They are all the same except the flags and the names have been changed to 1936_SCENARIO, 1938_SCENARIO, etc,
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Shrapneluk said:
*sight*
Scroll down, its sure than its here. Its called 'Imperial Apogee'.
Russia is to strong also Germany has 50% of its forces at belgium and netherland border
Andri said:
Schlieffen plan said, that Germans should have 90 % of their troops in Belgium border.
General_Grant said:
Westerners thought the Ottoman Empire was on the verge of collapse from 1780 on, yet in the 19th century it began reforming, and did a pretty good job of it. Witness how it held out in the Great War for so long, for instance.
Why wouldn't reform continue?
Likewise, the Arab revolts (and Arab nationalism) in general is overrated; the Arab revolt was led by some Bedouin from Saudi Arabia; hardly representative of Syria and Mesopotamia, which were mostly loyal to the Empire.
So, my guess is that you'd see continued efforts at reform; not as fanatical as in Attaturk's Turkey, but those were hardly an unmitigated success.
Certainly it's IC would be greater sans the devastation of the war; and it would use oil revenues more profitably than Britain did in the region.
Last edited:
Faeelin: I couldn´t agree more ... and it would be more fun playing the reforming Ottoman Empire rather than its decadent representation in the mod (which is undoubtly outstanding 
)
)
I agree with Faeelin as well.
Here's a suggestion for an initial setup for the Ottoman Empire.
Here's a suggestion for an initial setup for the Ottoman Empire.
Shrapneluk said:
I got this once, did you make the same mistake as me? and select the wron 1936 scenario?
I think you should applied account on Mantis Bug Reporting Grant.
Because the detection of bug will be difficult.
Because the detection of bug will be difficult.
IndoEsia45 said:
What is that Mantis thing?
And why do you think 'bug detection' is going to be hard?
Edit: i'll answer everything regarding the Ottoman Empire later, im a bit busy now.
Kabraloth said:
Well, the dodcanese would be Ottoman, Rhoades and the other Island(s) would be Italian, and, why would the Ottomans control Hedj or you know, Suadi Arabia, surely it would make it too easy to hit British Oil making lands.
Also, i've finally got to war, and just want to say, France and Russia are overpowered
.Also, the Russian army seems to be way too effective, as the UK, i had 3 divisions in Torun (2 39' Arty and a GQ), along with 7 German divisions, when war broke out, 10 Russian divisions beat the defence within seconds, everyone with 100% org. Surely the Russian Army would be much much worse then a Anglo - German force with equal numbers.
Also, the French are just too many, they have 18 on evryborder we have (exept Vietnam) wheres germany can only muster 10 max.#
Great mod, can't wait for further releases! (and events!)
Well, Yemen and the Hedjaz were under Ottoman influence/control even during World War I in our timeline, and 1915-1916 a railroad was supposed to be completed that would dramatically improve the infrastructure and allow the Ottomans to take direct control of the area. So, it would make sense for the Ottomans to take all of Saudi Arabia, especially as Britain was historically the Ottomans' protector to oppose the Russians, and so would be less likely to object. Also, Britain tended to favor colonial ports initially to control trade before working inland [India, Africa...], and so at this point she wouldn't have cared about some desert [to British eyes] without a signifactant amount of oil or other natural resources [yet developed]. As for the Ottoman Empire itself, while it was declining, the Young Turks were working to modernize with the Germans' help, and so could have improved their situation, especially militartily. However, if I remember, the Arabs did feel a disconnect from their Turkish rulers and did not identify with them, but I do not think they would have revolted without an external [or significant internal] spark. So, the Ottoman Empire should be stronger, but if it doesn't play its hand right, it should have the possiblity of an Arab revolt, in my opinion.Gigalocus said:
Le Fantasque said:
Britain fell out with the Ottoman empire around the time it made friends with Russia, sure, the world has switched and Britain is back with Germany. Also, the Ottoman empire was barely hanging on to what it had, let alone expanding into harsh desert warfare, which it had learnt was all but impossible against Italy in Libya, the Berlin - Bagdad railway was in no way ment to be used to help Ottoman expansion.
But, when i said it openly lets the Ottomans walts into oil making for the UK, was for game purposes.
The Ottoman Empire was not 'barely hanging on to what it had', the Ottoman Empire in fact had a quite loyal populace. Note that the Arab Revolt, despite significant British aid, was quite unsuccessful (and small). It took the Allies three years to get from Egypt to Anatolia, despite that most of the area was very open and not suited for trench warfare. And the Ottoman Empire did not lose against Italy in Libya because 'harsh desert warfare was all but impossible', they lost because they didn't use their navy, they were in the middle of reorganising their military, and the Balkan states decided to take the opportunity to attack. If anything, it was Italy that learned about the impossibility of 'harsh desert warfare', as the Italy still had not taken control of the region to anything approaching the Ottoman degree until after the Great War (it would go faster in TTL, of course, but it was still quite slow). And it would not be Ottoman expansion as such, it would be expanding de facto rule over areas which de jure are yours.Gigalocus said:
Oh, and the Ottoman Empire was still seeking British friendship until the UK confiscated ships en route to, and paid for by, the Ottoman Empire, an event that occured after the Great War had begun, and which would not had occured otherwise.
I disagree. The population of the Ottoman Empire in 1914 was significantly homogenic (muslim), except for the Armenians, who had waged a terror campaign since a couple decades.Gigalocus said:
True, there was unrest due to the rather badly and rashly made centralisation attempts of the Young Turks, but that would have petered out (as soon as they lost the next election) and the dissent could have calmed down, given time. I think the Arab revolts are exaggerated because of Thomas Lawrence.
As for the Bagdad railway (not to mention the Mecca railway, which allowed the Ottomans to stall British invasion for several years) - what exactly do you think it was for if not rapid troop movement and thusly a stronger internal power projection capability?
But the Nejd territory was already divided into Ottoman and British spheres of interest. I do not think the British would care terribly much if the Ottomans stationed a permanent garrison in Ryiad (which was pretty much all that was required as to control the territory - it was already dependant on food and water from Ottoman territory).
Aside from that, maybe they would be grateful to get rid of the ultraorthodox desert cultists (the Wahabites).