NationStates

North Arkana wrote:First off, the Luftwaffe was losing the Battle of Britain, badly, before the switch to city bombing.
Second, do you really expect the Kriegsmarine to hold back, *takes deep breath* HMS Duke of York, HMS King George V, HMS Malaya, HMS Nelson, HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Ramillies, HMs Resolution, HMS Royal Sovereign, HMS Revenge, HMS Rodney, HMS Royal Oak, HMS Valiant, and HMS Warspite, with just the Terrible Twins? Not even counting the swarm of destroyers and cruisers who would be mustered to oppose the landings? Not even counting the RAF who wouldn't be out of the game by a long shot. Do you know what RAF "defeat" in the Battle of Britain looks like? It looks like the RAF moving to bases out of range of German attack, where they rearm and resupply in preparation to attack the potential German invasion. They do not "shatter".

Germany loses Sea Lion. No ifs, ands, or buts.

I agree that Operation Sea Lion was not likely to be a German victory, but it was not impossible. The Battle of Britain was a war of attrition, and though the Germans had the worse of said attrition, they also had far more planes to spare. By switching their focus from military to civilian targets, the Germans allowed the British time to recoup and recover their losses, effectively deciding the outcome of the campaign.

If air supremacy had been secured, the idea is that Luftwaffe air umbrellas would prevent the Royal Navy from intercepting a German invasion force, which would be a small and quick force "bounced" across the Channel after a German victory at Dunkirk.

Torrocca wrote:

Wysten wrote:"Even the Nazis on their deathhbed had better shit." Except for the fact that almost all German AFVs post Pz IV were suffering from shitty transmissions and crew ergonomics.

"Hans! Ze transmission burned out again!"
"Vhat? Ve haven't even left ze factory yet!"

Not to mention the complete lack of fuel.

"Heinrich! Ve have no petrol!"

"Vhat? Ve have only gone 50 meters!"

Rezmaeristan wrote:

Bezkoshtovnya wrote:However the first killings of Jews by the Einsatzgruppen began in June 1941, which marks the shift from removal of Jews from Germany to outright extermination within Germany and beyond. While it isnt necessarily impossible that the Nazis would suddenly scale back their policy on Jews it seems unlikely. Using an armed unit of Jews and supporting a Jewish independent state I think is still far less probable than using Arabs and other Muslim groups since hitler had a degree of respect for them and they would be a far more influential force in the British Middle east and Africa.

So if our PoD is "Hitler decides to hold off on invading Russia until the UK and/or USA are knocked out", Germany and Italy's most likely allies in the Middle East are the Muslim Brotherhood, the Syrian Social Nationalist Party, and/or other Arab and Muslim nationalist movements.

I would say personally I find that to be a far more likely scenario. Plus Germany was trying to make nice with Persia and Muslim national movements for a while, in order to secure an oil supplier. I think Germany said they would support Iraqi full independence in return for oil access. If Germany suddenly began to advocate a Jewish state in the Middle East it would ruin the relationship they were trying to establish with Muslims and also likely damage support for Germany among muslims and side with Britain in order to prevent a Jewish state from happening.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

Orange-Transvaal wrote:What, for its ability to be target practice for Allied bombers?

Maus don't give a shit, it'll survive anything.

Unless you blow out it's track or have it cross any bridge smaller than the Golden Gate.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:I genuinely feel sorry for the Italians.

They got cucked by the Germans epic-style.

Soft underbelly of europe!

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

The South Falls wrote:I'll get the Maus...

Unironically the best armored vehicle of the war tbqh

It was going to be murdered by the ISU-152 and allies fighters anyway.

The South Falls wrote:

Torrocca wrote:
"Hans! Ze transmission burned out again!"
"Vhat? Ve haven't even left ze factory yet!"

Not to mention the complete lack of fuel.

"Heinrich! Ve have no petrol!"

"Vhat? Ve have only gone 50 meters!"

They had so many supply problems, especially late-war, that it's almost insanely ludicrous that they were still fielding those big cats.

Jokes aside, I doubt the Axis could've won the war regardless of leaders. They had far too many nations crashing down on them, and the likes of the USA (and the Soviet Union if we're counting the Germans invading Russia) at wartime might was just too much for Germany to handle, not to mention Japan and Italy.

The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile wrote:

North Arkana wrote:First off, the Luftwaffe was losing the Battle of Britain, badly, before the switch to city bombing.
Second, do you really expect the Kriegsmarine to hold back, *takes deep breath* HMS Duke of York, HMS King George V, HMS Malaya, HMS Nelson, HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Ramillies, HMs Resolution, HMS Royal Sovereign, HMS Revenge, HMS Rodney, HMS Royal Oak, HMS Valiant, and HMS Warspite, with just the Terrible Twins? Not even counting the swarm of destroyers and cruisers who would be mustered to oppose the landings? Not even counting the RAF who wouldn't be out of the game by a long shot. Do you know what RAF "defeat" in the Battle of Britain looks like? It looks like the RAF moving to bases out of range of German attack, where they rearm and resupply in preparation to attack the potential German invasion. They do not "shatter".

