One common thing with Alt-Hist I noticed is notion of inherent talent to certain historical people or their irreplaceability as either someone pulling off what they did is impossible or at least very unlikely, with history ending up completely different if they werent where they were
Meanwhile there's many threads on WI Pompey won against Caesar or Antony against Octavian, if Philip led the macedonian campaigns against Persia instead of his sonn Alexander or if the mongol tribes were united under someone other than Temujin
So what I propose with this thread is to listen possible "replacements" for both well known and obscure conquerors, figures that could have filled their place for better or worse
To be clear, full-scenarios are not required, but if you wanna explain why you think X replacing Y would make for a interesting discussion or a fun TL I fully support you doing so
Keep in mind being as effective as the original is not necessary, incompetents count, but you can also mention candidates that arguably could have done a better job
Meanwhile there's many threads on WI Pompey won against Caesar or Antony against Octavian, if Philip led the macedonian campaigns against Persia instead of his sonn Alexander or if the mongol tribes were united under someone other than Temujin
So what I propose with this thread is to listen possible "replacements" for both well known and obscure conquerors, figures that could have filled their place for better or worse
To be clear, full-scenarios are not required, but if you wanna explain why you think X replacing Y would make for a interesting discussion or a fun TL I fully support you doing so
Keep in mind being as effective as the original is not necessary, incompetents count, but you can also mention candidates that arguably could have done a better job