Alternate History Thread II...

[Thlayli]

Nice dis. I will be implementing the Three City System here as well, it probably won't cause too much havoc.

So how's this:

Norse Empire
Capital: Yorvick
Ruler: /
Government: Absolute Monarchy
Centralization: Unitary With Exceptions
Religion: Norse Christianity
Tech. Level: Age of Exploration
Army (Training): 50 Thousands (Professional)
Navy (Training): 30 Ships (Good)
Economy: Rich (+3)
Leadership (Military/Civilian): Good/Tolerable
Infrastructure: Good
Education: Literate
Culture: Devoted
Confidence: Respecting
Projects:
Public Allies:
Nation Background:

 

[Disenfrancised]

I think this is beyond the age where its just single ships. Plus I think das meant make the stats after the nation backgrounds are done .

 

[Thlayli]

I know, just making sure I didn't make any horrendous mistakes. (And das used ships in the stats he just posted.)

 

[das]

Its Norse Empire, not Viking Britain.

Centralization: Tight Federation

By now, Unitary with Exceptions.

Religion: (Not sure what to call this, Roman Catholicism or plain Christianity?)

Norse Catholicism (autonomous church, rather like Gallicanism). Sweden likewise has Swedish Catholicism, and Brittany is also Celtic Rite, others are simple Roman Catholic but still more autonomous than in OTL.

Economy should also be slightly increased.

The Norse navy is lesser both in size and in training right now, though only slightly, while their army should be Professional and much larger - they fought and won a war against two of Europe's hegemon powers early in the century and since then have campaigned in Europe on numerous occasions.

Also decrease Culture to Devoted as there are many discontent minorities, but boost the Confidence some.

Perhaps I should do Nation Descriptions first, and then you could do the stats in accord with them.

 

[Thlayli]

Changes made. I think I'll do that.

 

[das]

Don't forget to make it clear that the Norse Christianity isn't completely divided from the Catholics; its a national church, but more like Gallicanism than like Anglicanism, and not very different from usual Catholicism theologically apart from lesser emphasis on the Pope and greater emphasis on the King.

 

[Thlayli]

Right, I'll include a note. I'm doing the rules and such now, so...

 

[das]

Hmm, so you will do some other rules then?

 

[Stormbringer]

das, I want to do a modern-age NES eventually, but I do not want to do a simple historical one. Could you do a brief alt-history for me? The one I always pondered was the possible success of the August Coup in 1991, but if you have other suggestions please feel free.

 

[das]

Sorry, the 1990s and later really aren't my speciality, plus I'm busy. Could you ask Symphony instead?

 

[Symphony D.]

I don't really see how a successful August Coup would change much. It was already too late to recover for the USSR by then, in my estimation. The Warsaw Pact had crumbled, the Baltic States had already declared independence, Russia itself under Yeltsin was fighting the War of Laws against official USSR doctrine, and the military buildups during the 1980s Arms Races had severely crippled the economy. Even if the Communists held onto power at that point, I don't think it'd last them too much longer... beyond which, the Coup proper succeeding would take some work.

Now, if you were to go back a bit earlier to say, 1970, knock off Gorbachev somehow then fastforward to 1983 - 1985, have a hardliner follow Chernenko... then things could be interesting, considering that was the true height of the Cold War. It's not outside the realm of possibility that with Star Wars Reagan at the helm the diehards in the Soviet party might realize that if they wanted to "win" their window was fast receeding. There are actually already some thoughts on the matter. It's not entirely impossible that in an age of MIRV'd warheads, a last-ditch conventional war would be tried: if from the outset you only use conventional forces, your opponent is obliged to retaliate in kind as if he uses nuclear weapons first MAD comes into play. Unfortunately, once one side starts to lose, they're liable to use them anyway... and Soviet doctrine tended to include heavy tactical use of NBC weapons.

