Alternative History/Time Travel discussion thread

[Organized States]

A thread for Alternative History fans!

Here, you may discuss scenarios, works, authors, and give your personal opinion on series and upcoming books!

The first poll question is up!

[Greater Weselton]

What if the events in Frozen really happened in 1889?

[Organized States]

What if the events in Frozen really happened in 1889?

If you want to talk about Frozen, go to another thread.

[The Fascist American Empire]

What if Napoleon had been victorious at Waterloo?

[Rutthenia]

What if Napoleon had been victorious at Waterloo?

Belgium/the Netherlands would've been a part of France, and Indonesia, Suriname (and possibly South Africa) would be under French control. For one battle, the history of later-time colonization would be affected harshly.

[Organized States]

What if Napoleon had been victorious at Waterloo?

Interesting Concept, I'd think we'd see a lot less of the Prussians in the following years, and we might even not have seen the First World War.

[Occupied Deutschland]

I'm a big fan of alternate history.
I like Harry Turtledove's work.

With both of those things said, I must say, Harry Turtledove is an astoundingly BORING author. The dude has far too much of a tendency to reflect 'period-appropriate' (and the appropriateness of this is debateable in some cases) progressions of events that are so terribly dull as to invite mass reader-catatonia. His 'Washington DC diner' portions of the 'World At War' series, for example, seemed to be devoted almost entirely to establishing 'this is how _____ worked in the _______ (1890s, 1910s, 1920s, 1930s, etc.) and even in his 'Aliens invade Earth' series 'The World at War' he takes entirely unnecessary and uninteresting side-tours into ecology and the history of science-fiction as a genre and women's rights and virtually every facet of historical occurrence BESIDES 'how do the aliens change things directly?'.

This is something Robert Conroy seems to get, as his novels are generally more focuesed around a 'traditional' set-up of 'what if X happened instead of Y?'. Turtledove delves into much too extensive a subject matter for what his work entails, it seems to me. It's alternate history! I'm not looking for a brief treatise on the human condition, I'm looking for a brief foray into the boundaries of historical probability and historical allusions (something Turtledove does much better.more subtly than Conroy I must say. Nixon as a car-salesman, for example, being a wonderful moment).

[Organized States]

I'm a big fan of alternate history.
I like Harry Turtledove's work.

With both of those things said, I must say, Harry Turtledove is an astoundingly BORING author. The dude has far too much of a tendency to reflect 'period-appropriate' (and the appropriateness of this is debateable in some cases) progressions of events that are so terribly dull as to invite mass reader-catatonia. His 'Washington DC diner' portions of the 'World At War' series, for example, seemed to be devoted almost entirely to establishing 'this is how _____ worked in the _______ (1890s, 1910s, 1920s, 1930s, etc.) and even in his 'Aliens invade Earth' series 'The World at War' he takes entirely unnecessary and uninteresting side-tours into ecology and the history of science-fiction as a genre and women's rights and virtually every facet of historical occurrence BESIDES 'how do the aliens change things directly?'.

This is something Robert Conroy seems to get, as his novels are generally more focuesed around a 'traditional' set-up of 'what if X happened instead of Y?'. Turtledove delves into much too extensive a subject matter for what his work entails, it seems to me. It's alternate history! I'm not looking for a brief treatise on the human condition, I'm looking for a brief foray into the boundaries of historical probability and historical allusions (something Turtledove does much better.more subtly than Conroy I must say. Nixon as a car-salesman, for example, being a wonderful moment).

I so agree. Turtledove's writing, though good, comes out sluggish, it takes a while for you to get the full picture, and I sometimes feel he has too many characters in his books.

Conroy, has some rather good books (among my favorites are Rising Sun and 1945), but I sometimes feel he goes too quickly into things, and I personally feel, if Conroy took some of his writing style, and put it into a Turtledove style book, It'd make for an excellent read.

[Organized States]

Anyone know of any good novels about Operation Downfall other than Conroy's 1945?

[Adab]

What if the Germans emerged victorious at the Battle of the Bulge? Would Hitler be able to force the Western Allies to sign a peace treaty and fully focus on the Eastern Front? Would Germany be able to hold on against the Soviets or would it be overrun anyway?

[Organized States]

What if the Germans emerged victorious at the Battle of the Bulge? Would Hitler be able to force the Western Allies to sign a peace treaty and fully focus on the Eastern Front? Would Germany be able to hold on against the Soviets or would it be overrun anyway?

I doubt the Allies, would have signed a peace treaty over the loss at the Bulge alone. The Bulge wasn't much more than a delaying action.

[Arkolon]

What if the US never gained independence from the Empire, as the Brits devolved some of their power to them much like is being discussed about Scotland?

[Organized States]

What if the US never gained independence from the Empire, as the Brits devolved some of their power to them much like is being discussed about Scotland?

An odd scenario you put forward here, I think it wouldn't happen though. The Early US was pretty committed to independence. I'd assume there'd be a quite large insurgency.

Are you in anyway referring to the upcoming Robert Conroy novel which deals with this subject?

[Arkolon]

What if the US never gained independence from the Empire, as the Brits devolved some of their power to them much like is being discussed about Scotland?

An odd scenario you put forward here, I think it wouldn't happen though. The Early US was pretty committed to independence. I'd assume there'd be a quite large insurgency.

Are you in anyway referring to the upcoming Robert Conroy novel which deals with this subject?

Never heard of him.

[Organized States]

An odd scenario you put forward here, I think it wouldn't happen though. The Early US was pretty committed to independence. I'd assume there'd be a quite large insurgency.

Are you in anyway referring to the upcoming Robert Conroy novel which deals with this subject?

Never heard of him.

Ok, then...

