In "Germany wins" scenarios Eastern Europe looks always very similar even though German plans in the area (like elsewhere) were rather fuzzy IOTL.
WW1 Cliches
- Thread starter Lalli
- Start date
Archibald
Banned
France collapse in 1914 just as it did in 1940 OTL for the same reasons.
French army collapse in 1917 or 1918 because of mutinies, mutinies that of course never touch the German army
(as if the Germans were not humans - and a little pissed off by four years spent charging ennemy machine guns and walking on the rotten corpses of their friends
)
There were mutinies on German side, too.
French army collapse in 1917 or 1918 because of mutinies, mutinies that of course never touch the German army
(as if the Germans were not humans - and a little pissed off by four years spent charging ennemy machine guns and walking on the rotten corpses of their friends
) There were mutinies on German side, too.
yourworstnightmare
Banned
Yeah, if the Russian Empire don't collapse and is with the Entente the whole war, there wouldn't be a independent Poland. No chance in hell Russia would cede territory if they won a war.
They might try with Fullers plan but unlikely to have all they need to do it properly in 1919 - 1920 though......
Petike
Kicked
Some clichés and misconceptions that annoy me in particular :
Whatever POD occurs on the eastern front, it will always involve only Germans and Russians. A POD battle/event involving the Austro-Hungarians and Russians is impossible and/or verboten.
Spain and Switzerland can never be dragged into WWI.
The UK can never opt for neutrality, not even in the first phase of the war.
Austria-Hungary had shitty artillery and firearms in OTL. (Quite the contrary.)
The Austro-Hungarian army was multiethnic, but the Russian army was made up purely of Russians.
German aircraft carrier wank in WWI.
The soldiers in the German army all showed the same Prussian-style discipline and Prussian attitudes. Regional and individual diversity - what's that ?
Germans had the best army because it had the most conscripts.
After a CP victory, every German pan-European Zollverein turns into a spotless utopia of awesomeness.
After a CP victory, no matter how early it occurs, Austria-Hungary goes "herp-derp" and becomes Germany's submissive little bitch for all eternity.
The struggle of smaller nations in the conflict and after it (both military and national emancipation efforts) matter not. They deserve throwaway references at best. Or a diplomatic screw - we can't have those nasty nation states breaking up our beatiful old space-filling empires after the war, now can we ?
There was no aviation on the eastern front, period.
Fighting on the eastern front always equals Galicia, never parts of the Carpathians in Transleithania. There were no battlefields in Transleithania, and there should be none in ATLs. (Despite how little sence such a notion makes.)
Germans do a sudden lightning-fast 180° in their tank development doctrine and roll out an ubermega revolutionary design that helps them turn the tide and win the war in no time. (While a good timeline, rast's A Shift In Priorities is a blatant example of this.)
Whatever POD occurs on the eastern front, it will always involve only Germans and Russians. A POD battle/event involving the Austro-Hungarians and Russians is impossible and/or verboten.
Spain and Switzerland can never be dragged into WWI.
The UK can never opt for neutrality, not even in the first phase of the war.
Austria-Hungary had shitty artillery and firearms in OTL. (Quite the contrary.)
The Austro-Hungarian army was multiethnic, but the Russian army was made up purely of Russians.
German aircraft carrier wank in WWI.
The soldiers in the German army all showed the same Prussian-style discipline and Prussian attitudes. Regional and individual diversity - what's that ?
Germans had the best army because it had the most conscripts.
After a CP victory, every German pan-European Zollverein turns into a spotless utopia of awesomeness.
After a CP victory, no matter how early it occurs, Austria-Hungary goes "herp-derp" and becomes Germany's submissive little bitch for all eternity.
The struggle of smaller nations in the conflict and after it (both military and national emancipation efforts) matter not. They deserve throwaway references at best. Or a diplomatic screw - we can't have those nasty nation states breaking up our beatiful old space-filling empires after the war, now can we ?
There was no aviation on the eastern front, period.
Fighting on the eastern front always equals Galicia, never parts of the Carpathians in Transleithania. There were no battlefields in Transleithania, and there should be none in ATLs. (Despite how little sence such a notion makes.)
Germans do a sudden lightning-fast 180° in their tank development doctrine and roll out an ubermega revolutionary design that helps them turn the tide and win the war in no time. (While a good timeline, rast's A Shift In Priorities is a blatant example of this.)
Last edited:
This one is actually reasonable. Germany was the leading nation in chemistry at the time, and the process was discovered right before the war.
Surprised that no one mentions Gallipoli cliché. With just a little more resolve and/or planning the OE instantly collapses like a house of cards and the Entente gets total victory in one year.
Someone has already noted the obsession with Brest Litovsk and it is always the final terms not the initial terms offered.
Several have mentioned the inevitability of WWII cliché. Not only that but Round Two usually starts in later half of 1939.
