Advertisement
by The Danish Confederacy » Sun Jul 26, 2015 10:08 pm
General Dicking Around wrote:AND THEN JOHN SMASHED THE WINDOW AND FUCKED A GOOSE WITH A LIGHTSABER
[violet] wrote:Right. It's words. Billions of words. :)
Nerd³ wrote:You can't milk a dick/Vaginas don't drink milk.
Douglas Adams wrote:In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
by Ruridova » Sun Jul 26, 2015 10:09 pm
Bojikami wrote:3. Keep your nations within reason, complete realism is not a requirement but some degree of it is encouraged.
by Luziyca » Sun Jul 26, 2015 10:14 pm
by Bojikami » Sun Jul 26, 2015 10:14 pm
Luziyca wrote:Thanks, Boji.
*plots to anchluss Central Asia, some Pacific islands, maybe Philippines and even go as far west as Uganda, Kenya, and Madagascar... is probably getting too far ahead of myself*
by Luziyca » Sun Jul 26, 2015 10:16 pm
by Ruridova » Mon Jul 27, 2015 1:10 am
by Of the Quendi » Mon Jul 27, 2015 2:25 am
Unicario wrote:I'd imagine roughly OTL, maybe with Wallonia added in for good measure. ^^
by Unicario » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:05 am
Of the Quendi wrote:Unicario wrote:I'd imagine roughly OTL, maybe with Wallonia added in for good measure. ^^
It doesn't make much sense for the coalition to diminish the size of France without deposing Napoleon. Of the Great Powers Austria was the only one that wasn't absolutely hell bent on removing Napoleon at all costs. For Russia, Prussia and the United Kingdom allowing a non-Napoleonic France to retain control over the the western bank of the Rhine would have been far preferred to reducing a France led by Napoleon to its 1792 borders.
by Of the Quendi » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:53 am
Unicario wrote:But with Napoleon having lost the first round, and then winning at Waterloo (during the 100 days), and then being deposed again as per your sign-up (Louis Philippe I), it would make sense for France to be basically at 1792 borders plus Wallonia and Luxembourg. ^^
by Luziyca » Mon Jul 27, 2015 10:26 am
Of the Quendi wrote:Unicario wrote:But with Napoleon having lost the first round, and then winning at Waterloo (during the 100 days), and then being deposed again as per your sign-up (Louis Philippe I), it would make sense for France to be basically at 1792 borders plus Wallonia and Luxembourg. ^^
His deposition in my application has nothing to do with coalition wars against him. The OP says Napoleon stayed in power. The reason I use Louis Philippe is that Napoleon presumably would have not been alive in 1835. But if Napoleon was still sufficiently strong to prevent the seventh coalition from deposing him I don't see how he can have simultaneously been too weak to keep a Rhine border.
In fact in the Frankfurt proposals Austria's Metternich devised just such a scenario in which Napoleon would remain in power ruling a France restored to its "natural borders", the Rhine, Pyrenees and Alps. The proposal never came to fruition as Austria was the only power supportive of it, with the other coalition powers favoring harsher terms and Napoleon still believing that he could turn the war around. But those terms would seem a good basis for a partial Napoleonic victory in the seventh coalition.
by United Marxist Nations » Mon Jul 27, 2015 11:24 am
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Luziyca » Mon Jul 27, 2015 11:34 am
by Of the Quendi » Mon Jul 27, 2015 11:51 am
Luziyca wrote:IIRC, Napoleon had a son who briefly assumed the throne as Napoleon II.
by Luziyca » Mon Jul 27, 2015 12:53 pm
Of the Quendi wrote:Luziyca wrote:IIRC, Napoleon had a son who briefly assumed the throne as Napoleon II.
Napoleon II was emperor for two weeks during which he wasn't even in France. During his "reign" a five member governmental committee ruled France without ever bothering to recall Napoleon II from Austria. They surrendered to the Bourbons.
In this timeline I imagine Napoleon II would have been reunited with his father in France after the Seventh Coalition, but if Napoleon dies while his son is still a child, and that seems most likely, then I don't see Napoleon II being able to accede to the throne. In 1812 during the Mallet coup general Clarke failed (and was later admonished by Napoleon) to declare the King of Rome emperor when it was believed Napoleon had died in Russia. One of Napoleon's generals (unfortunately I can't remember which) apparently said something along the lines of; "People always forget that King of Rome" which I think sums up the lack of strength of the Bonapartist line of succession.
by United Marxist Nations » Mon Jul 27, 2015 1:11 pm
Of the Quendi wrote:Luziyca wrote:IIRC, Napoleon had a son who briefly assumed the throne as Napoleon II.
Napoleon II was emperor for two weeks during which he wasn't even in France. During his "reign" a five member governmental committee ruled France without ever bothering to recall Napoleon II from Austria. They surrendered to the Bourbons.
In this timeline I imagine Napoleon II would have been reunited with his father in France after the Seventh Coalition, but if Napoleon dies while his son is still a child, and that seems most likely, then I don't see Napoleon II being able to accede to the throne. In 1812 during the Mallet coup general Clarke failed (and was later admonished by Napoleon) to declare the King of Rome emperor when it was believed Napoleon had died in Russia. One of Napoleon's generals (unfortunately I can't remember which) apparently said something along the lines of; "People always forget that King of Rome" which I think sums up the lack of strength of the Bonapartist line of succession.
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Of the Quendi » Mon Jul 27, 2015 1:53 pm
Luziyca wrote:Well, he could have a regent.
United Marxist Nations wrote:What about either a return of the Republic or a non-absolutist monarchy? IIRC, Napoleon said something like "a constitutional monarchy will suit my son".
by Bojikami » Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:43 pm
by United Marxist Nations » Mon Jul 27, 2015 8:25 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by United Marxist Nations » Mon Jul 27, 2015 8:59 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by Bojikami » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:01 pm
United Marxist Nations wrote:NS Name: United Marxist Nations
Nation Claimed: Empire of Ethiopia
Head of State: Sahle Dengel (Civil War going on, it is complicated)
Head of Government: Sahle Dengel
Capital: Addis Ababa
Government type (as of 1835): Absolute Monarchy, but with civil war making effectively feudal
by Unicario » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:15 pm
by Luziyca » Mon Jul 27, 2015 9:17 pm
Advertisement
Return to Portal to the Multiverse
Advertisement