AHC: Longest Plausible World War I
- Thread starter Sabot Cat
- Start date
Another six to nine months if the Germans keep fighting forcing the Allies to invade Germany and occupy it.
Actually this might actually be a better outcome, because it would end the idea that Hitler and the Nazis put around that Germany wasn't really defeated and was "stabbed in the back"!!
Actually this might actually be a better outcome, because it would end the idea that Hitler and the Nazis put around that Germany wasn't really defeated and was "stabbed in the back"!!
I think the food angle is a good one.
Have the US declare early in the war (before the sinking of the Lusitania) that the US will provide food to whomever can pay, and that any attacks on US merchant ships will be a cause for war.
The Germans, by 1917, knowing they can't cut off Britain's lifeline, using unrestricted submarine warfare without cutting off their own supplies, are even less aggressive at sea. More food gets through to both sides, and the US gets richer while the war drags on.
German victory in the east gives a huge boost to morale and the belief they can win in the west as well. They keep pushing, and trench warfare continues for another two years, until the German army gets within artillery range of Paris.
France demands an Armistice in late 1919. Colonial raiding in east Africa continues for another few months.
Have the US declare early in the war (before the sinking of the Lusitania) that the US will provide food to whomever can pay, and that any attacks on US merchant ships will be a cause for war.
The Germans, by 1917, knowing they can't cut off Britain's lifeline, using unrestricted submarine warfare without cutting off their own supplies, are even less aggressive at sea. More food gets through to both sides, and the US gets richer while the war drags on.
German victory in the east gives a huge boost to morale and the belief they can win in the west as well. They keep pushing, and trench warfare continues for another two years, until the German army gets within artillery range of Paris.
France demands an Armistice in late 1919. Colonial raiding in east Africa continues for another few months.
Falkenhayn listens to the General Staff and makes the objective of the 1916 offensives the removal of Russia from the war rather than a battle of attrition centred on Verdun. The German Army seizes St Petersburg in late 1916 and Russia sues for peace.
The exit of Russia from the war is followed by the early defeat of Rumania and the defeat of the Allies at Salonica.
There are many possibly scenarios possible such as the Ottoman Empire seizes the Suez Canal with assistance from the other Central Powers, Northern Italy is invaded by the K.u.K and Italy exits the war.
Charlie
The exit of Russia from the war is followed by the early defeat of Rumania and the defeat of the Allies at Salonica.
There are many possibly scenarios possible such as the Ottoman Empire seizes the Suez Canal with assistance from the other Central Powers, Northern Italy is invaded by the K.u.K and Italy exits the war.
Charlie
It's longest plausible war, not shortest (not that a 1916/early 1917 end is anywhere close to shortest possible).
Mmm...have to spell it out. The victory of the Central Powers in the East focuses the war on the Western Front. The German Army with more manpower and improved food supplies from access to the Ukraine the Western Front becomes a more brutal struggle (think multiple Verduns along the line). With the technology available neither side can effect a breakthrough. The stalemate drags into 1919 or beyond and is resolved either by the entry of the USA into the war and the enacting of "Plan 1919" or by the total exhaustion of the combatants leading to possible revolutions.
Charlie
Hm, problem is though; if you free up the Eastern Front divisions as early as early 1916; the balance of manpower has just swung extremely heavily in favor of Germany (which can lead to breakthroughs). Bear in mind that Austria-Hungary's also freed up a huge portion of its armies, and is still going. You probably also butterflied the Brusilov offensive, so A-H is still a going force. Ottoman Empire also just got a lot of the pressure taken off it. Knocking out Russia early (and before Verdun and the Somme no less) is seriously one of the things which is basically a war-winner for Germany. Germany won't have nearly as many occupation troops in the East either; since barring a really total collapse of Russia, the Ukraine wasn't actually in the cards (the food situation wasn't extremely critical until 1917).
If the losses of Verdun and the Somme are avoided then the British and French armies are in much better shape to resist the German Army. If the Allies were facing a larger German Army they would be less tempted to waste their resources on offensives and may go quite defensive. Perhaps the outcome would be both sides using an elastic defence with very limited offensives which were defeated by massive artillery fire. In this case the conflict could go on for a long time until there was a game changer such as the deployment of US forces or Plan 1919. The K.u.K without the Russian front might be able to eventually overcome Italy although it may take a couple of years - it would be a race between the Austro-Hungarian empire falling apart and defeating the Italians. The Ottomans might well decide that a separate peace with the Allies is in their best interest.
In the long run this WW1 scenario turns into a contest of industrial production - England, France and the USA vs Germany. The outcome is the same as OTL.
Charlie
I think OTL already WAS the longest possible.
Italy is key factor: a neutral Italy opens a road for CP imports - the CPs situation is far better which allows for better equipped CP armies (and no need to fight italy frees manpower). Depending on other butterflies the CPs either win by 1917 or if the war runs wrong there will be a negotiated peace if both sides make no progress (1916 was sort of high point OTL for the CPs - surviving brussilova nd knocking out Romainia soon after entry in the war - which made things worse for Russia than a neutral Romania)
OTOH if you make Bulgaria or the OE Neutral the war will be shorter as the entente is even stronger compared to teh CPs.
