Narrow victory for Germany in WW2?
- Thread starter Tripsos
- Start date
How much of that was contingent on the course of the war, though? If the Soviets were beaten and several amphibious invasions by the Allies repelled, would public sentiment really be as enthusiastic?
The Atlantic Charter, which called for :
A disarmament of aggressor nations and a common disarmament after the war.
Was announced in late 1941, when things looked blackest. The Allies were committed.
Garrison
Donor
And those are some very large ifs that would be very hard to create a plausible scenario from based on previous efforts on this forum.
It was also only 2 years into the war, and a few months into Operation Barbarossa. If the Soviet Union fell and the war dragged on for 2, 3, or even 4 more years would things stay the same? They wouldn't consider any chance to buy time and build up their forces?
Maybe they don't even make any announcements or declarations, and instead just hold off on invading until an opportunity arises?
Indeed. It's like "let's assume all the roadblocks to Nazi Germany are removed" now wouldn't the allies seek peace?
I just wanted to make a TL about a pyrrhically victorious Nazi Germany that gets taken over by Hans Oster.
David Flin
Gone Fishin'
Your best bet is not to worry about how you get there, and simply state that this happens, and start from that point. A lot of good stories start from some seriously rubbish handwavium How We Got Here bits (Fatherland, Man In The High Castle).
Of course, that makes it a story rather than a serious history, and arguably this wouldn't be the forum for it.
If the purpose of the exercise is to plausibly achieve that, well, Good Luck. You're going to need it.
Hitler and Stalin fall into a coma after the fall of France.
Hitler's inner circle probably doesn't assassinate him (a few of them genuinely liked him from what I understand), but Stalin's does (no one liked him). Soviet infighting takes them out of the war for a bit before someone takes over. If this person is trigger happy he takes advantage of the Nazi pause due to Hitler's temporary absence and strikes at Germany.
Unfortunately, the SU is woefully unprepared for such a thing, as Germany won't be fighting in enemy territory and it would be at pre Barbarossa numbers. So Germany takes a loss in Poland while the Nazi leadership aims the bulk of their army East and pulverizes the Soviets, pushing them back into Moscow.
New Soviet guy is promptly killed and someone else takes over, with the new guy making concessions to the Nazis in order to get some temp peace agreement so they can sort their shit out.
The Nazi's, without Hitler at the head, fart around for a bit before he wakes back up a year later.
Hitler's inner circle probably doesn't assassinate him (a few of them genuinely liked him from what I understand), but Stalin's does (no one liked him). Soviet infighting takes them out of the war for a bit before someone takes over. If this person is trigger happy he takes advantage of the Nazi pause due to Hitler's temporary absence and strikes at Germany.
Unfortunately, the SU is woefully unprepared for such a thing, as Germany won't be fighting in enemy territory and it would be at pre Barbarossa numbers. So Germany takes a loss in Poland while the Nazi leadership aims the bulk of their army East and pulverizes the Soviets, pushing them back into Moscow.
New Soviet guy is promptly killed and someone else takes over, with the new guy making concessions to the Nazis in order to get some temp peace agreement so they can sort their shit out.
The Nazi's, without Hitler at the head, fart around for a bit before he wakes back up a year later.
Last edited:
Garrison
Donor
And that's cool, but it will be much easier to do in the Writers forum where you can concentrate on the narrative and not worry about all the inevitable questions about plausibility that a Nazi victory TL will inevitability raise in Post-1900. There are a lot of good TLs in Writers and if you take the advice of @David Flin and just skim over the how you got there part you can focus on the story you want to tell.
David Flin
Gone Fishin'
Indeed. Several published books started off life in the Writers' Forum.
Admittedly, the traffic in the Writers' Forum is much less than here, which is a shame as it's a good place if you're interested in the story side of things rather in the historical side. If you post here about WW2, well, there are a lot of exceptionally knowledgeable people, and the TL will get criticised if it doesn't make sense.
I do think people tend to be too harsh and deterministic with WW2 TLs. People tend to know a lot which means they see less 'space' between the facts. Shame really.
Thanks for the advice. I do like to write TLs with a sort of narrative direction beyond pure historical determinism, although I also prefer to get inspiration from real history and what might be plausible rather than simply making things up. I feel like a sense of historical verisimilitude gives the story a much greater weight and impact.
You can dot his without having to slave away under the harsh restrictions of this forum.
David Flin
Gone Fishin'
Six East End Boys for example, started off life in the Writers' Forum. It has a narrative direction, and is derived from a POD of a Brighton Bomb in 1984 that succeeded in its aim; the story is set 30 years after this.
As for Real History, I did do a WW3 story (Comedy of Terrors) in which every event described took place (somewhere), and which is possibly the least plausible WW3 story ever written. Edit: To be specific, this version had precisely one casualty, a general who sprained his wrist lifting a tumbler with too much whisky in it.
Last edited:
I do enjoy getting chapter-by-chapter feedback and advice from the forum (even if I may not have as strict standards for historical plausibility as many others), and just knowing that people are reading it also encourages me to continue writing (apologies if this is getting off-topic for this forum)
Was that the one where people looked for walls to bang their heads against?
This is why I wish people wrote more TLs about other modern conflicts and events besides WW2. Onkel Willie’s writings are a perfect example of quality TLs not related to WW2.
In regards to AH WW2 has been beaten to death, resurrected, beaten to death again and then the process repeated a dozen times. Unless you’re throwing in ASB elements or have a perfectly original idea I don’t see the appeal. There were over 100 different wars and conflicts between 1945-2000 so it isn’t like there’s a lack of source material.
He was pragmatic but his ruthlessness would eventually get the better of him. Not to mention I do not see the Allies taking a secret police official ascending to absolute power well.