Napoleonic Wank

I've never actually had a discussion on one before, nor have I seen many threads on the topic of a Napoleonic French victory scenario.

So, discuss.
 
Did Zach make a big TL about this?
It's not exactly a wank though, but it is awesome. Though sadly it really isn't focused on the Napoleonic era itself, more the post-war state of the world and the after-effects of a victory. Still good, just not focused on the period itself, at least relatively.

Currently though there's an excellent TL going on by King of Rome, The Last Eagle, which also tries to make a Napoleon wins scenario. It's really good, check it out.
 
It's not exactly a wank though, but it is awesome. Though sadly it really isn't focused on the Napoleonic era itself, more the post-war state of the world and the after-effects of a victory. Still good, just not focused on the period itself, at least relatively.

Currently though there's an excellent TL going on by King of Rome, The Last Eagle, which also tries to make a Napoleon wins scenario. It's really good, check it out.

That's what would interest me more actually.
 
Battle of Eylau could have been another Cannae had three sets of orders not all been lost. Avoiding the Peninsula War would be a good starter. This would butterfly the War of the Fifth Coalition until 1812 then you'd see Russia, Austria and Prussia with Spain, Portugal and Britain form the ATL War of the Fifth Coalition against France. Battles would rage across central Europe but much closer to France and much more suited to the Grand Armies abilities.
 
danwild6 said:
Battle of Eylau could have been another Cannae had three sets of orders not all been lost.
Wonder though how a clear victory for Napoleon at Eylau would affect the Russians. Would their be a Friedland or would the war stop right after Eylau? And how would that work on Tilsit?

danwild6 said:
Avoiding the Peninsula War would be a good starter. This would butterfly the War of the Fifth Coalition until 1812 then you'd see Russia, Austria and Prussia with Spain, Portugal and Britain form the ATL War of the Fifth Coalition against France.
I'm not sure about Spain. Technically, avoiding the Peninsula War would make Spain an ally of France. I'm also not sure the Spanish Bourbons wouldn't remain on France's side...
 
A possibility that might do to create a Napoleonic hegemony in the 1812 war is if the Russians prevail on the Tsar and Barclay de Tolly somehow to force a major, decisive battle relatively close to the Russian Empire's border, and before the combination of weather and successive tactical attrition enervates the Grand Army into a huge, cumbersome, immobile target. This defeat would be a Poltava in reverse and would give Napoleon a much-needed battlefield victory, and would place Alexander I in some deep political difficulties. An ultimate problem, however, with Napoleon's victory is a similar one to that faced by Hitler: a continental power attempting to fight the greatest naval power of them all without a navy sufficient to fight that kind of war in the first place.
 
Snake Featherston said:
a continental power attempting to fight the greatest naval power of them all without a navy sufficient to fight that kind of war in the first place.
The Continental Blockade was supposed to force Britain to peace in the long run. In effect, it did create economical difficulties in the last years of the Napoleonic Wars if I remember correctly what I read. So, I guess the British could be forced to sign peace via attrition in a Napoleon's Victory scenario that doesn't use a sealion.

Problem with the Blockade itself is that it was a double-egded sword: it also had huge effects on the European Continent's economy, especially on French ports like Bordeaux. And I frankly don't know if the Blockade wouldn't crack open, either by the will of Napoleon or by that of the Europeans, before the British find themselves economically exhausted. My knowledge on historical economics is not enough to answer the question.
 
The Continental Blockade was supposed to force Britain to peace in the long run. In effect, it did create economical difficulties in the last years of the Napoleonic Wars if I remember correctly what I read. So, I guess the British could be forced to sign peace via attrition in a Napoleon's Victory scenario that doesn't use a sealion.

Problem with the Blockade itself is that it was a double-egded sword: it also had huge effects on the European Continent's economy, especially on French ports like Bordeaux. And I frankly don't know if the Blockade wouldn't crack open, either by the will of Napoleon or by that of the Europeans, before the British find themselves economically exhausted. My knowledge on historical economics is not enough to answer the question.

The system was less about blockade and more about imposing French hegemony on Europe, Napoleon approved of cracks in his own system where it benefited his own coffers. If it were really about economic warfare in a rational sense, that in itself would have been a pretty big no-no.
 
There are three things that have to happen for Napoleon to win:

(1) The British have to give up and accept that Europe east of Russia is now dominated by one power.

(2) Austria, Prussia and Russia have to accept the downfall of the Bourbon dynasty and the precedent that sets for, say, the houses of Hapsburg, Hohenzollern and Romanov.

(3) Hardest of all: Napoleon himself has to stop and say "enough" — and not when he's on the brink of defeat, but when he's at the climax of a string of successes.
 
Top