Effects of not having troops in South Africa in the Boer war

[Swagteamfivethousand]

I am playing my first WE play through, and I was wondering, what happens if I don't put troops in SA during the Boer war, will I lose NM and victory points, or will I lose South Africa?

[Metatron]

You loose alignment for the GB per turn (+ some vp and moneyz if I remember correctly) But mostly the alignment hit is what you want to avoid. Same thing with other revolt events. The consequences are in the message logs.

[Altaris]

You also lose VP and money. It doesn't take too long to suppress the revolts as long as you have 1-3 corps in the region. 3 corps will typically end the revolt in 1-2 turns, it takes a bit longer (and is more random) with fewer units.

[Suidlander]

The Second Anglo Boer war 1899-1902 as a interesting what if scenario. What if Germany declared war against Britain during this war when almost the whole of Europe were rooting for the Boers and secretly hoping the British might lose the war.

[Altaris]

The Second Anglo Boer war 1899-1902 as a interesting what if scenario. What if Germany declared war against Britain during this war when almost the whole of Europe were rooting for the Boers and secretly hoping the British might lose the war.

Yes, I agree. Not to mention the Franco-Russian alliance wasn't so strong then. I guess the big question is whether Austria-Hungary would've stood beside Germany, had France/Russia put military pressure on Germany, as without it, I don't see how Germany stood a chance.

[Suidlander]

Germany stayed out of that war due to the fact that theire navy wasn't strong enough to confront the British. They were hoping to catch up with British with the Dreadnaught ships witch leveled the scenario a bit when they arrived. But the start of the Great War they were still not ready. Witch at the end of the day pretty much doomed the Central powers from the get go. At the time of the Boer war there were huge support( at least at public level if not official) from European countries and America. Now if this support would have being strong enough for the French/Russian alliance to stay neural or even support Germany in a war against the British empire is a very hard qeustion to answer. Russia moving into India, France taking over Egipte, Nigeria?

[Suidlander]

It sounds like a stretch. But one of the main reasons Germany stayed on the sideline was the navy issue. She wasn't ready and it can be argued that by the time the Great War started she still wasn't ready. It's the blockade and the desperate u boat campaign( America) that destroyed the central powers.

[Suidlander]

Pardon the almost double post I thought my first post didn't went through.

[Shri]

Only the French had a decent navy in 1899, the Boer War started soon after the 1st Naval Bill started and the Kaiserliche Marine was still an infant at that time.
Also England and Prussia had been allies since the early 1700s, for over 200 years till Kaiser Wilhelm's entry they were mostly allied with each other.
The BOERS fought a very good fight but i think, the decisive stupidity of the Kaiser was challenging English Naval Power.

For the cost of the Navy, the Germans could have trained another 2 million reservists and have had 1 extra field army, enough to complete Schlieffen in 1914 and say - "TATA" to France. The Navy was a total waste of German resources exactly as Bismarck foresaw as were those Colonies, Germany's strength was in it's industries and it's educated and growing population.
In-fact, there are several alternate histories on the net, wherein - No Navy and No Colony policy would have led to an Anglo-French Rapproachment not being done. A handfull of U-Boats and Krupp Heavy Artillery em-placed in coastal Fortifications would have kept the Russian and French navy at bay in case of War breaking out.
Also, remember by 1913 the German Merchant marine was the 2nd largest in the world, second only to UK and if no UK means no blockade and enough raw material and food could be imported by the Germans.

Overall, the Kaiser's stupid naval dream destroyed Imperial Germany, mind you - though people have negative perceptions of the Germans, if you read your history you will find the Imperial German Govt was no way the NAZI Govt which people have in mind.

Despite Bismarck's Kulturkampf and the so-called Purge of Catholics, Prince Hohlenhoe became the Chancellor.
The Jews were best treated in Imperial Germany compared to rest of Europe other than the Hapsburg monarchy.
Workers had fixed times, no child labour, universal and nearly free education in some of the best universities of the world.
Nobel Prize winners in those universities were as common as they are today in Ivy_League USA.
Pension and disability plans were in place. An Iron cot in old age was assured for nearly all workers.
Though conscription was mandatory, it was for a short period followed by a long period in the reserves and helped improve the physical stamina of the general populace. The British Officers certainly observed this in the early war period. Also there wasn't an all pervading class distinction in the military unlike the UK.
Exports were booming, per capita incomes were rising, more women were employed as a % of population in Germany pre-War than even Wartime England and France (there is a myth that German women were HausFrau and didn't work which has been disproved by successive economists).
Overall i would say by passing the Naval Bill, the Kaiser shot himself and his country in the foot.

[Field Marshal Hotzendorf]

I think he shot himself and his country more in the head then the foot!

[Suidlander]

And not to mention the First World War destroyed all of that and a generation of Europes young people. And it lead to the second war lead to even worst things.