I guess I could work on such a thing, though it's my estimation it'd either end in nuclear holocaust or with an initial Soviet advance before American assets began entering Europe in force. Given the performance in Gulf War I but little more than half a decade later, I am inclined to say Allied technology would probably match or beat Soviet numbers. If it didn't end in nuclear annihilation, it'd probably be a semi-draw brought about by internal dissent in the Soviet Union, particularly if Gorbachev was around but had chosen to go this route, with the likely collapse of the Soviet Union thereafter...

Alternatively, a hardliner could replace Gorby and not act, and Communism might continue on, though given its stagnating nature in the 80's and the inevitability of reform, I can't imagine it lingering on all that much farther really; cracks would appear sometime.

 

[silver 2039]

Alternatively, a hardliner could replace Gorby and not act, and Communism might continue on, though given its stagnating nature in the 80's and the inevitability of reform, I can't imagine it lingering on all that much farther really; cracks would appear sometime.

Or maybe the problems with the perstrokia reforms could be ironed out, and a China style sucess could be replicated....maybe.

 

[Insane_Panda]

However, as Gorbachev announced Perestroika, the USSR was already beginning to fall apart. 1990-91, as said before, was too late to save the USSR.

Everyone was jumping ship.

 

[silver 2039]

However, as Gorbachev announced Perestroika, the USSR was already beginning to fall apart. 1990-91, as said before, was too late to save the USSR.

Everyone was jumping ship.

True...however perhaps Yeltstin could be a more capable leader and despite the the USSR following a Greater Russia could emerge incorparating large portions of its fraternal socialist comrades. Yeltsin was a nationalist however he was clearly incompotent to allow so much Russian territory to break away, Belarus, Eastern Ukriane, northern Khzakstan etc...

 

[Insane_Panda]

Yeltsin was a nationalist however he was clearly incompotent to allow so much Russian territory to break away, Belarus, Eastern Ukriane, northern Khzakstan etc...

The process of fragmentation, however, began with Gorbachev. And even IF the USSR held together, it would be a ruined nation, and would have virtually no power left except for a huge (but paper tiger since the country is so ruined internally) military, and indeed would probably collapse a few years later.

 

[das]

IMHO the chances of Russia going by the same path as China are overrated. A more hardline communist renaissance might have happened had Andropov lived longer, though; that would probably have eventually led to WWIII unless USA were to break down for some reason (i.e. an economical crisis causing isolationism, but though both economies were being overstrained late in the Cold War, the Soviet one was worse off; somehow I doubt that Andropov could have reversed it...).

I do agree that 1990 is way too late if what you want is the survival of the USSR. What exactly DO you want, Storm?

 

[silver 2039]

The process of fragmentation, however, began with Gorbachev. And even IF the USSR held together, it would be a ruined nation, and would have virtually no power left except for a huge (but paper tiger since the country is so ruined internally) military, and indeed would probably collapse a few years later.

I wasn;t referring to the USSR holding together. I was referring to the USSR breaking up, but Yeltsin being a more capable leader and ensuring Russia got large portions of territrory that held Russian minorties and majoritie. That would alleivate problems of discontent nationalties and furthermore Russia could perhaps seek to preserve its power.

 

[North King]

After their economy was shattered and their military obsolete, the USSR really only had power in the diplomatic field--and lost that once their authority over most of their own lands ceased.

 

[das]

Technically neither the Soviet economy nor the Soviet military were as bad as you say; certainly not beyond repair, and safety could always be guaranteed by the nuclear arsenal. I do agree that realistically, it had to choose between OTL, North Korea (Andropovian renaissance, then WWIII) and Yugoslavia (though here we too have divergences - it could either become a nationalist state liked silver2039 suggested, reclaiming national lands at the expense of isolation abroad and a de facto state of siege, either just fall apart even more messily than in OTL; the former has good chances of leading to the latter in the end, but not necessarily).

 

[Swissempire]

Why does it need to be commies, there is lots of other scenarios that don't involve the USSR. Bigger Socialist South America, Someone in Africa actually uniting people, EU saying FU and taking over lots of land........etc.