Hey guys, I am starting to think I am going to have to bite the bullet for this one and have the Pretanic Faction State uprising spread throughout all of Pretany, mutinize the Pretanic military sometime in the early 1940’s and execute the royal family and crown, and then start a massive invasion of neighboring countries. it would be A sweep of a new Rusk Empire that takes over Suria, Galicia, Estensia, and threatens Kalm and Garlis but due to the Egyt Mountains makes it difficult to complete a full scale invasion. Rusk Empire theb become a major threat to Tircambry, Wesmandy, and use ground forces to invade large sections of Mazan and Sathria, as far south as Castellan. The Naval threat extends far into the northern countries through the Great Rift Sound, and then becomes the catalyst for creating the Mid-Pretanic Canal to invade Much of Kalm and possibly the rest of Sathria during a later date through the Barsas River. This eventually puts countries in the southern hemisphere at risk with control of the Sathrian Navy.
The eventual wars and factions of communism VS socialism VS Democracy that ensue drag the rest of the world into the war to stop the Rusk Empire from completing an ethnic cleanse of any more countries. This is just a thought out idea at the moment, with no serious connotations to it yet. My idea ends with the eventual destruction of several Pretanic Cities through fire bombing, a nuclear blast going off somewhere in a country that was an “axis” supporter, and the complete re-education of the Pretanic population and the end of the monarch being the absolute power in Pretany, the start of the Pretanic constitution, parliament, and the eventual opening of the Assembly of Nations as a stabilization force within St. Richards and the sealing off of the Pretanic Faction State from the rest of world where they can live out their idealized world in isolation. Let me know what you guys think about this. This would make for a VERY eventful early-mid 20th century not just for my country, but for the entire world, and explain why the AN is in Pretany to begin with. I also posted this in the wikipedia page for Wars and Conflicts. The reason I say this is because Pretany by the early 19th century is already one of the largest populous and most economically prosperous counties in the world with the largest monarchy and a very strong military. A quick beheading of the monarchy by the PFS could cause a chain reaction that could lead to a full fledged invasion of neighboring countries.
Basically there were questions of which country would or could host the “bad guy” in a world war scenario, and I figured Pretany could play that part due to it eventually becoming a “good guy” later with the opening of the AN.
We could also create a “communist bloc” like the soviet union that eventually gets defeated. I am willing to sacrifice half or more of my country to this “bloc” if other countries are willing to get on board. The bloc would last for a total of 20-30 years until the 1970s or so that is eventually destroyed and removed by AN forces at that time. The bloc does not have to be a geographical continuance of countries, but could be several separate countries that are tied together by ideology, and some of my neighboring countries may want to play a part in this. I know for sure Commonia should play a huge part in this war. How I’m not sure, but I am open to ideas.
Basically if we go forward with this idea we should maybe start with a list of countries starting in a circular area around Pretany that agrees to be invaded during this time frame. Maybe 1937-1945, and you all can contact me individually, or write your own invasion stories into your timelines. From there we will figure out the next step together.
Comment from Ernestpcosby on 10 June 2016 at 03:26
If we do end up going with this idea, Socialist era Woolonia (1920’s to 1980’s) would be a very good addition to this block.
Comment from Ernestpcosby on 10 June 2016 at 03:46
Well, other than the fact is in a different power of the world :/
Comment from Pawl on 10 June 2016 at 10:32
This sounds good.
I would be happy to have Tircambry threatened, attacked or invaded, and have the establishment of a PFS-allied breakaway republic in the east of the country. It would be re-absorbed into the Kingdom of Tircambry at the end of the war.
I expect Wesmandy would be involved too, most likely on the democratic side.
Comment from Leowezy on 10 June 2016 at 11:42
First off, I think your scenario sounds realistic. however…
I think we should look more closely at the fiction in OpenGeoFiction. Having a massive world war conveniently placed in the 1940’s to me just feels way to close to our real world history, and could in return encourage a way of thinking that will strengthen the links between our fictional and the real world even more.
I realise that many mappers envision their countries as a loose pendant to some real world countries, and that my approach with Kojo is on one hand more “from scratch”, and on the other hand a bit less believable; but I think it’s crucial to not desperately adapt features of real life world-history into OGF.
