What's the biggest WW1 could have been?

How could we have seen an even bigger more destructive WW1? More participants, more diversified regions and campaigns, more modernized tech emerging.
 

jahenders

Banned
How could we have seen an even bigger more destructive WW1? More participants, more diversified regions and campaigns, more modernized tech emerging.

The main one I could see if there was more active war with China-Japan -- kind of moving up the Japanese invasion a decade or so.

Another might be various African tribes/countries getting heavily involved on one side or another and that turning into bloody civil war (e.g. Rwanda, etc).

In the West, just about anything that makes it more destructive would probably cause a collapse by one or more combatants (France, Germany, etc.), probably making it overall LESS destructive.
 
PoD: Something just before the American Civil War that pisses off the French enough to openly support the Confederacy, at least financially, while leaving the British neutral.

Russia proceeds to provide support for the Union (training, resources, whatever), leaving very strong and very lasting US-Russian friendship. Russia and Prussia never drift apart, so Germany and Russia are firm friends heading into the 1900s, as are Russia and the United States. Austria and France maintain a close defensive alliance, with Spain allied to France and Great Britain allied to Austria.

United States + Germany + Russia vs. Great Britain + Austria + France + Spain + Japan. Ottomans are eventually lured in with promises of Austria making some concessions, and gaining Russian territory, while Italy joins the German-Russian juggernaut once Austria is overrun enough to prevent isolation. A surviving Ming state could go either way, or might just fight against both Russia and Japan in a side conflict.

Assuming our countries look more-or-less like they do OTL, the *Entente will end up losing, but this would feature every major world power.
 
TL-191 probably gives a good idea of how big the war could get, namely with open conflict in the Americas as well as Eurasia
 
TL-191 probably gives a good idea of how big the war could get, namely with open conflict in the Americas as well as Eurasia

Pretty sure the POD has to be post-1900.

There were French plans to bypass the German trenches by invading northern Switzerland at one point. Not sure how close they came to actually happening.
 
If South America could become involved as an active battlefield. Perhaps Brazil could be the site of a civil war between Allied backed republican Brazil and Center Powers backed royalist Brazil...
 
Pretty sure the POD has to be post-1900.

There were French plans to bypass the German trenches by invading northern Switzerland at one point. Not sure how close they came to actually happening.

well it still gives a decent idea of the scale that an alternate WWI could have, with major participants for both sides on every continent so that it really is a world war rather than a mostly-central-European-and-some-Near-Eastern-with-colonial-conflicts-on-the-side war
 
I'm surprised I haven't seen a bigger mention of India. With the British incorporating Indian troops, or an earlier American entry, all easily would've added more troop count but expanding the zones of conflict significantly is more difficult to imagine.
 

LordKalvert

Banned
I'm surprised I haven't seen a bigger mention of India. With the British incorporating Indian troops, or an earlier American entry, all easily would've added more troop count but expanding the zones of conflict significantly is more difficult to imagine.

How about the Americans stay neutral in 1917, the Germans defeat the Russians but the Austrians get scarred of the Germans and their new found strength.

This leads to the Russians and the Austrians switching sides. Austria allies with France and Britain to attack the rising Germans and the Russians attack India to get at the British?
 
Perhaps have that Russian admiral go ahead and attack the Swedish navy to drag them into the Central Powers. Doubles as a Russia screw too.
 

Riain

Banned
Have Italy join the CP early on, this would make the Med, north Africa and East Africa into battlegrounds and possibly draw enough naval strength away from the North Sea for the HSF to see more action. Japan attacking China is another possibility, which would draw Japanese naval strength away from the Indian Ocean and Med.

If enough naval strength is diverted from the North Sea then covert trade could continue with colonies and third parties.
 
Perhaps have that Russian admiral go ahead and attack the Swedish navy to drag them into the Central Powers. Doubles as a Russia screw too.
[FONT=&quot]Nikolai Essen. His lunatic plan has definite possibilities.



How about screwing with Austria-Hungary? Maybe have Rudolf survive and Franz-Josef die earlier, possibly aligning AH with France (interesting if the Serbian nationalists still assassinate someone) or have the murky circumstances around his death turn out to be an actual assassination.[/FONT]
 
Have the Three Kaisers League (Germany, A_H and Russia) continue and face off versus UK, France and Italy. USA comes in on UK side later. Japan is UK co-belligerent

Russia meddles in China / Manchuria provoking conflict with China (and Japan) in Far East

Russia also invades Persia with Ottomans to eliminate UK influence and cut off UK oil supplies. Which brings in significant Indian Army involvement.

Lastly South America kicks off with either Brazil or Argentina suffering a populist revolution (again) and initiates a regional conflict
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Three things pop to mind immediately.

1. Japan siding with Germany rather than Britain, leading to an active Pacific front.

2. The Maritz Rebellion is more successful, leading to the Boers reclaiming independence and the creation of a South African front.

3. Afghanistan accepting German overtures to join the war, leading to the creation of a fighting front on the Northwest Frontier of India.
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
Have long-term German planning supporting anti-colonial uprisings in the British & French empires; extra points for the Second Indian Mutiny.

With problems for the French especially in Indochina, perhaps the Japanese will bat for the Central Powers, which might drag the Americans in (& perhaps the Dutch). We will certainly make it a bigger conflict if we can get the Chinese involved, so hopefully Japan's appetite just peaks a couple of years early.

