possible.
Given the time period, Rhodes would have made a play for them, and yet Rhodesia was already too large. Probably occupy a strange limbo state between the Cape, rhodesia and the crown. Doesn't particularly matter at the moment because the only people there are british prospectors and native tribes.
The Mexican alliance is also increasingly the stronger part of the triple alliance between UK, Spain and them. Sugar and tobacco are starting to decline in importance as the rest of the world industrialised (this is going to hit Hawaii hard too) but the islands are still strategic ports, full of where settlers and have nice weather year round. Lots of immigration and tourism has already occurred and will continue to into the 20th century.
As we've discussed before, Haiti not falling to a massive slave revolt is huge for American history across both continents, and globally for how people view slavery and abolition. Will have directly impacted the southern US in terms of propaganda (or lack thereof) of what would happen to poor working class whites if the slaves go free, and also Gran Columbia because Haiti were the ones who harboured and funded Bolivar in his exile. He'd have to go to the US instead.
As to why its entirely owned by France, probably a Napoleon offshoot. He took it all, Britain siezed it during the war, post war France had to give it back, or didn't but had to pay Spain again for the privilege. The French and Spanish continental American empires are such a mess OTL and TTL during the napoleonic and post napoleonic period that anything that smoothed the process ttl would be seized upon.
I guess the biggest conceit that I feel has been glossed over in this AAR is how the Irish of all people just... become British? As if the Hunger doesn't happen? I dunno.
As to the Famine(s), the big one was in the middle of the 19th century, 50 years after Union with the rest of the UK and more than enough time to begin to resolve the issues that caused the massive issues following potatoe blights.
Due to Ireland being essentially a colony, a lot of its land was held by a few hundred families, who wanted crop for export to make money. Most of the actual Irish were thus subsitence farmers reliant on selling the grain they grew to make rent and on potatoes for actual food. Another issue was how inheritance worked, meaning land was split into smaller and smaller pieces till only potatoes could be viable. So Ireland was still producing an awful lot of grain, it just didn't belong to the Irish and they couldn't eat it...even during the famine.
Before union, the Irish parliament was incredibly impotent and corrupt, and after, Westminster was anti-irish, anti-catholic, and didn't particularly care or know much about what was going on.
So yes, some decent reform (similar to that done during the same period in the rest of the UK in fact), setting up some controls for export and listening when reports came in about food shortages would have prevented much of the famine after crop failure.
As to them becoming British...only in the sense the Welsh and Scots were also British. Urbanisation around Dublin, New generations being born under Union rather than seperate from the rest of the UK, Catholic emancipation when it does come in and English being pushed in schools is going to Foster some shared identity. There's resistance, of course, but there's a healthy and growing anglo-irish middle class on the east coast, almost everyone is better off than their grandparents were, and by the 1900s, the population is begining to boom and integrate with the late victorian/early edwardians. The future king is a big fan of Dublin (albeit for scandalous reasons), there's a lot of imperial hero's of Anglo Irish descent from Wellington to kitchner to the Radcliffes, and the divide in the country is now more between the growing urban (uncouth, unpious etc) population and the old rural Ireland (quaint, backward, uptight etc).
There's still trouble spots, most of them probably in the North, Irish nationalists who want Irish to be supported in schools and officially by governments, and some lingering Catholic/racist stuff. Protestant settlers will still have undue influence, economic and political power etc, esepcially rurally. Much of the population is still poor and has little to no infrastructure.
In essence, it's quite a lot like the other constituent parts of the UK, lots of rumblings but overall not terrible.
Mexico is also a source of oil, so that may also leave the UK with a lasting interest in propping up the country vs the Americans
Don't forget that France intervened in Spain in the 1820'ies (IIRC), so that's also a fine moment for territorial issue's to be smoothed over, either willingly or unwillingly.
And there may well be some more intervention immediately post war to try and save Spain from collapse (economic or political) that may smooth things out again...really, the Spanish Empire being what it is/was, they've been dependent on another GP to bail them out whenever there is any trouble since the napoleonic wars.
And Hispaniola is nothing compared to Cuba or the Philippines. The elite of Spain understand the reason why the ottomans are considered the sick man of Europe is because Spain isn't considered at all.
Well, the middle east post war is going to be mostly UK sphere, and persia is snuggly secure, so the british will have a great deal of oil to develop. That's relatively long term though. The US is, I think (?) Still the big oil producer until the middle of the century.
Always good to have allies with their own oil though, indeed.
- 1
Big two parter coming up to finish the 9th circle. Going to get the past couple of chapters their images up too.
Then we have all sorts of things. Naval landings, what America and Italy decide to do, all kinds of trouble in Russia, even worse stuff in China, and finally collapse, revolution, disaster and triumph (?).
A far lengthier world war than planned...ironic really...though saying that, it's looking like the Versaille and other post war treaties and agreements is going to be even lengthier if the comments are anything to go by.
Then we'll finally get to the democratic Germany part. Well...'democratic'...it'll be a republic at least.
Sort of.
Maybe.
Then we have all sorts of things. Naval landings, what America and Italy decide to do, all kinds of trouble in Russia, even worse stuff in China, and finally collapse, revolution, disaster and triumph (?).
A far lengthier world war than planned...ironic really...though saying that, it's looking like the Versaille and other post war treaties and agreements is going to be even lengthier if the comments are anything to go by.
Then we'll finally get to the democratic Germany part. Well...'democratic'...it'll be a republic at least.
Sort of.
Maybe.
- 3
- 1