What would the global consequences be of a Central Powers victory in the Great War? How plausible is Kaiserreich?

1. Britain and France would be severely weakened throughout the 20th century, especially France. Britain also weakened but not to the same degree.

2. The Ottoman Empire would still exist.

3. Republican forms of government would be far less prevalent in the 20th century, particularly in continental Europe. Monarchism would be much more popular.

4. Nazis never gain power in Germany, they never exist in the first place. It is quite possible that the Hohenzollern family still controls Germany.

5. The Soviet Union still exists, but it is much weaker because of Brest-Litovsk, probably collapses sooner as well.

6. Austria-Hungary still exists. The Habsburg dynasty continues to this day.

7. Germany and America become rivals for global hegemony.

8. Once everybody discovers how useful petroleum is, the Ottomans start making shitloads of money selling it.

9. If WW2 happens, Japan and the United States are on the same side.

In Kaiserreich they didn't give it up in the peace treaty, the Germans occupied it after the British revolution in 1926.

Depends on how much they beat Britain by. A close won peace treaty might only get them some colonial land or the channel islands. England would be reluctant to lose its western barrier.

It would only really work if Germany mounted a successful invasion of Ireland or Britain. Late in the war when the leaders of '16 were executed, anti-British sentiment was very high in Ireland so a German army would be popularly received by the locals and given shelter and food, they'd probably attract a few rebels to join them.

If Germany somehow managed to make land at the start of the war then things might be different. While it's true the Irish didn't like the English then either, the promise of Home Rule seemed barely within reach and many would think that it would be in their best interests to repel the German invaders so the crown might look favourably upon them. Same reason many Irish fought in WWI.

If Germany made land in Britain at any point in the war and captured London then Ireland would unquestionably become independent. The question would be whether Ireland would be made a republic or be made a German vassal under the rule of a German prince like what was planned for the Baltics under the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. While it might not seem much different for the Irish to be controlled by another German Protestant monarchy, I'm sure they'd prefer it to their eternal nemesis in England. As long as Germany treats the Irish Catholic natives better than the English did (which really isn't difficult) then they'd be accepted as a favourable alternative. It would give the unionists less of a foot to stand on too since being ruled by Protestants they couldn't make their usual accusations of "popery".

It's worth noting that even Eamon De Valera said he would accept a monarchy as a system of government provided the Irish people supported it, the only exception being that no member of the British royal family would be invited to take up this position.

Ireland is the most fleshed out country in Kaiserreich. The amount of shit going on involving Ulster and preparing for war with a revanchist exiled UK government in Canada and a syndicalist Britain while allying yourself with Germany is fantastic.

editthis.info/kaiserreich/Ireland

That would have been very beautiful.

Also should be said that the Bavarian royal family are the inheritors of the Stuarts, thus making them rightful rulers of Ireland. A Catholic monarch from them would sit much better with the majority Catholic population as well.

Why is it so hard to find all their glories artwork ?

What is the actual premise of Kaiserreich? What caused Germany to win WW1 in this timeline? Did America refuse to enter the war? Did the Germany army abandon the Schifflin plan for something more feasible?

There's a major flaw with your entire post.

Germany would never have been able to invade the Isles. Not in WW1, not in WW2.

Never.

Never? That's not certain. If Germany had won WW1, it would be much more powerful compared to how it ended up in real life. The treaty of Brest-Litovsk, would have given Germany control of 25% of Russia's population and industrial centers, as well as 90% of Russia's coal mines, and basically the entire Russian railway system. The net effect of this is a much stronger Germany and a much, much weaker Russia. In this situation, Russia would not longer be able to threaten Germany's eastern border in any significant way, freeing Germany to focus their attention elsewhere. This leaves Germany free to build a much more powerful navy.

And that's just the stuff from Russia. Had Germany been successful in WW1, they would have taken control of a sizeable chunk of France after the war ended, and the entirety of Belgium. Controlling these areas further enhances Germany's long-term shipbuilding potential, and gives Germany access to ports which are much harder for Britain to blockade. The net effect of all this is that Germany could feasibly have surpassed Britain in terms of yearly shipbuilding potential. And once that happens.......Britain's days of being a major power in the world are rapidly coming to a conclusion.

Germany cancelled unrestricted submarine warfare so the US never joined the war and eventually they managed to defeat France.

According to the wiki, Wilhelm decides against unrestricted sub warfare, the white Russian movement rises almost immediately after the treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Lenin is assassinated in 1918, Hipper sallies the Hochseeflotte for a second Jutland, resulting a straight tie but breaking the blockade long enough to bring in Ukrainian grain, the French army suffers enough casualties to go into revolt, and the Allied Spring offensive is repelled. Eventually the entire French army breaks and the BEF pulls out in 1919, resulting the French army launching a socialist coup that seizes control of Paris, resulting in a bunch of Allied countries changing governments and an armistice in 1921.

Britain's days as a major power were already coming to a conclusion at the start of WWI. They were eager for a war with Germany because they were producing a strong navy to rival their's. Had Germany won WWI Britain would be dead, would probably have a cap put on the amount of ships allowed in their navy like Germany's troop limits in the Treaty of Versailles. Except it's much harder to hide building battleships than it is to train soldiers.

>ywn never be kangz along with all your fellow americans
why live lads?

Here's the thing: the German High Seas Fleet never even came close to approaching the tonnage of the Royal Navy. Actually, they weren't even aiming for parity, Tirpitz and Wilhelm wanted a fleet with roughly 2/3 the tonnage of the Royal Navy. And they never even came close to achieving that comparatively modest goal. Despite this, Britain still felt disproportionately threatened by the disproportionately puny German fleet. Why? Because they knew that the British fleet would always be spread out around the world, whereas Germany could mass their entire fleet against the British Isles at any given moment. So even if the High Seas Fleet never achieved parity with the Royal Navy, it would still have put immense pressure on Britain just by existing. Britain understood this and it terrified them. In the calculus of the British admiralty. It was no acceptable for Britain to merely have the largest, most powerful navy on the planet. They had to have navy so big that nobody would ever dare provoke them. British policy was to maintain shipbuilding at such a level that the Royal Navy would always be at least 50% larger than the 2nd largest navy. Britain's vast colonial holdings provided the mineral wealth that made this level of production feasible. Remove those colonies from the equation, and the Royal Navy would soon find itself unable to maintain the overwhelming numerical superiority that their hegemony depended on.

>TLDR: It is unlikely that Britain would have ever agreed to a cap on shipbuilding, even if they lost WW1. However, such a cap would have been unnecessary from Germany's perspective, because simply taking away Britain's colonies would have left Britain unable to keep up with the rate of German shipbuilding, which by itself means that Britain is utterly fucked in the long-run unless it becomes submissive to German policy in order to avoid future conflicts, which is more or less what Tirpitz wanted from the beginning.

Their policy was to have a navy that was larger than the 2nd and 3rd largest navies combined. So that incase they were at war with them they would still rule the seas

How do you figure on 6?