Alternate History The Continental Army and Navy get a new weapon.

[Deleted member 88]

I would think rifles would be better weapons, given that warfare in this era was either line battles, or skirmishes in the woods.

I could see them being useful in the latter case. In close line combat-they’d definitely be effective weapons.

Though I suspect the British would acquire them in won battles and so on.

 

[ATP]

Why bother ? they win without it,right ? gave new weapons to somebody who actually lost.

 

[Sailor.X]

Why bother ? they win without it,right ? gave new weapons to somebody who actually lost.

Because it throws an out of context problem for the Redcoats into the mix. You got to remember in 1776 we were not yet winning the war. That would not happen into the 1780s. A lot of long hard battles and defeats are yet to come. This is to see how giving them a new weapon the world had not yet seen before and Ammo that no power of the time had the ability to make (Smokeless Powder has yet to be invented along with modern ammo) Not to mention the rate of fire of the shotguns. This would cause some interesting butterflies for sure.

 

[ATP]

Because it throws an out of context problem for the Redcoats into the mix. You got to remember in 1776 we were not yet winning the war. That would not happen into the 1780s. A lot of long hard battles and defeats are yet to come. This is to see how giving them a new weapon the world had not yet seen before and Ammo that no power of the time had the ability to make (Smokeless Powder has yet to be invented along with modern ammo) Not to mention the rate of fire of the shotguns. This would cause some interesting butterflies for sure.

Indeed.
And if french revolution start as in OTL, Napoleon could win in Europe - he was USA ally after all.And Europe united by him is very big butterfly,if you ask me.

 

[Navarro]

Indeed.
And if french revolution start as in OTL, Napoleon could win in Europe - he was USA ally after all.And Europe united by him is very big butterfly,if you ask me.

Napoleon was doomed from the beginning as he just didn't know when to stop fighting - better weapons don't change that. And even some kind of French Empire ruling all Europe would probably not last long.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Napoleon wouldn't be doomed if he did know when to stop fighting. The mad lad was offered so many chances for at least a short term peace with France at an increased advantage. Even almost until the end.

 

[Navarro]

Napoleon wouldn't be doomed if he did know when to stop fighting. The mad lad was offered so many chances for at least a short term peace with France at an increased advantage. Even almost until the end.

And in the end his enemies treated him very lightly for a defeated foe who had caused so much trouble ... even so far as to appoint him ruler of his own island in the Med ... and he squandered EVEN THAT.

And the two wars that ruined him were started by him INVADING HIS ALLIES.

 

[ATP]

And in the end his enemies treated him very lightly for a defeated foe who had caused so much trouble ... even so far as to appoint him ruler of his own island in the Med ... and he squandered EVEN THAT.

And the two wars that ruined him were started by him INVADING HIS ALLIES.

Even if attacking Russia was good idea, then why he try to take Moscow ? in 1812 there was nothing important there.He should go for Petersburg,cut tsar from Baltic and wait for peace terms.Russia needed Baltic route,and England alone could not help them.Austria would do nothing as long as he had army.

And attacking Spain to dethrone his ally and made his brother king...yes,that was very smart.

 

[Navarro]

Even if attacking Russia was good idea, then why he try to take Moscow ? in 1812 there was nothing important there.He should go for Petersburg,cut tsar from Baltic and wait for peace terms.Russia needed Baltic route,and England alone could not help them.Austria would do nothing as long as he had army.

He tried to march along the Baltic, but his armies there got stopped. Even if he had won in Russia, he would probably have gone on to try and carry out his planned conquest of British India which the conquest of Russia was the set-up for and gotten his army even more totally destroyed. And the Russians would turn on him in his weakness as the rest of Europe did.

Napoleon just did not know when to stop pushing his luck.

 

[MrBirthday]

And now I'm curious. @Navarro, what do you think the map of Europe would have looked like if Napoleon did have enough sense to stop once he had obtained maximum advantage for France?

 

[Knowledgeispower]

And now I'm curious. @Navarro, what do you think the map of Europe would have looked like if Napoleon did have enough sense to stop once he had obtained maximum advantage for France?