I think it can be realistically expected from a planet with the human race on it to have at least one or more “World Wars” in its rather recent history. But why the 1940’s? I realise that in our minds these dates are inherently linked with war and genocide, but why shouldn’t it have happened in the 1950’s? Or 1960’s? Of course technological factors played a role that WW II didn’t break out in 1850, but the reason it happened in the year it did happen were mostly of political nature.
And why communism/socialism vs. capitalism? There are many other ideologies that could have led to such a conflict, religion being one, or maybe just a silly fight between two related kings that fought over who would be crowned king of some 3rd country; history is full of such “silly” reasons.
To sum it up, before we hurry to recreate some WW II equivalent in OGF to make our world more “believable” (in my opinion it does the opposite, it makes OGF look like a real world clone with countries in slightly different positions and other place names) we should think about what likely causes there are in the already developed, rich history of OGF to cause such a conflict and how it would develop; right now we do the opposite, we think how it should develop (two sides, bad <-> good, 1940’s etc.) and then try to reconstruct our country’s history to fit such a development. I would encourage everyone to try and be as creative and original with this as one can be.
Of course that’s not to say that I don’t appreciate the proposals and “sacrifices” some users are willing to make in order to recreate the history as we know it :)
Comment from Ernestpcosby on 10 June 2016 at 15:03
@Leowzy While there perhaps may have been many reasons, it makes sense that different governmental systems would have been a primary reason, even if it’s not capitalism vs socialism persay. I highly doubt it would be religion based considering the nature of such in OGF seeming to be discouraged or minimal, and making it strictly religion based would isolate a lot of countries from the conflict. It doesn’t seem like in the OGF world religion would have triggered a full world war.
I do however, feel like the part about silly kings or leaders ties in quite nicely with government types being a major conflict, and would add a lot of the needed change.
Perhaps Authoritarian vs Libertarian vs Anarchist would be a more likely set of blocs. Socialist era Woolonia would still be able to play the same Authoritarian part, and it seems many other countries would fit well into the Authoritarian vs Anarchist part, and it would open the door for more countries to take sides not based on ideology persay but more on ideas on how government should operate. This also takes away the whole “good guy- bad guy” aspect because each country could sincerely be trying to use whichever system to help their country.
As for the date, I think if we change it at all, moving it back, not forwards, might be the best option, perhaps to the 1930s. This would make it possible to incorporate concepts and technologies from WWI and from WWII without making it too much like either, while also giving more freedom with the timeline if we were to incorporate other reasons.
As a whole, I like both bhj867’s ideas and Leowzy’s ideas. I really think there are ways to incorporate both without scrapping the Pretany idea. I do believe the timeline would need to be changed a bit, though.
Woolonia was a dictatorship all the way from the late 1910’s to the early 1980’s, so as long as at least the Authoritarian vs Libertarian vs Anarchist aspect was still included, it would still work.
Comment from Yuanls on 10 June 2016 at 16:12
Wow. That was spontaneous!
Ok so both my countries, Glaster and Agarderia were right-leaning, the former being democratic and the latter a dictatorship. experienced a communist takeover in the mid-40s becoming a left-leaning democracy and dictatorship respectively. I think the date could move either way, but I would prefer moving the date forwards to concur with my already well established wiki page for the Third Glastian Civil War. The respective regimes collapsed in the early-mid 80s, although instability caused the Agarderian Civil War in the 1990s and 2000s. I’m happy for both to be in political alliances.
If the war was to happen earlier, I could adjust Glaster’s war to be more of a consequence of the world war, like the communists in China, North Korea and south Asia.
Of course for it to be a truly global war, like WWII, it would have multiple battle theatres, so Commonia’s involvement may still be viable. That may be expanded on if this scenario comes to fruition.
Comment from Holdenburg on 10 June 2016 at 16:27
I like the Pretany idea and think it would be a great project for everyone to get involved in, in what would be an era that shapes the world and our countries. I also like the idea of Commonia being heavily involved. It would give a good reason for why the large nation is now so chaotic.
