Could WWI have been in the 18th century?

[Renfrost84]

I like fictional history books where the author takes parts of real history and changes them so that it affects other aspects of history. This would explain why I enjoy EU so much. So the question occurred to me, "Would it be possible to create a WWI-ish conflict in EUIII?" I am thinking that in order to have such a thing occur, I would want to have all of the WWI countries created in game (for example England has become GB, Germany exists as well as Italy and Russia). The goal would be to create most of the major nations (if not all of them) involved in WWI and somehow get them to ally in such a way that most of the countries would get pulled into the conflict. I would probably have to switch between countries to do it, but do you guys think this could be pulled off?

 

[Chamboozer]

Yeah, but it wouldn't occur as it did in the 20th century. The lack of industry is the main reason IMO.

 

[Viking]

No enlightenment age government could possibly have the ability to raise and maintain an army of millions. Not to mention that 1 maxim gun is equal to a full regiment of line infantry.

 

[S0ny B1ack]

Try it. Sounds great. For the formation of countries you should also try to help some strong Italian/ German country with selling him provinces they need if you can capture them to make them form the greater countries.
But for the alliances you would surely have to switch between them.

If you manage it I would love to see an AAR

 

[unmerged(76802)]

The Napoleonic Wars?

 

[Prussia Rules]

You'd probably can in EU III if you get the alliances right. But even then, nations peace out if it is good for their own, while in WWI countries didn't stop fighting unless either their alliance 'leader' asked for armistice, they were totally worn down or some internal troubles would call it quits (Russian Revolution)

If it would have been possible in the 18th century? No. The lack of industry, the lack of a strong government, the fundamental difference in warfare between the 18th century and the First World War and a load of other reasons, all made it impossible for a conflict on that scale to occur. Napoleon did his best and got a lot of countries involved, but the war was more complex then the First World War in terms of diplomacy.

EDIT: I mean the diplomacy during the war, as the First World War is in some aspects caused by the complex diplomatic games of the Great Powers in the 19th century.

 

[PanzerWilly]

Was it the War of Spanish Succession that was the first war to occur on three continents. If that's not a World War, I don't know what is.

Now as for trenches and mustard gas...

 

[Amateur Emperor]

If you want something WW1-ish, some mods include dates up to or past 1919.
Other than that you can change the game files themselves to include every aspect of WWI. I know, and use the Whole World Mod and it is actually quite great.

 

[Alfred Packer]

The 7 Years War (1756-1763) was also a World War

 

[Keinwyn]

The Whole World Mod has a 1914 campaign

 

[Meothar]

Since the concept of a continuent front did not apply to 18th century warfare, there was nothing like WW1 possible when you want to have these entrenched battles. During all the wars mentioned (Seven years war, Spanish succession), there was no constant fighting but single military campaigns and a lot of diplomacy between the battles.

 

[unmerged(84079)]

You'd need to get Austria-Hungary going too. and you should try and make sure you form Germany from Prussia and that they get the military reforms to reflect Germany's better trained troops IMO.

The other thing is that the Ottomans were semi-significant in WW1, but largely ineffective, despite the huge amount of land they held. They would probably be OP if given their historical borders.

 

[unmerged(163403)]

The 7 Years War (1756-1763) was also a World War

Yeah i agree completely, i hate it that it's not known as WWI, becuase it really was the first World War. Also, it annoys the shit out of me that most of my fellow Americans call it the "French and Indian War" and think the extent of the war was Colonists+GB vs. French+Indians.

On another note, The 7 Years War is much more interesting than WWI and would probably be more fun to play. Who wouldn't want to play as Prussia and defend yourself on all sides and STILL WIN???

 

[Dafool]

I played a Germany game where Austria dominated Poland and Hungary, the Papal States own most of Italy, a huge Russia formed, France owned eastern France and most of the Low Countries, and GB owned western France and the isles. GB, the Papal States, and Russia were allied against me as Germany, France, and Austria. The war lasted about a decade and it was fought in Europe obviously, along with India, North and South America, and southeast Asia(Borneo & Sumatra). Austria fell apart and GB was kicked off the continent. Russia made gains in SE Asia at France's expense, and the Papal states ended up losing a small bit of territory in the Americas. The USA also formed too, so it was definitely a very epic and global war.

It's very possible for things like this too happen, but you have to help the larger nations states form and not tear each other apart to really get any good results. The alliances will always show up in one way or another, once the smaller European states are gone. Germany and Italy are two you really have to help, and Russia sometimes needs a good push or two. After that it's just making sure that the whole thing doesn't start off before a "balance of power" is achieved and no one side is dominated.

 

[PanzerWilly]

The 7 Years War (1756-1763) was also a World War

That's the war I was thinking of.

 

[Ashantai]

Yes, and that was actually fought (land wise) on more fronts than the Great War, being in India, Africa, America and Europe. The War of Empire as it was called is a good name for it!

 

[luciusETRUR]

WWI happened all the time. It was a war created on a complicated system of alliances, before it didn't end up encompassing various parts of the world. Near East, Europe, Asia and America.

However, the Napoleonic Wars, the American Revolutionary War involved France, America, Britain, United Netherlands, Spain... the European system of military alliances really is what set a lot of these wars up. Which is why the American founders were so fearful of diplomatic entanglements..

 

[I am.]

The problem would be communications at the time... No way they could effectively communicate and coordinate
Like now, you get real time info of what your allied armies are doing (no way it was possible back then) It would be cool to get the results of a battle with several days lag (as it occured in large empires, the king would know this after a few days...)
Also not knowing how many troops your enemy has while he advances towards your lands...
would make the game much more fun IMHO

 

[Prussia Rules]

The problem would be communications at the time... No way they could effectively communicate and coordinate
Like now, you get real time info of what your allied armies are doing (no way it was possible back then) It would be cool to get the results of a battle with several days lag (as it occured in large empires, the king would know this after a few days...)
Also not knowing how many troops your enemy has while he advances towards your lands...
would make the game much more fun IMHO

Yeah, communication is a crucial part of warfare too of course. On of the reasons the rebellion in the Netherlands against the Spanish succeeded was thanks to the instructions of Filips II who were outdated everytime they arrived

 

[Trin Tragula]

The seven years war was basically it...
At least if your definition is fighting all over the world among all the great powers Obviously there's a ton of differences as well. It's also often named the first world war.