Italy is key factor: a neutral Italy opens a road for CP imports - the CPs situation is far better which allows for better equipped CP armies (and no need to fight italy frees manpower). Depending on other butterflies the CPs either win by 1917 or if the war runs wrong there will be a negotiated peace if both sides make no progress (1916 was sort of high point OTL for the CPs - surviving brussilova nd knocking out Romainia soon after entry in the war - which made things worse for Russia than a neutral Romania)
OTOH if you make Bulgaria or the OE Neutral the war will be shorter as the entente is even stronger compared to teh CPs.
With the technology available? The Mark I tank entered service in August, so if you delay German advancement in the west they might just be ready in time. Okay, they'll never secure a major breakthrough, but they might just put a bit of pressure on the Germans.
Most of the battles of Western Front were infantry/artillery battles - I did think about armour but its influence was very limited until 1918. The numbers of tanks available in 1916 was small and their was no satisfactory doctrine for their use. Even the mass tank attack at Cambrai in OTL in Nov 1917, although successful, did not lead to a breakout from the trenches.
The use of light tanks for close infantry support (Renault FT in May 1918) and
as a component of combined arms attacks (Mark V in July 1918) were early examples of the successful use of armour.
Charlie
yourworstnightmare
Banned
You can't prolong it indefinitely. The economy of all the participating nations would be wrecked sooner or later, and the people would get quite a bit revolutionary.
Not to put it too finely though; freeing up over a hundred divisions (less occupational strength) is a game changer; as much so as the US intervention, which even if USW remains active, is not likely to be significantly faster than OTL. There's probably somebody on this forum who can crunch the numbers (like BlondieBC), suffice to say that if Russia really fell apart in 1916, Britain, France, and Italy are in for a really shitty time.
Last edited:
BlondieBC
Banned
We need more food for Russia and Central Powers. So for single POD.
Late in 1915, the mercurial Tsar is brief about the food situation in Russia which is deteriorating. He believes and takes action. He takes a series of actions to boost food production.
- Often units had men with weapons. He pulls all unarmed men back from front over winter of 1915/16.
- He also pulls some men and horse back.
- We get no grand offensive by Russia in 1916. He informs the Western Entente that he is too weak for major attacks, just smaller supporting attacks.
Now to effects. (Hopefully)
- Russia grows just enough more food in 1916 to avoid revolution in winter of 1916/17. Once food crops start to grow in June 1916 (harvesting of gardens), the crisis is averted to until the next winter. Without major attacks, we have less anger also in Russia.
- Romania does not enter war. Add one million tons of Cereal to CP for year of 1916 and past. We get A-H to make it until at least 1919.
- Falkenhayn is not replaced. Need some luck here, since he is against USW, but lets have Kaiser overrule him and it happens anyway. Need USA to keep Entente in war.
- 1916 is bloody in west. Italy does not go that well for A-H, but no disasters this year.
- 1917 we get another set of Germans attacks in west. Entente hold with promise of USA help. Need luck again here, but possible outcome.
- Winter of 1917/18, Tsar will likely fall. Need whites to make peace in 1918 or at least effective cease fire. Russia too weak to attack at least in major way.
- Campaign of 1918. Germany has troops in east, by now all second or third class units. Too weak to do grand attack. French have been pummelled more, so they are too weak. UK waits for USA to arrive for 1918 attack season, not wanting to carry attack alone. Italy is bloody enough not to be serious attack threat in 1919.
- 1919 Winter- Another bad year. But everyone limps through.
- 1919 Summer Campaign. Well, at least we get to 1919 for full year of war. Need CP to get enough troops to west to stop win by USA green troops that year. Maybe have formal separate peace for Russia this year. Russia loses Congress of Poland, some Baltics. With enough bad luck, you might see a 1920 be the year the war end as USA brings average quality units with combat experience to the war.
Late in 1915, the mercurial Tsar is brief about the food situation in Russia which is deteriorating. He believes and takes action. He takes a series of actions to boost food production.
- Often units had men with weapons. He pulls all unarmed men back from front over winter of 1915/16.
- He also pulls some men and horse back.
- We get no grand offensive by Russia in 1916. He informs the Western Entente that he is too weak for major attacks, just smaller supporting attacks.
Now to effects. (Hopefully)
- Russia grows just enough more food in 1916 to avoid revolution in winter of 1916/17. Once food crops start to grow in June 1916 (harvesting of gardens), the crisis is averted to until the next winter. Without major attacks, we have less anger also in Russia.
- Romania does not enter war. Add one million tons of Cereal to CP for year of 1916 and past. We get A-H to make it until at least 1919.
- Falkenhayn is not replaced. Need some luck here, since he is against USW, but lets have Kaiser overrule him and it happens anyway. Need USA to keep Entente in war.
- 1916 is bloody in west. Italy does not go that well for A-H, but no disasters this year.
- 1917 we get another set of Germans attacks in west. Entente hold with promise of USA help. Need luck again here, but possible outcome.
- Winter of 1917/18, Tsar will likely fall. Need whites to make peace in 1918 or at least effective cease fire. Russia too weak to attack at least in major way.