Comment from Ūdilugbulgidħū on 10 June 2016 at 16:28
These are good thoughts. I think the ideas not to stick to real world ideologies and terminology are especially useful. Not to get into a long historical debate - but both world wars were essentially driven by both industrialisation and by ideologies, of which imperialism was perhaps even more important than fascism, communism or anything else on both sides. For example, in both world wars, the British were partly fighting ‘to save the Empire’.
Either way, I agree with Leo that there is already quite a lot of history within OGF - and we should build on that, not take things directly from the real world. If I was writing some things on the wiki, I would do it differently now - I intend to go back and change quite a bit, some time.
Last night Yuanls and myself exchanged a few messages about how to take this forward. We agreed that the first step would be to contact individual
users who have entered their countries in the powerblocks table on the OGF:Global Collaboration page (so if you’re reading this and you haven’t added your country already, reply here or add it). This will help us picture where countries that actively participated in a war are located, and how things might fit together. In some cases there are obvious counterpoints e.g. Kingdom of Pretany versus PFS (you need a better name btw!) . But it might be better, in fact, to allocate countries to sides at random, and work out how they came to be on that side afterwards. That might sound radical, but it seems to me just as logical as some real world alliances, a lot of which have depended upon the relationships between individuals - or small groups - in power. I think we work out the ‘factions’ after we see what countries are involved in driving the conflict.
Dates: I see your point Ernest. Any time between 30s - 50s would work for me, but the later the date the more believable the technology. That is just because weapons would be more likely to develop later given no ‘first world war’ equivalent in OGF.
The last thing to say is, that whatever the alignments were, the OGF world is not believable without some major wars. That is simply because the rule of verisimilitude has been set - and, unless you deviate from the reality of what humans are like, you can’t have powerplants (especially nuclear ones), highways, industrial cities, and hierarchical social structures without going through a period of conflict. You might as well have some elves hanging about somewhere. Because a certain level of technology has been reached, that conflict has to stretch around the world. That means that every country has to have been impacted by war, to some extent or another, as in the real world.
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 16:42
Oh yes, it is definitely time to find a name for this invading empire. Risky is the old name of the region, PFS is the name of the post war country. I will think of a name that is dominant and fits the importance of the event. I am excited to see how this will play out. I agree that we should probably take the anarchist vs authoritarian route instead of socialism vs democracy. It doesn’t have to be a direct copy of WWII. We should see what countries like PFS and Commonia have in common in the present era and build on that.
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 16:43
Comment from Sarepava on 10 June 2016 at 16:47
Socialist Arataran would also be a likely bloc member, rather like Cuba or Angola. Karolia would probably be like Sweden, officially neutral but in reality supplying arms and taking in escaped prisoners of war. Maybe like South American countries it declares war for the last few months on the side of the winner.
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 16:50
We need a country to lead the Democratic side. A strong country on par with Pretany that can be a driving military force to rally allies against the anarchist uprising. My only question is, would an anarchist imperialism work? Isn’t that an oxymoron?
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 16:54
Basically, who would be the leading force and which countries would be involved to bomb Pretany at the end of the conflict and end the war. The same country would also in fact more than likely be the driving force to negotiate and start the AN.
Comment from No Way on 10 June 2016 at 16:57
Freliberia is a country that was founded in response to turning the tides of the Ingerish monarchs. The colonist gained independence to found a country that places values in a free market society with induvial rights and freedoms.
The country is a sovereign nation on a Federalist system. So the nation is a federal constitution democratic republic with semi-sovereign states such as the system in the USA. I know not very original but it is what it is.
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 17:06
Another question. Is it realistic for Pretany to emerge from the war as a powerful economic force? I am thinking possibly 15-20 years of reconstruction. 1980 - 1990 would be the latest and most realistic I would go to have Pretany completely rebuilt with a socialistic society and a figure head monarch. The AN arrives around 1960 after the conclusion of the war and initial rebuild, and economically Pretany takes 20 more years to recover.
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 17:07
Socialistic federal monarchy with Democratic practices. My apologies. I’m on a thought train.