At the bare Minimum France would contain what is now Luxemburg, Belgium, the Netherlands, and probably the Rhineland, the Saar and Rhur as well

 

[Navarro]

At the bare Minimum France would contain what is now Luxemburg, Belgium, the Netherlands, and probably the Rhineland, the Saar and Rhur as well

That is most likely the largest France can get, minus the Netherlands. Generally the furthest he can push is to get France's eastern border to the Rhine.

 

[Knowledgeispower]

That is most likely the largest France can get, minus the Netherlands. Generally the furthest he can push is to get France's eastern border to the Rhine.

Hmmm I still suspect the Netherlands would have been effectively a puppet state though

 

[Sailor.X]

The War of 1812 might not even happen if Napoleon has huge success taking a chunk of Europe. Britain would be to busy shoring up it's own defenses.

 

[ATP]

And now I'm curious. @Navarro, what do you think the map of Europe would have looked like if Napoleon did have enough sense to stop once he had obtained maximum advantage for France?

If He was smart,he would not attack Spain or Russia, but partitioned Prussia between Poland,Saxony,Russia and Austria.Thanks to that England would lost their source of cannon-fodder.
And create big - but not too big - Poland to counter Russia.Basically french eqivalent of what Prussia did for England.

 

[Navarro]

If He was smart,he would not attack Spain or Russia, but partitioned Prussia between Poland,Saxony,Russia and Austria.

I mean, those countries were also his former enemies and he needed the Prussian state apparatus to remain in place so that the indemnity he made them give could be extracted.

And create big - but not too big - Poland to counter Russia.Basically french eqivalent of what Prussia did for England.

That was a part of why he invaded Russia, actually, as well as the attempted springboard to British India.

 

[ATP]

I mean, those countries were also his former enemies and he needed the Prussian state apparatus to remain in place so that the indemnity he made them give could be extracted.



That was a part of why he invaded Russia, actually, as well as the attempted springboard to British India.

Money he could get from states which take parts of Prussia.And why invade british India,when he could built 30 steam warships and invade England ? it would be much more cheaper then entire russian affaior - and plausible.

 

[Navarro]

Money he could get from states which take parts of Prussia.And why invade british India,when he could built 30 steam warships and invade England ? it would be much more cheaper then entire russian affaior - and plausible.

His navy got destroyed in 1805 and he never rebuilt it.

 

[ATP]

His navy got destroyed in 1805 and he never rebuilt it.

His mistake.After defeating Prussia he should gave East Prussia to Moscow,Silesia to Austria, all saxon land to Saxony and all polish to Poland - becouse Prussia was England sword on continent.
Then made Poland as his Prussia - to check on Russia and Austria.
Once he would do that,he should built 20-30 steam warships,add armour, and take England.Ironclads could be built with his technology,and any conventional warship would be useless against them.
And considering,that England had no real army,landing 50.000 troops would be enough.

 

[Airedale260]

His mistake.After defeating Prussia he should gave East Prussia to Moscow,Silesia to Austria, all saxon land to Saxony and all polish to Poland - becouse Prussia was England sword on continent.
Then made Poland as his Prussia - to check on Russia and Austria.
Once he would do that,he should built 20-30 steam warships,add armour, and take England.Ironclads could be built with his technology,and any conventional warship would be useless against them.
And considering,that England had no real army,landing 50.000 troops would be enough.

Meanwhile the Spanish and Portuguese are going to be building up their own forces and quietly or not so quietly siding with the British. Spain knows damn well it’s likely to be next on Napoleon’s menu, and Portugal and Britain are allied through the Treaty of Windsor. So now there’s an army that could actually threaten him, and if the British need a base on the Continent, they have it.

Nappy isn’t going to be building ironclads; sure, they may technically be feasible but that assumes he actually knows how they can be put to use and has the engineers to do the hard part. Which he doesn’t, at least on the first part.

Meanwhile the Royal Navy isn’t going to be idle, since they’ll damn well recognize the threat for what it is. They know if the French land they’re likely fucked. So they’ll also be expanding, and they can build better and faster than the French.

Could he defeat the British? In theory, yes, but that requires him to change his behavior and personality, and assumes the British won’t change to meet this new threat. Which is quite frankly absurd.