|
Post by Tito on Aug 6, 2016 23:42:44 GMT
The HRE campaing Of EW 4 Because its alternate history in the ew4 campaing hre captured france spain uk ottoman empire
|
|
|
Post by Laurent de Gouvion on Aug 6, 2016 23:44:33 GMT
On the subject of alternate history it would be good to talk about HRE campaing from EW4 like it was real history ( I know HRE existed but they didnt conqer the world ) We should talk about all the battles individually and The battle for Asia and Who would win the battle Prussia or Austria Prussia had better soldiers, but Fredrick Wilhelm III wasn't exactly the best king. Austria could use Metternich to make overtures with the German nations, thus isolating Prussia.
|
|
|
Post by Quintus Fabius on Aug 6, 2016 23:46:34 GMT
The HRE campaing Of EW 4 Because its alternate history in the ew4 campaing hre captured france spain uk ottoman empire Really, that is not possible. As I said, the stately quadrille is what made the pre-revolution world balanced. Everyone ganging up on Austria and German nations breaking from HRE... yeah.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2016 23:46:55 GMT
Stalingrad order 227 it was fight or die. Soviet Union it was more dangerous to retreat than charge the Germans. But the USSR was born as a superpower through the blood and million of lives lost to best the Germans.
|
|
|
Post by Quintus Fabius on Aug 6, 2016 23:47:12 GMT
On the subject of alternate history it would be good to talk about HRE campaing from EW4 like it was real history ( I know HRE existed but they didnt conqer the world ) We should talk about all the battles individually and The battle for Asia and Who would win the battle Prussia or Austria Prussia had better soldiers, but Fredrick Wilhelm III wasn't exactly the best king. Austria could use Metternich to make overtures with the German nations, thus isolating Prussia. Perhaps. But UK is going to dance the stately quadrille then.
|
|
|
Post by Laurent de Gouvion on Aug 6, 2016 23:49:53 GMT
Stalingrad order 227 it was fight or die. Soviet Union it was more dangerous to retreat than charge the Germans. But the USSR was born as a superpower through the blood and million of lives lost to best the Germans. Not really. Generals in Stalingrad didn't implement Order 227, because it was irrational to do so. It was revoked soon after. Instead, the cowards were put in punishment battalions where they had to do the most dangerous things.
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Aug 6, 2016 23:55:36 GMT
What if Muhammed Ali of Egypt was able to win the Oriental Crisis with aid of France and established a strong independent Egyptian state?
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Aug 7, 2016 0:00:04 GMT
What is that game its familliar Vicky 2. Ivan Kolev , you never told me you had that game as well! Paradoxstrategy would be interested in that. I am sorry comrade! Maybe Paradoxstrategy, you and I could all meet on steam one day to play a EU4 game as well
|
|
|
Post by Quintus Fabius on Aug 7, 2016 0:02:29 GMT
I am sorry comrade! Maybe Paradoxstrategy , you and I could all meet on steam one day to play a EU4 game as well Perhaps...
|
|
|
Post by Tito on Aug 7, 2016 0:03:20 GMT
What if Muhammed Ali of Egypt was able to win the Oriental Crisis with aid of France and established a strong independent Egyptian state? Ok but can you just remind me when was his reing
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Aug 7, 2016 0:03:34 GMT
What if Muhammed Ali of Egypt was able to win the Oriental Crisis with aid of France and established a strong independent Egyptian state? Ottomans crumble FAST in the Balkans. This causes the Balkan states that rebel early to become strong, at cost to the ones that take longer. Austria and Russia also become stronger. England is weaker, because it doesn't own the Suez Canal
|
|
|
Post by Quintus Fabius on Aug 7, 2016 0:06:22 GMT
What if Muhammed Ali of Egypt was able to win the Oriental Crisis with aid of France and established a strong independent Egyptian state? Ok but can you just remind me when was his reing Here, a quote by Ivan Kolev, the famous civil war gen: is Muhammad Ali the founder of Pakistan or some other one? He's the Albanian who took over Egypt during the Napoleonic Wars, and after the wars went onto conquer the Sudan, Eritrea, Crete and the Hejaz. He later declared war on the Ottomans, Egypt's overlords, in 1832, securing all of the Levant and some of Cilicia. After the First Turco-Egyptian War, Ali's Egypt began a period of decline, with multiple (Failed) revolts in the Levant and then a Second Turco-Egyptian War in 1839 (Also known as the Oriental Crisis). The Ottomans wanted to reassert dominance over Egypt and to retake the Levant. Following multiple Turkish defeats to the Egyptians, the European powers decided to get involved against Egypt. Following a blockade by the Allies and the occupation of Beirut and Alexandria, Muhammed Ali agreed to terms presented to him by the British. Ali would give the Hejaz, Crete and the Levant to the Ottomans, as well as become a loyal satellite of the Ottomans, and in return Ali's dynasty would remain in power of Egypt. He accepted and that put an end to Ali's military conquests.
|
|
|
Post by Ivan Kolev on Aug 7, 2016 0:08:25 GMT
What if Muhammed Ali of Egypt was able to win the Oriental Crisis with aid of France and established a strong independent Egyptian state? Ottomans crumble FAST in the Balkans. This causes the Balkan states that rebel early to become strong, at cost to the ones that take longer. Austria and Russia also become stronger. England is weaker, because it doesn't own the Suez Canal But what could this mean for the Scramble for Africa? Muhammed Ali was planning on invading the warring Ethiopian states I believe, so its very possible that Ali breaks through Ethiopia and even to as far as maybe Mogadishu (Somali states were also divided and were constantly at war I believe). This could mean even further Egyptian colonization of Africa, mainly moving into the Subsaharan interior and the coast. Western and Southern Africa remains largely the same. This would mean states like Italy and Britain become weaker, all though not as much (Loss of Suez is definitely a blow to the Brits) What could this mean to the Ottomans? Obviously, like you have said, Balkan independence, Russian and Austrian expansion, but what could this mean for even the 20th century?
|
|
|
Post by Quintus Fabius on Aug 7, 2016 0:10:02 GMT
Ottomans crumble FAST in the Balkans. This causes the Balkan states that rebel early to become strong, at cost to the ones that take longer. Austria and Russia also become stronger. England is weaker, because it doesn't own the Suez Canal But what could this mean for the Scramble for Africa? Muhammed Ali was planning on invading the warring Ethiopian states I believe, so its very possible that Ali breaks through Ethiopia and even to as far as maybe Mogadishu (Somali states were also divided and were constantly at war I believe). This could mean even further Egyptian colonization of Africa, mainly moving into the Subsaharan interior and the coast. Western and Southern Africa remains largely the same. This would mean states like Italy and Britain become weaker, all though not as much (Loss of Suez is definitely a blow to the Brits) What could this mean to the Ottomans? Obviously, like you have said, Balkan independence, Russian and Austrian expansion, but what could this mean for even the 20th century? It means that I'll get to do a great campaign for it in the Age of Strategy sequel about WW2 (still not released).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2016 0:15:43 GMT
Stalingrad order 227 it was fight or die. Soviet Union it was more dangerous to retreat than charge the Germans. But the USSR was born as a superpower through the blood and million of lives lost to best the Germans. Not really. Generals in Stalingrad didn't implement Order 227, because it was irrational to do so. It was revoked soon after. Instead, the cowards were put in punishment battalions where they had to do the most dangerous things.
But I thought NKVD went after soldiers family if they retreated or even defect
|
|