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 17:33
Btw, the automatic, draw a straw, approach for allocating sides for a country is not a bad idea. It would add an interesting and spontaneous aspect to the war that would force all users to work with their neighbors to write a little something in their history about the war and how it affected their current country. It is only a miniscule moment in the OGF world history, a short 20 years or so, but it was super influential in created the world today. I know some of my neighbors to the west Andy in particular I believe said, “write my history for me” but I would like to know how literal they meant that. We should have a list of, “be liberal with my history” countries, “I’ll write my own history working with my neighbors” countries, and “opt out of the war” countries. The opt out list should also have the users list a reason why their country, historically, was not involved into the war that makes sense. If it makes sense, they can opt out, like Switzerland.
Comment from Ūdilugbulgidħū on 10 June 2016 at 17:48
‘Rusky’ - you mean the ‘mildly derogatory ethnic slur for a Russian’? Not a good name either!
I understand your offer of Pretany, it is really going to help. But I can’t see anarchism playing a very strong role here, unless perhaps as part of another faction. If you’re looking for something internal to Pretany, I suppose its plausible, but globally, I think only expansionism - by one side or by both - is going to be the root cause of a believable conflict. I think we may be better to ‘mix it up’ in terms of ideology, religion, ethnicity … etc. The powerblocks page could end up helping us identify which countries wouldn’t be on opposing sides rather than identifying actual alliances.
Yes - an opt out is fine, of course. Countries that opt out would be neutral, and wouldn’t take active part in the war (though of course they could support other countries, perhaps their neighbours). All ‘world powers’ would be sucked in, inevitably. There would also be very limited international trade, for the duration of the war. Basically, most countries would have to vaguely align with one side or another.
Although accepting that some countries will naturally coalesce together, I think the random allocation of countries to blocks is almost certainly a better way to go.
Comment from Holdenburg on 10 June 2016 at 18:13
I’m not too keen on the random draw scenario. I can’t think of way how my country could ally themselves alongside a country of the likes of Nazi Germany or North Korea or ISIL. I think there really has to be a reason and an incentive for us to go to war and not simply lumping people on two sides.
Sorry, just my two cents for the brainstorming!
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 18:17
No that’s good. If it’s a bad idea, we want everyone to say so. Everyone’s opinion matters.
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 18:24
I’m working on a name change ok? lol. No offense to Russians in particular. Didn’t even think of that when I made the name. From my beginning days of OGF. Yes the PFS conflict was a mainly ethnic conflict, but I am looking to change that to more of an idealistic conflict. Basically everything from 1930 on is being completely rewritten in my history.
Comment from Ūdilugbulgidħū on 10 June 2016 at 18:27
@ Holdenburg - is your country on the OGF:Global collaboration page? It would be helpful to know which ‘side’ you see it being on.
But this is how I would envisage a random allocation process: 3 sides - 2 belligerents, 1 neutral. Countries that are ‘belligerents’ get either number 1 or number 2. Neutrals, and all the other countries that haven’t filled in the OGF powerblocks page, get number 3. Owners with 2 countries, or more, can take both the same number, or different numbers. We (that is, a small number of us tbd) sort through these countries, identify likely alliances (and ones which definitely look wrong) and allocate them to 2 belligerent blocks. That is the initial position at the start of the war.
Then we decide what the ‘character’ of each block is. We’re not talking nazi Germany or anything else post-WWII. The ‘colony/colonised’ may be as important, as may the geographic location of the countries that come out of it. And also, countries could ‘switch blocks’ during the course of the war - or decide when they come into the war, in earnest (so, they could be something ‘official’ as Sarepava outlined, but actually something else).
Comment from Yuanls on 10 June 2016 at 18:29
I agree with Holdenburg. People need reasons to ally with each other. My approach would be to formulate ‘core countries’ for the alliances and get the owners to decide, with reasons given.
Comment from Yuanls on 10 June 2016 at 18:33
I also think we need to decide when the war takes place, as the political status of countries would change with time.
Comment from dono87 on 10 June 2016 at 18:56
I take Leowezy’s position that we should not push too hard to mimic every detail about the real world’s wars, religions, timeline etc.
That said, I have already added Ataraxia to the slightly fascist bloc of states for the early 20th century. Whether Ataraxia would be on the sidelines, tacitly supporting one side, or openly belligerent remains to be seen as the story develops.