- Campaign of 1918. Germany has troops in east, by now all second or third class units. Too weak to do grand attack. French have been pummelled more, so they are too weak. UK waits for USA to arrive for 1918 attack season, not wanting to carry attack alone. Italy is bloody enough not to be serious attack threat in 1919.
- 1919 Winter- Another bad year. But everyone limps through.
- 1919 Summer Campaign. Well, at least we get to 1919 for full year of war. Need CP to get enough troops to west to stop win by USA green troops that year. Maybe have formal separate peace for Russia this year. Russia loses Congress of Poland, some Baltics. With enough bad luck, you might see a 1920 be the year the war end as USA brings average quality units with combat experience to the war.
By Cambrai, Britain lacked sufficient troops to really make use of the breakthroughs provided by tanks.
Last edited:
Something that I have discussed before could be a big success at the Second Battle of Ypres for Germany. Suppose the Germans had sufficient forces in place to exploit the four mile gap that appeared in French lines from the German gas attack. The town of Ypres is lost, the British and French lose more casualties and prisoners and the Germans end up in a better tactical position. It may not extend the war, but it puts the Germans in a much better position tactically. Perhaps 1916 sees worse French Army mutinies, perhaps the British and French armies are fatally separated. Again, I don't know if it extends the war, but it puts the Entente in a much worse position going forward.
One thing that's a real trend on this site is for people to massively overestimate the Central Powers. As I see it, they basically can't win, unless a miracle happens, or there's a PoD well before the war. This same logic applies to extending the war. There are many thing that could shorten the war in the allies favour, but not much that could significantly extend the CP's population's will to fight. Sure, you could stretch it out for a few more now months, but then all you do is make the disintegration of civil society in the CP even worse.
The miracle was the communist revolution in Russia, Yes, other than that miracle that its hard for anybody to defeat Russia and Britain and France.
Really the strategy above for Russia to not attack in 1916 and pull people back for food production is a good strategy for all the Allies. Don't attack, keep your costs down, keep morale at least tolerable, keep the blockade up, pick on Turkey as much as possible, clean up the remaining German colonies.
Eventually the Germans run out of food, rubber, copper. Lack of rubber for gas mask alone keeps the war from going into 1919 for long.
I think people are coming at the problem from the wrong angle. I see two main ways the war could e extended. Following WWI there were many relatively minor wars, and many situations that could have escalated. Lots of nations entered, left, and switched sides, so perhaps a less intense World War Two where powers cycle in and out of the war for years.
Also, no matter what happens in Europe, Britain can sit back and nibble at the periphery for years/indefinitely until the situation on the continent changes. Imagine a POD in which France gets knocked out in 1918 before the Americans arrive. Perhaps the American DoW and mobilization takes place later. From there, WWII is reenacted (preenacted?). Blockade of Europe to weaken the Germans, send guns and money to Russia, nibble the periphery, and then launch an overwhelming amphibious invasion. That could easily take you out to 1922.
Of course if you wanted to get really crazy, you can tack on a "Cold War goes hot" scenario after World War One Plus Two. It is plausible, if not likely that if the Anglo Alliance recruits communist Russia against the Germans, Russia will be in a similarly advantageous position post war, with communist organizations in German occupied countries being the most active resistance movement, and Russia establishing communist puppets in Eastern Europe. Indeed, with no atomic bomb, there's less deterance to intimidate communist Russia. The Red Hordes take their turn at kicking the Anglos off the continent. However, a Red Eurasia is utterly intolerable to the Anglos, especially when they are as geared up for war as they are. America flexes her indistrial muscle and in 1929 the last communist holdout in the Urals surrenders.
So that's something like World War One+World War Two+Non-nuclear World War Three+Nazi victory scenario, all continuous.
After that you get a warlord era in Europe which lasts until 1970.
Also, no matter what happens in Europe, Britain can sit back and nibble at the periphery for years/indefinitely until the situation on the continent changes. Imagine a POD in which France gets knocked out in 1918 before the Americans arrive. Perhaps the American DoW and mobilization takes place later. From there, WWII is reenacted (preenacted?). Blockade of Europe to weaken the Germans, send guns and money to Russia, nibble the periphery, and then launch an overwhelming amphibious invasion. That could easily take you out to 1922.
Of course if you wanted to get really crazy, you can tack on a "Cold War goes hot" scenario after World War One Plus Two. It is plausible, if not likely that if the Anglo Alliance recruits communist Russia against the Germans, Russia will be in a similarly advantageous position post war, with communist organizations in German occupied countries being the most active resistance movement, and Russia establishing communist puppets in Eastern Europe. Indeed, with no atomic bomb, there's less deterance to intimidate communist Russia. The Red Hordes take their turn at kicking the Anglos off the continent. However, a Red Eurasia is utterly intolerable to the Anglos, especially when they are as geared up for war as they are. America flexes her indistrial muscle and in 1929 the last communist holdout in the Urals surrenders.
So that's something like World War One+World War Two+Non-nuclear World War Three+Nazi victory scenario, all continuous.
After that you get a warlord era in Europe which lasts until 1970.