Speaking of the Dutch, the Schleiffen Plan involves sweeping through the Maastricht Appendix, which the Dutch chose to interpret as an act of war. Or the British elect to turn the German right flank with an amphibious landing in the Frisian Islands :eek:

Switzerland on the map appears to be a good route to outflank the Western Front. All you need is a general staff that can't figure out what all those brown lines on a map represent.

The madness of Admiral Essen has already been mentioned so the Swedes are spoken for; Denmark is a nice place for the British to land on (they may not all get off the beaches though) so the Germans may pre-empt the invasion - it's just a question of dates as far as the hapless Danes are concerned.

The Portuguese (or their ever shifting governments) were pretty desperate to enter the war just in case their colonies were used to buy peace so they can make it under their own steam. Spain is a bit of a problem as I can't see them fighting unless the Central Powers are on the verge of victory.

Ideally either Britain or Germany has long standing plans to distract the Americans by inducing Mexico to commit national suicide (although the presidents will be nice & rich in exile). After that setting the fratricidal South Americans at each others' throats would be child's play.

Struggling to spread the war to Antarctica unless the followers of Scott & Amundsen decide to settle matters of honour on the ice shelf :eek:
 
Some fresh new ideas in thus thread.

Royal Marines getting ground into the sand dunes of Western Jutland ...
Swedish pirates smuggling phosphates into Germany ....
WALLIES "patrolling" the Swedish coast in an attempt to discourage smuggling.

Speaking of smuggling ... dozens of Zeppelins support General Lettow Virbeck in East Africa.

The Finnish Civil War lasting longer with German support for Swedish-speaking nobles and continuing Russian support for Finnish communists.

The Netherlands dragged in ...

Basque separatists trying to carve thier own enclave out of the corner of an exhausted France. Spanish Basques helping Basque separatists.

Catalonian separatists see this as a good opportunity ....

Speaking of separatists ... Irish Catholics succeed in importing significant amounts of weapons.

In the aftermath, every minority tries to reclaim its homeland from exhausted empires. Overlapping claims lead to viscious fights between ethnic minorities.

The USA says: "Sort out your own problems because we are going home."
 
If South America could become involved as an active battlefield. Perhaps Brazil could be the site of a civil war between Allied backed republican Brazil and Center Powers backed royalist Brazil...

It would have to be the other way around, since the Brazilian Royal Family had deep links to both Portugal and France. And I might be a bit wrong about Brazilian history, but how much credibility did the Brazilian monarchy really even have at that point? Definitely not enough to start a civil war based on it.

The most likely option would be to somehow get a militarist government in power in Peru, and from there, get German support to resolve disputes with Colombia and Ecuador. To get the most countries involved, restart the War of the Pacific and get Bolivia to join in to get something back. Peru considered the area around Arica and Tacna as occupied territory and I believe their status was never satisfactorally decided before 1929. You just need German backing. The problem with that is, Germany poking around in South America will draw an immediate response from the US. Peru vs Ecuador/Colombia is probably your best bet. Naval power was essential to the First War of the Pacific and that will hold true in a repeat of it, and Peru in 1914 had a very weak navy compared to Chile, so Germany would have to send significant part of the High Seas Fleet to assist. Unless you have Central Powers Japan, maybe they might help Peru, but I think their fleet will be needed elsewhere, unless they get spectacularly lucky early on.

Otherwise, a civil war occurring in Latin America and the Central Powers backing one side is the best option and fighting a proxy war is your best bet.

Struggling to spread the war to Antarctica unless the followers of Scott & Amundsen decide to settle matters of honour on the ice shelf :eek:

British polar explorers are having a bad day, randomly find a party of German/other CP explorers, then start shooting?
 

Redbeard

Banned
Perhaps have that Russian admiral go ahead and attack the Swedish navy to drag them into the Central Powers. Doubles as a Russia screw too.

Norway had gained full independence from Sweden by 1905 and was much more oriented towards GB than the other Scandinavians (further away from Germany, closer to GB and with a big global Merchant navy to protect). As I understand the general attitude in Norway wasn't exactly cordial towards Sweden and I guess they could be talked into squeezing Sweden from the West if the British promise support and if the Russians have a good go from the East.

By 1914 Denmark de facto was a non-belligerent German vassal and would be pressed to actively join the CP if Russia attacks Sweden. The Danish Government (and people) probably would be happy to aid the Swedes in fighting the Russians, but it would be extremely difficult to gain any support for fighting Norway which was and is seen as the "Premium brother people". BTW the King of Norway was a brother to the King of Denmark.
 
The main one I could see if there was more active war with China-Japan -- kind of moving up the Japanese invasion a decade or so.

Another might be various African tribes/countries getting heavily involved on one side or another and that turning into bloody civil war (e.g. Rwanda, etc).

In the West, just about anything that makes it more destructive would probably cause a collapse by one or more combatants (France, Germany, etc.), probably making it overall LESS destructive.

Seeing as nearly every African country was under the control of a European power, that is what happened to a degree.

South African troops invaded South-west Africa and took it over, and South African (and other) troops also fought a long campaign against Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck in East Africa.

With rgard to African 'tribes' fighting taking up arms against each other because of a European war, that's pretty much ASBs.
 
Top