But geography should also count, and I haven’t anticipated much in the way of conflict with my two most active neighbors (Kojo, Wiwaxia). We have all been democratic to some extent for centuries.
Comment from Holdenburg on 10 June 2016 at 19:08
@Udilugbuldigu Yes I have updated the OGF:Global collaboration page a couple of hours ago. My only point is my Catholic constitutional hereditary monarchy/federal parliamentary democracy is much more likely to align with a country with similar religious and political beliefs. However your proposal sounds good as opposed to random selection.
Comment from bhj867 on 10 June 2016 at 22:07
To stick with the theme of the area. I am renaming the horrible “Rusky” to a more Native american sounding name, like it’s neighbors
Some options I have come up with are:
Ichnia (Ichnian Empire)
Caddo (Caddian Empire)
Twisp (Twispan Empire)
Antigo (Antigan Empire)
Comment from Yuanls on 10 June 2016 at 23:10
I like Caddo and Antigo.
Comment from Ūdilugbulgidħū on 10 June 2016 at 23:48
This is all good progress (btw I like Antigo more than the others). We have a few things to think about e.g. ‘People need reasons to ally with each other.’ That’s right, but at the moment, if we were to go from the list we have, there just aren’t two opposing sides, in terms of alignments. This will not result in a believable world war.
The method I proposed isn’t in fact a ‘random draw’. Think about WWII - how could nazi Germany ally with Communist USSR? Those two were, before the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, arch enemies. The small details of history - and the strategic position those countries found themselves in - meant that, while it made mutual sense, they allied with each other. So it is possible for countries that on paper look like opposites to be on the same side, although they may not be aligned, in fact quite the opposite. Similar things happened in WW1 (e.g. Ottoman Empire) and in other parts of the world in WW2 (e.g axis & imperial Japan).
On the wars and conflicts page, for 1940s 19 countries (plus colonies) are aligned with democracy. 7 are dictatorships. Commonia is the only big country that is not aligned with democracy, all the other dictatorships/anarchies are minor players. This means 2 things:
We need to decide which of these we want to pursue.
I would go for creating two opposing blocks among the democracies, as I suggested before. Commonian history is a minefield (sorry for the bad allusion!) and it would be very hard to decide how, and where, the war was fought if we went with Commonia. Going with democracies on both sides we can avoid many parallels with real world wars, and we can create our own OGF story. We won’t have so many issues of countries being identified with real world extremist ideas, and we can bring in additional countries and future users along the way. Commonia, in fact, could serve as a counter-balance, with whichever side appears weaker having the strong part of Commonia on its side, while internal divisions align other parts of Commonia with the opposite block.
Some thoughts, anyway.
Comment from Reece202 on 11 June 2016 at 00:51
For whatever it’s worth, here’s what I’ve been kicking around for Calliesanyo’s participation in the war:
Calliesanyo has longstanding ties with Commonia, and despite a recent series of skirmishes in what is now Calliesanyo’s Nokorizo Prefecture (ca. 1840-1880s), Calliesanyo is allied with [some part of] Commonia. Calliesanyan military fights along [that part of] Commonia’s for about 75% of the duration of the war, until fighting moves closer to the homeland, with probable bombings on major Calliesanyan cities. At this point, the Imperial Government sues for a separate peace and exits the war.
Whether this ends up working, there it is for consideration.
Comment from bhj867 on 11 June 2016 at 01:35
Antigo it is.
Comment from Ernestpcosby on 11 June 2016 at 03:42
In reference to Udi’s idea about democracies on both sides, that was one of the reasons why I had said sort of an Authoritarian vs Libertarian, as both of these in most situations were sort of democratic and both sides can range from Also, there could be some exceptions, like there could be a libertarian government who has close alliances with a more authoritarian government and joins the other side.
Just to be clear, I’m saying libertarian in the sense of less government involvement, not in the case of the actual party or anything, and when I say authoritarian I just mean more government involvement.
I understand if the idea doesn’t work, but I thought it would tie in well, even if it isn’t the main concept.
Either way, Freedemia would be neutral, and I want to have Woolonia on the losing side or the one that suffered more because the idea was that the dictator-like government made alliances with the wrong nations.