Germany loses Sea Lion. No ifs, ands, or buts.

I agree that Operation Sea Lion was not likely to be a German victory, but it was not impossible. The Battle of Britain was a war of attrition, and though the Germans had the worse of said attrition, they also had far more planes to spare. By switching their focus from military to civilian targets, the Germans allowed the British time to recoup and recover their losses, effectively deciding the outcome of the campaign.

If air supremacy had been secured, the idea is that Luftwaffe air umbrellas would prevent the Royal Navy from intercepting a German invasion force, which would be a small and quick force "bounced" across the Channel after a German victory at Dunkirk.

More planes to spare? In what universe?

And, again, in what universe is the poorly equipped Luftwaffe anti-shipping arm stopping the whole Royal Navy from dogpiling the channel so hard they can sink the river barges being used for transport by just using their wakes?

this blew up way more than I expected holy crap

The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile wrote:

North Arkana wrote:First off, the Luftwaffe was losing the Battle of Britain, badly, before the switch to city bombing.
Second, do you really expect the Kriegsmarine to hold back, *takes deep breath* HMS Duke of York, HMS King George V, HMS Malaya, HMS Nelson, HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Ramillies, HMs Resolution, HMS Royal Sovereign, HMS Revenge, HMS Rodney, HMS Royal Oak, HMS Valiant, and HMS Warspite, with just the Terrible Twins? Not even counting the swarm of destroyers and cruisers who would be mustered to oppose the landings? Not even counting the RAF who wouldn't be out of the game by a long shot. Do you know what RAF "defeat" in the Battle of Britain looks like? It looks like the RAF moving to bases out of range of German attack, where they rearm and resupply in preparation to attack the potential German invasion. They do not "shatter".

Germany loses Sea Lion. No ifs, ands, or buts.

I agree that Operation Sea Lion was not likely to be a German victory, but it was not impossible. The Battle of Britain was a war of attrition, and though the Germans had the worse of said attrition, they also had far more planes to spare. By switching their focus from military to civilian targets, the Germans allowed the British time to recoup and recover their losses, effectively deciding the outcome of the campaign.

If air supremacy had been secured, the idea is that Luftwaffe air umbrellas would prevent the Royal Navy from intercepting a German invasion force, which would be a small and quick force "bounced" across the Channel after a German victory at Dunkirk.

Air Supremacy isn't something you "get" it's more like you have to hold. Besides at the time of the proposed landing only two squads in the whole of the Luft were trained in hitting ships. The problem is that the German industry pre-Speer, for a lack of a better term, was a fucking shitshow and could no where near produce the planes needed to maintain AS above the Isles not to mention the valuable fuel being wasted when it can instead go to the Panzer divisions.

Orange-Transvaal wrote:this blew up way more than I expected holy crap

Welcome to NSG.

Nantoraka wrote:

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:I genuinely feel sorry for the Italians.

They got cucked by the Germans epic-style.

Soft underbelly of europe!

The M13/40 was a decent tank when it rolled out, okay!?

It’s fucking dumb to compare it to a fucking Sherman and go "lol it fucken sucks".

Nantoraka wrote:Jokes aside, I doubt the Axis could've won the war regardless of leaders. They had far too many nations crashing down on them, and the likes of the USA (and the Soviet Union if we're counting the Germans invading Russia) at wartime might was just too much for Germany to handle, not to mention Japan and Italy.

I agree, the Axis lost because the weight against them was always going to be too much. It was a stupid and senseless war built on the whim of a madman.

Torrocca wrote:

The South Falls wrote:Not to mention the complete lack of fuel.

"Heinrich! Ve have no petrol!"

"Vhat? Ve have only gone 50 meters!"

They had so many supply problems, especially late-war, that it's almost insanely ludicrous that they were still fielding those big cats.

It's because of the Nazi need to dick measure with the Soviets for heavy tanks. And the IS-2. It's all because of the IS-2.

North Arkana wrote:More planes to spare? In what universe?

At the very beginning of the campaign, in July 1940, Britain had ~600 planes to Germany's ~2,400. Of course, these numbers evened out later, but I believe that Germany always maintained at least a slight numerical advantage, and in these early months, before RAF fighter production amped up, the disparity is obvious.

And, again, in what universe is the poorly equipped Luftwaffe anti-shipping arm stopping the whole Royal Navy from dogpiling the channel so hard they can sink the river barges being used for transport by just using their wakes?

As evidenced above, the Germans had the numerical and technological advantage in the summer/fall of 1940 to manage a combined paratroop/amphibious landing with a small number of forces.

Also, this is derivating further from our timeline, but suppose Germany hadn't invaded Scandinavia; the Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe would have been even more capable of securing a beachhead.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

Nantoraka wrote:Soft underbelly of europe!

The M13/40 was a decent tank when it rolled out, okay!?

It’s fucking dumb to compare it to a fucking Sherman and go "lol it fucken sucks".

The FT17 sucks when compared to the M1 Abrams, so...