[Alexandreon]

What if the Germans emerged victorious at the Battle of the Bulge? Would Hitler be able to force the Western Allies to sign a peace treaty and fully focus on the Eastern Front? Would Germany be able to hold on against the Soviets or would it be overrun anyway?

Germany in the time of Operation "Wacht am Rhein" ("Watch on the Rhine") were unable to win the WW2, due to several reasons.

First of all, German fuel and material reserves were depleted since Soviet capture of Romania and ongoing fighting on Hungarian front. Germany needlessly launched so called "Adolf Hitler Panzerprogramm" in 1943, introducing a lot of laborious and expensive vehicles, such as Panzer V, known rather as Panther. Panther during its debut in 1943 proved to be extremely unreliable vehicle, prone to mechanical failures (two Panthers ignited and burned completely during driving of the railway embankment before the battle of Kursk). And to make matters worse, Panthers were supposed to become equipment of one of two tank battallions a German armored division had at those days. One can barely imagine the chaos caused by depriving divisions of half of their potential and transferring it to the mainland for re-equipment and re-training with new model of tanks. Rarely more than 15 battallions of Panthers were present at the same front, and what is more even then they were rather treated as heavy tank detached battalions, depriving armored divisions half of their potential.

Apart from that, one has to be honest. The Western Front wasn't the one where Germany lost the war. Yes, the failure of Wehrmacht in Battle of the Bulge faciliated the defeat of Reich, but was hardly decisive. It was the Eastern Front that engaged most of German military potential, and in the turn of 1944 and 1945 the Red Army was rolling towards Berlin in a pace that is hard to imagine. On 12 January 1945 the Vistula-Oder Offensive began, which took Soviet forces from their start lines on the Vistula River almost 300 mi (480 km) to the Oder River; located 70 km (43 mi) from the German capital of Berlin. And in 1944 Wehrmacht took heavy beating in Operation Bagration and several others.

Besides, the air offensive of Western Allies deregulated German military industry, so... Germany wouldn't be able to win WW2, and personally I believe that they were unable to win it since the very outbreak of the war, given really limited access the Reich had to strategic resources and its limited economical potential, compared to the UK, US and USSR.

[Republic of Coldwater]

I'm working on an Alt History for the Alternative History Wiki (and maybe an RP), and although I cannot say too much to avoid spoilers, I can give you a basic picture so all of you can judge it's realism (Please do so I can improve upon it)

The point of divergence was sometime after the American Revolution where political divides got larger. The Federalists and Democratic-Republicans were far more radical in their platforms and their ideas after the radical sects of their party were able to take over. This would result in three distinct American nations, New England, America and Carolina. New England would be the hard-core Hamiltonian areas, America would be a mix of New England and Carolina's ideas, while Carolina was based off Jeffersonian ideas.

Furthermore, what do you guys think will happen next if this divide were to happen sometime in the late 18th Century.

[Organized States]

I'm working on an Alt History for the Alternative History Wiki (and maybe an RP), and although I cannot say too much to avoid spoilers, I can give you a basic picture so all of you can judge it's realism (Please do so I can improve upon it)

The point of divergence was sometime after the American Revolution where political divides got larger. The Federalists and Democratic-Republicans were far more radical in their platforms and their ideas after the radical sects of their party were able to take over. This would result in three distinct American nations, New England, America and Carolina. New England would be the hard-core Hamiltonian areas, America would be a mix of New England and Carolina's ideas, while Carolina was based off Jeffersonian ideas.

Furthermore, what do you guys think will happen next if this divide were to happen sometime in the late 18th Century.

This is a great concept you have here, I tend to think on the side of the whole time period part, is that we'd see these states in a fairly weak postion. Carolinas (and the South in general), didn't have the population New England did.

On the flip side, New England didn't have the agricultural base the South did.

I'll try to expand on this later.

[Republic of Coldwater]

What if the US never gained independence from the Empire, as the Brits devolved some of their power to them much like is being discussed about Scotland?

How did the US not gain independence? If it was due to a failed war, then the US would be bound to have a second revolution as there is that spirit, while intelligent people like Thomas Paine and Jefferson would continue to write and support another revolution. If it was due to a lack of support, and people like Paine didn't release Common Sense, then I'd be sipping some tea and speaking in a British Accent.

[Traekun]

So far my favorite alternate histories have been online timelines rather than books. And I hate time travel. (As does China.)

The first is Reds: A Revolutionary Timeline. It is based around a US socialist revolution in 1933, the domestic and international results of that revolution, and the things that led up to and derived from that revolution. Manages to be a socialist USA that is neither stupidly utopian nor stupidly dystopian, manages to work off of US socialist history rather than just pasting the Soviet Union onto America, and is quite well detailed.

The second is Superpowers. It is based around the survival of the Roman Empire and Mongol Horde into the modern day and how this changes the world's geopolitical structure. Far more detailed than almost any other timeline I have seen, my only real concern is that it is currently in the middle of being revised so it might be best to wait until that ends to make a final judgement.

[Organized States]

So far my favorite alternate histories have been online timelines rather than books. And I hate time travel. (As does China.)

The first is Reds: A Revolutionary Timeline. It is based around a US socialist revolution in 1933, the domestic and international results of that revolution, and the things that led up to and derived from that revolution. Manages to be a socialist USA that is neither stupidly utopian nor stupidly dystopian, manages to work off of US socialist history rather than just pasting the Soviet Union onto America, and is quite well detailed.

The second is Superpowers. It is based around the survival of the Roman Empire and Mongol Horde into the modern day and how this changes the world's geopolitical structure. Far more detailed than almost any other timeline I have seen, my only real concern is that it is currently in the middle of being revised so it might be best to wait until that ends to make a final judgement.

Interesting timelines, I've never really seen those before. Great finds!