Comment from Ernestpcosby on 11 June 2016 at 03:43
*both sides could range from more extreme to just normal. Sorry about the typo
Comment from Yuanls on 11 June 2016 at 07:44
I still think we need to decide when the war takes place. My countries go through radical changes in the late 40s, which will impact on who they ally with.
Comment from Leowezy on 11 June 2016 at 14:07
I think it would be a good idea to move this discussion to a wiki talk page; what title should the potential article have? I favour “The Great War”, to get some distance to the “World War” teme going on xD….
Comment from Ernestpcosby on 11 June 2016 at 19:18
I second Great War
Comment from Yuanls on 11 June 2016 at 19:41
I like that as well. I’ve always called it the Great War.
Comment from Demuth on 11 June 2016 at 20:23
Hmmm, the Great War sounds fine, although that’s what they called WWI in English until after WWII. How about the Long War, the Wide War or maybe figure out how many years it is and call it the Eight Year War or something like that.
Anyway, my two cents: I agree with those who’ve said we should try to avoid mimicking the real world and as much as possible build on what history we’ve already got here in OGF. Also, to me, grabbing resources is mostly what war is fundamentally about, rather than competing ideologies, be they political or religious, so that’s what this war should be about.
Wiwaxia, a left-leaning country for much of the last century, would probably be involved only in so much as its alliances require it. As Dono87 said, relations with Ataraxie have long been peaceful; likewise with Pasundan-Padjadjaran, although our two countries warred in the late 1700s.
As for Østermark, it would be on the opposite side of whichever side Nucia is on and try to use any war to get back at Nucia and take over the part of Nyrike Island that is now Nucia’s.
Comment from Yuanls on 11 June 2016 at 21:17
I like the x years war idea. Quite refreshing and different from the war suggestions. When I think, having it put as the Great War makes it seem a bit old-fashioned, more from the 19th or early 20th century. I think your name may actually work.
Comment from BMSOUZA on 11 June 2016 at 23:46
I dont like the name “Antigo” as a country name, because in portuguese (and I imagine spanish too), this word means “Ancient”…
Comment from bhj867 on 12 June 2016 at 00:31
It also comes from the Chippewa Indian name for the river that flows through the area, “Nequi-Antigo-sebi” meaning “spring river” or “evergreen in Wisconsin, USA. Most of the PFS names are of Native American or Algonquin origin. Antigo is a word in two languages.
Even if so. The ANTIGO tribe was one of the oldest in Pretany, so “Ancient” is fitting.
Comment from Leowezy on 12 June 2016 at 10:27
So, how many years would we expect for such a conflict? I suppose it will develop over time and most participating nation won’t be involved in active combat for all of that time. I think 6 or 7 years would be fine, but we’d still have to agree on when it takes place and for what exact “reason”. I like Demuth’s resource-reasoning, perhaps the initial spark could have been that one country stopped supplying some vital resource to a neighbour, and as political tension rose and an invasion was feared, the region militarised and then it all blew up?
Comment from Ūdilugbulgidħū on 12 June 2016 at 22:04
This discussion is continued on the talk page of a specific OGF page on 20th century global war: here, as suggested by Leowezy.
Comment from adminero_us on 21 June 2016 at 18:21
Remember Vinnmark was a far-right nation until it was defeated by a communist union, which annexed it. But there weren’t any communist union in OGF, so that story is a bit of nonsense.
Comment from ifgus on 27 March 2017 at 20:17
I’m sorry for not reading everything in this page. it’s a bit too much…
can someone tell me what was decided?
Comment from zhenkang on 26 November 2018 at 00:39
Hmm now I see how Antigo becomes Antigo.
Just my thoughts about Antigo’s involvement. I doubt Antigo wants to be involved in the World War since it has just gained de facto independence and likely devote its efforts to post-war developments after the civil war. Neverthless, it is still possible Antigo will try to gain something out of it, like a possible military alliance with Suria and Mazan and gain access to other nations’ military to build up its own as well. Maybe Antigo will just be at the backseat while trying to gain some stuff to help benegit itself. It is posisble Antigo may be involved in several illegal arm deals in the war.