Wysten wrote:Air Supremacy isn't something you "get" it's more like you have to hold. Besides at the time of the proposed landing only two squads in the whole of the Luft were trained in hitting ships. The problem is that the German industry pre-Speer, for a lack of a better term, was a fucking shitshow and could no where near produce the planes needed to maintain AS above the Isles not to mention the valuable fuel being wasted when it can instead go to the Panzer divisions.

Air supremacy only needed to be maintained for a short window of time to allow German troops to land on the island. The British Army was in no position to defeat a German invasion once they got boots on the ground.

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:

Nantoraka wrote:Soft underbelly of europe!

The M13/40 was a decent tank when it rolled out, okay!?

It’s fucking dumb to compare it to a fucking Sherman and go "lol it fucken sucks".

Ok, then let's compare the Carro Armato P 40 to the Sherman. It's almost more than 2 years newer in design, uses inferior riveted, thinner armor, has a weaker gun, weaker engine, moves slower, has an inferior suspension design, and 103 of them were built.

Bombadil wrote:

Nantoraka wrote:Jokes aside, I doubt the Axis could've won the war regardless of leaders. They had far too many nations crashing down on them, and the likes of the USA (and the Soviet Union if we're counting the Germans invading Russia) at wartime might was just too much for Germany to handle, not to mention Japan and Italy.

I agree, the Axis lost because the weight against them was always going to be too much. It was a stupid and senseless war built on the whim of a madman.

Jim P already stated it, but you have to wonder what was going through Hitler's mind when he jumped on the United States and the Soviet Union at the same time.

The South Falls wrote:

Western Vale Confederacy wrote:
The M13/40 was a decent tank when it rolled out, okay!?

It’s fucking dumb to compare it to a fucking Sherman and go "lol it fucken sucks".

The FT17 sucks when compared to the M1 Abrams, so...

water is wet and the earth revolves around the sun

The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile wrote:

Wysten wrote:Air Supremacy isn't something you "get" it's more like you have to hold. Besides at the time of the proposed landing only two squads in the whole of the Luft were trained in hitting ships. The problem is that the German industry pre-Speer, for a lack of a better term, was a fucking shitshow and could no where near produce the planes needed to maintain AS above the Isles not to mention the valuable fuel being wasted when it can instead go to the Panzer divisions.

Air supremacy only needed to be maintained for a short window of time to allow German troops to land on the island. The British Army was in no position to defeat a German invasion once they got boots on the ground.

And all the times when the invading force would need supplies and reinforcement.

The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile wrote:

North Arkana wrote:More planes to spare? In what universe?

At the very beginning of the campaign, in July 1940, Britain had ~600 planes to Germany's ~2,400. Of course, these numbers evened out later, but I believe that Germany always maintained at least a slight numerical advantage, and in these early months, before RAF fighter production amped up, the disparity is obvious.

And, again, in what universe is the poorly equipped Luftwaffe anti-shipping arm stopping the whole Royal Navy from dogpiling the channel so hard they can sink the river barges being used for transport by just using their wakes?

As evidenced above, the Germans had the numerical and technological advantage in the summer/fall of 1940 to manage a combined paratroop/amphibious landing with a small number of forces.

Also, this is derivating further from our timeline, but suppose Germany hadn't invaded Scandinavia; the Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe would have been even more capable of securing a beachhead.

>Kriegsmarine surface fleet doing anything other than looking pretty in their concrete docks

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

Orange-Transvaal wrote:What, for its ability to be target practice for Allied bombers?

Maus don't give a shit, it'll survive anything.

Except for my boy the P-47

I don't want to quote everybody but allow some input on the things being said here.

>BT series tanks being better than Panzer 2
Not true. They had a better gun, I suppose, but worse armor, nonexistent comm equipment, overburdened, 2 3 man crew, and nonexistent offroad driving capability. The Christie suspension was not designed for Russia's terrain, and the BT used it. In fact, one of the contributing factors of Barbarossa's early success was that the BT series formed the backbone of the Red tank divisions, and there was mud... The T-60 was considered to be one of the best light tanks of its time, there's no debate about that.

>King Tiger cracking from 122mm HE
If you are struck by such a large shell and live to tell the tale, it's a victory by itself. Even on modern tanks, a direct hit with such a large HE shell can result in a mission kill and even crew deaths due to spalling.

>equipment of Soviet vs German infantry
Germans were behind with SMG production and their use of bolt action rifles remained an issue through the war, however, they employed more light machine guns on a squad level to provide full auto firepower, especially in paratrooper units. Furthermore, they had various hand-held anti-tank weapons in abundance which are commonplace today but weren't back then, and better comm equipment than the Soviets.

The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile wrote:

Wysten wrote:Air Supremacy isn't something you "get" it's more like you have to hold. Besides at the time of the proposed landing only two squads in the whole of the Luft were trained in hitting ships. The problem is that the German industry pre-Speer, for a lack of a better term, was a fucking shitshow and could no where near produce the planes needed to maintain AS above the Isles not to mention the valuable fuel being wasted when it can instead go to the Panzer divisions.

Air supremacy only needed to be maintained for a short window of time to allow German troops to land on the island. The British Army was in no position to defeat a German invasion once they got boots on the ground.

Then what? There's still the Royal Navy and supplying of said troops to worry about.