If the Germans win the Battle of the Marne it means they win the war before Christmas
If Germany attacks East and goes on the defensive in the West they are assured victory in 2 years
The SR are never allowed to come to power in Russia even for a month
The AH can never defeat the Serbs in 1914
If Hughes beats Wilson in 1916 he keeps the US out of the war
If TR wins in 1912 he always gets the US into the war immediately after Lusitania if not sooner
Germans take Paris if they attack during the French mutinies
If the Easter Rising never happens or its leaders are not executed Irish Catholics develop a great love for the British Empire
Someone has already noted the obsession with Brest Litovsk and it is always the final terms not the initial terms offered.
Several have mentioned the inevitability of WWII cliché. Not only that but Round Two usually starts in later half of 1939.
If the Germans win the Battle of the Marne it means they win the war before Christmas
If Germany attacks East and goes on the defensive in the West they are assured victory in 2 years
The SR are never allowed to come to power in Russia even for a month
The AH can never defeat the Serbs in 1914
If Hughes beats Wilson in 1916 he keeps the US out of the war
If TR wins in 1912 he always gets the US into the war immediately after Lusitania if not sooner
Germans take Paris if they attack during the French mutinies
If the Easter Rising never happens or its leaders are not executed Irish Catholics develop a great love for the British Empire
yourworstnightmare
Banned
Yes, Teddy doesn't need to take the whole US into war. He just goes to the war himself and punch the Germans into submission.
I am working on this TL
Ottoman out in 1915, AH in 1916, end of war 1917...... but the changes start with the French using a modified plan XVI rather than XVII in 1914 and Churchill
being more interested in primative armoured landing craft than landships
Click "Quote" on the lower right of that post, delete the other text in between the two "
" boxes, and copy the remainder into your sig (on User CP).
Or you could just copy it from either of our posts.
I want to as well, but my sig only allows up to 150 characters
Curiously, that was one of the first WI's I ever read.
The late John Gunther suggested in Ch 1 of Inside USA that had California gone the other way in 1916, "the United States might conceivably have stayed out of World War I".
Regrettably, Gunther didn't say why he thought so. For my money "conceivably" is the operative word, as Nov 1916 was getting very late in the day.
why are these clichés?
sweden becoming a central is quite possible, not on their initiative, but after being attacked by the russians (the admiral essen thing)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Essen
Italy would have been harder, but not impossible.
you forgot : the Netherlands could have been a Central Power / entente
Austria-Hungary must always collapse.
Or conversely, it always survives.
Same with the Turks.
The Socialist-Revolutionaries (as well as the Mensheviks and the Cadets) were in power through their participation in the Provisional Government IOTL, only having been ousted from power due to the February Revolution having failed to provide 'peace, land, and bread' (which consequently became a popular Bolshevik slogan along with 'all power to the soviets')
The Provisional Government surviving intact is definitely a WWI cliche and is a fairly common concept in AH fiction. Kerensky's rule was gradually eroded until his downfall in October (or November) 1917, due in no small part to the supposedly defensive war under the Provisional Government turning into an offensive war with the infamous Kerensky Offensive which occurred alongside spiraling fuel and resource shortages in Petrograd as the war shifted gears despite the Provisional Government's promises not to wage an offensive war.
Furthermore, the land question was yet to be solved under the Provisional Government and IMHO it was unlikely that the moderate socialists and/or Kerensky could've solved the burning land question. When the Bolsheviks came to power in October 1917 they simply adopted a Left SR program on land redistribution, which gave peasants the green light to go ahead and to seize land, burn manors, etc. across the countryside as soviets of peasant deputies were set up in rural villages nationwide.
And bread-food-had yet to be won under the Provisional Government. Resources, esp. fuel, were still scare in Petrograd which contributed to the July Days protests calling for soviet power (something which the moderate parties then controlling the main Petrograd Soviet wouldn't do, those parties having expressed full support towards the Provisional Government) and finally the October Revolution.
So without 'peace, land, and bread' becoming a reality the Provisional Government was merely continuing through the use of borrowed time-sooner rather then later it would collapse.
Which brings me to another WWI cliche: a victorious White Russian movement which goes on to rule Russia (be it through a restoration of the monarchy, a republic, or military rule). This is unlikely owing to the conservatism of the White movement's leaders, such as their reluctance to carry out land reform (as land reform was something the reds would've done and in fact, did do to their benefit) until the very end when Wrangel assumed power and by then the tide had turned.
The best way for the Whites to seize power would've been through a coup in mid-1918 when the Bolshevik-Left SR Soviet government was at its weakest and most vulnerable, when domestic and foreign counterrevolutionaries could've taken advantage of the chaotic situation then prevailing in Red Petrograd to seize power.
Then it would only be a matter of installing military rule, while IMHO a restoration of the monarchy is highly unlikely at that point.